[Jungian Cognitive Functions] Getting to the POINT

[Ene]

I think "points" are learned through the context and connotation when the explicit details relate to the audience's interpretation of something. Sometimes I just talk for the sake of being known, and in those cases, a dry illustration of my perspective can suffice. If someone gives a long-winded explanation, it probably means they think they are misunderstood, which, from what I hear, is rather common for INFPs.

Ginko,

Are you an INFP then? I really don't know you yet and that is why I am asking. I do believe you are correct in saying it is common for INFPs as I am beginning to "see" that it is the case.

 

[Ene]

a common Ne/Ni conco:
Ne: [insert a ramble about Y X & Z]
Ni: so your saying that Y = X/2+Z, meaning [insert Ne observation]..
Ne: yes, and X=(Y-Z)*2
Ni: but that means...
Ne:.and ofcourse Z=Y-X-2
Ni: so whats the point of all this?

One possible solution for Ni users reading or listening to Ne content (here and elsewhere), as well as maximizing Ni/Ne dynamics, is to percieve that there will be multiply points, or rather meanings.. which the Ne author might be completely unaware of, and in fact would rather apriciate.

I think to some extent thats what my INTJ father did with my ENFP mother and my ENTP self, and he seemed to enjoy it more often then getting frustrated by it.

Okay, duely noted, muliple points, many of them unintential. Whether I get anything out of it or not is entirely up to me.

 

[PeaceBaby]

I thought the connections were "obvious" and connecting them was tedious & dull. It seemed to me someone had to be pretty stupid to not get it...

&

Anyhow, once I was informed that people weren't following me, I began to laboriously connect the dots, add more details, & probably over-explain. Now you have a wall-o-texter.... Be careful what you ask for.

&

To me this looks like "stupid" again. And when Je types make points, I admit I tend to ignore them. I consider the info & decide for myself what it means.

This. Me making the connections is what I call "chewing your food for you". I don't want someone to chew mine for me, so I am sure not gonna chew yours for you, nor do I really wish to - I used to feel it very lazy of others to expect this kind of nutritional delivery.

And @bold: agreed 100%. Not interested in Je'ers stating their judgments like fact. To me, you are just one subjective person with one opinion. I need way more data than your singular evaluation, although that opinion is very valuable to me. And I'm not going to stand there and state my opinion like it's all facts either. The more voices, the better - in order to distill truth. The end goal of Ji I think.

 

[Ginkgo]

Ginko,

Are you an INFP then? I really don't know you yet and that is why I am asking. I do believe you are correct in saying it is common for INFPs as I am beginning to "see" that it is the case.

I am INFP.

 

[skylights]

Edit - haha, I'm reworking my post to get to the point!

As an overall point, I believe "getting to the point" is positively correlated with Je strength and Ni strength.

I don't know if it's an issue of more or less information as it is rambling as opposed to focused information.

I suspect that people with strong Pe/Ji usage prefer more cross-contextual application of Pe information with the goal of refining Ji structure. In terms of usefulness, Je prioritizes initiation of external action, while Ji prioritizes a crystallized inner structure of how to respond to circumstances, as well as understanding of other internal structures. So for Ji, the more varied information we test against our judgment frames, the better our judgment becomes.

If Je/Pi, on the other hand, seeks to create external structure and loosen internal structure, and a huge amount of varied external information would essentially be the antithesis of that.

Ni in particular seems to prefer concision, as well. Both Ni and Si distill, but Si seems more comfortable with a fair amount of discrete points, while Ni seems to prefer to identify one point. It may have to do with N being more conceptual in nature, and seeking to include all things real or not, while S is more practical and would prefer to deal with actually exists, without trying to rope in the non-existent.

That's what I gather from my INFP friend. I want so badly to say to her, "Oh, for cryin' out loud already...get to the point!" But then I look at her and realize that the seems to be the point. And I don't do it, because it seems to do her good just to talk about pointless stuff.

Well, that sounds boring for you! It seems to me that there should be some way of maximizing the communication to meet both of you. If you know you're talking with an INFP, you could probably ask up front what her overall impression of whatever she's talking about is, and her Ne and Te should help with that. You could also try to listen less for a point and more for the experience, trying to visualize yourself as her in the situation. Could be challenging, but at least maybe it would make it more interesting for you.

So, maybe that's what my friend is trying to do? Get the "feel" of an experience across to me?

Maybe, yes. Fi can be incredibly hard to articulate, just like Ni... it's like trying to catch water with a screen... My ISFJ actually did end up understanding what I was trying to convey - he pulled up a Google image that fit it exactly!

I think as Fi users we also like to talk about experiences to go back through our judgments to see how sound they were, and to have others listen so that they can add their own perceptions, which might show us new information we didn't think of at the time that may change our judgment of the situation. For example, yesterday one of my bosses was in an awful mood, and I happened to mess up on something in front of him. He gave me a lecture and said that I don't take personal responsibility, an impression which does not fit with my perception of myself. (I feel like I admit to messing up all the time IRL, lol!) I spoke to my ISFJ later, going through the whole situation, and he laughed and said he'd received that same lecture with that same exact accusation from that same boss back when he worked with me. That clarified to me that I shouldn't be so concerned about the possibility of me not taking responsibility, as evidently it's more an element of my boss's own perception than an actual reflection of me.

Hmmm....good point. haha...thanks.

Thank you for the responses!

Here's a good example: my INTJ daughter or ESTJ husband will pronounce that person X or situation X is "stupid" or "ridiculous". Am I just supposed to accept that at face value? No. I need the story, I need to hear the details, I need to appreciate the context if I am going to provide any decent alternative or counter-point or solution to their judgement. I might agree with their assessment by the end, or provide a useful less "charged" viewpoint. At any rate, I want the details. I need the details.

Yes! The Js in my life do this too. I find it frustrating because I recoil at such blunt labels without explanation, as I naturally immediately apply them to internal quality. I've been having to learn how to suspend my own judgment of the J for making that judgment until I hear the whole story, because to me it seems so superficial. And it is - but that's what makes it okay to call something or someone "stupid", because it's not about their internal character.

FWIW, it bothers me a lot less with ENFPs than ENTPs. I really only run into the problem with ENFPs when I'm trying to offer assistance, and trying to single out a root cause to act on. After a few minutes of talking, eventually the ENFP will just throw up their hands and tell me, "IT'S ALL THE THINGS, OK??? ALL THE THINGS!!!!" I'm probably as frustrating to them as they are to me, tbh.

Frustrated frustrating ENFP, lol. I suspect the reason for that is probably you're trying to identify a Te cause to act on and their problem is really in Fi - which for us comes before Te, so we can't decide how to Te act until we decide what we Fi want. I don't know about other ENFPs, but I rarely experience Te dissonance. Though if I know what I want to do, Te users are SO helpful.

ENTPs, otoh, it's like they derive a sense of superiority from the inability to stay on topic. With rare exception, they're usually not worth the time to communicate with as it usually just devolves into conflict.

I doubt that's their intention, but I know what you mean.

I actually think this loops back to what I mentioned before with Ji structure and Pe integration. For ENxPs, it's pleasing to lock that new information into the structure - and encountering new information that doesn't fit the structure forces you to improve your structure, so it's annoying, but it's a good challenge. ENTPs throw out lots of Ne scenarios because it forces checking of the Ti structure - it is sort of a superiority if they can present a new scenario that eludes the other person's Ti structure. They have to stretch their Ne to do that, though, so it's challenging to them, too.

It's like sparring, I guess. For us it's "training" and it's useful because it improves our Ji response in a padded environment.

I've also read that INFPs often may use terminology or reference things others are not familiar with, assuming that they are, which leaves people confused. I'm not sure why we may do this, but I know I do this, especially with areas I have some knowledge in (using specialized terminology assuming everyone knows them). I think it's some tert Si thing & giving the benefit of the doubt.

My ISFJ does this all the time. I'm actually starting to learn formal names!

I remember some smart INTJ explaining that Ni users identify and categorize things by function instead of by static characteristics, which could be a major reason for information seeming irrelevant across Ni-Si lines.

Being an NP, there's a lot of crossing of contexts. You create a relationship between two things to explain an abstract idea. A story is often, again, illustrative. And we're not necessarily going off topic... we just didn't spell out the connection for you. If given enough time, I think it wraps back around & you have quite ingenious point on your hands .

Yes! It all comes back to the structure. We'll loop back because everything is connected. And how pleasing, to have a cohesive picture of the universe.

[eta: this post still effectively nails it for me, why INFPs can sound like "Emo emo. Emo. Emo? Emo." to me.]

 

[Flatlander]

I am becoming more and more aware of just how non-Fi dom I really am and to tell the truth, sometimes I have to cut and paste Fi-dom posts and take them apart in order to try to get to the heart of what is being said [and that takes so much time, that I have a hard time posting replies to a lot of what is said here] and to my utter amazement, there often is no “point” or 'heart' of the matter and I get a bit frustrated because I feel like it is aimless wandering, but of course, it's not. I have discovered this with my INFP friend in real life; she often spends a long time telling me about something. I keep waiting for the point, but there is no point. She is just sharing an experience with me. Maybe that is more a P thing than an Fi thing. I don’t know.

Is it an NiFe thing that I feel there needs to be a purpose for what is being said, that it needs to be leading up to something, to produce something or is it a result of the J-function? Or is it a Te quality that I need for things to "produce something of substance" that I can somehow utilize and make sense of?

How are you sure that she's an INFP, if I might ask? That sounds to me like perceiver talk, especially Si/Ne as it seems to encourage simple experience-talk more, especially if she's just doing it with you alone. I might posit that she has Fe going on too, if she's doing it to create a friendly atmosphere with you. I've always found Fi to get more to its own point, at least as part of the dominant/inferior axis.

Anyway, speaking as an Ni dom with auxiliary Thinking, I usually find my own points in things if the person didn't seem to make one themself. I do it by reframing what they're saying to get to the core of it, and if I'm not sure my thinking is accurate I ask if I'm correct. Otherwise if I'm interested I lead them deeper into the topic with questions, or I don't bother and let it go. You sound vaguely like you might be seeking Ni (Te?) for some reason, rather than thinking with it.

 

[garbage]

If "getting to the point" is a Te and non-Beta thing, then I'm pretty much typology-fucked.

I need to know where things are going if it's going to be a long account. It helps me be patient and enjoy the story.

Ideally, yes. My problem is finding the relevance. There’s some reason they’re saying it. Until I know what that reason is, they’re just saying a bunch of *stuff* (that I’ll never remember or be able to pay attention to, because I have no idea where it fits). If you give me the grocery cart before you start passing all sorts of *stuff* to me, then I’ll have somewhere to put it. Otherwise I’ll only be able to ‘hold’ one or two of those things (and if I can’t figure out what those two things are for, I’ll put them down as soon as I get distracted and forget about them as well).

Blammo, this all resonates for me, too.

 

[Ene]

How are you sure that she's an INFP, if I might ask?

You might and she took the test. (Also, this might be beside the point, but if you spent one day with her out looking for fairy rings and talking to cats and worrying about spontaneous human combustion, you'd understand.)

That sounds to me like perceiver talk, especially Si/Ne as it seems to encourage simple experience-talk more, especially if she's just doing it with you alone.

She doesn't do it to me alone.

I might posit that she has Fe going on too, if she's doing it to create a friendly atmosphere with you.

That's a good thought. But, that is just how she communicates with everybody.

I've always found Fi to get more to the point, at least as part of the dominant/inferior axis.

Hmmm...then maybe it's not soley an Fi thing. Maybe it is a combination of factors.

Anyway, speaking as an Ni dom with auxiliary Thinking, I usually find my own points in things if the person didn't seem to make one themself.

I do this, too. I'm not saying that I don't or that I'm not capable of it, only that it means

reframing what they're saying to get to the core of it

, Hence, that is why I cut and paste and restructure what is said in order to get to the bottom of it. Sadly, in a conversation, I can't always do that and I have to ask for clarification or else as you say,

I don't bother and let it go.

, which is regrettable, probably.

You sound vaguely like you might be seeking Ni (Te?) for some reason, rather than thinking with it.

, just want to understand how they influence communication styles.

 

[Flatlander]

You might and she took the test. (Also, this might be beside the point, but if you spent one day with her out looking for fairy rings and talking to cats and worrying about spontaneous human combustion, you'd understand.)

That could be the result of other functions, too. Inferior N in either direction. Even inferior S. Dominant Fe and inferior Ti. It all depends on why she expresses herself this way.

That sounds to me like perceiver talk, especially Si/Ne as it seems to encourage simple experience-talk more, especially if she's just doing it with you alone.

She doesn't do it to me alone.

I said 'with', not 'to'. If she's doing it with a group of people it might still be Si-Fe-like, especially if she thinks she's sharing something relatable.

I might posit that she has Fe going on too, if she's doing it to create a friendly atmosphere with you.

That's a good thought. But, that is just how she communicates with everybody.

The point about it being 'you' wasn't meant as you alone, but general terminology.

I've always found Fi to get more to the point, at least as part of the dominant/inferior axis.

Hmmm...then maybe it's not soley an Fi thing. Maybe it is a combination of factors.

Seeing as this is how things usually work in the psyche, it's likely. But if it's function-related, I'd still posit it isn't necessarily Fi, and she may be incorrectly typed.

Anyway, speaking as an Ni dom with auxiliary Thinking, I usually find my own points in things if the person didn't seem to make one themself.

I do this, too. I'm not saying that I don't or that I'm not capable of it, only that it means ,

Then why would you complain about not being able to find the point?

reframing what they're saying to get to the core of it

Hence, that is why I cut and paste and restructure what is said in order to get to the bottom of it. Sadly, in a conversation, I can't always do that and I have to ask for clarification or else as you say,

Cutting and pasting to restructure isn't the same as reframing, exactly, in the Ni sense. Restructuring has as much or more to do with T, and what you did here is vaguely reminiscent of Ti because it cuts in these individualistic places that don't even conform to the structure of sentences or the points I made themselves, but rather to the structure of your own thoughts so that you can respond to them. Reframing in the Ni is more like this:

Person A says: I'm this, that, and the other.
Mind goes: This, that and the other really means belonging to X structure/having X in common.
I say: So you're saying you're X?

It's reframing to find the point of connection between disparity, or the dynamics that connect separate points. It can get much more complex than that but it always leads back to an underlying point.

I don't bother and let it go.

, which is regrettable, probably.

I don't continue debate or conversation when there's no significant understanding to be gained from it, and I tend to see right through to whether I will find this or not.

, just want to understand how they influence communication styles.

If we're still on it, I'll go into it later, I have to run.

 

[Flatlander]

You might and she took the test. (Also, this might be beside the point, but if you spent one day with her out looking for fairy rings and talking to cats and worrying about spontaneous human combustion, you'd understand.)

That could be the result of other functions, too. Inferior N in either direction. Even inferior S. Dominant Fe and inferior Ti. It all depends on why she expresses herself this way.

That sounds to me like perceiver talk, especially Si/Ne as it seems to encourage simple experience-talk more, especially if she's just doing it with you alone.

She doesn't do it to me alone.

I said 'with', not 'to'. If she's doing it with a group of people it might still be Si-Fe-like, especially if she thinks she's sharing something relatable.

I might posit that she has Fe going on too, if she's doing it to create a friendly atmosphere with you.

That's a good thought. But, that is just how she communicates with everybody.

The point about it being 'you' wasn't meant as you alone, but general terminology.

I've always found Fi to get more to the point, at least as part of the dominant/inferior axis.

Hmmm...then maybe it's not soley an Fi thing. Maybe it is a combination of factors.

Seeing as this is how things usually work in the psyche, it's likely. But if it's function-related, I'd still posit it isn't necessarily Fi, and she may be incorrectly typed.

Anyway, speaking as an Ni dom with auxiliary Thinking, I usually find my own points in things if the person didn't seem to make one themself.

I do this, too. I'm not saying that I don't or that I'm not capable of it, only that it means ,

Then why would you complain about not being able to find the point?

reframing what they're saying to get to the core of it

Hence, that is why I cut and paste and restructure what is said in order to get to the bottom of it. Sadly, in a conversation, I can't always do that and I have to ask for clarification or else as you say,

Cutting and pasting to restructure isn't the same as reframing, exactly, in the Ni sense. Restructuring has as much or more to do with T, and what you did here is vaguely reminiscent of Ti because it cuts in these individualistic places that don't even conform to the structure of sentences or the points I made themselves, but rather to the structure of your own thoughts so that you can respond to them. Reframing in the Ni is more like this:

Person A says: I'm this, that, and the other.
Mind goes: This, that and the other really means belonging to X structure/having X in common.
I say: So you're saying you're X?

It's reframing to find the point of connection between disparity, or the dynamics that connect separate points. It can get much more complex than that but it always leads back to an underlying point.

I don't bother and let it go.

, which is regrettable, probably.

I don't continue debate or conversation when there's no significant understanding to be gained from it, and I tend to see right through to whether I will find this or not.

, just want to understand how they influence communication styles.

If we're still on it, I'll go into it later, I have to run.

 

[Ene]

Flatlander,

I appreciate you taking the time to contribute to this thread, for lending your ideas and input. Thank you.

So about my friend, I interact with her often and I am sure she is not an S and she is deifinitely not an Fe. I do see a lot of Ti and Ne at work in her daily life. At least, I think they are Ti and Ne.

Of course it is possible that she could be mistyped.

For all I know, you could be mistyped. I could be mistyped.

So, whatever her type, she is socially awkward and in a group she puts people ill at ease. I think she wants to be relatable but doesn’t have a clue how to be. She is clumsy and awkward [physically]. After an initial meeting, people are often put off by her.


Why did I complain about it?

To lure you here, of course, and entangle you in this discussion. Apparently, it worked, because you're here.

Actually, I didn’t mean to complain but if it came across that way, then to be blunt, it takes longer. I interact with so many people, on any given day, that I sometimes get lazy with the ones who take the long scenic route to get to their destination.

And no, cutting and pasting to restructure isn't the same as reframing, exactly, but it does help me to reframe it in my mind as I go. It’s like a short cut.

I don't continue debate or conversation when there's no significant understanding to be gained from it, and I tend to see right through to whether I will find this or not.

Significant understanding...I hope to gain some of that. Perhaps we will still be on it when you return. If you don't mind, I would like to ask you by what means you arrived at your own type.

 

[cafe]

Because People Are Stupid.

(Is that concise enough?)

It's concise and it's probably true, but it doesn't make me not want to understand the reasoning that went into a particular action.

Even if it was simply acting on impulse, I may not ever identify with it and I may still think it's stupid, but for some reason, I'm compelled to try to understand. I suspect because I want things to be predictable and if I can understand what motivates even stupid people to do things, I will see some kind of pattern or at least be able to make one up.

 

[Entropic]

[MENTION=16382]Ene[/MENTION] so is your friend an INTP or an INFP? If she prefers Ti and Ne she can't be an INFP since INFPs prefer Fi and Ne. Also, claiming we all could be mistyped is a weak logical argument because it assumes the logical probability that we're mistyped is true for everyone which it is not. If we have a system that explains what a type is, we can measure our understanding of the theory against this system and receive results of various accuracy.

As for your description of your friend's personality, it doesn't reveal any of her cognitive functions. What functions would specifically be associated with social awkwardness anyway? Any type can be socially awkward for various reasons.

As for the purpose of this thread, so your point was to "lure us here" to discuss about this, but what is it that we are discussing, exactly? What is the point of this discussion? Is it to discuss the type of your friend, why some individuals have issues making logical points when expressing themselves or something else such as discussion itself?

 

[Ene]

Lea,

First, my friend tests as an INFP. Flatlander asked if there was a possiblity she could be something else. Of course, there's a possiblity. There's always a possibility. Secondly, I feel that I was quite clear about what I was wanting to discuss, functions behind communication styles.

Also, claiming we all could be mistyped

well, some of us could be. People often don't look at themselves honestly and therefore they don't always answer assessment questions honestly. Likely, we are not all mistyped, but some of us...probably are. Logical or not, it's a probability.

is a weak logical argument because it assumes the logical probability that we're mistyped is true for everyone which it is not.

Not for everyone, but for some.

If we have a system that explains what a type is, we can measure our understanding of the theory against this system and receive results of various accuracy.

True, provided we have a solid understanding, which I have never claimed to have. I came here to help me learn. I'm no expert on cognitive functions. And as you say, various accuracy, meaning that sometimes we will not be completely accurate. In order for results to always be accurate the tests would have to be infalible and the people taking the tests would have to be completely objective and many times human beings are not completely objective.

As for your description of your friend's personality, it doesn't reveal any of her cognitive functions.

No, it doesn't. It just reveals manisfestations of them.

As for the purpose of this thread, so your point was to "lure us here" to discuss about this

,

Lea, that was a statement made in a good-natured attempt to joke around. I'm sorry it didn't come across that way. I am a very easy-going person. I joke around--alot. I see humor in most things and even when people have proverbial steam coming out their ears [NOT SAYING THAT ANYBODY HERE DOES] I tend to see something funny. I honestly started this thread because I just wanted to understand what people thought were the functions behind why some of us want to get to the point and some of us don't.

but what is it that we are discussing, exactly?

What is the point of this discussion?

See the original post and another where I restate the objective.

Is it to discuss the type of your friend

, No, that just got tangled up in the discussion.

why some individuals have issues making logical points when expressing themselves or something else such as discussion itself?

What cognitive functions are behind why some people want to get to the point? What cognitive functions are behind why some people just want to express but not actually have any particular thing they are expressing.


Now, a side note:

I have probably spent more time here than I should have today, but I do thank each person who attempted to help me answer my questions. A lot of insight has been shared and I have come to believe that I understand the possible combinations of functions that produce each type of communication. I have tried to make sure that I acknowledged each person who took the time to answer my questions. I will consider all the info you've provided, view points, etc. I am a busy person. My time is valuable and I believe that each person's here is valuable. So being on this forum, participating in a discussion, actually means something to me. It has a purpose for me, a point. It's not just something I do to pass the time. I am interested in typology. It helps me as a writer. It helps me as an educator and as a self-defense instructor. Having said that, I may soon be absent from the forum as this weekend begins the spring tour season for me, so as of Friday, I may not be around much.

So, once again, thanks everybody.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

double post.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

Not interested in Je'ers stating their judgments like fact. To me, you are just one subjective person with one opinion. I need way more data than your singular evaluation, although that opinion is very valuable to me. And I'm not going to stand there and state my opinion like it's all facts either. The more voices, the better - in order to distill truth. The end goal of Ji I think.

Yes! The Js in my life do this too. I find it frustrating because I recoil at such blunt labels without explanation, as I naturally immediately apply them to internal quality. I've been having to learn how to suspend my own judgment of the J for making that judgment until I hear the whole story, because to me it seems so superficial. And it is - but that's what makes it okay to call something or someone "stupid", because it's not about their internal character.

[If I’m understanding this correctly] I think actually that it is about their internal character- it’s just that Js need to go in the different direction. We need to go into communication ‘blunt’ end first. I think maybe with introverted perception, there’s waaaaaa-a-a-ay too many applications for that information. Je needs to go: Kingdom -> Phylum -> Class -> Order -> Family -> Genus. Information about the ‘family’ is useless to me until the kingdom, phylum, class and order hav been placed (and so on, any such variation in that direction). I can handle a couple of those being skipped- like I can estimate ‘phylum’ based on what’s being said about ‘order’….but it drives me nuts sometimes to be passed a bunch of something about ‘family’ without saying what ‘kingdom’ one is referring to. Because whatever is being said about ‘family’, or ‘genus’- my mind starts scanning like crazy and there are too many effing kingdoms out there to try to figure out which one we’re talking about. It’s like finding a needle in a haystack- which isn’t a bad thing, but just give me a ballpark of where that needle *probably* is within that haystack. Bouncing from context to context isn’t a big deal to Pe, but to Pi each context is a potential black hole/bottomless pit/entire universe within itself.

Whereas Ji first tries to place the ‘genus’ and works its way up to figuring out which ‘kingdom’? I think there’s a strong tendency to take all the judgment required to go from ‘genus’ to ‘kingdom’- from the very beginning of evaluating a thing all the way to the end where the thing has been baked and thoroughly chewed and digested and can confidently called a fact(!)- and project that accumulation of judgment into when a Je’er is simply trying to begin the categorization process.

There’s a skit by The State called The Bearded Men of Space Station 11 that perfectly exemplifies (imo) what it’s like to deal with Te. Unfortunately they monitor youtube pretty heavily for copyright violation so I can’t post it. But essentially: a high ranking officer shows up at Space Station 11 to announce that all men in space with beards will be declared aliens “because beards don’t grow in space.” He says this to a table seated full of bearded men. They look stunned, and keep saying things like, “…You’re kidding though, about ‘beards not growing in space’, right?” That’s the whole skit. Like, they can’t grasp how this guy is standing in front of them insisting beards don’t grow in space, when they’re sitting there with beards that have grown in space. I watched this with my son and we both had the same reaction: “Wow, if ever anything has ever perfectly exemplified why it’s difficult to deal with [my eNTJ ex husband, his father]…..It’s. This. Skit.”

It takes a lot of work for me to realize Te assertions aren’t actually the end product they appear to be- they’re starting points. Even though I logically know this, it’s still hard for me….and I’m a total J, so I can only imagine how hard it is for a Pe’er to grasp the extent to which Je assertions aren’t as “I’M RIGHT AND THIS IS A FACT” as they appear to be. But they aren't.

I refer to that post so much, it wouldn’t surprise me if uumlau has started to regret the day he wrote it. And/or possibly put me on ignore. (But dang it, it’s a good explanation!)

 

[Flatlander]

Flatlander,

I appreciate you taking the time to contribute to this thread, for lending your ideas and input. Thank you.

So about my friend, I interact with her often and I am sure she is not an S and she is deifinitely not an Fe. I do see a lot of Ti and Ne at work in her daily life. At least, I think they are Ti and Ne.

Of course it is possible that she could be mistyped.

I don't ask that question purposelessly. I ask it when I think it's better than a distant possibility.

Also, if I'm correct in seeing Si/Fe in her cognition, then INTP is a possible type (Ti Ne Si Fe).

For all I know, you could be mistyped. I could be mistyped.

The point is to figure enough out about yourself that you can get past the 'for all I know' stage and have at least a reasonable chance of having typed yourself correctly.

So, whatever her type, she is socially awkward and in a group she puts people ill at ease. I think she wants to be relatable but doesn’t have a clue how to be.

I might suggest socionics ILE for her? This sounds kind of like seeking capability with Fe, which I might expect from the type. And the way you put it, it sounds kind of conscious to her to do this.

ILE is ENTp, Ne-Ti.

Other option seems like ILI, with PoLR Fe. Meh, donno.

She is clumsy and awkward [physically]. After an initial meeting, people are often put off by her.

Inferior Sensation may fit the bill.

Why did I complain about it?

To lure you here, of course, and entangle you in this discussion. Apparently, it worked, because you're here.

Actually, I didn’t mean to complain but if it came across that way, then to be blunt, it takes longer.

Huh? What did you mean by the bolded?

I interact with so many people, on any given day, that I sometimes get lazy with the ones who take the long scenic route to get to their destination.

Sounds exhausting. All of it.

And no, cutting and pasting to restructure isn't the same as reframing, exactly, but it does help me to reframe it in my mind as I go. It’s like a short cut.

It's important to keep terms differentiated when talking about functions and their manifestations, to try to make it clear what each one is really doing, as much as you can. Otherwise you will outwardly misattribute things in ways that can confuse others.

In my opinion, it's really important to be careful on a forum where people are trying to learn about typology - they are likely to get the wrong ideas from it, try to use them in psychoanalyzing others and probably make a lot of mistakes and increase misunderstandings. I've seen this happen, and it's not always bad for the typer who thinks because they will consider what they've learned and strive to refine their understanding, but many don't really think psychologically or are prone to getting caught in traps without even realizing it.

Significant understanding...I hope to gain some of that. Perhaps we will still be on it when you return. If you don't mind, I would like to ask you by what means you arrived at your own type.

I thought I was an INTP when I started out - I internet-tested as that type. I spent awhile muddling around descriptions on sites like typelogic and saw ideal images in the INTP and the INTJ but didn't understand how exactly they were reached, and wanted to figure it out.

So I found out about functions, filled out a questionnaire on PerC and got typed as an INFJ, started thinking about Ni as a possibility alongside Ti and wondering how Fe would fit into my psyche. I went through a long process of simultaneously investigating functions to try to get to the idea of what they really are and how they compare and contrast to and work with each other, and reflecting on my mental life to get in touch with how I developed and what's really going on when I think. Investigating Enneagram also helped with this in a secondary way, because I came to understand where it is appropriate to separate motivation from function use and where it's not, how the two forces mingle and separate in the psyche. But in the end it comes down to understanding myself without the functions first, to see for myself how I work, and then using the functions as some external concepts that contribute to a map of what I see.

And the map I came up with isn't as clear as 'I'm Ni Te Fi Se'. It's something like.. everpresent Ni with a T coloring that was ingrained through years of semi-consciously practicing the perspective for different reasons (role models in my life who are T, the added distance from the world it gave me, etc.), and can look like Ti or Te in response to different situations, F that shows up but I'm not so aware of or mostly become aware of at a more basic level, and this strident Se that's consciously black and white in refinement, all-important or not present. The Ni is quite nuanced, F lacks nuance relative to T, and Se can leave me helpless. The principle of polar dom/inf functions that tend to get extreme being paired with auxiliaries that undergo more individual development that might be differently defined - it works for me, because it matches a reality in which I see different people with different levels and types of mental development, but usually there's one perspective that will be identified with, put forth most strongly, and if the person is neurotic the inferior will show up in exotic ways.

In MBTI by functions my closest alternative is INTJ, because I am indeed Ni dominant with T secondary. I'd actually rather a denotation like iNt, no J or P, as neither J nor P as behaviors apply perfectly to me on a consistent basis, and I don't put much stock in that indicator.

It's been almost two years? since I started thinking about this stuff. By this point, I trust my own concepts of the functions pretty well, I've essentially gotten to their core and I can see what I think of as their manifestations. But I still explain my thinking on the forum when it seems needed because it leaves no room for debate except on the theoretical level (a la "That's not Fe!") and a proper justification put out there requires justification in return to make any response legitimate.

 

[PeaceBaby]

It takes a lot of work for me to realize Te assertions aren’t actually the end product they appear to be- they’re starting points. Even though I logically know this, it’s still hard for me….and I’m a total J, so I can only imagine how hard it is for a Pe’er to grasp the extent to which Je assertions aren’t as “I’M RIGHT AND THIS IS A FACT” as they appear to be. But they aren't.

Heh, I hear you. Stating X = Y hardly seems like a starting point, that's for sure (vs even a slight variation X = Y?). Yet over the years, the realization has sunk in ...

And of course INxP's are Te / Fe inferior; we only say Te / Fe stuff when pressed or stressed. So it usually comes out pissy (sorry for the word, best one I can think of). It's almost impossible not to project some internal guk onto what we hear since it goes through all the filters first before it hits our Te / Fe. The waters get muddy. You guys just sound so judge-y all the time! And we have to take the pointy end of the stick and work what is to us, backwards. After it poked us. Ouch!

(lol all my mixed metaphors, gruesome!)

 

[OrangeAppled]

If I'm having trouble explaining something sometimes, I actually like J people who say like 1 sentence which articulates or summarizes it perfectly. It's really pleasing.

It is good active listening to repeat back what someone said to you in your own words (often a more concise version) so as to show how you understood them. I do this with people & appreciate when they do it with me in a way that is not trivializing or over-simplifying my point.

I can go back & forth for awhile with those who do, because they'll repeatedly miss the point in their effort to shove it into a neat little summary which often has nothing to do with the point. But if they get it right, then it's refreshing to see someone, well got it right. With Je types, it seems like they have pre-defined, external categories they are shoving everything into, but you're trying to explain something which exists outside of those. It's not even categorizable... it's like asking a painter to arrange their strokes in some logical manner - huh?

----

INFPs are tagged "harmonizer-clarifiers" by Keirsey I think (?) and this describes a listening style, among other things. In using good active listening, I think INFPs will do the "repeating back" thing a lot, and in doing so, we can clarify someone's own expression & draw out THEIR points in a way that is meaningful and accurate. This is very helpful to people who are not articulate or even good at understanding their own feelings, both emotional & rational feeling. I actually find that few other people do this kind of listening, especially well.

However, I think Nardi's study shows Ti types are rather poor listeners. I suppose the tendency to tune people out because you don't find what they're saying "relevant" has its advantages, but the problem is when "relevancy" is always determined by the listener. It has to make sense according to a point they've pre-decided on, which will certainly make you miss someone's point if it's in a blindspot or covering ground that has never occurred to you.

I often will feel that INTPs create a strawman a lot because of poor listening. They hear one thing & assume the larger point or the reason for a conclusion, & then they write it all off as a whole without listening to the rest for clarification. To me, this again looks like "stupid" or "poor reading comprehension". It seems INFJs may do this also....

However, I often do start with an introduction of sorts when speaking to give an overview and then I may fill in details. But I think this was learned. Writing in essay style at times & using details is because of my education, and it's a Te aspect a fair amount of IxFPs probably learn through school.

I'm more exploratory in communicating naturally though. Ne is more interactive - you pull ideas out of the moment, and use those to explain Ji, which is hard to communicate in a way others will grasp readily. So I can't connect it all in my head & then give a finished, polished product in speaking unless I'm writing & have the time & inclination to arrange things. When I write, it's out of order.... I often start a sentence, move to another, come back to finish the first, shift paragraphs around. It's hard to do that when speaking.... Sometimes it feels like communication should be spherical, in 3D, not this block method. I feel like one point branches out & then swings back around to form another - how can a paragraph structure that properly? It really cannot. I think Pe is more like dancing in the moment spontaneously & Je is like choreography (which I hate also).

How are you sure that she's an INFP, if I might ask? That sounds to me like perceiver talk, especially Si/Ne as it seems to encourage simple experience-talk more, especially if she's just doing it with you alone. I might posit that she has Fe going on too, if she's doing it to create a friendly atmosphere with you. I've always found Fi to get more to its own point, at least as part of the dominant/inferior axis.

Anyway, speaking as an Ni dom with auxiliary Thinking, I usually find my own points in things if the person didn't seem to make one themself. I do it by reframing what they're saying to get to the core of it, and if I'm not sure my thinking is accurate I ask if I'm correct. Otherwise if I'm interested I lead them deeper into the topic with questions, or I don't bother and let it go. You sound vaguely like you might be seeking Ni (Te?) for some reason, rather than thinking with it.

I agree. Rambling story telling is common to Si types IMO. That's why too many details or rambling can pop up with INxPs & sometimes even ENxPs, but usually they are a part of something "greater". It's more like puzzle pieces being put together.

Si tangents are very linear. One thought leads to the next, like falling dominoes. And it's often NOT connecting to a larger concept. It's just a stream, and the facts are valuable for their own sake (which is not very Ne or Fi at all). I have a hard time with seeing the point or meaning in what some SJs around me discuss, finding a lot of it "noise", but I'm sure there is a point & meaning & I strive to see it. Learning to grasp other styles of communication is a sign of being a good communicator yourself, IMO. If you're not getting someone's point, sometimes the problem is you're a poor listener or have poor comprehension.

INFPs usually use tangents, rambles & details to explain a point or points that are very nuanced & difficult to explain in ordinary, direct langage. Fi is very nuanced. This is why I appreciate the active listening style I mentioned above & that this post describes also.

 

[gromit]

It is good active listening to repeat back what someone said to you in your own words (often a more concise version) so as to show how you understood them. I do this with people & appreciate when they do it with me in a way that is not trivializing or over-simplifying my point.

I can go back & forth for awhile with those who do, because they'll repeatedly miss the point in their effort to shove it into a neat little summary which often has nothing to do with the point. But if they get it right, then it's refreshing to see someone, well got it right. With Je types, it seems like they have pre-defined, external categories they are shoving everything into, but you're trying to explain something which exists outside of those. It's not even categorizable... it's like asking a painter to arrange their strokes in some logical manner - huh?

Yes frustrating when the message is not getting across, but really nice when it is