User Tag List

First 4121314151624 Last

Results 131 to 140 of 481

  1. #131
    Member hathor_sekhmet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    So, all the INFP will bring to the long term relationship is occassional emotional support (since it is only needed on occassion) and silly banter? Great contributions those are, are they not? Definitely enough to qualify the INFP as a member of a profound long term relationship. Will definitely respect someone a great deal who brings to the table only banter and occassional support, yet is completely without merit on all other occassions (most of the time). Banter is to be classified under the category of emotional support, (as you mention this makes the INFP a fun person to be around). Emotionally stable people tend to require little support, with that goes the banter and other methods of emotional affirmation the INFP offers.

    Accordingly, the emotionally stable or a sound person will require such utilities only very rarely. Therefore it makes little sense for him/her to consistently make investments in what will pay off rarely.
    Yes, I think those are great things to bring to the table. A romantic relationship would require emotional intelligence (INFPs are emotionally intelligent, that's how we can help people through bad times) to keep healthy and afloat. Fun doesn't hurt. A friendship would also require emotional intelligence, and an amount of fun, to maintain. No matter how "emotionally stable" one is, if one has a healthy emotional range, one will occasionally (not so rarely as you suggest) feel badly (look, I'm using one of your tricks, thanks). Life throws crap at you. Very few people can handle it all by themselves all the time.

    Emotional intelligence and good times -- what more would a sound, functioning person require in a relationship?

    Unless by "emotionally stable" you mean "in denial of having emotions" or "having few to no emotions." Which I would not deem emotionally healthy.

    Plus, I think many INFPs can cook quite well.

    Come, BlueWing, step into our embrace. Tell us where it hurts and we will heal you.

  2. #132
    Member hathor_sekhmet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Because you have not pointed out the invalidity of my argument or the errors in establishment of my premises, reasonableness requires you to believe that it is not non-sense.
    I missed this last part.

    It is nonsense. I have pointed out in my previous posts why your point is invalid.

    My gosh, this is actually kind of fun....

  3. #133
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hathor_sekhmet View Post
    I missed this last part.

    It is nonsense. I have pointed out in my previous posts why your point is invalid.

    My gosh, this is actually kind of fun....
    The premise you are challenging is that INFPs do not have any respectable qualities.

    You argue that they do, namely that they can provide emotional support, and everyone needs this (you argued in your last post).

    Emotionally stable people tend not to experience emotions that are difficult to control often. Therefore should be able to handle them on their own.

    An emotionally stable person is one who experiences emotions in predictable patterns, as stable is synonymous with consistent. Such a person would have an easy time managing his/her own emotions simply because it is easy to adjust to a regime that is predictable.

    Therefore, you have failed to refute that premise.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  4. #134
    Member hathor_sekhmet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    The premise you are challenging is that INFPs do not have any respectable qualities.

    You argue that they do, namely that they can provide emotional support, and everyone needs this (you argued in your last post).

    Emotionally stable people tend not to experience emotions that are difficult to control often. Therefore should be able to handle them on their own.

    An emotionally stable person is one who experiences emotions in predictable patterns, as stable is synonymous with consistent. Such a person would have an easy time managing his/her own emotions simply because it is easy to adjust to a regime that is predictable.

    Therefore, you have failed to impugn that premise.
    BlueWing, you lovely curmudgeon!

    Perhaps you do not respect those qualities, but other people (yes, healthy and functional people) do and should. Again, I say that a person with a healthy range of emotions will occasionally need or want support. My definition of "healthy range of emotions" probably differs from yours -- I can't see any way around that difference. All I can say is: there ARE such things as opinions!

    Emotions and predictable patterns... in your ideal Thinker world, maybe. Even you are clearly biased against INFPs because of some disappointment.

  5. #135
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hathor_sekhmet View Post
    BlueWing, you lovely curmudgeon!

    Perhaps you do not respect those qualities, but other people (yes, healthy and functional people) do and should. Again, I say that a person with a healthy range of emotions will occasionally need or want support. My definition of "healthy range of emotions" probably differs from yours -- I can't see any way around that difference. All I can say is: there ARE such things as opinions!

    Emotions and predictable patterns... in your ideal Thinker world, maybe. Even you are clearly biased against INFPs because of some disappointment.
    If you want to be emotionally stable, you need to have a narrow range of emotion. That is the healthiest. This way, you can easily understand them and control them. On the other hand, if there is a wide range of emotion, there will be simply too much work for you to do. This is not healthy because you will not be in control of your life, as your emotions will rule you, not vice versa. Alternatively, if you have a firm grasp over your passions, you get to choose exactly what internal diet of thought is best for you and nothing shall stop you from embracing it.

    Bottom line is the healthiest, or the most conducive to your long term happiness range of emotions, is a very narrow one.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  6. #136
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    Speaking of narrow range, it's rather unobjective to judge people solely based on what they do for you, or people exactly like you. I have absolutely no use for ESFJs, but others do.

  7. #137
    Member hathor_sekhmet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    If you want to be emotionally stable, you need to have a narrow range of emotion. That is the healthiest. This way, you can easily understand them and control them. On the other hand, if there is a wide range of emotion, there will be simply too much work for you to do. This is not healthy because you will not be in control of your life, as your emotions will rule you, not vice versa. Alternatively, if you have a firm grasp over your passions, you get to choose exactly what internal diet of thought is best for you and nothing shall stop you from embracing it.

    Bottom line is the healthiest, or the most conducive to your long term happiness range of emotions, is a very narrow one.
    The problem is that we cannot control what range of emotion we truly possess. Many people have a wide range of emotion. The unhealthy thing to do would be to claim that one has a narrow range of emotion when one doesn't -- in essence that is denial. Those extra ugly emotions will pop up when one doesn't want them to. It is healthier to face them head-on and in that way "control" them, though I don't necessarily agree that "control" is the best word for it. Facing ugly emotions head-on does not mean letting them control you. Rather, it is understanding them and thus preventing them from surprise-attacking you in the dark.

  8. #138
    Member hathor_sekhmet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flak View Post
    Speaking of narrow range, it's rather unobjective to judge people solely based on what they do for you, or people exactly like you. I have absolutely no use for ESFJs, but others do.
    Yes, exactly what I wanted to say but more concise lol.

  9. #139
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flak View Post
    Speaking of narrow range, it's rather unobjective to judge people solely based on what they do for you, or people exactly like you. I have absolutely no use for ESFJs, but others do.
    I am not talking about me, but a healthy person, adept at the pursuit of happiness in this world. There can hardly be a doubt that emotional stability is a prerequisite for this, as it is difficult to be happy when you're not in control of your inner life. In that case, you simply do not know what you need to do in order to be happy, and how you will accomplish that. (Your emotional instability will prevent you from thinking clearly, therefore you will not be in the position to chart your own course and follow through on it)

    Quote Originally Posted by hathor_sekhmet View Post
    The problem is that we cannot control what range of emotion we truly possess. Many people have a wide range of emotion. The unhealthy thing to do would be to claim that one has a narrow range of emotion when one doesn't -- in essence that is denial. Those extra ugly emotions will pop up when one doesn't want them to. It is healthier to face them head-on and in that way "control" them, though I don't necessarily agree that "control" is the best word for it. Facing ugly emotions head-on does not mean letting them control you. Rather, it is understanding them and thus preventing them from surprise-attacking you in the dark.
    Some people are biologically predisposed to experience a narrow range of emotion, others, by contrast, a wide range. The discrepancy between the cognitive faculties of Thinking and Feeling illustrate this concept clearly and thoroughly.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  10. #140
    Member hathor_sekhmet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    I am not talking about me, but a healthy person, adept at the pursuit of happiness in this world. There can hardly be a doubt that emotional stability is a prerequisite for this, as it is difficult to be happy when you're not in control of your inner life. In that case, you simply do not know what you need to do in order to be happy, and how you will accomplish that. (Your emotional instability will prevent you from thinking clearly, therefore you will not be in the position to chart your own course and follow through on it)



    Some people are biologically predisposed to experience a narrow range of emotion, others, by contrast, a wide range. The discrepancy between the cognitive faculties of Thinking and Feeling illustrate this concept clearly and thoroughly.
    Ok, now I understand why no one even bothered contesting your points. I know you're not going to agree to disagree, since to you your opinion is fact, but I am going to drop this (knowing that your point is nonsense) in favor of doing something more productive.

    So you're saying Thinkers have a narrower range of emotion than Feelers? Great, now I can go around claiming that I have SO much more emotional depth and complexity than all you dead-inside NTs -- BlueWing said so!

    (I really am very sorry for clogging up this thread!)

Similar Threads

  1. [INFP] INFP Quotes/Proverbs
    By Rebe in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 12-23-2014, 08:43 PM
  2. [INFP] Are INFP's boring???
    By Scott N Denver in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 06-14-2012, 10:22 AM
  3. [INFP] INFP Quotes?
    By liYA in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-19-2011, 12:34 PM
  4. [INFP] Are INFPs Easy to Pick on?
    By Ginkgo in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 86
    Last Post: 10-27-2009, 03:11 AM
  5. [INFP] Are INFPs Non-Religious?
    By TopherRed in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 10-11-2009, 01:57 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO