• 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.

[INFP] Are INFPs "sexy"?

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Then your statement that it would be better for "one" to turn elsewhere than the INFP for quality long-term friendship/partnership is false. I've already pointed out why. I think real-life experience in relationships trumps abstract theory when it comes to real-life relationships..

Abstract theory is what describes all of our ideas. There is nothing in our experiences that could not be computed into a theory. You either explain how your experiences lead to relevant insights (make a theory), or drop it. (Or of course, declare yourself unreasonable where you wont have to explain anything)

Then your statement that it would be better for "one" to turn elsewhere than the INFP for quality long-term friendship/partnership is false. I've already pointed out why. I think real-life experience in relationships trumps abstract theory when it comes to real-life relationships..

Recapitulate for me, I must have missed where you did this.
 

Usehername

On a mission
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
3,794
I have a very close (probably too close?) INFP male friend that I've known since grade 9 that is the epitome of sexiness (according to everyone from ESTP volleyball teammate to ENFJ new friend to INTP high school friend). ENFP male friend can't figure out why the INFP hasn't had a million girlfriends as every girl he meets always asks questions about the INFP.

Would it work with a xxTJ female and a very xxFP withdrawn male? I don't know.
 

hathor_sekhmet

New member
Joined
Sep 27, 2008
Messages
53
MBTI Type
INFP
Abstract theory is what describes all of our ideas. There is nothing in our experiences that could not be computed into a theory. You either explain how your experiences lead to relevant insights (make a theory), or drop it. (Or of course, declare yourself unreasonable where you wont have to explain anything)



Recapitulate for me, I must have missed where you did this.

My theory: Many INFPs make great long-term friends or partners for some people. Not all people, of course, but some people. And not all INFPs do, because of course there are unhealthy examples of the type.

I've built this theory around my experiences of being a great long-term friend for several people.

What do I mean by "great friend"?

I agree with your assertion that INFPs are useful for our ability to navigate emotional waters. I have helped my friends through many tricky emotional situations and continue to do so. Even if they treat me unfairly, I am always there for them when they need me. Perhaps you do not require or value such support, but there are people who do.

My Fi does not turn me into a flighty fool whom no one can ever respect. Perhaps it is true that I am loyal and supportive because it makes me feel good about myself (I suspect that's partly true for anyone), but does that change the fact that I make a good long-term friend or potential partner? I'd say no, it does not change that fact.

It's very easy for us to compromise on this, actually. Just retract the statement that implies that INFPs would not be a good long-term friend or partner for ANYONE.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
My theory: Many INFPs make great long-term friends or partners for some people. Not all people, of course, but some people. And not all INFPs do, because of course there are unhealthy examples of the type.

I've built this theory around my experiences of being a great long-term friend for several people.

What do I mean by "great friend"?

I agree with your assertion that INFPs are useful for our ability to navigate emotional waters. I have helped my friends through many tricky emotional situations and continue to do so. Even if they treat me unfairly, I am always there for them when they need me. Perhaps you do not require or value such support, but there are people who do.

My Fi does not turn me into a flighty fool whom no one can ever respect. Perhaps it is true that I am loyal and supportive because it makes me feel good about myself (I suspect that's partly true for anyone), but does that change the fact that I make a good long-term friend or potential partner? I'd say no, it does not change that fact.

It's very easy for us to compromise on this, actually. Just retract the statement that implies that INFPs would not be a good long-term friend or partner for ANYONE.

Indeed, I have listed certain kinds of people who may appreciate the INFP. This claim is incompatible with the proposition that noone would regard them as a worthwhile friend/partner. This is a claim that I did not make. Though, a general, sound functioning person ought not to.

As we have listed before,

1)People who need emotional support and have a dependency problem.
2)Domineering Thinkers.
3)Severely emotionally retarded Thinkers.

These groups include a very small portion of the psychologically HEALTHY populace.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Seriously though Blue Wing, why do you hate INFPs?
Why ask for an explanation from the author himself.

I often have value disagreements with INFPs due to the similar mental mechanism but different decision maker (T/F), yet I tend to appreciate those of the type greatly. For example, many of my favorite musicians are INFP.

By the way, I said I don't usually find INFPs sexy earlier, but if Feist is, and it's certainly possible, then nevermind. :D
 

hathor_sekhmet

New member
Joined
Sep 27, 2008
Messages
53
MBTI Type
INFP
Indeed, I have listed certain kinds of people who may appreciate the INFP. This claim is incompatible with the proposition that noone would regard them as a worthwhile friend/partner. This is a claim that I did not make. Though, a general, sound functioning person ought not to.

As we have listed before,

1)People who need emotional support and have a dependency problem.
2)Domineering Thinkers.
3)Severely emotionally retarded Thinkers.

These groups include a very small portion of the psychologically HEALTHY populace.


Well, I still don't agree with that.

I'll moderate my theory, then:

Many INFPs make good long-term friends or partners for some sound, functioning people.

Everyone goes through emotional turmoil sometimes, even sound, functioning people who are usually not dependent. This is where the INFP comes especially in handy. In times other than emotional turmoil, INFPs can be fun people to just BS with. So we make good long-term friends or partners for those who appreciate a shoulder to lean on in times of emotional hardship, but who also enjoy playing around. Because we ARE playful. :cheese: So no sound, functioning person wants that or should want that?

Damn, I should have known better than to fall into the trap that is Internet debate. I'm sorry for cluttering up this thread. I just think it's BS that no one's calling BlueWing out for this nonsense.

Yes, BlueWing, please tell us what INFP stabbed you in the back and left you in a ditch. We can all hate the specific person together instead of slinging mud on everyone of the same type.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Well, I still don't agree with that.

I'll moderate my theory, then:

Many INFPs make good long-term friends or partners for some sound, functioning people.

Everyone goes through emotional turmoil sometimes, even sound, functioning people who are usually not dependent. This is where the INFP comes especially in handy. In times other than emotional turmoil, INFPs can be fun people to just BS with. So we make good long-term friends or partners for those who appreciate a shoulder to lean on in times of emotional hardship, but who also enjoy playing around. Because we ARE playful. :cheese: So no sound, functioning person wants that or should want that?

.

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.

Damn, I should have known better than to fall into the trap that is Internet debate. I'm sorry for cluttering up this thread. I just think it's BS that no one's calling BlueWing out for this nonsense.

.


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.
 

hathor_sekhmet

New member
Joined
Sep 27, 2008
Messages
53
MBTI Type
INFP
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.
 

hathor_sekhmet

New member
Joined
Sep 27, 2008
Messages
53
MBTI Type
INFP
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....
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
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.
 

hathor_sekhmet

New member
Joined
Sep 27, 2008
Messages
53
MBTI Type
INFP
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! :cheese:

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

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
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! :cheese:

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.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
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.
 

hathor_sekhmet

New member
Joined
Sep 27, 2008
Messages
53
MBTI Type
INFP
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.
 

hathor_sekhmet

New member
Joined
Sep 27, 2008
Messages
53
MBTI Type
INFP
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.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
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)

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.
 

hathor_sekhmet

New member
Joined
Sep 27, 2008
Messages
53
MBTI Type
INFP
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! :rolleyes:

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