I finally got around to watching this video.
Firstly- more as an aside- yes, there is a big difference between being self-absorbed and exuding some sense of superiority. I don’t think they’re even particularly in the same ballpark, or that they’re easy to mistake for one another- so I don’t understand how this guy thinks they get conflated. Even the capacity to refer to it as “self-absorption†is an indication of humility. [While this guy seems to see a significant difference between “selfish†and “self-absorbedâ€- I personally wonder if INFPs wouldn’t still find “self absorbed†to fall short in describing that world view. In my mind, the difference is that the former carries a stigma of active indifference towards the well-being of others and the latter a stigma of obliviousness to the well-being of others. “Self-absorbed†is, imo, still a somewhat derogatory phrase (if especially for an NF, I’d think)- moreso than the guy in the video seems to believe? ]
I suspect “self-absorbed†is to INFP what “paranoia†is to INFJ: it’s a somewhat short-sighted/depreciating way to explain what that thought process looks like from an outside perspective. While it can be said that both are true (from the outside)- to say simply “paranoid†or (I’d think) “self-absorbed†belies adequate understanding of how that (respective) internal landscape works. While he does explain that (dogs hearing other frequencies analogy)- he also keeps saying Fi “is self absorbed,†instead of emphasizing “appears to be self absorbed.†So anyway, that was distracting to me- I think I’d take umbrage if I were an INFP. I personally think “self absorbed†isn’t that far removed from “selfishâ€- I’d think Fs (if not especially NFs) would agree, but maybe that’s just me.
As far as what he says about INFJs:
I think he’s spot on when he says incoming information hits a non-emotional place. This isn’t to say it won’t cause an emotional reaction- but the information definitely really does go to an unemotional place. Any emotional reaction usually just serves to push processing that information at a faster pace- but it feels like my emotions have almost nothing to do with the information, the emotion has to do with my reaction to the information. In such instances where there’s an emotional charge, it can be highly noticeable- and I presume that is what he means by “speaks through feelingsâ€. And just like he mentioned how NFPs can sound like they are more emotionally invested in the ideas they're putting forth than they really are- I think Fe tends to come across as having a lot more conviction than is actually there.
He says we’re not sensitive- I’d say it’s more that we’re not sensitive to the same things. When some important aspect of some pattern emerges- such as inconsistencies- though we generally aren’t able to articulate for an infuriatingly long time (“They’re taking in far more abstract communication than they can communicate out†is exactly right), we are incredibly sensitive to it. I think most of us try to ignore it until we can articulate it, or until we’ve got some bloody knife in hand to avoid sounding paranoid- but we’re very sensitive to it. We can’t turn it off. I think this is the whole reason we are notorious for simply backing away- if we weren’t so sensitive to incoming information, if it were available to simply *not* be sensitive to it, we would turn it off when it becomes unbearable.
Towards the end, I very much agree with this too: “When you’re dealing with an INFJ, you have to realize they are taking in ideas very abstractly, very unemotionally. That’s what goes in. What comes out, they talk through their feelings. So how do you deal with them? You realize that their feelings are their way of communicating, not ways of thinking. They aren’t communicating feelings, they’re communicating through feelings and what’s behind that is unemotional.â€
