Actually, I once said that was the reason I didn't like SJs. Because they were against ALL change, where as I was only against unnecessary or negative change.It reminds me of a conversation I had a long time ago with an INFP on INFPgc chatroom. Me and another ISFJ were being accused of being rigid, not wanting to change, shooting down their plans etc. However if they looked at it from our perspective, they would quickly see that we're not against change but unneccessary change. This is true for the ISTJs as well. We essentially operate on the motto: "If it's not broken, don't try and fix it" and "If you are going to change the system, provide me with good justification."
Actually, yes. A lot of people on here with SFJ spouses imply that they struggle with them precisely because they refuse to do that and stick stubbornly to a traditional framework that isn't comfortable for them.Think about it this way: Does it seem so unusual as an idea that an ISFJ might adapt to their partners needs, changing their frameworks because they believe that it will improve things?
Then again... I have no way of knowing that those people were SFJs other than the word of the person who claimed it, which might very well have been biased.
Yep. That's a good point. Although interestingly enough, I'm in a state of apathy right now... because I'm struggling to find any meaning in action. I used to have the motivation of pleasing my teachers, but now there's no meaning.How do people operate without reasoning anyway? There's always some motivation behind actions. Most people would agree that people seek meaning for their actions, otherwise we would be in a state of apathy. For some this is religion, for others it'd be creating meaning for ourselves.
That's hard for me to accept, though. Aren't real life experiences kind of confined to a narrow sphere that might not be applicable to other contexts? I have trouble accepting individual experience as meaningful. To me, experiences seem to make people biased for and against particular traits based on how they've been impacted by them, not objective.Yep. Therefore it's best to take the MBTI model with a pinch of salt and use it as a basic model and then refine it with real life experiences, while trying to maintain being objective as possible when doing so.
Well, I don't really think intuition is about being creative or imaginative. I always thought it was more about thinking in terms of patterns rather than details, and feeling attuned to the mental/reflective side of life rather than the physical/active side.When I first came to MBTI I thought I was an ISXX because I had totally rejected intuition within me, because I do not see myself as a creative nor imaginative individual. Having been with an INFJ friend, I could see that while there was many similarities, there was also lots of differences and she concluded the same. She also wanted to become a writer, I'm not so good with words.
ISFPs don't have Ne. The functional order is Fi, Se, Ni, Te. It's ISFJs that have Ne as the forth. Si, Fe, Ti, Ne. I think it's assumed that you're much more likely to use the four functions in your type, than the four in your shadow.Regarding Si and Ni. It's interesting to hear about your friends experiences, do you mind elaborating a little more on that? Otherwise I could be an ISFP, except there's the major problem that I identify Ne as my weakest function. Brainstorming and going off tangent is difficult for me. I've tried improving Ne by engaging in the whole Seaside - Ocean - Dolphins etc, but you would quickly realise that I'm always operating within a framework than allowing myself to go into something completely unrelated to the original point.
Actually, my Ne is terrible as well. NPs say things that go over my head all the time. I get NJ humor (usually dry humor) rather well, but NP humor eludes me.
Yeah, me too. I had exactly the same bias until I met some ISFPs on here.There's also the fact that I do identify much with Se as a function. In fact until recently I had a fair amount of bias for SPs as I essentially associated it with hedonism.
TThis is the bane of my existence. I create so much of this.hat coupled with some experiences with unstable SPs basically made them out to be rather... dubious. But I've always known that this is just prejudice. One thing that interests me most about psychology is actually how susceptible we are to bias created from self-defensive mechanisms, as it's something I aim to reduce within myself.
Eh... I actually have a prejudice against Christians, but it's because parts of their morality seem unjust to me. It's mostly because I'm personally affected by some of it due to an unfortunate... situation I've found myself in. So I ally myself with those who disagree with Christians as a way of protecting myself and finding acceptance.Thankfully I met a wonderful ESFP who happens to be a christian. Personally I think her religion provides her with a sense of stability and ethical positions like "To be kind to people etc". It's wonderful as she is so kind and quirky at the same time, somebody who is willing to accept people as long as they are reasonably within christian morals. So in some ways that has dismissed my prejudice against ESFPs.
But I agree with your assessment of SFPs... they can be very kind, quirky, and accepting.
Well, you kind of have to conform. I may openly express disagreement here, but in real life? I'll swallow my pride and act precisely according to the rules, as long as I don't have a personal need to do something that's against the accepted rules. But I'll do that secretly rather than publicly.There are lots of things that I keep and lots of things I've rejected based on whether I view them as truth. I explaind earlier in this post about how SJs react to change in beliefs and values. However in practice I'm more willing to conform unless I view there as being an obvious major problem with society.
That framework you described is pretty much a carbon copy of mine. And about small talk... I used to assume it was shallow and superficial because it was often associated with those things. But after getting into more conversations with people using it, I found it really wasn't so bad. It only sucks if you can't keep up with it because you don't know the subject (in this case shopping). Ironically, there's very little difference between "intellectual" and "shallow" conversation besides the topics you're expected to know about.Just to give a little background on how I have potentially come to create my model of reality in bullet points.
- Rejection from school at early age.
- Development of perfectionism in order to be accepted.
- Refusal of falling to peer-pressure to engage in 'immoral acts'
- Social Anxiety producing shyness. Don't fit with 'mainstream' crowds.
- Observance of negative treatment towards outcasts.
- Stronger development of protection for the underdogs.
- Development of moral relativism. Remaining neutral in arguements.
[Why do people bully? Why did they persecute people for believing the world was round in the past? etc]
- Decision to find my own system of what is truth.
This is the framework that I have adopted and it can hold true for other sensors. You could also say that I was influenced by a close INFJ friend during my adolescent years (13-19).
I've changed a few times for example: I used to think that shopping and small talk is superficial, but then I met an ISFP who loves shopping and clothing, and I could never describe her as shallow. Regarding that of small talk, I discovered that topics that aren't interesting to me as usually deemed as small talk. But it's extremely possible for some one to go into lots of depth with shopping etc. Someone mentioned small talk as being a method of exchanging greetings/acknowledgement of the other person rather than conversation and I think that's extremely true.
Scientific method? How can you apply that to MBTI? It's not observable... is it?It's all good! You do make insightful posts, for example that one about the limitations of MBTI. For me personally I find it best to operate in a scientific method way when dealing with the theory.
My parents personally hate that I do this, but I use extreme examples to counter a theory being 100% correct and thus it needs refining. Another example: I operate on the belief that function ordering is not rigid and fluid, however the first two functions along with the inferior are usually good indicators of type. Then BlackCat came along and pwned me by telling me that his inferior is actually well developed.
LOL, I actually do that all the time. Some of the NPs really hated it, though, so I stopped, at least on here.