OP, in my opinion, we're super sexy.
Yeah, I know that whole argument with SolitaryWalker is done, but I've got something to say. SW, if you're around, listen up.
Equipped with your theory, will you judge every INFP (or anyone you assume is such) to be a selfish, spoiled brat, incapable of comprehending complex reasoning? Does that go against any of your principles?
In your study of the INFP character, (not just how Fi, Ne, Si and Te interact), you have no doubt noticed that INFPs usually view themselves as fundamentally flawed. They know their flaws only too well. Most decide to combat and overcome those flaws, which gives the depth of character you claim they lack.
Your obliterating laser beam analysis is fairly accurate, though wholly unnecessary. Good job of pouring the salt on the open wound. You know exactly how to knock someone off their high horse. How ironic, that's exactly what INFPs are accused of doing: attacking someone at their weakest point!
Also, what motivated you to apply objective logic to a thread with a subjective premise? To get people to devalue INFPs as you apparently do? That's not going to yield any significant results. People will form their own opinions regardless of what you highly recommend. Or was it to get people to see the value of logical thinking? If society is geared for the ESTJ as the theory suggests, INFPs have already had "Logic over emotions!" rammed down their throats enough. They don't need to hear it from you, too.
Perhaps you wish to be respected for your logical thought processes. You failed hard. How can you expect to receive dignity and respect if you do not respect and dignify your audience? You get the respect you give. I'm sure any truly good orator knows that.
It seems some NTs enjoy theorizing in its own right; exercising their mental faculties gives them great pleasure. If you made your post simply to further your own interest in mental gymnastics, to attack people for mere sport, who's self-serving now?
(Note: You might say you're addressing the fallacies of the INFP thought process, but I say you "attack people." An individual who identifies with the INFP profile likely finds personal identity to be among their top values. INFP profile : personal identity :: attack of INFP profile : attack of personal identity. Once again, you failed to tailor your presentation to your audience. Major points lost, and for what?)
I'm not going to list all possible motivations you may have, firstly because I'm not inside your head, secondly because I'm interested to know what your motivation really was. It may not matter to you, but I'd like to understand you better, so it matters to me. Remember, you're in NF territory.
You've indicated that Thinking is your preference rather than Feeling. You value logic over emotion. That is your preference, your opinion, to which you are entitled. And this is an opinion thread, so differing opinions are good to discuss. But to present your opinions as absolute logic which everyone must embrace, and to say that anyone who doesn't is an unreasoning moron, is highly presumptuous. If your assertions were true fact, no one would dispute them, like no one disputes a mathematical equation or that the world is round.
Everyone's got strong points and weak points. Every type has advantages and disadvantages. Both decision-making styles are perfectly suited to certain circumstances and ridiculously inappropriate for others. To dismiss all people of a certain group before you truly know them, simply because they prefer a style of thinking different from yours, is to behave close-mindedly. To urge others to do the same is to behave as a tyrant. (Speaking of tyrants, who is this royal "we" you keep speaking of? You and every INTP, NT, or INFP hater in the world? You and everyone who agrees with you? You and Lady Logic? You and your cat? You and whose army?)
I don't want to hear "Oh, but paradox fox, you speak of respecting one's audience, yet you've broken your own rule." You lost respect a long time ago. I'll respect you when you clear yourself of hypocrisy. You can do that by delineating your motives and by turning your laser beam onto your type and all other types.
Go brush up on your persuasion skills while I brush up on my teeth. Your presumptuousness tastes like BO.
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.
Narrow range of emotions? Let me guess, all of the good and none of the bad? All of the bad and none of the good? Two good and two bad?
Ok, well what if you get raped on the street? Your child murdered? A terrorist attack on your town? Where will you be then? How narrow will your emotions be? Let me know when you get there, and I'll be fascinated to watch you pontificate your way out of that one.