Frank, you're not going to to get your questions answered.
SolitaryWalker, I take your opinion seriously in virtue of your value for it, yet I also don't take you seriously, for the thought that you may want to change your opinion later and not be held to what you've said. I think I can speak for others here, even if they seem to disagree.
I was wondering what in others can bring out your mean or aggressive side?
I struggle with indifference. The relationship between Rei Ayanami and Asuka Langley Soryu in Neon Genesis Evangelion is
exactly the dynamic I have in mind. I can act
JUST like Asuka, trying to impress people but also being insecure about my own abilities and my ability to fit in. Sometimes, everyone in the world can seem like an indifferent Rei who won't look at me or take me seriously, and where I'm typically calm, in moments I can lash out as hysterically as Asuka can when I feel particularly alienated.
You can ask, what causes this feeling? And it is my own attacks on myself. I understand the perceptual nature of the dynamic. It's all in my head, and that's the only place I can work with it. So you can ask, what behaviors in others trigger self-attack? But I would wonder if you haven't been paying attention. It is a matter of perception. Perceiving external causes to internal conflicts are always projections which are illusory.
Asuka says it herself, "this isn't me". And it's not me either. It's just a common psychological/behavioral pattern I've experienced. But I mean to be clear: even its reappearance over time doesn't mean it has any power, or is true in its implications. I simply make mistakes in my thinking. The dynamic my be completely depersonalized, and thus generalized. For wasn't alienation everyone's fundamental "problem"?
Every human dynamic is ultimately expressed in every individual, either implicitly or explicitly, because every functional attitude is required to compose the human. What then is the importance of preferences for tendencies to over- or under-express certain dynamics except as a matter of contingent natural or learned ability?
You will not understand the INFPs by discussing with them, because discussion inevitably introducing Thinking into the matter which they loathe. ... In order to give you the answers that you are seeking, one must carefully think through the problem you have posed.
On the second point, SW has offered good advice. There's something to discussing the nature of things and people and ideas and such with others, but also a lot to be said for thinking critically about the matter yourself. True creativity always arose from the individual.
On the first point, there is an element of truth, and we can take SW's statement as a warning. It's very easy for many of us feeler types to become over-enthusiastic about raw experience and take "The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life" too much to heart, suspecting reason of necessarily abstracting and isolating oneself where the point is to live. But this crime is distinct from reason, which was always the sole faculty capable of producing clarity, and clarity the sole guarantee of safe passage through the unknown, where all that manifests is
seen in the
light of
reason. (These words are not indifferently correlated.)