Let's try and clear up some misconceptions

[Glycerine]

Yeah, but that's Fe shit I wouldn't expect you to be drawn to in the first place...

Well, thats just another misconception. I hope you're kidding. My ENFP sister is much more into that shit than I am and she uses Fi. Liking those type of things has nothing to do w/ Fe or any function. It's more or less stereotypical female interests.

 

[Fecal McAngry]

Well, thats just another misconception. I hope you're kidding. My ENFP sister is much more into that shit than I am and she uses Fi. Liking those type of things has nothing to do w/ Fe or any function. It's more or less stereotypical female interests.

Fe is far more prototypically girlie/feminine than Fi. Not sayin' there are no ENFP chicks who wear lipstick...

 

[Thalassa]

Fe is far more prototypically girlie/feminine than Fi. Not sayin' there are no ENFP chicks who wear lipstick...

The thing about Fi is that it can be all different things, hippie, girly, or punk rock, whatever. A really major misconception I think is that all xNFPs are pacifists or something.

Someone was saying last night how ENFP females are more casual than INFP girls, for example, and I think there's probably truth to that...but we still get this idea projected onto us like we're all breathless airheads.

 

[Glycerine]

Interesting, I still find that very hard to believe. However thanks for clarifying!

 

[astroninja]

Let's see if this kicks up some discussion

Liking mathematics (or being a raging nerd) are not prerequisites for being an INTP

I did well in Math, but i HATED it with a passion. Humanities is for me.

 

[astroninja]

Everywhere I go, people know what an ENTP is and they talk about how we can't stop eating pancakes. It sucks.

You need to go to new places

 

[briochick]

However strong your P preference, it won't make you unable organise adequately or remember things you said or did or thought just seconds ago or keep your mind on task for long enough when you've decided to, or make you constantly lose things you care about or feel completely overwhelmed by the prospect of handling every day demands. It won't make you fail in school even though you have both the intelligence and the will to excel. It won't make you unable to finish a single written exam in your whole life even though you know the material better than anyone, because you can't organise your thoughts sequentially if they're not written out in front of you yet so you can hold them in mind long enough, or keep your mind from wandering and wandering even more the more stressed you get about how much it's wandering. If what you're describing as your P preference is a pattern of behaviour you'd actually prefer not to have but don't know how to change and is causing you significant problems functioning and fulfilling your potential, it's not a personality preference, by definition; you have a neuro-cognitive disability and need to get help before your life falls apart. I learned that one the long, hard way.

That sounds like a nasty case of ADHD/ADD, which is a slight neurological disorder.

This thread is fantastic btw.

Being INFP does not mean you're always walking around airily (who the heck walks airily anyway?).

 

[astroninja]

Being INFP does not mean you're always walking around airily (who the heck walks airily anyway?).

Flying cockroaches. If crawl = walk.

 

[Fecal McAngry]

The thing about Fi is that it can be all different things, hippie, girly, or punk rock, whatever. A really major misconception I think is that all xNFPs are pacifists or something.

Someone was saying last night how ENFP females are more casual than INFP girls, for example, and I think there's probably truth to that...but we still get this idea projected onto us like we're all breathless airheads.

I think the "breathless airhead" type is typically perceived to be female ESFPs, and it has some truth in it. Here, maybe: YouTube - Jennifer Tilly interview on Late Night (1993)

But female ENFPs? Vapid? Is she vapid?: YouTube - EMMA THOMPSON LAST CHANCE HARVEY ANS INTERVIEW

 

[Tamske]

Another misconception I've encountered both in real life and here.

Thinkers aren't Feelers who need to find their real Feeler selves back.
There are real Thinkers. People who don't hide their feelings because society expect you to be efficient and/or logical. They aren't hiding anything - they just ARE efficient and/or logical. People who have problems talking about their feelings, not because they're introverted, but because they need to realise they are feeling something and this can take some time. People who say "I'm sorry to hear that" when somebody says a relative is sick, while thinking "Was that the good reaction? I hope I don't have to know the name of that relative..."

And an addition to the "Thinkers do value love" these I've posted earlier...

Thinkers do value love
... but they don't like romantic fuss. Roses in February? If my ESTJ comes home with that, I'm going to the police in search of my REAL husband. The one who comes home on Valentine, saying - "Can I have the computer, I need to add some data to our bookkeeping."

 

[Andy]

Here is another misconception that seems to have been doing the rounds lately. Te isn't an opinion forming function - it doesn't use externalised parameters to decide the truth of something. Te is an action determining function. It's "opinions" tend to be limited to what needs to be done, how it should be done, and what the end results will be.

Ask a strong Te user for an opinion on something they consider to be of little relevance, and you likely to get a disinterested grunt (you would from me, that's for sure). A TJs opinions will most likely be formed via Fi instead. An ITJ will usually form such opinions rather slower than other types, while an ETJ will probably have a few very strong opinions on certain topics, and nothing else where.

 

[simulatedworld]

Here's a really annoying misconception that I'd like to see debunked once and for all:

The people who invented Socionics made up their own function definitions, and they have nothing to do with Jung's.

So stop whining about how every non-Socionics idea is deeply flawed and completely wrong. If you want to make up your own function definitions, be my guest, but use some different terms for them so we know wtf you're talking about. Every other typology system on the planet preserves Jung's function definitions instead of making up new ones, and when we discuss functions on this forum, we're almost always using Jung's definitions--NOT the rearranged Socionics ones.

Socionics advocates are so pretentious and yet so oblivious.

 

[Eric B]

I used to think that way, but after all the Jack Flak discussions, plus the rest of the stuff I was learning about the functions (such as seeing the "attitude" or "orientations" separately from the four functions), I saw that it is a cloudy matter of interpretation of Jung, So I could see why Socionics would yield different conclusions with the same codes.

But it's true that it would have been good for them to use a different code system. They actually do; the little shapes, but someone then translated it into the MBTI letters.