Yes, "truth" and "honesty" are both virtues, but it is trivially easy to be truthful and/or honest, and use the truth to do evil things. Fi/Te preferences tend to incur a degree of ignorance to the possibility, that being truthful and perhaps harsh (Te) is acceptable, though sympathy and affection might be applied afterward (Fi). Ti/Fe would rather avoid the harshness if it is not merited.
In the case of Ti/Fe I think it depends on which one is valued above the other. I think a lot of TPs consider incorrectness just cause for "harshness" (the definition of which is relative) in many cases, but I don't see FJs doing that a lot.
I think you might be misreading things a bit, here, SW. It isn't a case of "never squelching" and certainly not "no matter what." INFPs hide their feelings, generally. The part to which you object is that when you hit a hot-button issue, perhaps unintentionally, with an INFP, they start throwing their Fi-reasoning at you, which you perceive as "a certain sense of entitlement."
I don't believe that INFPs generally hide their feelings. That is part of the distinction I'm drawing between 4s and 9s; type 9 is more focused on maintaining the peace and thus less likely to argue, while type 4 is more insistent on sticking up for its values.
I find that type 4s insist on others catering to their values more often than type 9s. I understand
why they're doing that; I just find it selfish and unreasonable in many cases.
My primary point here is that you've entered an arena which is important to the INFP (or xNFP in general). Until you actually address the important matter in terms that the xNFP can understand, they won't back down. It's too important to back down.
I've noticed this.
Here's a question for you, Sim: do you have this xNFP problem outside of forums? If you do, then it might be worth figuring out how to handle it with real people in real life, and that might translate into handling it on the forum. If you don't, then perhaps there's an essential ingredient/signal missing in forum-land upon which you would usually rely to navigate the problem.
Not very often. I know a few particular NFPs who abuse emotional blackmail and guilt tripping in order to always have their feelings catered to, but I also have a good number of NFP friends and most of them don't generally do that kind of thing.
I'm aware of how to deal with it now; I've learned since PB and a few others explained the reasoning. In the case of difficult NFPs in real life I'm much more likely to just ignore it even when I think they're being ridiculous, but that's really only because I prefer preserving those personal relationships to fighting it out and possibly alienating them permanently. When they're not in emo meltdown mode they're often pretty enjoyable people.
I realize their intention is usually just to maintain their personal integrity, not manipulate others, but sometimes they end up doing a lot of emotionally manipulative things without really realizing it. I don't often call people out on it in real life because I care about not alienating most people in real life, but as far as virtually anonymous internet arguments go...there are some people I just don't care about alienating or offending.
To the topic at hand, of Ne-users with Ti and Fi repeatedly battling it out on the forum. I think it's how Ne works, except here the core values, Ti and Fi, are often antithetical. Ti demands a logical consistency of ideas, and will argue endlessly against anyone who appears to be voicing inconsistent ideas. Fi demands personal integrity (subjective self-consistency), and expects it primarily of oneself, but also of others.
That's certainly true.
There is a core argument that revolves around the Ti users apparently lacking personal integrity (expressing emotions that are not "felt," but are instead expressed for effect, to make a point, for example), and the Fi users apparently lacking any logical consistency (because Fi principles are personal integrity axioms, not subject to disproof by Ti-style logical inconsistency arguments). Typically, each makes arguments that the other considers invalid.
Also true.
Neither side steps back to reflect upon what is going on, because core values of both are violated. The focus of both sides is to defend, not to discover.
Well, I don't really expect to convince an INFP that his Fi value is wrong--that's clearly not going to happen. A lot of times, when I think someone is being ridiculous, I focus more on entertaining people who already agree with me than on actually convincing the opposing party--like a pundit, kind of. This usually happens when I'm already pretty certain the opposing party can't be convinced.
Note that I never carry on this kind of argument in PM. There's no point because I'm not going to convince the NFP and no one else is listening.
I do feel somewhat uncomfortable now sim that you've made a distinction between type 4's and 9's ... I know you know my enneagram type and thus may be using our interactions as a basis to make a new "rule" that works to explain certain behaviours.
It's not a rule; it's an observation that's supported by the descriptions of 4 vs. 9 values. It's subject to change if contradicting information comes up.
However, you know I will argue an point until I've made it; will seek to illuminate my POV and can be very determined in doing so. I do think I take more pains to bridge the gap between our communication styles, but I am not convinced you can attribute all that to simply being a 9 wing. My particular upbringing, my age and life experience all play a part in having determined what works and what doesn't work in these particular situations.
Well obviously enneagram type is not the only factor at work here; I'm just noting the trends I've seen. Clearly differences between individuals will come into play and I'm sure you can find some INFP 9s who are more argumentative than some INFP 4s; that's beside the point I'm making.
Young ENTP's are some of my favorite people. Confident and headstrong. Trying to make the world fit into a construct yet at the same time engaged in all the possibilities, thus attempting to reconcile if and how they fit too - a wonderful oxymoron.
To me Seymour summarized the communication difficulties succinctly and precisely. I'll go back and get that quote.
His quote seems to me an accurate assessment of the situation.
sim, I probably feel as angry as any other 4 wing sometimes ... and I do tend to rush to defend feelings in most contexts. Many people PM'd or repped me to drop my discussion with you in Pretentious Fi ("It's not worth it PB!") But our combined tenacity brought us to an understanding, at least a little better one, and thus a better rapport. Most people will give up on the discussion long before I did, not because I'm better, but because I was determined to find our common ground. That's the 9 wing at work - I could not let that go til we could communicate on a more equal footing. I did not want conflict to remain between us. 4 wings are more comfortable with conflict. I feel more threatened by it. Thus I will work on eradicating it.
It's not a 9 wing; if you're a type 9, your wing is either 8 or 1.
But yes I agree that's partially due to the 9 type vs. the 4 type. Doesn't that support my conclusion about the tendencies of INFP 9s vs. INFP 4s?
As far as other's reactions: Satine is also one who will work to try to enhance understanding, but she won't sugar-coat her responses. OA and marmy get pissed at you because to them it's the same old sim over and over again, who never listens and paints them with the same brush, so they just don't think you're worth the time or trouble.
Summary: It is deeper than "INFP 4's are the trouble, 9's aren't."
Oh well, they're welcome to ignore me if they want to.
You don't think I really believe that
all INFP 4s are more troublesome than
all INFP 9s, do you?
I'm sure if you look hard enough, you can find a few ISFPs with more aggressive personalities than a few ENTJs...that doesn't really negate the statement that ENTJs are more aggressive than ISFPs. It's just a statement of trends, not a precise description of every individual.
If you're not willing to speak in generalized terms that describe the average tendencies of groups (and, by necessity, do not apply to every individual in the group), I don't understand how typology makes any sense to you.
No offense, but some of the biggest guilttrippers I know are T's. Abuse of the F function in *any* person can include guilttripping, ime.
