The nasty side of unhealthy MBTI types.

[greenfairy]

[MENTION=15773]greenfairy[/MENTION]

"does not care whether the receiver takes it as an insult"

you cant seriously expect me to understand someone whose type i dont know. and i dont think people have the right to misinterprete what i say by their own will, forming it into something which it _isnt_.

Right, which is why I say both people have a responsibility for making communication effective, and it's not about who is right and wrong. And I wasn't directing my assessment at any particular person- it's just what I think of the issue of insults. The question was asked and I decided to take the liberty of answering because I thought my opinion would be useful.

 

[ceecee]

and i think IQ is just bullshit, intelligence is about being the best _you_ you can be, not someone elses idea of intelligence.

Only someone with a lower IQ would say this.

 

[Vilku]

Only someone with a lower IQ would say this.

lols, te's. often your magical thinking annoys me.

the reality isnt something you can define by test. open your eyes, look outside, see? thats the reality, not some test devised to figure out if people can figure out somethng irrelevant. i mean, seriously, who on earth needs such skills as the abstract thinking that the iq tests are about? you cant apply that in practice.

next time you beat me at a pokemon game, please dont brag me how big it made you.

 

[EJCC]

Only someone with a lower IQ would say this.

Or someone with a higher IQ who didn't let it get to their head -- and didn't forget that it's only a measure of one small subtype of intelligence.

"Everyone is a genuis. But if you judge a fish on its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing it is stupid."
- Albert Einstein

 

[EJCC]

i dont think so. there are people who can see through their prejudices, and analyze others neutrally without affiliations to any direction.

True. You don't seem to be one of them, though -- as you appear heavily biased against INFPs.

you cant seriously expect me to understand someone whose type i dont know. and i dont think people have the right to misinterprete what i say by their own will, forming it into something which it _isnt_.

ill tell you from experience: ive been physically attacked, because i smiled. i didnt even smile to this person, he just went all nuts and created paranoid theories about it. how on earth am i supposed to know how a _stranger_ thinks? its impossible.

Better to have some working assumptions, than none at all. General interpersonal trends, personal precedent, and social norms, are all good starting points. Obviously it can never be an exact science.

i think its an Fe - Fi difference. fe fellas judge comments by intent, Fi fellas judge by their own feelings, not caring of the intent.

ive been complimented as for being a "normal person" and "a typical male", which is as offending as you can get with me, but due me being Fe, im able to value those compliments for their intent, not their effect.

Not necessarily true. IME Fi-users tend to care more about intent, e.g. when someone has done something wrong and are apologizing while explaining themselves. They find it easier to partially excuse people for having the right intent, while still telling them to do better next time. Whereas, Fe-users are more likely to say "Stop making excuses and fix the problem."

I know this from personal experience.

 

[Lexicon]

and i dont think people have the right to misinterprete what i say by their own will, forming it into something which it _isnt_.

At the risk of sounding pedantic, on what basis are you capable of assigning any "rights" to others at all? People are entitled to whatever mindsets they choose by default- that's beyond your/my/etc control. That's a simple consequence of existing, & apt to vary. It's up to each individual to calibrate their perceptions/expectations internally/externally as they see fit. There's little utility in being outraged over someone failing to understand you. Considering we can never even fully understand ourselves, it's probably best to try to sit back & expect the unexpected, I figure.

ill tell you from experience: ive been physically attacked, because i smiled. i didnt even smile to this person, he just went all nuts and created paranoid theories about it. how on earth am i supposed to know how a _stranger_ thinks? its impossible.

@bold You seem to at least grant yourself that much leeway, regarding 'rights' to interpret (or not interpret). It appears to me by your previous statement that you have some trouble extending that awareness to those around you.

The crazy person is obviously an exception- I've witnessed that stuff before/been involved in it. It sucks. There's only so much you can brace yourself for. But overall, you're going to encounter more "sane" people than you will volatile. I think you're running the risk of overcategorizing people in a manner that may have more conflict potential than utility, in the longterm.


Most of what you're expounding upon has little to do with function theory at all, & more to do with the general human condition, & your own perspectives based on the sum of your experiences, & the resulting emotional imprints left behind, imo. Risk of projection factors into that overcategorization.

 

[Vilku]

Better to have some working assumptions, than none at all. General interpersonal trends, personal precedent, and social norms, are all good starting points. Obviously it can never be an exact science.


I know this from personal experience.

"True. You don't seem to be one of them, though -- as you appear heavily biased against INFPs."

lolwat? i dont claim my thoughts to be finished, but i dont think ive said anything about them that isnt a honest observation.
i think infp's have one of the most innocent ways of breaking down, they dont start killing people, torturing people, or insulting others. the only thing that happens is they themselves get messed, start blabbering a bunch of nonsense, shout/think silly thoughts about others and ignore others. to me, thats like having water thrown at my face in comparison to some types raping tendencies in similar states. so yeah, rather that than being raped.

"Not necessarily true. IME Fi-users tend to care more about intent, e.g. when someone has done something wrong and are apologizing while explaining themselves. They find it easier to partially excuse people for having the right intent, while still telling them to do better next time. Whereas, Fe-users are more likely to say "Stop making excuses and fix the problem." "

Fi fellas usually take it as a personal insult if i criticize their activities. its not like my intent was to harm them, im just trying to guide them into focusing on more relevant things. so they wouldnt be stuck.

At the risk of sounding pedantic, on what basis are you capable of assigning any "rights" to others at all? People are entitled to whatever mindsets they choose by default- that's beyond your/my/etc control. That's a simple consequence of existing, & apt to vary. It's up to each individual to calibrate their perceptions/expectations internally/externally as they see fit. There's little utility in being outraged over someone failing to understand you. Considering we can never even fully understand ourselves, it's probably best to try to sit back & expect the unexpected, I figure.



@bold You seem to at least grant yourself that much leeway, regarding 'rights' to interpret (or not interpret). It appears to me by your previous statement that you have some trouble extending that awareness to those around you.

The crazy person is obviously an exception- I've witnessed that stuff before/been involved in it. It sucks. There's only so much you can brace yourself for. But overall, you're going to encounter more "sane" people than you will volatile. I think you're running the risk of overcategorizing people in a manner that may have more conflict potential than utility, in the longterm.


Most of what you're expounding upon has little to do with function theory at all, & more to do with the general human condition, & your own perspectives based on the sum of your experiences, & the resulting emotional imprints left behind, imo. Risk of projection factors into that overcategorization.

so youre completely fine if someone sadistic just enjoys raping you for fun? after all, their judgment was so, so innocent. they only wanted pleasure, and since you have no rights to demand them to care for others.

 

[Lexicon]

"True. You don't seem to be one of them, though -- as you appear heavily biased against INFPs."

lolwat? i dont claim my thoughts to be finished, but i dont think ive said anything about them that isnt a honest observation.
i think infp's have one of the most innocent ways of breaking down, they dont start killing people, torturing people, or insulting others. the only thing that happens is they themselves get messed, start blabbering a bunch of nonsense, shout/think silly thoughts about others and ignore others. to me, thats like having water thrown at my face in comparison to some types raping tendencies in similar states. so yeah, rather that than being raped.

I'd like to see some kinda statistical data to back up your rape conclusions one way or the other. As it stands, this statement is almost comical. A spectacular leap in very basic reasoning.

Fi fellas usually take it as a personal insult if i criticize their activities. its not like my intent was to harm them, im just trying to guide them into focusing on more relevant things. so they wouldnt be stuck.

Do you suppose it's possible you're imposing your own sense of subjective relevance onto people who may simply have different values compared to your own?

 

[prplchknz]

I am not offended by others actions unless it encroaches on me personally.or if the person is extremely stupid and i can't understand how they're not a gold fish. I guess the second part is more me being puzzled, rather than offended

 

[Lexicon]

so youre completely fine if someone sadistic just enjoys raping you for fun? after all, their judgment was so, so innocent. they only wanted pleasure, and since you have no rights to demand them to care for others.

I've survived sexual assault, in the past, among other things, incidentally (I can't/won't speak for anyone else who has experienced that). No it shouldn't have happened. However, I was talking about perspectives in of themselves, not the actions. The two are separate, but can run in tandem, of course. I am aware some people are simply fucked up- their distorted thinking/emotional reactions/impulses are beyond their sense of control, perhaps, & absolutely beyond mine. Acting on those thoughts/feelings, however, is a choice- & I do hold them responsible for their actions. They're free to think & feel as they like, for I am not qualified to repair damaged people, nor am I qualified to police the psyche of fellow humans.

The default freedom of perception I pointed out- and the personal responsibility for wrongdoings you're now focusing on, are two separate concepts. People don't "have to" care about others. Many don't, and I accept that as a reality. However, not all of them will act in callous ways because they are aware of consequences for their actions (not to mention, not all less-empathetic people are malicious by nature). I wasn't attempting to defend evil actions by any means. I only pointed out that people can and will interpret the world however they've personally evolved to, so it's useful to keep that in mind when interacting with others, vs universally expecting or demanding they see reality as you may (which I mean yeah, harmony is certainly ideal, but it's not what is- & what is tends to be what we all have to learn to work around/prepare for, however we can). It was a neutral statement about a concrete fact.

Is it that hard for you to hold two conflicting ideas in your mind at once? (this is meant to be an actual query, by the way, not a rhetorical remark)

 

[five sounds]

I appreciate the need to discuss this topic. Hurting others is often a misunderstood experience on one or both sides. I just hate to read these posts with their contentious undertones. People hurt people. Nobody likes it. Can we try to discuss things, especially this subject, with compassion and understanding rather that with one-ups and put downs?

I was trying to avoid speaking up in this thread, but every time I see new activity here, I feel more and more strongly about it.

Peace, Love, and Personalities baby

 

[Coriolis]

Not necessarily true. IME Fi-users tend to care more about intent, e.g. when someone has done something wrong and are apologizing while explaining themselves. They find it easier to partially excuse people for having the right intent, while still telling them to do better next time. Whereas, Fe-users are more likely to say "Stop making excuses and fix the problem."

Either your generalization is flawed, or I am an odd Fi-user. Intent does not excuse effect. Whether someone broke a tool I lent them intentionally or accidentally, it is just as broken. Intent influences only how I handle it. I will think better of the person, not for speaking the words of an apology, but rather taking action to make amends. When presented with an apology, I am likely to say, "I don't care about that. How are we going to fix this?"

I realize that, as with insults as we previously discussed, I am probably filtering all of this through Te first.

You are plainly intelligent and persistent but I don't want to play this game with you anymore, so I am putting you on Ignore for a while.

Should I feel insulted, or consider this a feather in my cap?

 

[Lexicon]

Either your generalization is flawed, or I am an odd Fi-user. Intent does not excuse effect. Whether someone broke a tool I lent them intentionally or accidentally, it is just as broken. Intent influences only how I handle it. I will think better of the person, not for speaking the words of an apology, but rather taking action to make amends. When presented with an apology, I am likely to say, "I don't care about that. How are we going to fix this?"

I realize that, as with insults as we previously discussed, I am probably filtering all of this through Te first.

Ha, this is how my xxTJ boyfriends were with regard to mishaps most of the time. Fe wants to immediately clarify & apologize (I'm also personally highly verbal in terms of trying to express feelings/intent & connect), but actions speak louder than words, so I've learned to try to bite down on the "sorries," unless I can immediately follow it up with a concrete solution (presenting it or already carrying it out), as that tends to resonate better with the Te dom/aux people, than the words alone.

 

[EJCC]

[MENTION=5159]Lexicon[/MENTION] and [MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION]

That rings true with my experience, so I guess I was misleading in my statements before. I'm the same way with apologies, generally -- i.e. sorrys don't solve anything, so please just get it fixed -- but I value the reasoning behind their mistake. I've found that Fi-users are more likely to explain themselves, and to respond well to other people explaining themselves. It's good to know where the person was coming from, so you can nip the real problem in the bud by telling them where their thought process went awry. By contrast, my personal experience has shown that Fe users respond very poorly to this and think the Fi user is avoiding taking responsibility for their actions.

Edit: I also may think more highly of the person if their reasoning was strong, than if it was a stupid or thoughtless mistake.

 

[Society]

^ this discussion is going so much better than i thought it would, FYI.

my impression is that Fi relates by projecting the self externally, so when Fi is confronted by someone's disagreeable actions, it can still relate by asking "how would i be in a position where this would make sense that i would have done the same".

(edited: on 2nd thought, my reflection on Fe was wrong)

 

[Lexicon]

[MENTION=5159]Lexicon[/MENTION] and [MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION]

That rings true with my experience, so I guess I was misleading in my statements before. I'm the same way with apologies, generally -- i.e. sorrys don't solve anything, so please just get it fixed -- but I value the reasoning behind their mistake. I've found that Fi-users are more likely to explain themselves, and to respond well to other people explaining themselves. It's good to know where the person was coming from, so you can nip the real problem in the bud by telling them where their thought process went awry. By contrast, my personal experience has shown that Fe users respond very poorly to this and think the Fi user is avoiding taking responsibility for their actions.

Maybe this isn't so much about Fi/Fe - or I could be a weird Fe person (that wouldn't be too far a leap, ha), but generally I appreciate explanations, as I get to learn better how they process the world, feel, think, etc. I feel closer to them that way. Understanding isn't always going to condone an action, but it helps in preventing future issues, in my experience. I do dislike the overly simple "i'm sorry" phrases that people try to apply as a pacifier or band-aid, to hurry up & move on. It sets off alarms in my head that either they're being insincere, or they're not understanding what the problem might have been, thus we can't really communicate to reach a resolution together.

I think some people will get touchy on the wording itself of the explanation, and then dismiss it as an excuse (and sometimes that;s all it is, but other times, it's a matter of semantics). Like someone might say, "I yelled because you pissed me off." Well, that's definitely going to feel like the person's assigning culpability for the emotional damage to the other party. Sometimes, that's their intent, other times, they're just not that great at explaining what emotionally set them off so badly. Everyone's got vulnerable spots, & it helps to address it directly when they've been tread upon. So I try to listen/look for that, see if they're attempting to communicate that to me, before dismissing the explanation as avoidance of responsibility. Usually at that point, I'll acknowledge that I see where they're coming from, but point out that I find it unacceptable/hurtful that they chose to act on their feelings in the way they did. Often I reach resolutions with volatile people this way.

I feel like so many conflicts between people in general wouldn't even happen if people tried to clarify those little things, nuances, that may go unsaid. If that makes sense. But of course that's the idealist's desire; the reality is humans are messy- the cogs in our metacognition & reasoning can easily grind to a halt when you drop particularly sharp feelings into the gears. These things can and will happen, & the most we can do is learn, teach ourselves, grow.

 

[Elfboy]

[MENTION=15003]Vilku[/MENTION]
if you want to know what enneagram types at their worst are:
http://www.typologycentral.com/foru...urosis-chapters-enneatypes-1-through-9-a.html

 

[Coriolis]

That rings true with my experience, so I guess I was misleading in my statements before. I'm the same way with apologies, generally -- i.e. sorrys don't solve anything, so please just get it fixed -- but I value the reasoning behind their mistake. I've found that Fi-users are more likely to explain themselves, and to respond well to other people explaining themselves. It's good to know where the person was coming from, so you can nip the real problem in the bud by telling them where their thought process went awry. By contrast, my personal experience has shown that Fe users respond very poorly to this and think the Fi user is avoiding taking responsibility for their actions.

Edit: I also may think more highly of the person if their reasoning was strong, than if it was a stupid or thoughtless mistake.

I should have included this as an important step when someone has done something wrong. Yes, I want them to do what they can to fix it, but I also want them to understand why it happened so it can be avoided in future. Someone can do this part even when the problem is not fixable. An explanation that helps to expose where the mistake lies is therefore useful. An explanation that tries to justify the behavior and shirk responsibility just makes the situation worse. Everyone makes mistakes now and then, it's how we handle them that is important.

 

[Ginkgo]

[MENTION=8031]Ginkgo[/MENTION]

i think unhealthiness is the over use of your primary function, being all lost in over doing it. healthiness is the balance of functions, when you start diverting your attention more equally on all functions. (and thus using them in a constructive, non-destructive way)

for example, introverted types get lost in their own heads when unhealthy. the external world becomes hostile. for extroverts i suppose we could assume the opposite.

I think your theory is garbage.

 

[Southern Kross]

Either your generalization is flawed, or I am an odd Fi-user. Intent does not excuse effect. Whether someone broke a tool I lent them intentionally or accidentally, it is just as broken. Intent influences only how I handle it. I will think better of the person, not for speaking the words of an apology, but rather taking action to make amends. When presented with an apology, I am likely to say, "I don't care about that. How are we going to fix this?"

I realize that, as with insults as we previously discussed, I am probably filtering all of this through Te first.

I think this is being filtered through Te first. It's not entirely incongruous with the Fi thinking but focusses too much on solving the problem.

[MENTION=4945]EJCC[/MENTION] is on the right track. Fe does concern itself a great deal more with intent, and Fi is much more focussed on the effect, but also mindset. When Fi users (probably more so with FP than TJs) seem like we're taking intent into account, it's really where the mindset (of the person who said/did something) is being evaluated. To me the intent is just another factor in the internal state and thought process that causes a person to act a certain way. Fe does a similar thing where it evaluates intent against the resulting behaviour.

As for which is more important (effect or mindset), it depends on the situation. It is a complicated, subjective issue, with no hard and fast rules.

my impression is that Fi relates by projecting the self externally, so when Fi is confronted by someone's disagreeable actions, it can still relate by asking "how would i be in a position where this would make sense that i would have done the same".

As for unhealthy MBTI states:

INFP 4w5 so/sp (me in my mid teens)
Very moody, sullen, irritable, impatient. Flippant and sometimes tactless. Nitpicking of mistakes and fault in others, deliberately contradictory towards others, perfectionistic, know-it-all-ness. Become extremely withdrawn, distrusting, defensive. Cut themselves off from others, uncommunicative of feelings, bury themselves in solitary activities. Very cynical, disillusioned and pessimistic. Believe that it's them against the world. Self-destructive and neglectful towards self, and yet often self-indulgent and self-absorbed. Act like they don't give a damn about others (although they may very much).

Basically with INFP all the negativity is turned inward, so they don't really do much harm, except that they're not exactly fun to be around.