[NF] NF:Accommodating Others?

[heart]

I keep seeing the statement that NF live to accommodate others, while NT live to seek truth. Questions like this make me re-think the whole business of type all over again.

I do not accommodate others very much in my life. I don't particularly like to compromise or conform to what others want me to do and I certainly don't live to compromise or conform. I'll do it to get along at work or to please someone very close to me but I don't live for it and I find it extremely unpleasant when I have to.

I do spend a great deal of time seeking truth through study and thought, but I admit that my own feelings are allowed a voice in what I believe. The truths I seek are more about those surrounding human or animal welfare, psychology, good vs. evil.

I have my own idea of truth based on this and I would not compromise this to please someone else or to accommodate for them...at least not without feeling great pain that I had betrayed my own beliefs. I would see that as a denial of my own personal truth and one of the most self-damaging things I could do.

What do other NF think about this? Do you really live to compromise and conform to what others want you to be or do for them?

 

[Totenkindly]

I would like to see what the NFs say, but I would not use the word "conformity" to describe them, nor would I call it "compromise."

For NFs, truth seems to be very relational and personal. This leads them to make space for others and accommodate them as unique and worthwhile spirits in ways that other types generally do not (at least not instinctively).

NTs originally seem to fixate on impersonal truth (i.e., look around at the world and speculate on what might be there and what is possible, based on the impersonal cause/effect system). People are not necessarily the end result of the system, just a piece of it.

 

[heart]

I am going off the definition of accommodation here.

I would say I am able to appreciate other's differences but I do not *live* to settle their differences nor to change my own outlook to make them feel more comfortable. I do not enjoy being a negotiatior for others conflicts.

I am able most often to empath their individual situations but I do not always act on those feelings, especially if the facts of the situation show that they created their own pain. I can feel for them without feeling moved to act for them. Sometimes people have to deal with their own stuff before they learn anything and anyway a person can really get burned out fighting for the causes of people who won't learn from their own mistakes and who won't be honest with themselves.

 

[ptgatsby]

Not to speak for the NFs, but I think the difference can be seen in the thread about being more responsible before raising kids.

NFs, yourself included, bind yourself to the personal relationships in a situation. The travesty of having kids before being ready is a personal issue. For the NTs that were agreeing with you, they weren't agreeing with you, only the portion that was objective while you didn't agree with the objective view. In a way, we simply weren't able to talk each other.

Having said that, accommodation is only one factor of being a F - I suspect you are extremely low in accommodation while high in compassion and empathy. I can't comment on the tender and accepting. Even if you believe in MBTI and cognitive traits as absolutes, you could of been developed in a way to reduce your accommodation.

 

[heart]

The part that you seemed to have the most trouble understanding me about in the childfree thread was the idea that an otherwise rational and reasonable person could have an intentional blind spot towards their own weaknesses that could cause them trouble.

Humans, no matter how devoted to logical thought, are not robots. If we put denial into our software programs, we're going to be prone to error. That was my main point in that thread about the issue but it got drowned out.

 

[ptgatsby]

Humans, no matter how devoted to logical thought, are not robots. If we put denial into our software programs, we're going to be prone to error. That was my main point in that thread about the issue but it got drowned out.

No, I got your point and I don't want to derail the thread... but it highlights the difference. I stopped responding because we simply couldn't relate to each other. The question as to why we couldn't relate can be summed up in the personal view (exactly what you said above) compared to my need for the situation to be logically coherent (the solution was prohibited by the condition). If you look at the thread, the T's were all in agreement but felt something was wrong with it - that is why.

 

[heart]

No, I got your point and I don't want to derail the thread...

Uh, you brought it up again....

but it highlights the difference. I stopped responding because we simply couldn't relate to each other. The question as to why we couldn't relate can be summed up in the personal view (exactly what you said above) compared to my need for the situation to be logically coherent (the solution was prohibited by the condition). If you look at the thread, the T's were all in agreement but felt something was wrong with it - that is why.

My very point was that the behavior of human beings cannot be ascribed to totally logical terms because of the irrational nature of the ego and its defeneses. That's not just my personal view. Psychologists spend their lives studying this aspect of human nature and how to help people see around their own self deception. Carl Jung said that the avoidance of pain was the root cause of all neurosis.

As I remember there was only one NT and a few NF discussing the issue I raised. There was one ST, but he didn't really say anything except to ask how I would have felt to have never been born, I didn't really see that as adding anything to the issue. The sampling was really too small and the NF reacted as strongly to my premise about defense mechanisms as you did.

 

[ptgatsby]

Uh, you brought it up again....

I was trying to explain the differences between NF approaches and NT approaches but you don't seem interested in that part of it so I'll stop it here. You are right about the thread participants, I must of been thinking about another thread that we were in... Or I'm just plain confused.

 

[heart]

I was trying to explain the differences between NF approaches and NT approaches but you don't seem interested in that part of it so I'll stop it here.

The way I understood what you said is that an F may be more comfortable with the ambiguity of certain aspects of human nature while the T will not be comfortable thinking about those aspects. They want life to fit logical parameters while Fs are more comfortable observing illogical aspects that come into things. You'll have to refine my understanding there because I probably understood you wrong.

The real question I am asking in this post is, do NF really live to accommodate others? I understand that NF are different than NT in their views but is the difference really accommodating to others?

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

For NFs, truth seems to be very relational and personal. This leads them to make space for others and accommodate them as unique and worthwhile spirits in ways that other types generally do not (at least not instinctively).

I recognize that everyone has a flawed and personal perception to some extent. This is why I attempt to remove myself as a source of truth, and respect the boundaries of others 'truth'.

NTs originally seem to fixate on impersonal truth (i.e., look around at the world and speculate on what might be there and what is possible, based on the impersonal cause/effect system). People are not necessarily the end result of the system, just a piece of it.

This is my ideal, but find that human beings in general have a great struggle to achieve it. I'm fascinated by the interplay between perception and reality. What i caution against most is when someone confuses 'objectivity' for their own personal bias. That is why it is important to acknowledge the nature of bias - it is part of that bigger picture of truth.

 

[ptgatsby]

The real question I am asking in this post is, do NF really live to accommodate others? I understand that NF are different than NT in their views but is the difference really accommodating to others?

The difference is that Fs attempt to make judgments based upon subjective personal views. Ts attempt to make judgments based upon objective impersonal views. NFs and NTs come in quite a few flavours, but I'd say that NFs are no more accommodating than SFs.

Fs tend to be empathetic, compassionate, accepting, tender and accommodating.

Ts tend to be logical, reasonable, questioning, critical and tough.

(These are from the MBTI Step II sub-traits of F/T)

No one sub-trait defines them all, but it can be said that Fs will generally be more personally accommodating that Ts... although both have issues that are close to their heart/identity that they are probably most stubborn on. So the answer should be no.

Really, the whole issue can be summed up as Fs being social competent and Ts being incompetent

 

[heart]

Really, the whole issue can be summed up as Fs being social competent and Ts being incompetent

If that were the deciding factor then I would be a T. I seriously do not think I am a T.

 

[Blossom76]

I keep seeing the statement that NF live to accommodate others, while NT live to seek truth. Questions like this make me re-think the whole business of type all over again.

I do not accommodate others very much in my life. I don't particularly like to compromise or conform to what others want me to do and I certainly don't live to compromise or conform. I'll do it to get along at work or to please someone very close to me but I don't live for it and I find it extremely unpleasant when I have to.

I do spend a great deal of time seeking truth through study and thought, but I admit that my own feelings are allowed a voice in what I believe. The truths I seek are more about those surrounding human or animal welfare, psychology, good vs. evil.

I have my own idea of truth based on this and I would not compromise this to please someone else or to accommodate for them...at least not without feeling great pain that I had betrayed my own beliefs. I would see that as a denial of my own personal truth and one of the most self-damaging things I could do.

What do other NF think about this? Do you really live to compromise and conform to what others want you to be or do for them?

mmm interesting! you could easily say, that as you make compromises and conform at work or with someone close, that you are living to accomodate others in your life, but i think each of us do it in varying degrees, quite possibly down to what percentages you scored, but even thi scant be set in stone as am sure we fluctuate through out our life time.

i am farely new at the hole mbti and knowing am an INFP, so dont berate me too much if my ideas are way off!

 

[erm]

I think the T/F axis is the hardest to tell apart. I would say that since they are J functions, F's and T's differ on what they value, and I think F's value subjective truth more and T's objective truth. As a result of this, NF's tend to be more accommodating, for some individual reason (e.g thinking truth is different for each individual), but this is merely because they have a subjective foundation and so many NF's will be unaccommodating and not show any F qualities, simply because F and T qualities are the symptom not the cause.

So i would answer that, yes NF's are, on average, more accommodating, but only because it's part of their search for truth, whereas with NT's it is less likely to be part of their quest.

So overall i would say they both search for "truth", just in different ways.

 

[Sahara]

I keep seeing the statement that NF live to accommodate others, while NT live to seek truth. Questions like this make me re-think the whole business of type all over again.

I do not accommodate others very much in my life. I don't particularly like to compromise or conform to what others want me to do and I certainly don't live to compromise or conform. I'll do it to get along at work or to please someone very close to me but I don't live for it and I find it extremely unpleasant when I have to.

I do spend a great deal of time seeking truth through study and thought, but I admit that my own feelings are allowed a voice in what I believe. The truths I seek are more about those surrounding human or animal welfare, psychology, good vs. evil.

I have my own idea of truth based on this and I would not compromise this to please someone else or to accommodate for them...at least not without feeling great pain that I had betrayed my own beliefs. I would see that as a denial of my own personal truth and one of the most self-damaging things I could do.

What do other NF think about this? Do you really live to compromise and conform to what others want you to be or do for them?

See I find you are still describing what an NF is like anyway, I don't think any of us live to conform, and we all feel like we are betraying personal truths by doing it.

However we will do it, do it until resentment kicks in and then stop conforming/accomodating.

Infact most of the NF descriptions I have read tend to describe us as being very unhappy over a time if we are forced to act differently for others.

 

[heart]

mmm interesting! you could easily say, that as you make compromises and conform at work or with someone close, that you are living to accomodate others in your life, but i think each of us do it in varying degrees, quite possibly down to what percentages you scored, but even thi scant be set in stone as am sure we fluctuate through out our life time.

i am farely new at the hole mbti and knowing am an INFP, so dont berate me too much if my ideas are way off!

I think the term "living" to do something means you have a passion and a love for doing something. Otherwise you are doing something to live, not living to do that, at least that is how I always understood the phrase.

 

[heart]

See I find you are still describing what an NF is like anyway, I don't think any of us live to conform, and we all feel like we are betraying personal truths by doing it.

However we will do it, do it until resentment kicks in and then stop conforming/accomodating.

Infact most of the NF descriptions I have read tend to describe us as being very unhappy over a time if we are forced to act differently for others.

Yes, but the phrase "living" to accomodate others implies that NF get special enjoyment and satisfaction out of being accomodating. I don't get any special joy or satisfaction out of accomodating others, in fact it is the opposite for me.

 

[Cindyrella]

I have a different interpretation of accommodation. I'm going to give you an example. Say there is someone at your workplace that everyone else likes to pick on. Maybe his sense of humor is a little off, maybe he exaggerates stories about his personal life, maybe he is just a little too quirky for the average person to accept. Because of these characteristics, your coworkers talk about him behind his back, tease him, and crack jokes on him all the time. Being an NF, I would not participate in that type of obnoxious behavior because I know what impact it can have on another person. I would rather dig a little deeper and find out more about the person to determine WHY he is so "off kilter."

I use this example because I've been in this type of work environment before. It turns out the guy had a pretty unusual/negative childhood which probably accounts for all of his awkwardness. Even though all of my other coworkers knew this, they failed to consider this information as significant and picked on him anyway. I always try to look beyond the surface because everyone has a story, everyone has a background that can explain so much.

I believe this is a form of accommodation. I don't interpret the characteristics of NFs the way some people do. I am not a pushover and I will not always conform to what's conventional. Why? Because apparently total lack of regard for another human being's feelings is pretty damn conventional. That's how I look at it.

 

[SuperServal]

I have a different interpretation of accommodation. I'm going to give you an example. Say there is someone at your workplace that everyone else likes to pick on. Maybe his sense of humor is a little off, maybe he exaggerates stories about his personal life, maybe he is just a little too quirky for the average person to accept. Because of these characteristics, your coworkers talk about him behind his back, tease him, and crack jokes on him all the time. Being an NF, I would not participate in that type of obnoxious behavior because I know what impact it can have on another person. I would rather dig a little deeper and find out more about the person to determine WHY he is so "off kilter."

I use this example because I've been in this type of work environment before. It turns out the guy had a pretty unusual/negative childhood which probably accounts for all of his awkwardness. Even though all of my other coworkers knew this, they failed to consider this information as significant and picked on him anyway. I always try to look beyond the surface because everyone has a story, everyone has a background that can explain so much.

I believe this is a form of accommodation. I don't interpret the characteristics of NFs the way some people do. I am not a pushover and I will not always conform to what's conventional. Why? Because apparently total lack of regard for another human being's feelings is pretty damn conventional. That's how I look at it.

I completely agree with this. Sometimes I actively seek out "off-kilter" people for two main reasons.
1. I find that the "loners and outcasts" tend to be more interesting people in general. If I can momentarily connect with some of these people and/or become friends with them, then it adds a little more spice to my life.
2. This less selfish reason is because I genuinely want to make these people feel like they are loved and appreciated by at least some facet of humanity. I try everything in my power to understand people and where they are coming from and why they might be acting like they are. And sometimes this effort does require quite a bit of accommodation. But I feel that the rewards of understanding people better (it makes both parties feel better about themselves, and a little wiser) are worth the accommodation.

(I try to do this with everyone, not just "off-kilter" people, but it usually takes more effort to understand less conventional types, so it's easier to see those cases as examples of accommodation.)

 

[cafe]

I try, sometimes not very successfully, to work towards balance. I want to balance my well-being, the well-being of my husband, the well-being of my children, the well-being of friends and extended family. I try to prioritize and I sometimes triage.

My values are very important to me, but one of the things I value most are people, especially the people I'm closest to. So always there is this balance and sometimes conflict between my core values and harmony with the people I care about.

The way this has worked out as I've gotten older, with more responsibilities and less energy, is that I've gotten more passively accommodating of people outside my inner circle- I can't be bothered to put myself out, either to defend my values to them or to expend my energy, time, and resources to help them in an active way. I try to be tolerant, kind, and encouraging, but not to commit myself. I choose who I give to and I ration what I give.

I pretty much live how I want to, but try to keep the bare minimum of appearances in order to avoid making myself a target for people who need to keep everyone else's ducks in a row. I keep my circle small and make myself available to them, accommodating as I can.

My understanding of Truth continues to evolve. I don't expect that to ever change. I have become somewhat earthy and pragmatic and more than a little cynical. I do what I can reasonably do and to heck with the rest. I have a good relationship with my husband, I have great kids, I have a home of my own, and I get one short shot at this thing. By golly, I'm going to enjoy it.