• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

[Fi] Fe blindness; Fi shortsightedness

PeaceBaby

reborn
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
5,950
MBTI Type
N/A
Enneagram
N/A
Despite being Fi dominant, my Fe overrules Fi all the time. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one." Ironically, I know this is because my Fi demands it.

But I have been pondering the difference between the two functions. Mostly thinking of the misapplication of each, hence the post title.

Fe blindness: interchanging your own needs with the needs of the group. This means that sometimes the group needs become yours, and sometimes, you allow your personal needs to be applied over the group, because you have an agenda you want to fulfill. In other words, you trick yourself into believing you are doing something for the good of the group, but it is really what you WANT. And you violate the needs of the group to do so, all with a pretty veneer applied over top to make it look like the needs of the group are what you are working for. And, YOU can even start to believe it yourself, that you are only doing what is good for the group.

Fi shortsightedness: you feel your feelings, but you apply them over top of what you perceive from others. Example: let's say you're angry with person X because you've been done wrong, so you allow that anger to colour all of your interactions with person X and thus you lose prized objectivity in your relationship. It takes a great deal of personal power to step back and not allow your own feelings to cover you. Alternatively, you feel others feelings, and you misinterpret them as your own, finding it hard to unweave what you own vs what other people own or are trying to blanket you with.

Just some thoughts this morning; discuss, refine or disagree if desired.
 

Scott N Denver

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2009
Messages
2,898
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Despite being Fi dominant, my Fe overrules Fi all the time. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one." Ironically, I know this is because my Fi demands it.

But I have been pondering the difference between the two functions. Mostly thinking of the misapplication of each, hence the post title.

Fe blindness: interchanging your own needs with the needs of the group. This means that sometimes the group needs become yours, and sometimes, you allow your personal needs to be applied over the group, because you have an agenda you want to fulfill. In other words, you trick yourself into believing you are doing something for the good of the group, but it is really what you WANT. And you violate the needs of the group to do so, all with a pretty veneer applied over top to make it look like the needs of the group are what you are working for. And, YOU can even start to believe it yourself, that you are only doing what is good for the group.

Fi shortsightedness: you feel your feelings, but you apply them over top of what you perceive from others. Example: let's say you're angry with person X because you've been done wrong, so you allow that anger to colour all of your interactions with person X and thus you lose prized objectivity in your relationship. It takes a great deal of personal power to step back and not allow your own feelings to cover you. Alternatively, you feel others feelings, and you misinterpret them as your own, finding it hard to unweave what you own vs what other people own or are trying to blanket you with.

Just some thoughts this morning; discuss, refine or disagree if desired.

I've written this elsewhere, but as a quick recap let me say that:

Fi: taking personal values, which are often universal, and applying them in a given situation. "Pain is bad, this [dog/person/child/animal/whatever] is in pain therefore I will go help it [provide support, talk, call for help, be soothing, etc], EVEN if my culture/society/group says that we are from different groups that shouldnt deal with each other [wealthy people dont waste their time with poor people for example], or regard for their social status [ie don't care if person in pain is a doctor or a garbage collector].

Fe: concerned with social well-being, deals with "the most appropriate way to conduct interactions within a society." For example "I personally think this person is a self-centered chauvinistic asshole but they have a socially important job so I will be polite and say 'good morning sir, how are you today?' to them"

Thats my contrast in a nutshell, but here is shorter one. Fi is concerned about itself and want it wants, but *tends* not to be excessively narcissistic and often serves a s breeding ground for compassion. To others sometimes it seems excessively selfish, and is often hard to detect or understand, hence its frequently being referred to as "invisible". Fe is concerned about what others want, social harmony, and how to acceptably give others what they want. Fe users often can give too much and be taken advantage of by others with less scruples.
 

Skyward

Badoom~
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
1,084
MBTI Type
infj
Enneagram
9w1
I've written this elsewhere, but as a quick recap let me say that:

Fi: taking personal values, which are often universal, and applying them in a given situation. "Pain is bad, this [dog/person/child/animal/whatever] is in pain therefore I will go help it [provide support, talk, call for help, be soothing, etc], EVEN if my culture/society/group says that we are from different groups that shouldnt deal with each other [wealthy people dont waste their time with poor people for example], or regard for their social status [ie don't care if person in pain is a doctor or a garbage collector].

Fe: concerned with social well-being, deals with "the most appropriate way to conduct interactions within a society." For example "I personally think this person is a self-centered chauvinistic asshole but they have a socially important job so I will be polite and say 'good morning sir, how are you today?' to them"

Thats my contrast in a nutshell, but here is shorter one. Fi is concerned about itself and want it wants, but *tends* not to be excessively narcissistic and often serves a s breeding ground for compassion. To others sometimes it seems excessively selfish, and is often hard to detect or understand, hence its frequently being referred to as "invisible". Fe is concerned about what others want, social harmony, and how to acceptably give others what they want. Fe users often can give too much and be taken advantage of by others with less scruples.

There's a description of Fe I have read that is basically that Fe is sensitive to 'social currency' and can work with it well. Social currency is something to the effect of, when you greet someone you have given a certain amount of social currency and the other person should respond in kind, and depending on who the person is, they may respond differently, believing that they indeed HAVE payed in kind, even though you dont see it that way. Sort of understanding others by how they 'spend their money.'

I hope that made sense.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
There's a description of Fe I have read that is basically that Fe is sensitive to 'social currency' and can work with it well. Social currency is something to the effect of, when you greet someone you have given a certain amount of social currency and the other person should respond in kind, and depending on who the person is, they may respond differently, believing that they indeed HAVE payed in kind, even though you dont see it that way. Sort of understanding others by how they 'spend their money.'

That's one general way to look at it.

To me, it's a system of social interactive rules that communicate your commitments... and the group responds in kind.

I was thinking alot about it while watching Avatar last week -- Jake got kicked out for "betraying the people" but was automatically given free pass back in because he accessed the Fe cultural network by conquering the toruk, which only the Na'vi's strongest cultural heroes had ever accomplished. By locking into this part of the cultural exchange, any personal feelings about Jake's past actions were swept away in terms of the overall positive currency he had bought by undertaking that risk and proving himself not just victorious but worthy and "aligned with" the culture's heroes.
 

Lightyear

New member
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
899
I've written this elsewhere, but as a quick recap let me say that:

Fi: taking personal values, which are often universal, and applying them in a given situation. "Pain is bad, this [dog/person/child/animal/whatever] is in pain therefore I will go help it [provide support, talk, call for help, be soothing, etc], EVEN if my culture/society/group says that we are from different groups that shouldnt deal with each other [wealthy people dont waste their time with poor people for example], or regard for their social status [ie don't care if person in pain is a doctor or a garbage collector].

Fe: concerned with social well-being, deals with "the most appropriate way to conduct interactions within a society." For example "I personally think this person is a self-centered chauvinistic asshole but they have a socially important job so I will be polite and say 'good morning sir, how are you today?' to them"

I am not sure I agree with your examples.

I am an Fe user but actually see myself far more in your description of Fi. My reasoning would go something like this: "I personally think this person is a self-centered chauvinistic asshole but he is also a human being so he deserves basic respect and if he is in genuine pain basic compassion."

I would never just be nice to someone because he has a socially important job, I would feel like the most hypocritical asskisser on the face of this earth. If this person is an idiot he deserves general kindness from me for the simple reason that he is a human being and I always start with the assumption that there must be redeeming qualities in even the most annoying person and I am going to be nice to them until they have exhausted all my patience and proven me wrong.
 

Seymour

Vaguely Precise
Joined
Sep 22, 2009
Messages
1,579
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
There's a description of Fe I have read that is basically that Fe is sensitive to 'social currency' and can work with it well. Social currency is something to the effect of, when you greet someone you have given a certain amount of social currency and the other person should respond in kind, and depending on who the person is, they may respond differently, believing that they indeed HAVE payed in kind, even though you dont see it that way. Sort of understanding others by how they 'spend their money.'

I hope that made sense.

I'd agree with that. I think Fe also tends to assume that different relationships also involve different social obligations. If your friend is sick, you go visit them because that's what friends do. If they are graduating, you attend their graduation. If they are getting married, you buy them a wedding gift. If it's just an acquaintance, you don't have to do those things, but of course they are on your Christmas card list (or whatever). It makes for a cozy social system, where each person in a relationship is periodically re-assured that they are important, and people know who they can count on.

If someone doesn't do those thing, then Fe assumes they are communicating anger or that they don't care. You don't just get to opt out of social rituals obligations. Fe has a memory and makes plans based on those social obligations and currency.

Fi is much more in the now. You do things because they express your genuine feelings toward someone or your values. You may empathize with someone regardless of their social relationship. If you do something nice for someone, you don't assume they will do something nice for you (and vice versa). If you don't reciprocate (for whatever reason) that doesn't mean you didn't appreciate and value what another did for you. Fi can also under-value social rituals because they seem fake, insincere or lack depth.

Fe can respond to Fi's behavior as selfishness, since it isn't reciprocating evenly and doesn't meet all the expected social obligations. Fe users can also be puzzled when an Fi-using friend can be so present one minute, and then withdraw socially the next.

That's one general way to look at it.

To me, it's a system of social interactive rules that communicate your commitments... and the group responds in kind.

I was thinking alot about it while watching Avatar last week -- Jake got kicked out for "betraying the people" but was automatically given free pass back in because he accessed the Fe cultural network by conquering the toruk, which only the Na'vi's strongest cultural heroes had ever accomplished. By locking into this part of the cultural exchange, any personal feelings about Jake's past actions were swept away in terms of the overall positive currency he had bought by undertaking that risk and proving himself not just victorious but worthy and "aligned with" the culture's heroes.

I agree... in a way he cheated and got a lot of Fe cred he didn't earn (that bothered me a little... he didn't really deserve their trust at that point).

On the other hand, it seems like Jake had to learn a little Fi to get out of his bind. He was stuck between two (or three) conflicting Fe (and Te) networks of obligation. He was a soldier, a researcher and a Na'vi... and each role had conflicting requirements and value-systems. In some sense, he had to figure out the larger universal values to decide what to do. One could argue cynically that he went with the Na'vi because his legs and his hormones were telling him to. One could also argue that those things forced him into being open to a new perspective.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I think Fe also tends to assume that different relationships also involve different social obligations. If your friend is sick, you go visit them because that's what friends do. If they are graduating, you attend their graduation. If they are getting married, you buy them a wedding gift. If it's just an acquaintance, you don't have to do those things, but of course they are on your Christmas card list (or whatever). It makes for a cozy social system, where each person in a relationship is periodically re-assured that they are important, and people know who they can count on.

If someone doesn't do those thing, than Fe assumes they are communicating anger or that they don't care. You don't just get to opt out of social rituals obligations. Fe has a memory and makes plans based on those social obligations and currency.

Fi is much more in the now. You do things because they express your genuine feelings toward someone or your values. You may empathize with someone regardless of their social relationship. If you do something nice for someone, you don't assume they will do something nice for you (and vice versa). If you don't reciprocate (for whatever reason) that doesn't mean you didn't appreciate and value what another did for you. Fi can also under-value social rituals because they seem fake, insincere or lack depth.

Fe can respond to Fi's behavior as selfishness, since it isn't reciprocating evenly and doesn't meet all the expected social obligations. Fe users can also be puzzled when an Fi-using friend can be so present one minute, and then withdraw socially the next.

This is all pretty good too.

What's funny is when I see very Fi people accusing Fe people of "being fake."

It's very obvious both are doing things for others out of their values, but the rationality behind the two basic types of behavior can confuse or irritate the other.
 

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Despite being Fi dominant, my Fe overrules Fi all the time. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one." Ironically, I know this is because my Fi demands it.

Bolded part = why this is not really Fe. If your so-called "Fe use" is directly motivated by a more important Fi value, then it's just Fi.

It's a mistake in reasoning to assume, "I did something for the group's benefit, therefore I must have used Fe."

Different functions can lead to the same actions; the key here is the underlying motivation. No single action is associated exclusively with one function. If you're not doing Fe things for Fe's sake alone, it's still just another manifestation of Fi [and/or some other function(s).]
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I always see Fi as being concerned with individuals. If people have internal peace, then they will exude that feeling and it will color their interactions and motives, resulting in more external harmony, and the world will be closer to the ideal.

I think Fi can seem self-absorbed to Fe because it's so concerned with its individual self and authenticity, and it can ignore group standards, but that concern is extended to other individuals in many situations (often why we root for the underdog, the outcast, the misunderstood). In that sense, yes, we are "short-sighted", because we cannot skip past the internal feeling - it must be dealt with first before we can step outside ourselves and gain perspective.

I see Fe as being concerned with group harmony. If people get along and things run smoothly between them, then that will affect how they feel inside for the better, creating internal peace that further supports external peace, and the world will be closer to the ideal.

I think Fe can start with promoting the peace externally before it is felt internally, and that seems to "fake" to Fi - Fe can be "fake it until it's real" from my Fi perspective. In that sense, yes, they are "blind", because they cannot see the trees for the forest - individual feelings can get lost while promoting group needs, including the Fe's own personal feelings/needs.

So I see Fe and Fi as having similar goals, but working from opposite ends. I think in best situation, they are extremely complementary, but it requires an ability to understand that the other is coming from a different direction, and hey, you gotta meet each other in the middle. It's something like a language barrier sometimes - things can get lost in translation, but if it's overcome, then a lot of good can be accomplished.

* This is all generalizing to express my viewpoint, because I do realize that no one is entirely one way or the other. I'm also referring to Fi and Fe primarily in NFs, because I think SF motivations are less "ideal oriented" - they seem more about practical and immediate results for harmonious feelings/relationships. From that perspective, NFs can seem blind and SFs can seem short-sighted, but for different reasons.
 

neptunesnet

man-made
Joined
Sep 5, 2009
Messages
1,228
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
5&4
Instinctual Variant
sx
Wow, SW.

You're really aversed to Fi, aren't you?

I'm sorry. :hug:



EDIT: Thumbs up for the OA post above me.
 

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Wow, SW.

You're really aversed to Fi, aren't you?

I'm sorry. :hug:

What are you talking about?

This post has nothing to do with my opinions of any given functions. I'm pointing out that the motivation is more important than the surface behavior, regardless of which function(s) we're talking about.

People come to the erroneous conclusion that they use all the functions because they read descriptions that say, "Te users will commonly do x, y and z" and think to themselves, "But I do x, y and z sometimes, so I must be using Te when I do that!"

But you're not, because the same actions can carry completely different motivations when performed by different people. The broader point here is that functional attitudes are motivational value systems, not descriptions of observable surface behavior.

I'm a total loss as to how you interpreted this as anti-Fi, but then, I guess taking offense where none is intended is what INFPs do best.

For another example unrelated to Fi--

Te people will commonly take leadership roles in order to get situations under control and move toward the desired external world goal. But taking control of a situation is not automatically Te--any function might lead to a decision to take control of a situation; the function used is determined by why you did this, not what you did.

So Fe might motivate someone to take control of a situation because the Fe user thinks it's his social obligation to do so.

Or Ti might motivate someone to take control of a situation because the Ti user thinks it would be inconsistent for him not to.

Or Se might motivate someone to take control of a situation because the Se user thinks that's the best way to make an immediate impact and that he has a gut feeling that it's what he should do.

etc. etc...."I took control of the situation to get a goal completed" =/= "I used Te"; when discussing functions we're referring to motivation, not behavior.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Wow, SW.
You're really aversed to Fi, aren't you?
I'm sorry. :hug:

I'm afraid I'm going to have to agree with SW on this one, I have no idea why you jumped to that conclusion.
What he said made a lot of sense... at core, which ever function is driving the others functions is... well... in charge.
It doesn't matter which one it is, nor does it mean anyone is being adverse to anything. It's just a general rational principle.
 

Stanton Moore

morose bourgeoisie
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
3,900
MBTI Type
INFP
What are you talking about?

This post has nothing to do with my opinions of any given functions. I'm pointing out that the motivation is more important than the surface behavior, regardless of which function(s) we're talking about.

People come to the erroneous conclusion that they use all the functions because they read descriptions that say, "Te users will commonly do x, y and z" and think to themselves, "But I do x, y and z sometimes, so I must be using Te when I do that!"

But you're not, because the same actions can carry completely different motivations when performed by different people. The broader point here is that functional attitudes are motivational value systems, not descriptions of observable surface behavior.

I'm a total loss as to how you interpreted this as anti-Fi, but then, I guess taking offense where none is intended is what INFPs do best.

I think what she wanted to know is: why are you sound so angry in your posts? They almost all have a strong sense of hostility and condescension. Do you think no one will take you seriously if you just say what you think without veiled insults? Do you really think that a bunch of INFP's (whom you seem to really dislike) don't see that?
 

Seymour

Vaguely Precise
Joined
Sep 22, 2009
Messages
1,579
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Also agree with OA. (typical)

I also think that extreme Fe can feel oddly impersonal sometimes (despite being warm). One starts to wonder "does this person value me for me, or am just filling the 'friend' slot for this person?" and "is this person having lunch with me because they WANT to, or is it a dreary obligation to them on some level?"

Since I grew up in the South (which is more extraverted and Fe-based, socially) moving to the Northeast was kind of a shock. On the one hand, people here are less friendly and outgoing, but conversely when they seem friendly and interested it's usually because they actually are.

(Didn't see SW's post as hostile, just impersonally blunt in direct T fashion. I'd say PeaceBaby was using Fe, but it was just being used to back Fi. PeaceBaby wasn't acting like an Fe-dom motivationally, though, I agree.)
 

neptunesnet

man-made
Joined
Sep 5, 2009
Messages
1,228
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
5&4
Instinctual Variant
sx
I'm a total loss as to how you interpreted this as anti-Fi...

It's not just that post. You have a history, sir.

But, oh well.

I'll stop provoking you before it becomes too much and you have to blacklist me or something. Or worse: viciously attack other INFPs without warrant.

:newwink:

...but then, I guess taking offense where none is intended is what INFPs do best.

Somehow, I knew you were going to say that.

;)


I'm afraid I'm going to have to agree with SW on this one, I have no idea why you jumped to that conclusion.

It's all in the TONE!
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I think what she wanted to know is: why are you sound so angry in your posts? They almost all have a strong sense of hostility and condescension. Do you think no one will take you seriously if you just say what you think without veiled insults? Do you really think that a bunch of INFP's (whom you seem to really dislike) don't see that?

Oh gee...
Well, this is interesting. :)

The thread topic is "Fe blindness; Fi shortsightedness" ... not "Why does SW sound grumpy all the time and thus probably dislike Fi?"

Regardless of how someone thinks SW or other posters sound, if we could keep on topic instead of making things unnecessarily personal...? This sort of question could be handled more appropriately in PM.

(And yeah, I'm wearing my Fe hat here.)

It's all in the TONE!

What, like a G-sharp vs an A-flat? ;)

Actually, rereading SW's first post, it was absolutely T-style neutral.
Tone seems determined by listener as well as by speaker.
That's why I prefer we go back to topic, thanks.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I think what she wanted to know is: why are you sound so angry in your posts? They almost all have a strong sense of hostility and condescension. Do you think no one will take you seriously if you just say what you think without veiled insults? Do you really think that a bunch of INFP's (whom you seem to really dislike) don't see that?

Don't feed him.

These conversations on Fe and Fi go so well until some ENTP shows up.

This is exactly what they want. Responses are usually along the lines of: "I'm not angry! Don't tell me how I feel! NFPs always ___ [whine about NFPs]. I know everything about everything, but you're just too emotional for this conversation to be productive!". :tongue:

Now back to the discussion, which was interesting.
 

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I think what she wanted to know is: why are you sound so angry in your posts?

I'm genuinely surprised that anyone found my posts in this thread to be angry or hostile.

They almost all have a strong sense of hostility and condescension. Do you think no one will take you seriously if you just say what you think without veiled insults? Do you really think that a bunch of INFP's (whom you seem to really dislike) don't see that?

On the contrary; I think INFPs are the only people who see that, because it's really not there.


I'm a total loss as to how you interpreted this as anti-Fi, but then, I guess taking offense where none is intended is what INFPs do best.

I'm really not kidding about that. You people really do attach emotional motivation to everything when none exists, and often it seems like you go out of your way to take offense even when none was intended whatsoever.

I posted in this thread to share information, not attack anyone.

Note that the only non-INFP in the thread didn't see anything offensive or hostile about my post either...!


P.S.,

My roommate and best friend is an INFP. I don't hate you; in fact, the type I dislike most is your complete opposite (ESTJ.) I do get pretty annoyed with your constant insistence on reading hostility into everything, though.


It's all in the TONE!

Don't assume that the way you would be feeling if you used my tone is the way I am feeling when I use it. There have been a million threads about this and it's pretty commonly accepted by numerous people across lots of different types that INFPs routinely project their own emotional motivations onto everyone else.


Don't feed him.

These conversations on Fe and Fi go so well until some ENTP shows up.

This is exactly what they want. Responses are usually along the lines of: "I'm not angry! Don't tell me how I feel! NFPs always ___ [whine about NFPs]. I know everything about everything, but you're just too emotional for this conversation to be productive!". :tongue:

Now back to the discussion, which was interesting.

This is directly relevant in a thread about Fi short-sightedness. Also, ENTPs are not by any means the only people who are irritated by routine INFP insistence that they know everything about our feelings. We're just the ones who most commonly make a point of arguing it with you.
 

Stanton Moore

morose bourgeoisie
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
3,900
MBTI Type
INFP
Don't feed him.

These conversations on Fe and Fi go so well until some ENTP shows up.

This is exactly what they want. Responses are usually along the lines of: "I'm not angry! Don't tell me how I feel! NFPs always ___ [whine about NFPs]. I know everything about everything, but you're just too emotional for this conversation to be productive!". :tongue:

Now back to the discussion, which was interesting.

Sorry OA. I just get tired of the constant yapping. It gets really old.
but you? You're wise.:hug:
 

Stanton Moore

morose bourgeoisie
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
3,900
MBTI Type
INFP
I'm genuinely surprised that anyone found my posts in this thread to be angry or hostile.



On the contrary; I think INFPs are the only people who see that, because it's really not there.




I'm really not kidding about that. You people really do attach emotional motivation to everything when none exists, and often it seems like you go out of your way to take offense even when none was intended whatsoever.

I posted in this thread to share information, not attack anyone.

Note that the only non-INFP in the thread didn't see anything offensive or hostile about my post either...!

I know. I was referring to many of your posts in the past, as much as this one. I guess I just see you as a bit of an asshole. I bet that makes a fucked up person like you smile, huh?
But I'll defer to Jennifer, and drop it. Peace, conflicted bro.
 
Top