[MBTI General] Is my lack of certainty about other people an indication that I'm not iNtuitive?

[Thalassa]

Well, I have very good "telepathy" with loved ones, like knowing people need me or that they're trying to contact me or even that they're standing behind me. I can feel that someone I'm already close to may come back into my life.

But I am terrible at jumping to wrong conclusions. Like seriously, I can think this or that and have it be totally wrong. I made two very bad guesses about another person and myself just this past week. I've also mixed up my own vision/desires with what I thought was intuition.

I think this is a sign my Ni is tertiary not in any way dom/aux. I don't think I'm Ne, either, because I seriously don't sit around and think about absurd hypotheticals and I can get really frustrated when someone insists on their theory being correct when it clearly doesn't have jack shit to do with real life. However, I am "random" and "big picture"...and guess what? Se is random and big picture too, and Se types frequently mistype as Ns, especially ISxPs.

Also, when I was in my teens my Ni felt very "mysterious" and "supernatural" to me, which is apparently common in Se types more than true NFs, especially INFJ who has Ni as a dom function wouldn't see their Ni as "mysterious." I even had an INTJ say the other day on this forum in a thread that his Ni isn't all that mysterious.

I know this doesn't apply if you're an ISFJ, in fact if you were ISFJ you would reject Ne, so you might want to ask someone like Giggly, or even EJCC (an ESTJ who has well developed Ne, ESxJs do more often, my ESFJ ex did, and my ISTPs ESFJ mommy is about 50 and her current age uses Ne with such dexterity it just confirmed to me that she has more Ne than I do!)

 

[Randomnity]

[MENTION=206]Randomnity[/MENTION] I think you make a very good point about something feeling so right in your head that you can MAKE it right, force it to be right, use its "rightness" as a starting point, and that being an Ni-dom tendency. Personally, I think I also don't like putting myself "out there" to get shot down. Sometimes I reach very definite conclusions about people. I might judge someone harshly and definitively when I've reached a point of real anger and hurt with them. But I'll keep most of it to myself. I may feel very very right and sure about them, but I know it's subjective too. Hard to explain. I guess I hedge my bets a lot.

I identify a lot with what you describe too, actually - maybe it's a tert-Ni thing, or a 6 thing, or who knows.

Also, when I was in my teens my Ni felt very "mysterious" and "supernatural" to me, which is apparently common in Se types more than true NFs, especially INFJ who has Ni as a dom function wouldn't see their Ni as "mysterious." I even had an INTJ say the other day on this forum in a thread that his Ni isn't all that mysterious.

Interesting. I don't see my tert-Ni as mysterious or supernatural at all, although I do have a hard time really understanding what is Ni as opposed to Ti, because they really seem to overlap and work together, in my view. But maybe that's just because I don't see many things in life as "supernatural".

 

[Thalassa]

I identify a lot with what you describe too, actually - maybe it's a tert-Ni thing, or a 6 thing, or who knows.



Interesting. I don't see my tert-Ni as mysterious or supernatural at all, although I do have a hard time really understanding what is Ni as opposed to Ti, because they really seem to overlap and work together, in my view. But maybe that's just because I don't see many things in life as "supernatural".

It could have to do with my own belief system, because I was raised with a lot of both Irish and Native American superstition, in the South, amongst Christians.

It could be the Fi/Ni combo as opposed to the Ti/Ni combo that creates this "feeling" of course.

Jung talks about Se doms (ESxPs) having a kind of pagan sense, with a superstitious, "magical" religiosity. This could be an argument for my being ESFP.

I also grew up in the South, as I say, around a lot of historical properties and was educated quite roundly about history by my elders, so maybe my Fi internalized this as being able to "feel" energies in old houses, etc.

 

[uumlau]

It's really just that I hardly ever feel I have some sort of magic radar for people. I seldom feel I have infallible instincts and that sort of thing. And it seems to be a common thread with N-aux and dom to feel that way.

Yeah, Ni doesn't mean that you have magic powers of intuition, and most Ni-doms I meet and speak with don't feel that they're doing anything that remarkable. On occasion, they get uncannily accurate premonitions they can't explain, but it's not like a super power.

What makes someone Ni (as opposed to Si) is that Si thinks like this:

People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect,

while Ni thinks like this:

but *actually* from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly... time-y wimey... stuff.

Basically, Ni looks at things dynamically, where INTJs think in terms of physical/objective dynamics, while INFJs think in terms of people dynamics. Si sees history as a huge repository of knowledge, Ni looks to history to see how things might happen in the future. There's the whole inside-the-box and outside-the-box cliche, but truth be told, Si has a really really big box with meticulous details for exceptions to generalities, where Ni has lots of boxes which get switched out as needed for the case at hand. (Actually, Ni has no boxes, but a set of rules of functional dynamics. The rules are fairly constant, and evolve slowly as we learn, but we can't put them to words, and are instead stuck with describing the material specifics that suggest the underlying ideas, hence "lots of boxes.")

Because we focus on the dynamics of situations, we see things that others don't see when they focus on the individual things/objects/people. It just isn't obvious to us, especially early on, that other people don't perceive the world this way, but it's exactly why Ni gets tagged as being mystical: most other people (whatever 90-odd percent of them) don't think this way, so that which is blindingly obvious from a dynamic, functional perspective appears to be deep and insightful to others (if true) or completely wacky (if false or not falsifiable). Worse, it's hard to put the functional dynamics into words: I've mentioned before how Newton had to invent calculus to talk about gravity. All of the Si (and Se) things in the world have fairly precise names and labels, but the laws of human interaction, for example, still defy explanation and we're stuck with abstract concepts or (in the case of this forum) typologies.

In short, we observe and state that which is obvious to us, but we often cannot explain "why" it is true to those who don't think like us, so it's labelled "mystical."

An interesting aspect of Ni-doms as described in Nardi's latest book is that both INFJs and INTJs both use a part of the brain that deals with "precise speaking": we're well aware of how difficult it is to convey our ideas, and so we get a lot of practice converting abstract concepts into everyday speech.

 

[Esoteric Wench]

[MENTION=7063]SilkRoad[/MENTION], for what it's worth, you read as an INFJ to me... and a pretty well-balanced one at that. I know we haven't interacted directly very much, but I always enjoy reading what you have to say... which is filled with what is obvious to me as Ni-insight. I've also noticed that your Fe doesn't manifest itself in the way that it does with other INFJs.

Have you considered that this "lack of being sure of your insights about people thing" is more about Fe than about N versus S? From my Fi point of view, one of the most salient traits I observe in Fe-users is that they state their Fe observations as if they are unequivocal fact. In other words, to Fi-user me, Fe-users often make statements about people and relationships that seem horrendously overconfident. I've come to learn that Fe users of the INFJ variety aren't intending to come off as "judgey" (thanks [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION] for this word) in their statements as I sometimes hear it.

Highlander explained how some types come across as judgier than others, but that for INFJs they weren't nearly as "judgey" as they sounded. He did this in one of his posts in another thread that I can't seem to find after searching for about 10 minutes. [Highlander, you know the post I mean. The "judgey" one. Can you find it and post the link here? Thanks!]

Anyway, Silkroad, my whole point is that you don't seem to express your Fe in the way other INFJs on this forum do. So I attribute the differences you're observing between yourself and other INFJs as an Fe thing. Perhaps something in your upbringing or your personal development made it important to you to not jump to judgment too quickly. Consider this a blessing that makes you a well-rounded, ethically mature INFJ.

 

[SilkRoad]

Interesting. I don't see my tert-Ni as mysterious or supernatural at all, although I do have a hard time really understanding what is Ni as opposed to Ti, because they really seem to overlap and work together, in my view. But maybe that's just because I don't see many things in life as "supernatural".

I don't think I've ever really had the feeling that I was doing/experiencing something mystical. I've certainly had strange moments in my life and I wonder if I have had premonitions or if it's just confirmation bias...etc. However, I think one of the things it comes down to in my case is that I see connections others don't - and that constantly - and they are things which seem normal to me. I experienced this a lot in school or uni, I'd hand in a paper knowing that quite frankly I hadn't even worked incredibly hard on it (well, some of the time!) and the teacher or professor would praise the connections I'd found that others hadn't, and they seemed so obvious to me, but apparently not to most others. I think I tend to see little patterns everywhere and weave them into bigger and bigger patterns. I let myself do this quite freely when it comes to - uh - my fascination with spies, or Arthurian legend, or whatever. I'm more reluctant to do it with people issues, I guess.

I have no idea if it's Ni or something else but I don't think anything that has really affected me emotionally ever leaves the pattern - so to speak. I have interests which I've kind of moved on from - but I never move on from a real passion 100%, it is always there and other things grow from it. There are people in my life who are no longer in my life for one reason or another and we may never speak again. But almost every day they'll weave themselves through, somehow. Something will remind me or I'll feel something I learned from the experience.

 

[SilkRoad]

Yeah, Ni doesn't mean that you have magic powers of intuition, and most Ni-doms I meet and speak with don't feel that they're doing anything that remarkable. On occasion, they get uncannily accurate premonitions they can't explain, but it's not like a super power.

What makes someone Ni (as opposed to Si) is that Si thinks like this:

while Ni thinks like this:


Basically, Ni looks at things dynamically, where INTJs think in terms of physical/objective dynamics, while INFJs think in terms of people dynamics. Si sees history as a huge repository of knowledge, Ni looks to history to see how things might happen in the future. There's the whole inside-the-box and outside-the-box cliche, but truth be told, Si has a really really big box with meticulous details for exceptions to generalities, where Ni has lots of boxes which get switched out as needed for the case at hand. (Actually, Ni has no boxes, but a set of rules of functional dynamics. The rules are fairly constant, and evolve slowly as we learn, but we can't put them to words, and are instead stuck with describing the material specifics that suggest the underlying ideas, hence "lots of boxes.")

Because we focus on the dynamics of situations, we see things that others don't see when they focus on the individual things/objects/people. It just isn't obvious to us, especially early on, that other people don't perceive the world this way, but it's exactly why Ni gets tagged as being mystical: most other people (whatever 90-odd percent of them) don't think this way, so that which is blindingly obvious from a dynamic, functional perspective appears to be deep and insightful to others (if true) or completely wacky (if false or not falsifiable). Worse, it's hard to put the functional dynamics into words: I've mentioned before how Newton had to invent calculus to talk about gravity. All of the Si (and Se) things in the world have fairly precise names and labels, but the laws of human interaction, for example, still defy explanation and we're stuck with abstract concepts or (in the case of this forum) typologies.

In short, we observe and state that which is obvious to us, but we often cannot explain "why" it is true to those who don't think like us, so it's labelled "mystical."

An interesting aspect of Ni-doms as described in Nardi's latest book is that both INFJs and INTJs both use a part of the brain that deals with "precise speaking": we're well aware of how difficult it is to convey our ideas, and so we get a lot of practice converting abstract concepts into everyday speech.

Mmmkay, I relate to a lot of this. Converting abstract concepts into everyday speech? I'm a writer. And I am told that I am very good at this...and it happens pretty naturally...if I need to write an article or something, at least if it is something I am truly interested in, it will just sort of grow in my head and form into the right words and the right structure and then I just need to write it down...

I understand what you mean about focusing about dynamics, rather than individual specifics. I think it's got at least a bit to do with why I see things very few others do, and then miss the fact that the tree in front of my house was chopped down weeks ago (well, metaphorically speaking anyway!)

 

[SilkRoad]

[MENTION=7063]SilkRoad[/MENTION], for what it's worth, you read as an INFJ to me... and a pretty well-balanced one at that. I know we haven't interacted directly very much, but I always enjoy reading what you have to say... which is filled with what is obvious to me as Ni-insight. I've also noticed that your Fe doesn't manifest itself in the way that it does with other INFJs.

Have you considered that this "lack of being sure of your insights about people thing" is more about Fe than about N versus S? From my Fi point of view, one of the most salient traits I observe in Fe-users is that they state their Fe observations as if they are unequivocal fact. In other words, to Fi-user me, Fe-users often make statements about people and relationships that seem horrendously overconfident. I've come to learn that Fe users of the INFJ variety aren't intending to come off as "judgey" (thanks [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION] for this word) in their statements as I sometimes hear it.

Highlander explained how some types come across as judgier than others, but that for INFJs they weren't nearly as "judgey" as they sounded. He did this in one of his posts in another thread that I can't seem to find after searching for about 10 minutes. [Highlander, you know the post I mean. The "judgey" one. Can you find it and post the link here? Thanks!]

Anyway, Silkroad, my whole point is that you don't seem to express your Fe in the way other INFJs on this forum do. So I attribute the differences you're observing between yourself and other INFJs as an Fe thing. Perhaps something in your upbringing or your personal development made it important to you to not jump to judgment too quickly. Consider this a blessing that makes you a well-rounded, ethically mature INFJ.

Hmmm this is a really interesting perspective! Thanks for coming at it this way. I think that in general (although I can be judgmental too, I'm afraid...) my Fe manifests more as diplomacy. I think it's partly nature and partly nurture. I am a lot like my dad and he is super-diplomatic. Actually, people sometimes think he's a lawyer, which annoys him, but anyway And yeah, I was raised to not impute bad motives to people, and that sort of thing. We are all IxxJs in my family (not positive of anyone's type but dad is probably ISFJ, mom probably INTJ and brother probably ISTJ) and I think we just tend to keep our judgments to ourselves a lot. I actually think I am more open with statements of judgment than I used to be but probably still fairly diplomatic for the most part.

 

[Reverie]

Basically, Ni looks at things dynamically, where INTJs think in terms of physical/objective dynamics, while INFJs think in terms of people dynamics.

Because we focus on the dynamics of situations, we see things that others don't see when they focus on the individual things/objects/people. It just isn't obvious to us, especially early on, that other people don't perceive the world this way, but it's exactly why Ni gets tagged as being mystical: most other people (whatever 90-odd percent of them) don't think this way, so that which is blindingly obvious from a dynamic, functional perspective appears to be deep and insightful to others (if true) or completely wacky (if false or not falsifiable). Worse, it's hard to put the functional dynamics into words: I've mentioned before how Newton had to invent calculus to talk about gravity. All of the Si (and Se) things in the world have fairly precise names and labels, but the laws of human interaction, for example, still defy explanation and we're stuck with abstract concepts or (in the case of this forum) typologies.

In short, we observe and state that which is obvious to us, but we often cannot explain "why" it is true to those who don't think like us, so it's labelled "mystical."

An interesting aspect of Ni-doms as described in Nardi's latest book is that both INFJs and INTJs both use a part of the brain that deals with "precise speaking": we're well aware of how difficult it is to convey our ideas, and so we get a lot of practice converting abstract concepts into everyday speech.

Thank you again yet another excellent post on the subject of Ni. I'm beginning to have a new appreciation of the fact you INTJs share the same dom function as yours and a few other INTJs descriptions of the functions are so elegant and well worded.
Seeing the dynamics is precisely the right way to describe it.

 

[Reverie]

Anyway, Silkroad, my whole point is that you don't seem to express your Fe in the way other INFJs on this forum do. So I attribute the differences you're observing between yourself and other INFJs as an Fe thing. Perhaps something in your upbringing or your personal development made it important to you to not jump to judgment too quickly. Consider this a blessing that makes you a well-rounded, ethically mature INFJ.

I forgot to say one thing... I know INFJs are generally thought of as "judgey" though Ni is in fact a perceiving function. When it becomes more elegant and has developed enough with age and maturity we're able to view things from multiple perspectives and angles and place the event or dynamic in several context frames and it follows that we refrain from "judgey" behavior as we don't attach absolute judgements to as many events. I think any negative "judgeyness" is reserved for actions that have very negative effects on larger scale human dynamics in general.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

On my run today, I got an idea of a way to illustrate how I feel Ni is, compared to Se, Si, and Ne.

But I don't have time to do it right now. Hopefully by tomorrow.

 

[Cellmold]

On my run today, I got an idea of a way to illustrate how I feel Ni is, compared to Se, Si, and Ne.

But I don't have time to do it right now. Hopefully by tomorrow.

Why? vs What's that? vs When? vs What if?

Heh just a joke. A nice bad joke...

 

[SubtleFighter]

I'm also an INFJ who's an e6. Don't count out being an e6 as having a big hand in your uncertainty with your Ni. Second guessing (or more like eighth guessing) myself too much is something I really struggle with.

Here's another possibility: do you have low self-esteem? Since Ni is a really subjective function that can't be readily explained to anyone else outside of the person themselves and focuses on things that most other people aren't focusing on and could sometimes come to "conclusions" that no one else around seems to share, an Ni-user with low self-esteem could struggle with having faith in their own inner voice that has little to no external validation.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

I related to your OP, Silkroad, and I do not have certainty about any other human being on the planet including family. It is far too easy to assume to be correct based on confirmation bias. Since coming to understand human perception better and how we filter out information based on our expectations, it is clear that each person is in great danger of assuming accuracy as a result of confirmation bias. Fear makes us in even greater need for reality to be what we expect. It will never be smaller than our comprehension and that is frightening, especially when relating to people because we can never know for sure who will hurt us. It is why inflated egotism can easily translate into someone limiting their ability to learn.

I have spent my life making a continual effort to understand other people. What I have learned is not that I am "never wrong about people", but rather that people are complex and dynamic systems and that it is not possible for any human being to fully comprehend another. Observing a human being is like observing a deep river that is constantly changing and that contains many layers of currents. Even if we can analyze components of personality, the way these combine is like an ever shifting kaleidescope. When you start to really get a feeling for what another person is, it is almost humbling in its vastness.

 

[Giggly]

You're INSFJ.

 

[RaptorWizard]

I would say that sensors deal more with what is certain or what what appears on the surface to be what is, whereas an intuitive would question these perceptions.

 

[UniqueMixture]

Could be extreme introversion. I think is tend to second guess themselves a lot. Also, I've noticed the inner reactions they have can be way off base because of a bad experience so they react to that negative experience rather than the actual person

 

[Z Buck McFate]

As a few have already mentioned, I think that INJs (both F and T) can be in the habit of saying things more declaratively than they realize.

Here’s the post Esoteric Wench alluded to, which highlander wrote. I agree that it’s a good ‘un. I especially like (and agree with) the way he phrased the paragraph about Ni doms.

I was referring to judgment expressed being different than judgement applied. If you look at some of the different types, I think you can see how this plays out:

Te doms (ENTJ, ESTJ) - They clearly leap to judgments and they express those judgments to everyone around them

Ni doms (INFJ, INTJ) - They might communicate an opinion and come across very forcefully in that opinion (because the extraverted function is a judging function) but inside their minds, they are constantly evaluating all of the information that's coming in and navigating towards a point of view. That point of view changes. It isn't static. They are dominant perceivers.

Fi doms - As it relates to their Fi values, these are very strongly held. It's the "center" of them so to speak. I once knew an ISFP very well. On the outside, she appeared quite flexible, relaxed and would just go with the flow. You couldn't get her to express an opinion. Question: "Where do you want to go to dinner?" Answer "I don't know". She refuses to pick a place. It was one of many cases where I would ask her what she thought about something and she would just say, "Well, I don't know." However, in other ways, she was not particularly flexible. There were a number of things where no amount of logic or persuasion could be used to get this person to change their mind. It's as if there were certain principles she had that simply were not open to change. She wasn't open to new information. I recall the line, "what's good enough for my parents is good enough for me." What? It used to drive me batty - this combination of indecisiveness on the one hand and inflexibility on the other - in an opposite way to how I seemed to think.

So, the bottom line is that I think judginess relates to the dominant function and whether or not the function is extroverted or introverted. If a person has a dominant extraverted judging function then they are judgey and sound judgey. If they have a dominant introverted perceiving function and an auxiliary extroverted judging function then they will sound judgey abut are far less so than they appear to be on the outside. If they have a dominant introverted judging function and an extraverted perceiving function then they will appear to not be so judgey on the outside but will be much more judgey on the inside. Finally, if they have a dominant extroverted perceiving function then they will not come across so judgey and won't be so judgey. Anyway, that's what I think.

Also, I know "judgey" is not actually a word.

And I agree with sentiments expressed (in this thread) that the psychic/mystic shtick does INJs a disservice.

 

[SilkRoad]

I'm also an INFJ who's an e6. Don't count out being an e6 as having a big hand in your uncertainty with your Ni. Second guessing (or more like eighth guessing) myself too much is something I really struggle with.

Here's another possibility: do you have low self-esteem? Since Ni is a really subjective function that can't be readily explained to anyone else outside of the person themselves and focuses on things that most other people aren't focusing on and could sometimes come to "conclusions" that no one else around seems to share, an Ni-user with low self-esteem could struggle with having faith in their own inner voice that has little to no external validation.

No, don't have low self-esteem - it was lower when I was younger but that's never been a huge problem for me, probably mainly as I come from a very supportive family. I think these days it's average to the high side of average. However, speaking of family, my parents particularly tend to worry, be anxious, and see the possibilities for what can go wrong, which I'm sure has a lot to do with the e6 and maybe this question generally.

I'd be interested in your perspective, do you have any other comments about this question generally? Do you think it's good to question your intuitions/perceptions or do you try to do it less than you already do?

I related to your OP, Silkroad, and I do not have certainty about any other human being on the planet including family. It is far too easy to assume to be correct based on confirmation bias. Since coming to understand human perception better and how we filter out information based on our expectations, it is clear that each person is in great danger of assuming accuracy as a result of confirmation bias. Fear makes us in even greater need for reality to be what we expect. It will never be smaller than our comprehension and that is frightening, especially when relating to people because we can never know for sure who will hurt us. It is why inflated egotism can easily translate into someone limiting their ability to learn.

I have spent my life making a continual effort to understand other people. What I have learned is not that I am "never wrong about people", but rather that people are complex and dynamic systems and that it is not possible for any human being to fully comprehend another. Observing a human being is like observing a deep river that is constantly changing and that contains many layers of currents. Even if we can analyze components of personality, the way these combine is like an ever shifting kaleidescope. When you start to really get a feeling for what another person is, it is almost humbling in its vastness.

Related to this a lot, thanks.

I feel like when I make very definite judgments about others (tending to be negative), it's almost like a coping mechanism to deal with them in (or out of) my life, but I know it's limiting in some respects at least.

You're INSFJ.

You know, I think that's quite possible.

I would say that sensors deal more with what is certain or what what appears on the surface to be what is, whereas an intuitive would question these perceptions.

I think everyone SHOULD question their perceptions...I guess it's just finding a balance between doing it too much and not enough...

Could be extreme introversion. I think is tend to second guess themselves a lot. Also, I've noticed the inner reactions they have can be way off base because of a bad experience so they react to that negative experience rather than the actual person

In my case, definitely not extreme introversion or even close. I'm an outgoing introvert (I get "what, you're an introvert? But you're a people person!" and that kind of thing a lot), and kind of "ambivert" in a lot of ways. I'm actually inclined to think it's more likely to be very introverted Ni-doms who rely on magical thinking, perhaps not being sufficiently in touch with what the real world is actually like. Not too sure about that though.

What I would say though is that bad experiences (in particular) remind me of all the other similar bad experiences. So if I have a bad experience with someone, if it seems to have been a bit of a pattern in my life, that person will come to represent all the other people and incidents that were similar, in a sense. At that point I tend to get a sort of "deja vu, but too late" feeling...

I think I have better than average people skills. On the other hand, I tend to get blindsided by other people turning out to be assholes.

 

[Reverie]

And I agree with sentiments expressed (in this thread) that the psychic/mystic shtick does INJs a disservice.

I think the problem is it turns us into some kind of caricatures, when there are many concrete benefits that you have with Ni. One is to be able able to reframe events, which comes in handy if you're for example a psychologist, because you can actually help people who are stuck in a mental rut. I think we don't see it as a simple black and white thing but how to communicate that in a way that encompasses all the different aspects of what any one thing is. That's an artform in itself. ;D

I related to your OP, Silkroad, and I do not have certainty about any other human being on the planet including family. It is far too easy to assume to be correct based on confirmation bias. Since coming to understand human perception better and how we filter out information based on our expectations, it is clear that each person is in great danger of assuming accuracy as a result of confirmation bias. Fear makes us in even greater need for reality to be what we expect. It will never be smaller than our comprehension and that is frightening, especially when relating to people because we can never know for sure who will hurt us. It is why inflated egotism can easily translate into someone limiting their ability to learn.

I have spent my life making a continual effort to understand other people. What I have learned is not that I am "never wrong about people", but rather that people are complex and dynamic systems and that it is not possible for any human being to fully comprehend another. Observing a human being is like observing a deep river that is constantly changing and that contains many layers of currents. Even if we can analyze components of personality, the way these combine is like an ever shifting kaleidescope. When you start to really get a feeling for what another person is, it is almost humbling in its vastness.

I think confirmation bias is something that you're quite naturally aware of if you can see an event or matter from several angles. I don't think other's are aware of us being aware of it. Like many things that's one that should be mentioned in any conversation...from a practical standpoint it would make very long conversations...
In general I would say that INFJs (atleast the older ones who've been around to observe things for a long time) tend to be very aware of confirmation bias constantly.
It makes some normal human functions hard. Try being angry at someone. ;D Doesn't really work easy unless you willfully and rigidly decide to take the low road and not see the event from many perspectives: yours theirs, the neigbour's, the neighbour's dog's, from a group dynamic POV, from a spiritual POV, from an efficiency POV...it's an issue for me atleast. ;D
I think one major problem is in commmunication and HOW you communicate a subject. Language is somewhat limited and in real life you have to condense things to communicate anything. Otherwise you'll not say anything at all because it'll come out in a crude and biased way no matter how hard you try.