[NF] How do NFs view INTJs?

[Angry Ayrab]

I don't hear that one very often that's for sure!

Seriously, them and INFJ's turn me on to no end. Think Jodie Foster... and I am not talking about looks here. But that smooth I don't give a rats ass what the world thinks attittude and that mysterious aura they give... oh god I am turned on by just typing it.

Also, brains on a girl are so sexy, and INTJ's are definitely not lacking in that department... most of the time that is.

 

[Wolf]

Ok, as long as it was gentle, personally I never read anything for him, that is why I felt kind of rude, but he was trolling, hence my douche comment.

I guess he is one of the regulars here, unlike me... a plain newb

I thought you appreciated when INTJs tell it like it is. It's not trolling when it's specifically about the person and accurate.

Familiarity with the people in question would have helped.

 

[Virtual ghost]

wow when I say "because I feel like it" usually means I don't feel like explaining.

That is the main reason why INTJs don't like that.
If the topic is not about something personal some INTJs will even take it as attack on their intelligence.

 

[songofcalamity]

Weird.

They amuses me.

 

[SillySapienne]

I thought you appreciated when INTJs tell it like it is. It's not trolling when it's specifically about the person and accurate.

Familiarity with the people in question would have helped.

{insult removed}
-MacGuffin

 

[Synapse]

What I find uncomfortable when dealing with intj's is

The tunnel vision, it's like a clash of the titans. It's the lack of compromise when their judgments are set. I notice when my brother and father clash they will never compromise. Both rely on their intelligence, both are unwilling to adjust to the other's perspective and dismiss the other as flawed. Then proceed to prove their thinking is right based on their intuition. This can work against them because to be wrong disorients their foundation to such an extent its threatening and will go to extremes to prove it isn't wrong.

Their intuition compensates for this at the expense of conflict that is counter intuitive. The thinking is biased against feelings as an unnecessary function. In stating their proofs their emotional vulnerabilities are locked and undeveloped.

The closer you get to the truth of their logical reality the greater the resistance. It is what their intuition demands of their thinking to visualise a future that will be fixed to exist in the precise manner they have planned in their statistically predictive analysis, sure they compensate for errors but the present is arbitrary.

Emotional intelligence, the tolerance threshold is set to the lowest priority. Their emotional vulnerability is too much to deal with and is viewed as corruption in the face of logic. The weakness then is not knowing or learning how to experience emotions and become far more emotionally fragile and reactionary than you'd think.

Relating well with people is difficult and emotions become annoying for you. And when emotions happen to excess its like the frightened puppy syndrome, criticise when its offensive and play down the value of negotiation and diplomacy. You speak directly that assumes people are able to accept the logic as proof of their flaw. This displaces trust and discussion becomes insincere. The criticism is also a way of showing affection but makes people defensive because it hurts them.

 

[runvardh]

I find INTJs not too difficult to deal with when they're more mature. I guess the biggest thing that bugs me would be the assault rifle type questions. It's not even dependent on what selection it's on, whether full auto, three round burst, or semi-auto; the way the question comes tends to be most difficult. The biggest problem with communicating that, however, is that if they haven't come to terms with feeling they end up incapable of seeing it as a problem. Now, as someone who knows there is no ill intent to the question at all (they just want to know) I do my best to remind my emotionality about that and try to reply in kind. By the way, if you want an explanation of my feelings, be prepared for it to be long in coming and possibly flawed since it's possible I'll be trying to explain color to someone with only black and white sight.

 

[wedekit]

Just to add on, I don't think I have ever met a Female INTJ that I didn't like. However, I have run into quite a few male INTJs that I didn't care for.

 

[Sniffles]

I cannot agree more with the comments concerning "tunnel vision" and "assault rifle type questions" - ROTFL very clever description!

I had a short exchange about this with Liason(INTJ) in her introduction, and she noted that INTJs rarely if ever consider anything outside the realm of logic.

Now I have nothing against logic, but I certainly know there's so much that logic cannot answer. Probably a typical INFJ position, but it seems I can address issues both within logic and outside it. So from my point of view, it seems the INTJ's vision is more limited and narrow compared to mine.

Bluewing talks about this in his INFJ profile, how Fe acts as less a constraint on Ni then Te does. So while INFJs and INTJs are both introverted intuitives, the INFJ is more intuitive by nature.

And this plays itself out time and time again whenever I discuss topics with INTJs. To me it seems they can't grasp the big picture(or rather a wider picture). The INTJ style of argument seems more analytical in style, while the INFJ(or at least myself) seems more "mystical" in style.

Now if the INTJ and INFJ agree with each other, well then you have one hell of a combination. But as enemies, oh brother!

As for the assault rifle style question, again I couldn't agree more. I often compare debating an INTJ to having a cheese grater shoved into my face.

 

[Haphazard]

As for the assault rifle style question, again I couldn't agree more. I often compare debating an INTJ to having a cheese grater shoved into my face.

I don't know if I'd call them assault rifle style questions. More like sniper rifle questions. Usually you only need one or two to bring the whole thing down. Then again, debating for me can become a blood sport...

I wonder... You know, I've had the opposite experience when arguing with INFJs. They often seem quite pedantic to me.

 

[helen]

And this plays itself out time and time again whenever I discuss topics with INTJs. To me it seems they can't grasp the big picture(or rather a wider picture).

Would you mind sharing what topics exactly you have found frustrating to discuss with INTJs? Cuz I find I can talk about most anything with my INTJ friend, except he seems rather skeptical about the whole concept of psychology (considered as a science), so I sorta avoid discussing that.

 

[Sniffles]

Yes I guess sniper rifle analogy would be more apt, since they come unexpectedly and out of nowhere.

I wonder... You know, I've had the opposite experience when arguing with INFJs. They often seem quite pedantic to me.

Interesting, could you explain this further?

 

[INA]

I don't know if I'd call them assault rifle style questions. More like sniper rifle questions. Usually you only need one or two to bring the whole thing down. Then again, debating for me can become a blood sport...

I wonder... You know, I've had the opposite experience when arguing with INFJs. They often seem quite pedantic to me.

And pedantry invites mockery, which the INFJ then calls immaturity!

 

[Sniffles]

Would you mind sharing what topics exactly you have found frustrating to discuss with INTJs?

It could be any subject, but #1 on the list has to be anything related to the existence of God or anything religious-related.

Cuz I find I can talk about most anything with my INTJ friend, except he seems rather skeptical about the whole concept of psychology (considered as a science), so I sorta avoid discussing that.

Well yes, I don't mean to imply that all INFJ-INTJ exhanges are purely hostile or whatnot. I've had plenty of friendly and interesting discussions with INTJs before myself.

I'm just outlining the different approaches of both types which often leads to hostilities or misunderstandings, from my own personal observations and experiences. And I admit I'm a bit hostile to INTJs lately, due to some recent incidents in my life - namely an INTJ girl breaking my heart.

 

[Haphazard]

Yes I guess sniper rifle analogy would be more apt, since they come unexpectedly and out of nowhere.

Interesting, could you explain this further?

I think it comes from Ti. I know Bluewing's argument that Ti is weak in INFJs, but considering his justification for everything he writes is 'pure typology' as opposed to 'applied typology,' I don't really think we can count that.

They tend to stick ruthlessly to principles that INTJs like to try to uproot. The idea is that if you destroy the base, the whole thing comes tumbling down, so it looks like the best weak spot for an argument. And INFJs (along with INTPs) really, really hate that.

I don't know about other INTJs, but I get a thrill out of debate. People who know me well generally think I'm even-tempered and reasonable, at least until there's a debate, and then I tear apart everything they stand for. It's a lot easier to do this online (because, well, online, you don't have to worry about the person's feelings getting so hurt that they'll come and make you regret it later), so I guess I come across as rather vicious. It's all in good fun, really, but people don't understand that.

 

[Sniffles]

They tend to stick ruthlessly to principles that INTJs like to try to uproot. The idea is that if you destroy the base, the whole thing comes tumbling down, so it looks like the best weak spot for an argument. And INFJs (along with INTPs) really, really hate that.

Yes I do hate that. As for destroying the base, I do that too, but in a different style. To use your term, you guys are far more vicious when doing it.

Once my opponent is down on the ground, I stop kicking him. You guys keep going at it untill he's literally dead.

 

[Uytuun]

I've recently had an incident in which defeated Ti didn't want to just lie down peacefully with its hands over its head, but insisted on trying to worm itself out of the deathlock, trying to bend logic etc. So you have to step on it and obliterate it fully. Seriously, debates tend to get heated and are probably experienced very differently by Fs. We're not attacking you, we're attacking your theory. A heavy J especially will be in it to win.

My discussions with INFJs have been of the sort in which their emotions seriously corrupt their reasoning skills, though, so I have no real life examples of that interaction.

I'm open to every topic and as Ni dominants we are among the most well-positioned to understand the limits of logic.

INTJs are deep rather than wide, that's true and I can see how a heavy Ti INFJ and an INTJ might accuse one another of the same thing: not understanding what the other is trying to convey, but patience and a willingness to understand can solve this.

I'd also be cautious about basing your ideas of type too much on BlueWing and basing your assessment of how INTJs view logic on Liason only (nothing personal).

it seems I can address issues both within logic and outside it

I think that a typical INTJ is more adept at channelling pure intuition into the debate by means of Te whereas your access to it in the context of the debate is limited since it's got Ti to take into account, so you lose the intensity of either Ni or Ti, but you win the ability to understand both. I'd guess that lacking Te it's sometimes difficult to express your standpoints.

 

[Haphazard]

Once my opponent is down on the ground, I stop kicking him. You guys keep going at it untill he's literally dead.

I don't believe an argument is dead until I see the beaten, bloody corpse. It's like in superhero movies -- if you don't see the corpse, they're not dead, and will return in the sequel.

It's nothing personal. Really.

 

[Sniffles]

I've recently had an incident in which defeated Ti didn't want to just lie down peacefully with its hands over its head, but insisted on trying to worm itself out of the deathlock, trying to bend logic etc. So you have to step on it and obliterate it fully.

Yes, with you people it's like "Accept our position or ELSE!"

And you brow-beat anybody who disagrees with you to submission.

We're not attacking you, we're attacking your theory.

Do you know how many times I have tell other people that? LOL.

The only problem is what I described above, how the INTJ is more analytical in argument, while the INFJ seems more mystical. And trust me, you simply cannot apply analytical tactics to mystical arguments; it's a completely different realm.

When you INTJs seek to tear arguments apart, to me you engage in what Chesterton called "the fine art of missing the point". You either comprehend the point or you don't; if it's necessary for you to tear it apart, then you really don't grasp the point - you missed it big time.

I'm open to every topic and as Ni dominants we are among the most well-positioned to understand the limits of logic.

INTJs maybe positionied to understand the limits of logic, they still cannot going beyond those limits.

INFJs are open to every topic too.

INTJs are deep rather than wide, that's true and I can see how a heavy Ti INFJ and an INTJ might accuse one another of the same thing: not understanding what the other is trying to convey, but patience and a willingness to understand can solve this.

That's basically my main argument: INFJs and INTJs perceive the world in different ways, despite both being dom Ni - it's still used to different ends.

I'd also be cautious about basing your ideas of type too much on BlueWing.

My arguments are based mostly upon my own observations. BlueWing's profile mentioned something that corresponds to my own observations. Same thing with Liason.

 

[Uytuun]

Yes, with you people it's like "Accept our position or ELSE!"

And you brow-beat anybody who disagrees with you to submission.

I don't understand where this hostility comes from, really, unless you're projecting. The Ti person later admitted to being defeated, he just didn't want to admit it right then, so I had to make sure he'd been fully undermined. It was a matter of his argument being unsound, not his accepting my position. At other times, I'm the one under his foot.

And what would a mystical argument be?

if it's necessary for you to tear it apart, then you really don't grasp the point - you missed it big time.

So if we disagree with your point or find it's not valid and point that out to you...we don't grasp the point...that sounds an aweful lot like what you said of us in the first quote.

INTJs maybe positionied to understand the limits of logic, they still cannot going beyond those limits.

Before I address this: what is your conception of going beyond logic in a debate?