[NF] INFPs, what do INFJs do that drives you nuts?

[skylights]

Spent my last hour Googling the answer to my question since it was poorly received by a member here. For those who didn't see it, this is what I posted:

NFJs sometimes seem to say things to encourage action out of others, but what they say may be a specific distortion of information aimed with getting the other person to fulfill what the INFJ wants, as opposed to what the other person may want if they knew more information.

It's just really confusing to me that NFJs are concerned with consequence in external reality, but it also seems like NFJs feel like it's okay to manipulate others in external reality. So it's like external reality is what counts, but then it's okay to trick people into messing up, and then hold that against them?

Got my answer from pleasant INFJs elsewhere. (No offense to other INFJs here who have been very pleasant as well).

INFJs, I understand my mistake, and sorry for assuming that withholding information was generally malintentioned, because I understand now that it isn't. It's hard for a Ne dom to see that because we operate on assumption that "the more information, the better" and share information very openly as a general rule.

@Lexicon, thank you for your explanation too, because that last paragraph in particular was helpful.

The individual may hold back certain things by nature, for privacy reasons, or simply think it's innocuous & of little consequence, with regard to other parties. I've seen this in NJ's, frequently, and it can easily be mistaken for some kind of conscious [and even malevolent] deception.

I agree that this occurs in almost all people, and certainly more the more unhealthy they are, but I do contend that INFJs in particular demonstrate the combination of external influence with holding back certain information than other types. As far as I have experienced, most SFJs are generally more forthright, for better or for worse, and NFJs are generally a little more harsh on their close friends/family/coworkers when we create discord - I assume because you guys can generally "see it coming".

Following up my earlier posts and in response to OP, I figure it might be useful for INFJs to understand that sometimes another can feel "played" when an INFJ has presented information in one way, and then the other person finds out more information and realizes that would have acted otherwise in a situation if they had understood more about it. (Not that I necessarily think full information disclosure is always the best way to go about things, but just so you understand where I was coming from.)

 

[Anew Leaf]

Fair enough, but us INFP's are supposed to be trying to remember all our stuff about INFJ's too, those little details ...

Works best both ways.

I think what's tricky for each of us is not immediately jumping to our default mode.

@bold, Where did that crop up?

 

[Tiltyred]

Deleted

 

[skylights]

I still don't understand, I don't think, what you're talking about. That we tell lies of omission in a story designed to crank someone else up and set them about doing mischief, is what I get. That's horrible. The more positive spin might be that we give information as we understand it, to a person who we think will then be able to influence the course of events better than we might, for the common good. I think it's possible for anyone to leave out pieces of information just because their memory is faulty, they perceived events differently etc. It's certainly possible INFJs do this, because of our Ni, which sees big pictures and may omit detail either inadvertently or because we don't adequately consider detail in the first place, but it seems very odd that it would be seen as characteristic of INFJ to do this. On purpose. I'm not saying we don't, but if we do in large enough numbers that it's a thing, I'd like to hear more about it.

Just Google "INFJ manipulation".

I'm sorry that I don't really want to share more than that but you make me feel guilty for interpreting INFJs in a negative light. If the INFJs in my life hadn't had agendas for me - agendas that I never asked for, nor was I ever consulted in regards to - we wouldn't have this problem to begin with: I don't like feeling like a pawn in a game of chess, even if I'm succeeding as a result. And I don't feel like I should have to be made to feel guilty for explaining something INFJs do that drives me nuts in a thread asking what what do INFJs do that drives you nuts.

Obviously I don't hold this trend, assuming it is one, against you personally. However, I have seen it described by numerous people in numerous places, and I have a really hard time understanding why it's so repulsive to even consider that its existence is a possibility. There are some trends I don't particularly appreciate about ENFPs as an ENFP myself... flakiness, for example. I'm an enneagram 6 and that makes me a slightly different kind of ENFP - I might be indecisive and I might be anxious; however, it is extremely rare that I am flaky. But I can't deny that flakiness is a problem for ENFPs in general. Lots of people point out ENFP manipulation, and ENFPs always have to explain that it's almost always inadvertent (we're not Js, we don't even usually have an agenda, unless we're pissed). A lot of times people just think we like them way more than we actually do because of god-knows-what signals that we're accidentally sending. It's accidental but it still happens. That's what I'm saying here. It's not like I'm trying to character-assassinate INFJs. I just want to know why this keeps happening.

 

[Southern Kross]

Lol, no need to duck, my friend! You hit the nail on the head. I didn't believe that she truly wanted discourse because to me it seemed
1) She had already made up her mind and anything that disagreed with her hypothesis wasn't going to be considered.
2) I offered an alternative list of what I perceived to be more my issues to compare my perceptions with hers. So did cascadeco. It wasn't that we were disagreeing that INFJs have shortcomings. It was that we simply couldn't identify with some of the behaviours she mentioned.
3) I tried on two occasions offering examples of remorse. The first was negated as not being remorse because it was too insignificant. The second was not commented on. As cafe has said, I have to explicitly attempt to emote, as it is very much my goal not to impose my emotional state on other people (feels like talking on a cell phone loudly about personal things in a public place). Maybe what I said didn't appear to be emotional enough to be perceived as another story to add to the picture. Maybe it didn't seem like remorse because it was looking at cause and effect (see umlauu's post) and that seemed to negate any remorse that I expressed. I don't know.
4) She did not explicitly state what she wanted. If it was trying to understand, I attempted to explain why that approach was not going to yield the desired outcome from us. If it was trying to warn others, I didn't understand why she would continue engaging discussion with people that she already appeared to dislike and didn't seemingly see any hope for change in.
5) Despite saying that she was wanting discourse, little snarky phrases and comments were thrown in there that said the opposite much louder to me.
I am more than happy to consider my blindspots. However, if I don't know someone well, then they are going to need to look for commonalities and then explain where we diverge in behaviour or opinion and inquire why. Stating negatives as fact when they are not familiar with me personally just makes me assume that they are not interested in bringing about change in a constructive way and I don't want to play the game.

Ahh, I see. So I was on the right track. It's interesting to see your thought process and how you read the situation.

It seemed that the initial discussion of OA's points was rather congenial but I wonder now if the INFJs were biting their lips in annoyance and attempting to discuss the issue as best they could. The thread seemed to explode a few pages later, when I imagine, the patience eventually ran out. It's a pity the INFPs didn't spot that at the time, and that the INFJs didn't grasp what the INFPs implied - that way the escalation could have been avoided. Unfortunately, neither are good at picking up each other's esoteric signals.

So in approaching that situation over again, what do you see as an effective opener to better understand intent or know what to do? I certainly am not negating that either Mane or OA had abyssmal experiences that have coloured their perceptions of INFJs. They have every right to feel that way. What I need is to understand my role in the discourse that follows. Would it be more useful to say, "Could you tell me more about why you feel that way?" I kind of thought that they had told us why they felt that way though. They had experiences with INFJs that were really negative.

Any ideas you have would be greatly appreciated.

It's tough to come up with an approach that feels counter intuitive to yourself. I find keeping in mind small clarified points, like the ones [MENTION=9310]uumlau[/MENTION] gives, is useful when communicating - it's like a translation short hand. I've actually used some of the stuff that has come up in discussions on this site in the past. One about FJs has been useful with my mum: the idea that FJs want to affect others and assume others want to affect them - consequently innocent statements can sound like judgements. A common example:

Me: Have you done [insert some chore]?
My Mum: No, I haven't, but I've been very busy lately! I had to do [insert other chore or errand] all morning and then I got tired and went for a lie down after lunch, so I ran out of time! I can't be expect to do everything around here and your father certainly never helps. He's always working late as well as Saturday mornings! I asked him to do [insert task] weeks ago and he hasn't still hasn't done it yet!
Me:

The pure and honest truth is that I usually only ask in the first place in order to gain information. If the chore wasn't done, I would do it myself - I just needed to know if she had done it or not. But to her I seemed to be saying, "WHY HAVEN'T YOU DONE THIS CHORE?!". Keeping in mind the "assumption of judgement" in FJs has helped me to phrase things a little better (I sometimes need to explain why I need to know, not just what I need to know) or to placate her when I mess up. Anyway, I digress...

I guess what I'm getting at is to sit back and take a breath first and fore most and remember those little short hand points - eg. "INFPs can sound rude and blunt but don't always realise or intend it", and, "INFPs need their feelings to be validated (or at least to not be invalidated)", and "INFPs don't often pick up subtle Fe signals and need me to be more explicit at times" etc. If it seems like these rules particularly apply to the situation, stop and try to rethink the INFP's responses. TBH you don't need that much help because you're usually pretty good about doing this - the misunderstandings tend to be relatively minor with you.

As for your role in the discourse specifically, that's a tough one. Perhaps if you had said outright, "I'm having trouble understanding where you're coming from. Can you give some examples?" it might have gone down better. If you're confused, say that you are. We can't see the same inconsistencies that you do in what we're saying, so we assume it's clear unless people say otherwise. A little (sensitive) Te style directness can help us to understand what you're feeling. I noticed some of the INFJs did this, but once things got terse, it seemed to stop.

I wouldn't say, "could you tell me more about why you feel that way?" - that could be misinterpreted. It might be easier to appeal to our Si if you need more information - like asking for examples or to clarify a particular point further. That way you effectively ask about the subjective experience while dodging the potential minefield of the Judging functions. If you have to address Fi style impressions it's probably better to avoid "why" questions (eg. why do you feel that way?"). It can sound like implied demand for justification or that there's something wrong with that feeling/belief/impression. "How" or "what" might be more effective - eg. "how did you feel when that happened?" or "what was your reaction?". This suggests that the feeling just "is what it is" - that it simply exists, removed from questions of whether it's right or wrong, because that is secondary to us. And if you feel that emotion or reaction is incongruent in relation to the situation (ie. the cause and effect don't match to you), don't address (or correct/attack/undermine) the emotion. Instead, address the cause from your perspective. Explain or reframe the situation as you see it or have experienced it, and it's quite possible the incongruent effect (ie. the emotional response) will change as a indirect result. INFPs actually believe that the right frame of understanding has the capacity to change an emotion. To quote Lenore Thomson:

Developed Fi naturally leads people to favor mercy or forgiveness for people who have done heinous acts--anything from theft to murder to genocide--acts that, under the ordinary laws that make a society manageable (see Extraverted Thinking), would usually merit their imprisonment or execution. From a developed Fi perspective, the criminal is still a living soul, still unique and precious despite whatever he may have done. If we walked in his moccasins for a while, maybe we could see it his way. Without condoning his crimes, maybe we could see how we ourselves could have done the same things under similar circumstances. This use of empathy as one's ultimate anchor of orientation leads to a resolute non-judgementalness. First empathize--find something in your own heart that lets you see how someone could feel and act the way he did--and then you will probably find that you no longer feel hatred or a desire for retribution.​

But I don't want to make it seem like the onus is all on you. I also think many of the INFJs (you included) did a lot of these things in this thread, but perhaps the response you received wasn't put in your language and you were left feeling frustrated and dissatisfied.

I think that for each of us, we don't always understand that what we see isn't that obvious to other people and it is not at all insulting to describe it. We might not even think to describe it, because as you say, it's like explaining the colour of the sky and it seems so obvious that it would be kind of mean-spirited to actually verbalize it as if the other person were stupid or something.

I know what you mean. I'm totally questioning whether I sound condescending in my above suggestions.

Understanding the why and how is the only way that I can actually see what you are seeing. If you (general kind of you) won't explain the why and how part, I feel like I'm being penalized for being seeing impaired (when it's more just that you don't know that I don't have the same kind of vision as you, so you assume I'm purposefully acting obtuse or avoiding something that is right in front of us). I couldn't explain why it bothered me before, but saying that it's just that INFJs are insisting everyone communicates in their way or they won't play is only partly true. Of course, we all prefer our own communication style, but deeper than that, I can't give the other person what they need if I don't know what it is that they see right in front of them that I don't.

Makes sense. I've never seen myself as someone who's deliberately evasive but I suppose it can seem like a refusal to explain oneself.

Sorry for the wall of text

 

[Eilonwy]

ETA: This same kind of thing happened from the other side of the coin, when I posted the Special Snowflake crown and stated that it was a joke. People doubted my intentions, even though I did say it was a joke, because they saw what the image represented as inconsistent with my stated intention. I tried explaining, but finally realized that I had unintentionally hurt some feelings and apologized rather than restating my intention again, since, to me, restating would seem like I was denying that I hurt some feelings and was just defending myself instead. In other words, I took it seriously that I had hurt some feelings and I needed to acknowledge that and try to make amends.

OA says, in not so many words, "I want to understand why INFJs do this" or "I want to hear what you have to say". This signals (to varying degrees) that she is: prepared to defer, open, not fully decided, willing to listen, respects others views, willing to re-examine things etc. However, perhaps in light of her abrasive statements, fidelia doesn't feel that the state of mind OA was in (when she said "I want to understand") has been established and as result, she questions her motives. To OA, this is basically fidelia not believing her when she said "I want to understand", which seems like an accusation of affectation, or, is at least evidence that fidelia chooses to ignore what she says - which she finds insulting and frustrating. It's like being asked to prove that you mean well over and over again. It's also frustrating because it feels like, if someone won't even give you the benefit of the doubt in terms of your motives, how can you possibly ever convince them to believe in any of your points/ideas - they appear too closed off to properly listen.

So, if I had continued to insist that I had only been joking, feeling like I wasn't being given the benefit of the doubt about my motives when I stated up front that I was joking, ignoring that people had told me that I had done something inappropriate to them because I felt they were just being too closed off to listen, and other INFJs came into the thread to also explain that I had only been joking, then any INFP who had been offended and hurt by my post would have taken all of that at face value and not been hurt or offended anymore? They would see that I was just pushing back and defending my inner POV? Or, would the more realistic scenario have been that I would have been called out over and over again on my insensitivity and lack of remorse (as I think I should have been if I had continued to ignore that I had hurt some people's feelings)?

 

[uumlau]

So, if I had continued to insist that I had only been joking, feeling like I wasn't being given the benefit of the doubt about my motives when I stated up front that I was joking, ignoring that people had told me that I had done something inappropriate to them because I felt they were just being too closed off to listen, and other INFJs came into the thread to also explain that I had only been joking, then any INFP who had been offended and hurt by my post would have taken all of that at face value and not been hurt or offended anymore? They would see that I was just pushing back and defending my inner POV? Or, would the more realistic scenario have been that I would have been called out over and over again on my insensitivity and lack of remorse (as I think I should have been if I had continued to ignore that I had hurt some people's feelings)?

FWIW, my Mom was an INFJ. She really didn't do sarcasm well. Or rather, she did it too well. She would say something completely ridiculous/impossible with a tone that said, "I'm totally serious." Instead of people getting the joke, people would believe her.

 

[Eilonwy]

FWIW, my Mom was an INFJ. She really didn't do sarcasm well. Or rather, she did it too well. She would say something completely ridiculous/impossible with a tone that said, "I'm totally serious." Instead of people getting the joke, people would believe her.

Yes, but this was on the internet and everyone is leveled to providing their own *tone* to the posts, since they have no body language to go by. And I stated up front that it was a joke. And it was. I knew what the symbol meant, but didn't realize that it would be in such bad taste to some people. If I dismissed their feelings and them as "can't take a joke", or "aren't taking me at my word", I'm sure my outcome wouldn't have been any different than OA's.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

I am rather curious- this is a question for other INFJs here- for you, did this thing with OA start before this thread? Because for me it’s mostly about having read bitter comments for a long time now and what seems like that bitterness slowly being directed towards INFJs here. There’s something about seeing that, and also noticing that in all this time the bitter comments haven’t seemed to lighten up at all. It’s one thing when someone is bitter and gradually the bitterness in their voice fades, because that indicates it’s a problem that will go away on it’s own. But it hasn’t seemed to get any better, which makes it harder to keep ignoring. But no one else is really saying this, and it’s sorta being treated as if it started with this thread- so, is it just me?

Where's the mystery in looking at OA's post? It's as clear as day she's had some negative experiences and they color the post with emotion and a lack of objectivity. It's also clear she needs to process that and restore some balance - who would want to go around for the rest of their lives thinking INFJ's are best avoided? It seems unbalanced and thus feels wrong so she's trying to get the clarity that hearing alternate perspectives bring.

There’s a difference between someone presenting a theory with some attachment to the discussion going a certain direction in order to heal personal wounds (there’s something they need to hear in order to heal some wound) and someone presenting a theory from the detached position of simply wondering if they understand it correctly (with no personal attachment beyond maybe that of wanting to appear smarter or something). Of course no one is 100%OMGOMG objective- but as someone said earlier in the thread (fia?) there are degrees. The more ‘objective’ someone can be, then the less emotionally attached they are to (or dependent on) a certain outcome.

I believe that INFJs are particularly sensitive to those degrees of objectivity: the worst thing a person can do in the heat of conflict is make an emotional plea and claim to be speaking ‘the facts’. It comes across as incredibly manipulative, and like a person carrying too many bags it will not fit through the ‘door’….we do not actively look for how to make sure it doesn’t fit- it seriously just shows up that way on it’s own and we have to separate ‘person’ from ‘bags’ before we can allow it in and follow the story. And it has nothing to do with doubting someone’s sincerity- it can and has happened with people I love and trust….though I do tend to not be able to get close to people who can’t effectively separate those things in the first place, no matter how sincere they are, because it’s honest to god truly just too confusing to me.

One of the reasons I buy into function theory with Fi/Ti/Fe/Te is because I have noticed this consistent theme: Fi’ers are okay with smudging ‘facts’ so long as some underlying truth about Feeling isn’t getting corrupt, but doing that looks dishonest to Ti’ers (and likewise, it seems as though sticking to definitions and trying to present things in a way which removes the emo seems ‘dishonest’ to Fi’ers?). Even INTJs, I’ve noticed, will use terms like “It’s the ultimate sin to corrupt information”…..whereas I personally cringe at the word ‘sin’ being used in that context; to me- there is no ‘ultimate sin’, there’s only ‘most likely to be considered ultimate sin across widest span of cultures’ AND I still need to put scare quotes around it (to indicate a “so called” qualifier). There really does seem to be an unconscious priority on either keeping T pure (logistical?) or F pure (I don’t even…), and getting it ‘wrong’ is agitating (and dishonest?) to the other side.

Also: I noticed in the doorslam thread, we are pretty big on needing people to be clear about whether they are venting OR putting forth theories for consideration. We said so over and over again. If you say ‘venting’, then fine, we understand it’s about purging excess emotion and we can put aside our urge to ‘correct’ that which seems off to us…..but damnit don’t say ‘putting forth theories for examination’ and then start venting. It is not possible to ‘invalidate your experience’ if it’s about putting forth a theory for examination! When those get convoluted, it’s hard to shake the feeling people are trying to be manipulative or something, there’s just *something* extra going on and it creates white noise. We will keep pointing out again and again that it looks more like purging excess emotion- not to ‘discredit’ but because we need that presented upfront since it’s polluting the conversation with emotional attachments to a specific ‘healing’ outcome and it’s throwing furniture in our path so we won’t be able to follow. [So for the love of all things holy Fi’ers- if you’re talking to us and you’re venting then JUST OWN UP TO VENTING SO WE CAN ALL MOVE FORWARD. Admit you have a specific attachment to a certain outcome, because not doing so is dishonest to us. We’re not trying to “discredit” anyone by pointing out that it’s there- we’re pointing out that it’s there because IT’S THERE, it’s totally there and we can’t ignore it.]

Until that is brought into the light, it just looks like this to us:

[video=youtube;jgi7QCu1qAo] The Bill [/video]

A person asking for one thing but almost ‘clearly’ wanting another. That^, right there, sums up the entire doorslam thread, imo. I like to *hope* there’s at least a little bit of Dave Foley’s character in all of us laughing the whole time (at how the internet is srs bsns).

That’s kinda how OA’s posts have come to feel to me too - only there really wasn’t any ‘white noise’ feeling until she actually starting making presumptions about our response and/or lack of response (because then it directly involved us and there’s been no indication this will go away on its own- and the more something is starting to look like an unattended-to powder keg in our environment the harder it is for us to ignore, it creates louder and louder ‘white noise’). At first it was just confusing because it was hard to understand what she was looking for- and frankly I let go of that first post without much thought (in the common issues thread) as venting. Then when it came up again (and again)- I know I either sent her another rep or left a VM saying something like “I’ve seen some of this, I discuss this in my blog” <-that was intended to be an invitation to more specific questions if she wanted to ask (maybe I should have been more clear, I don’t know, when she didn’t respond I figured maybe she just didn’t like me or something- but I did try).

I know it must look like we had a strong reaction that came from nowhere (and so it looks like it’s ‘clearly’ about not liking criticism), but I know at least for me it was a slow accumulation. And anyway PB, that's the hang up with subjective/objective.

 

[Eilonwy]

I guess my point is that, despite the communication differences, both sides would like to be treated with some respect. So, when someone says "my feelings were hurt", which of the following would be the better answer to keep the lines of communication open?

A) You shouldn't feel that way because (it wasn't my intent) (that's just my communication style) (you're just twisting reality and trying to get out of taking responsibility) (insert reason here)
B) I'm sorry I hurt your feelings, (it wasn't my intent) (that's just my communication style, but I'll try to work with you so that I don't come across so harshly) (insert reason here)

I would think that acknowledging/validating that someone's feelings were hurt, whether that was the intent or not, is a better choice to keep communication open than continuing to defend ones' self by saying that it's the other person's fault for not getting it (even if they AREN'T getting it). I think this is true for almost all human beings, not just INFX's. I realize that none of us (humans) are perfect (me included) and we will all slip up on this at one time or another. And after acknowledging that the other person's feelings were hurt and that an effort will be made to try to accommodate their feelings, then you can still try to make your point, if there is still a point to be made.

ETA: Also, the person being apologized to would need to take into account any explanation that required some accommodation on their part, so that it's not all one-sided. So, if the explanation of communication style is offered, then BOTH people involved need to compromise and work towards a comfortable middle-ground. If either side turns out to not be sincere in their desire to communicate, then the whole process will fall apart eventually anyway.

 

[Society]

hmm, question: is it possible that some of the behaviors described are related to a particular way Ni>Fe will deal with early onset of low self esteem?

see, i just remembered something my ex talked about a long time ago, that in her adolescence she thought - or rather "just knew" - that was able to read that the other girls around her didn't like her and saw something as fundamentally wrong with her, despite not being "honest enough" to openly express it or even to openly socially reject her for it or provide her with any confirmation, she "just knew". even as an adult there was little doubt in her mind that it was the case.

i was thinking about the information thing. i've seen both INFPs and INFJs that won't give clear information for what i suspect are different reasons. with INFPs i think it's Te which can sometimes be very impatient about figuring out the relevancy of information and won't divulge it because they don't associate it with the goals in mind in the first place. with INFJs i think it is that they are used to not knowing how they figured something out in the first place, so explaining it is a bit like trying to reverse engineer your own thoughts. both cases can seem manipulative without being such.

so now i am wondering, is it possible that the process of Ni provides projections with the best camouflage?

i imagine that if you are habitually used to having all sort of conclusions about what others think that you can't quite explain or know how you've reached, so then when your mind is projecting a deep seeded assumptions about ourselves onto others, it won't necessarily be experienced any differently. an emotional-wolf in mental-sheep's clothing.

 

[Fidelia]

Ahh, I see. So I was on the right track. It's interesting to see your thought process and how you read the situation. You know, it's only from a couple of other threads like this that I've realized that my thought process isn't as totally obvious as I think it is. I felt like all the way through I had stated exactly those points, and so when OA wasn't responding with anything that would ease that tension and other people were attempting to conciliate by urging us to ignore her tone and consider if we couldn't see bits of truth in her words at least, I was frustrated. I felt that I was being up front and also trying to be cooperative and now, not only was there no effective communication, but I was also being inaccurately interpreted by people around me as just being defensive when it wasn't that at all.

It seemed that the initial discussion of OA's points was rather congenial but I wonder now if the INFJs were biting their lips in annoyance and attempting to discuss the issue as best they could. In both hers and Mane's cases, I realized that their expression of what was going on was likely to have some more personal agenda and also that it was maybe a little more extreme because of their bad experiences. I didn't even mind Mane's so much because it was clear that he was just looking for some way to get a question answered in his head so that he can move on with the process of forgiving. However with her, despite repeated questions asking for what she wanted to see happen, there was no answer to that question. By the longer post where she answered, she included less jibes and so I was more willing to try to cooperate, but then she didn't respond.The thread seemed to explode a few pages later, when I imagine, the patience eventually ran out. It's a pity the INFPs didn't spot that at the time, and that the INFJs didn't grasp what the INFPs implied - that way the escalation could have been avoided. Z Buck's last post in this thread explains it for me. You can't fudge facts and then say you are being objective, even if you quote outside people etc. If you are venting, I will ignore the facts given and concentrate on validating you so you can get on with the problem solving part. For me, it just seems so counter intuitive to spend a lot of time on the "How did that make you feel". I think that is because if it were me I'd give someone a look like , say "It made me feel like crap" and then "Can we get back to what happened and what it means. How can I avoid finding myself in this situation in the future, or do you have any additional info I'm missing that could help me feel better about this whole thing" Discussing those kinds of things is what provides comfort to me. I assume right off the bad that those feelings you have are valid, but that they'll also change once the situation improves in some way.Unfortunately, neither are good at picking up each other's esoteric signals. I experienced this in another thread where every time the ENFP in question kept returning to her point without addressing the INFJ concerns, they turned up the volume and bluntness a little louder because they assumed that she just wasn't getting it. In fact, she was hearing their message but didn't feel it was fair, so didn't address it. Is this what was happening there?


It's tough to come up with an approach that feels counter intuitive to yourself. I find keeping in mind small clarified points, like the ones [MENTION=9310]uumlau[/MENTION] gives, is useful when communicating - it's like a translation short hand. I've actually used some of the stuff that has come up in discussions on this site in the past. One about FJs has been useful with my mum: the idea that FJs want to affect others and assume others want to affect them - consequently innocent statements can sound like judgements. A common example:

Me: Have you done [insert some chore]?
My Mum: No, I haven't, but I've been very busy lately! I had to do [insert other chore or errand] all morning and then I got tired and went for a lie down after lunch, so I ran out of time! I can't be expect to do everything around here and your father certainly never helps. He's always working late as well as Saturday mornings! I asked him to do [insert task] weeks ago and he hasn't still hasn't done it yet!
Me:

The pure and honest truth is that I usually only ask in the first place in order to gain information. If the chore wasn't done, I would do it myself - I just needed to know if she had done it or not. But to her I seemed to be saying, "WHY HAVEN'T YOU DONE THIS CHORE?!". Keeping in mind the "assumption of judgement" in FJs has helped me to phrase things a little better (I sometimes need to explain why I need to know, not just what I need to know) or to placate her when I mess up. Anyway, I digress...

I guess what I'm getting at is to sit back and take a breath first and fore most and remember those little short hand points - eg. "INFPs can sound rude and blunt but don't always realise or intend it", and, "INFPs need their feelings to be validated (or at least to not be invalidated)", and "INFPs don't often pick up subtle Fe signals and need me to be more explicit at times" etc. The problem here, is that I felt like I was doing all of those things. I kind of took it as an unvarnished and personally tinged account, but a valid one nevertheless. Willingness to engage in discussion without being directive and pointing out stuff right away to me is validating the other person's feeling. Should I be asking about their emotional state now? I know this seems like a dumb question, but it honestly would feel so wrong if someone did that to me, that I can't guess what the response would be. It's sort of like George on Seinfeld discovering that the key to his success was to do everything exactly opposite of what he would naturally be inclined to doing. I thought I was being helpful by stating where my thinking diverged from hers and asking her how I could be more helpful in my response. If it seems like these rules particularly apply to the situation, stop and try to rethink the INFP's responses. TBH you don't need that much help because you're usually pretty good about doing this - the misunderstandings tend to be relatively minor with you.

As for your role in the discourse specifically, that's a tough one. Perhaps if you had said outright, "I'm having trouble understanding where you're coming from. Can you give some examples?" (This is good - to me it sounds like what I'm thinking, but I realize now I need to state things more explicitly) it might have gone down better. If you're confused, say that you are. We can't see the same inconsistencies that you do in what we're saying, so we assume it's clear unless people say otherwise. This is also helpful. To us those inconsistencies seem so clear that it's hard not to believe that people are willfully not seeing them, but I realize that it is just like some of the other stuff we can't see that you can. It helps to at least know what stuff to verbalize moreA little (sensitive) Te style directness can help us to understand what you're feeling. I noticed some of the INFJs did this, but once things got terse, it seemed to stop.

I wouldn't say, "could you tell me more about why you feel that way?" - that could be misinterpreted. It might be easier to appeal to our Si if you need more information - like asking for examples or to clarify a particular point further. Also useful. I've noticed that this is a common way you communicate. I think I tend to think more in overall patterns over time, so often I can't think of an example when people ask me this. Therefore I don't think to ask them for oneThat way you effectively ask about the subjective experience while dodging the potential minefield of the Judging functions. If you have to address Fi style impressions it's probably better to avoid "why" questions (eg. why do you feel that way?"). It can sound like implied demand for justification or that there's something wrong with that feeling/belief/impression.Good to know! I understand this feels invasive to Fi users. It's just so hard though to understand the cause and effect part without it! I'll chew on that bit for awhile...Thank you for offering alternatives. "How" or "what" might be more effective - eg. "how did you feel when that happened?" or "what was your reaction?". This suggests that the feeling just "is what it is" - that it simply exists, removed from questions of whether it's right or wrong, because that is secondary to us. And if you feel that emotion or reaction is incongruent in relation to the situation (ie. the cause and effect don't match to you), don't address (or correct/attack/undermine) the emotion. Instead, address the cause from your perspective. Explain or reframe the situation as you see it or have experienced it, and it's quite possible the incongruent effect (ie. the emotional response) will change as a indirect result. Never thought of this. I'm not sure how to do it in practical terms, but it is a direction to head and sparks some thinking. Obviously my way has not been working, so I need all the help I can get!INFPs actually believe that the right frame of understanding has the capacity to change an emotion. To quote Lenore Thomson:

Developed Fi naturally leads people to favor mercy or forgiveness for people who have done heinous acts--anything from theft to murder to genocide--acts that, under the ordinary laws that make a society manageable (see Extraverted Thinking), would usually merit their imprisonment or execution. From a developed Fi perspective, the criminal is still a living soul, still unique and precious despite whatever he may have done. If we walked in his moccasins for a while, maybe we could see it his way. Without condoning his crimes, maybe we could see how we ourselves could have done the same things under similar circumstances. This use of empathy as one's ultimate anchor of orientation leads to a resolute non-judgementalness. First empathize--find something in your own heart that lets you see how someone could feel and act the way he did--and then you will probably find that you no longer feel hatred or a desire for retribution.​

So again, it's trying to simulate the feelings etc so that you can effectively try to recreate his experience and experience it personally in your head as much as is possible?

But I don't want to make it seem like the onus is all on you. I also think many of the INFJs (you included) did a lot of these things in this thread, but perhaps the response you received wasn't put in your language and you were left feeling frustrated and dissatisfied.


I know what you mean. I'm totally questioning whether I sound condescending in my above suggestions. Nope, not at all! You are offering practical suggestions for how we can change the outcome of regular miscommunications. You've done so without making me feel stupid for not knowing or adding any perjorative comments in between to muck up the message. To me, this is all I was seeking in the first place! Knowing how to go at things in the future is what matters to me. Like you commented with umlauu, each of these kind of threads results in a couple of little points to take away that are useful in every day life.


Makes sense. I've never seen myself as someone who's deliberately evasive but I suppose it can seem like a refusal to explain oneself.

Sorry for the wall of text

I invented walls of text! It was only after finding that ENFPs hate reading it that I forced myself to start making shorter paragraphs and sometimes numbering points so they are more user-friendly.

 

[Fidelia]

hmm, question: is it possible that some of the behaviors described are related to a particular way Ni>Fe will deal with early onset of low self esteem?

see, i just remembered something my ex talked about a long time ago, that in her adolescence she thought - or rather "just knew" - that was able to read that the other girls around her didn't like her and saw something as fundamentally wrong with her, despite not being "honest enough" to openly express it or even to openly socially reject her for it or provide her with any confirmation, she "just knew". even as an adult there was little doubt in her mind that it was the case.

i was thinking about the information thing. i've seen both INFPs and INFJs that won't give clear information for what i suspect are different reasons. with INFPs i think it's Te which can sometimes be very impatient about figuring out the relevancy of information and won't divulge it because they don't associate it with the goals in mind in the first place. with INFJs i think it is that they are used to not knowing how they figured something out in the first place, so explaining it is a bit like trying to reverse engineer your own thoughts. both cases can seem manipulative without being such.

so now i am wondering, is it possible that the process of Ni provides projections with the best camouflage?

i imagine that if you are habitually used to having all sort of conclusions about what others think that you can't quite explain or know how you've reached, so then when your mind is projecting a deep seeded assumptions about ourselves onto others, it won't necessarily be experienced any differently. an emotional-wolf in mental-sheep's clothing.

I can't speak for others, but in my case, I often have a strong feeling about something before I can articulate why I feel that way or have reached that conclusion. In most cases, I should just go with it, but it bothers me until I can explain to myself why I feel that way. I think this is one of the roles that Fe plays for me. I have to verbalize thoughts a bit and in articulating different events, those facts (that most people start with in the beginning, but I fill in towards the end) start falling into place and becoming something recognizable. It's like doing a puzzle and slowly watching the whole picture emerging. That's why by the time the whole picture emerges, we're pretty sure that what we saw was correct. The trick with Ni is that it often is, but sometimes it isn't. In many cases, I stay in a situation too long because I want to be fair and want to see that pattern emerge in a tangible way. However, sometimes when I have too much previous history, I have a hard time keeping the past experience out of the present one and keeping an open mind. And occasionally with Ni, I can reach the wrong conclusion. It's a useful tool though a lot of the time.

 

[Society]

I can't speak for others, but in my case, I often have a strong feeling about something before I can articulate why I feel that way or have reached that conclusion. In most cases, I should just go with it, but it bothers me until I can explain to myself why I feel that way. I think this is one of the roles that Fe plays for me. I have to verbalize thoughts a bit and in articulating different events, those facts (that most people start with in the beginning, but I fill in towards the end) start falling into place and becoming something recognizable. It's like doing a puzzle and slowly watching the whole picture emerging. That's why by the time the whole picture emerges, we're pretty sure that what we saw was correct. The trick with Ni is that it often is, but sometimes it isn't. In many cases, I stay in a situation too long because I want to be fair and want to see that pattern emerge in a tangible way. However, sometimes when I have too much previous history, I have a hard time keeping the past experience out of the present one and keeping an open mind. And occasionally with Ni, I can reach the wrong conclusion. It's a useful tool though a lot of the time.

hmm, i like the puzzle metaphor. but i wasn't questioning the validity of Ni itself. what i am wondering is whether the experience of psychological projections could - for an NJ - be indistinguishable from Ni?

 

[uumlau]

hmm, i like the puzzle metaphor. but i wasn't questioning the validity of Ni itself. what i am wondering is whether the experience of psychological projections could - for an NJ - be indistinguishable from Ni?

One useful way I've found to look at the function hierarchy is that the dominant function isn't merely "dominant", it's essential and unavoidable. It's who the person is, and they simply cannot be otherwise. The other functions are gradually manifested, and fall in and out of "scope" as it were, but the dominant never leaves the picture. For an Ni dom, this means that nearly all of that thought process is like [MENTION=7111]fidelia[/MENTION]'s puzzle metaphor. Sometimes the puzzle forms slowly, other times it forms quickly. Sometimes it forms so quickly that it isn't even a thought, it's simply "obvious".

With regard to your other observations about your ex, I don't think that pattern has much to do with Ni or MBTI types. Ni types can be very paranoid, imagining entire scenarios from a few strands of clues, and I'm sure that's how your ex INFJ processed it, but the paranoia doesn't arise from Ni or being INFJ. That particular paranoia arose from being concerned about her position in her social circle. It's a neurotic tendency that tends to play out the same way regardless of MBTI type. Enneagram, however, is a typology that is well-equipped for analyzing this kind of thing, where type 6 appears to have a predisposition towards having trust issues with others, and helps outline the healthy and neurotic ways such issues are handled. The Big Five personality typology has a "Neuroticism" scale, which is particularly interesting in terms of MBTI, because the other four scales of the Big Five correlate with MBTI types (more or less, it's a bit off) but the Neuroticism scale doesn't correlate with anything in MBTI at all.

 

[Society]

One useful way I've found to look at the function hierarchy is that the dominant function isn't merely "dominant", it's essential and unavoidable. It's who the person is, and they simply cannot be otherwise. The other functions are gradually manifested, and fall in and out of "scope" as it were, but the dominant never leaves the picture. For an Ni dom, this means that nearly all of that thought process is like @fidelia's puzzle metaphor. Sometimes the puzzle forms slowly, other times it forms quickly. Sometimes it forms so quickly that it isn't even a thought, it's simply "obvious".

...agreed.

Ni types can be very paranoid, imagining entire scenarios from a few strands of clues, and I'm sure that's how your ex INFJ processed it, but the paranoia doesn't arise from Ni or being INFJ. That particular paranoia arose from being concerned about her position in her social circle. It's a neurotic tendency that tends to play out the same way regardless of MBTI type. Enneagram, however, is a typology that is well-equipped for analyzing this kind of thing, where type 6 appears to have a predisposition towards having trust issues with others, and helps outline the healthy and neurotic ways such issues are handled. The Big Five personality typology has a "Neuroticism" scale, which is particularly interesting in terms of MBTI, because the other four scales of the Big Five correlate with MBTI types (more or less, it's a bit off) but the Neuroticism scale doesn't correlate with anything in MBTI at all.

all viable options. but the particularities of her anxiety are a different matter, its how she dealt with it that's curious.

none of that answers the question though or even alludes to that:

With regard to your other observations about your ex, I don't think that pattern has much to do with Ni or MBTI types.

i suppose the easiest way to ask this would be for examples in which INFJs have caught themselves making a psychological projection, and how hard/easy they find it to distinguish between that and Ni realizations?

disclaimer: i should also add that not giving such is not to be seen as stating they don't have any or unable to do so, any participation in the inquiry is to be done with full consent, etc'. the intent is to find another piece of the puzzle and see if it fits (because i am greedy that way).

 

[cascadeco]

I am rather curious- this is a question for other INFJs here- for you, did this thing with OA start before this thread? Because for me it’s mostly about having read bitter comments for a long time now and what seems like that bitterness slowly being directed towards INFJs here.

When I saw her post, it was utterly unsurprising to me... it induced an internal eye roll, to be totally honest, because I was like, here we go again, yet another post about her issues with infj's. And yes, prior to this thread I was already tired of reading about the negative experiences and the jabs (which I've noticed off and on for months, if not a year or two).

So yes, truthfully my hackles will be raised in this situation, right from the get-go, as there's such a clear personal thing the other person's trying to heal or address, without it just being pure theory and understanding/discussion/detachment. (As you describe in greater detail...) So I then feel placed in the position of being asked to somehow heal the other person / 'fix' their perception, and all of this hullabaloo occurs, bringing tons of people into it, asking people to be super vulnerable, all to heal that persons' wounds.

As for how it 'should' have been addressed from my perspective? (and this goes for any individual person on the forum who has personal wounds that have morphed into issues with an entire Type, as it's certainly not unique to OA) Take away any veneer of it being theoretical and objective, splashing across an entire type, and instead open a blog-type-thread stating you have wounds and would like input from infj's (or whatever type) to understand them or understand why you may run into bumps with that type.

Because I think until that very evident aspect of still carrying a personal wound/angst/hurt against a Type in general is removed, infj's will have a hard time believing or trusting in the persons' claim that it's just 'theoretical', as the bias is extremely evident in the posts. AND I think infj's will put on battle armor (I will, at least), or at the very least be extremely wary, if the wounded person is attempting to have an objective discussion about a Type, when it's clear they can't, really, when they already have their own ideas of that Type and what they think of it.

I think it's also something that since I (we?) pick up on, it can also for the other person end up creating a self-fulfilling prophecy, in a sense... i.e. the other person is hurt and starts thinking certain things about a Type in general, then when they encounter a new person of the type they're still hurt about or have issues with (broaden this to ANY trait one is wounded over), they're already thinking certain things of that type, the new person of that type will very likely will pick up on it, then will be wary, the person who's still hurt finds further proof, rinse and repeat.

 

[Society]

In psychopathology, projection is an especially commonly used defense mechanism in people with certain personality disorders: 'Patients with paranoid personalities, for example, use projection as a primary defense because it allows them to disavow unpleasant feelings and attribute them to others'.[17]
According to Kernberg, all 'the primitive defenses, such as splitting, projection and projective identification, are commonly connected with primitively organized personalities, such as:[18]
Borderline personality disorder
Narcissistic personality disorder
Antisocial personality disorder
Psychopathy

hmm, that definition is somewhat of an extreme take, yes it does show itself in personality disorders as a core and necessary mechanism, but as a psychological mechanism in general, it is readily available to anyone, and everyone can and will at times psychologically project their assumptions and feelings onto others.
to illustrate: certain kind of cancer can make you cough really badly, coughing doesn't mean you have cancer. in asking INFJs how they deal with a cough, whether there's any trends such as cover their mouths with their hands or use a tissue or the back of their arm or perhaps merely cough the other way, i am in no way trying to imply they all have cancer. everybody coughs.

i do think your underestimating the potential value it can have to the discussion:
could be entirely possible i'm not onto anything at all, but bare with me - if the average Ni dom is less likely to be able to distinguish between a projection and a reliable Ni conclusion, or possibly need a lot more conscious effort to avoid it, then in most cases, its going to be little things and happen very rarely, its not going to mean much of anything. BUT, what happens when you take that formula, and add unhealthy - painful - lack of self esteem as the source of projection?

 

[skylights]

Preliminary thoughts ahead; figured they were solid enough to post.

Tilty, thanks for your explanation, and I'll address it later tonight. I have thought processing to do.

In the meanwhile, I want to point out that I probably would have just said something back - that's my usual response, lol - but throughout this thread, almost any sign of "fight" from an NFP has been chastised as a deliberate attempt to hurt INFJs. I am reactive, for sure, and I did want to respond, but it took me a good 10 minutes of flustering to figure out what I wanted to do, because the last thing I wanted was for it to come off as an attack - clearly that's a huge communication barrier and the thing that started all this conflict in the first place. Anyway, for one, I was worried that if I just left the information, it could be interpreted by additional INFJs as a deliberate attack on INFJs, which I didn't want. If I fired back at you, that could be interpreted by INFJs as a deliberate attack on INFJs, which I did not want. I didn't really feel like I had any decent options, but I did want to make some kind of response because it hit me so hard - so I just tried to deep-six the whole thing, and just hoped that people would notice that I was withdrawing instead of attacking, out of desire not to cause any more harm than has already been done. The whole episode made me feel stupid because I felt like I didn't know how to communicate effectively at all.

But then I see the thing where you take "Why do you feel that?" as accusatory when we mean it literally and are standing there waiting for an answer, knowing we're the ones not getting it, and ... I start to get it.

!

FWIW, I'm understanding a lot more about INFJ perception from this thread, too.

I also am totally amenable to someone I trust engineering things for me. I might feel a little stupid when I realize what happened, but if someone I trust engineers an object lesson for me, I don't object. I don't think that's what you're talking about, Skylights, but I'm trying to circle in. Sorry it's taking so long.

Actually that's exactly what I'm talking about. I still feel wary about that, even if it's someone I trust otherwise. I don't like being left out of the know... I would be angry if it were revealed to me. I mean, if it was preceded by attempts to reason like with the girl with the colors, I think that's fair. And that example doesn't really cross any boundaries, because it didn't really change any of her decisive actions, short of taking an extra photo a day. It's when my decisions in regards to major things like friendships or work or relationships are changed based on partial information that it really freaks me out. I don't know why. I'll have to think on this more - have to get back to work now.

 

[Tiltyred]

I think it's reasonable that it freaks you out. I don't think that needs to be examined.