No need to apologize. I just always prickle a bit when someone mentions using reactions of others as a yardstick for our own development or personal qualities. I don't object in principle, and find the infrequent feedback I do get can be useful; I just get so little of it. Can I assume, then, that if I am not seeing the kind of negative behavior you list (avoidance, hostility, checking-out) that I am probably doing OK???I probably wasn’t very clear with that statement, I apologize.
If this is the MO, people pick up on this, and reflect it back. The INTJ then has a choice about whether to declare that everyone else is the problem in this scenario, or whether they are the common denominator and perhaps it is their approach that needs refinement.
INTJs have a very unique process and perspective as well as a natural and in many ways admirable ability for detachment, and therefore it’s not unlikely that they will be misunderstood a great deal of the time. When talking about people’s reactions, it isn’t intended that people will be warm, fuzzy and “get†them all the time. But if people are consistently running away, avoiding, hostile, or completely checking out in the presence of the INTJ, this is useful information for them to take into consideration in development.
No need to apologize. I just always prickle a bit when someone mentions using reactions of others as a yardstick for our own development or personal qualities. I don't object in principle, and find the infrequent feedback I do get can be useful; I just get so little of it. Can I assume, then, that if I am not seeing the kind of negative behavior you list (avoidance, hostility, checking-out) that I am probably doing OK???
I knew an INFP awhile ago who seemed unable or unwilling to recognize that she was the common denominator in the many life situations she frequently complained about: job, neighbors, local area, etc. She would find another job, move to another city, but things never seemed to improve. Of course the only thing that was a constant was herself.
Have found that INTJs are REALLY good at reading intentions of others' actions but aren't good at READING the feelings of others.
my INTJ friend is quite often baffled by why people do the things they do, so i guess the reading intention isnt an INTJ thing, but something that INTJs are can be good or bad at like other types
My friend, I think by intentions the above poster meant honest/dishonest, good/bad. Not the logical course of action; we all know that many actions are not intentional but mere serendipity.
intention = reason. reason is the logical course of action, which naturally includes the good/bad etc things, at least if you simplify it to those.
Oh hush, stop being silly and re-inventing language as you go.
Accept that sometimes the good people of the public might have a point.
apparently you disagree with analyzing intention being the same thing as figuring out why someone behaves the way they do. could you give an example where the intention of someone is different from the reason why he does what he does? i cant figure out any examples, but it might be because im bit tired
Careful now; that is a different use of 'intention' as you gave in Post #26. And indeed, in this instance the correct use of 'intention'.
Anyway, the INTJ 'should' understood if someone has good or bad intentions in their actions even if they cannot understand why they act the way they do.
I think we now have fine consensus upon the issue.
How marvellous! Pumpkin pie for everyone in the thread!
Have found that INTJs are REALLY good at reading intentions of others' actions but aren't good at READING the feelings of others. (Am I being rude etc?) A common INTJ issue this is?
I actually think I'm pretty good at this - at least when I'm with a person face to face. Ni you know.
Combining the three kinds of the sublime: in its catness, the noble, in its situational comedy, the splendid, and the terrifying in this your verbal classification.That is, I believe, a cat-ass-trophy ...
Combining the three kinds of the sublime: in its catness, the noble, in its situational comedy, the splendid, and the terrifying in this your verbal classification.
But anyway, sometimes they have really good insights into other people, and sometimes they are having Ni/Fi tunnel vision with Te oversimplification, and they are so used to being "right" that they can't see how wrong they are, or what they're missing,%