INFp Turning into INFj

[simulatedworld]

Who's actually being fucked with is relative.

 

[527468]

A.D.D. attention-seeking patterns have Fe written all over them. Although for your sake, it depends on what you define as Fe.

 

[Ginkgo]

Yeah, I would say that I am an INFP, but Fi doesn't make sense to me. The whole concept of "fighting passionately for your beliefs" seems ridiculous and blind, not to insult any Fi users here.

The reason I was talking about being a registered independent is that I often imagine the two parties as their respective animals. They fight and trod upon each other, but never actually achieve anything. American democracy isn't even democracy, but that's a whole other story.

I often had social anxiety because I would, for whatever reason, 'know' that people were talking behind my back in certain social situations. This was a product of Ni/Fe. And while it was true, my angry, reclusive behavior was unhealthy.

 

[Orangey]

You have a clear distaste for Fi, which you've admitted to in the past, and it's showing here. This is only going to reinforce the desire to of the OP to be Ni-dom.

Fi is rigid and arbitrary? Fe has external purpose and works towards common goals? But by implication, Fi doesn't? I mean, come on dude, the negative connotations to your word choices and phrasing for Fi is obvious, as are the positive connotations for Fe....no wonder so many INFPs fight the Fi-dom label.

Hmmm, I'm not seeing what's so heinous about his distinction. Would it make things better if he also mentioned that the external community standards by which Fe operates are also arbitrary? Is it not true that morality comes from within, for an Fi dom? Is it not true that this morality is pretty independent of externally imposed standards or systems of ethics? Is it not true that attaining the most moral perspective (i.e., finding a personal worldview that is the most ethical) is an end in itself for an Fi dom?

I mean, I'm no Fi user, but those things seem to be pretty much in line with the function definition. But if any of those things is not true in an explicit sense (none of this, "oh well we're all influenced by society so in a way we all get our morality externally"- this is true but useless since the Fi-Fe distinction is purely for conceptual clarity) then I could see why that might be offensive. But as you said, you're just reacting to word choice.

And I don't see how turning the OP off of Fi should be a concern. I'm sure the OP can think for his/her self.

 

[Lethe]

Hmmm, I'm not seeing what's so heinous about his distinction. Would it make things better if he also mentioned that the external community standards by which Fe operates are also arbitrary? Is it not true that morality comes from within, for an Fi dom? Is it not true that this morality is pretty independent of externally imposed standards or systems of ethics? Is it not true that attaining the most moral perspective (i.e., finding a personal worldview that is the most ethical) is an end in itself for an Fi dom?

I mean, I'm no Fi user, but those things seem to be pretty much in line with the function definition.

As a (tertiary) Fi user, I never saw a description that was clearly off-base in Simulatedworld's posts. Exaggerated, perhaps, but it is not inaccurate as to how the feeling functions are defined, or as one of the many real-life manifestations. I enjoy staunchly supporting my personal values until the end, despite the lack of public favoritism towards this attitude.

 

[527468]

INFJs are more externally people oriented, and much more able to reach out and endear, encourage, communicate, with a great deal of considerateness. INFPs are usually more reserved and less expressive towards others, keeping more of the serenity, self-satisfaction, contentment to themselves, looking for their calling through a behind the scenes process affecting the "human condition" or whatever, like BlackCat mentioned. They're basically stability seeking with their social/ethical-ness, where INFJs are initiative driven with their social/ethical-ness. I'm talking about in real life, by the way. The difference is basically all here:

Portrait of an INFJ
Portrait of an INFP

Also don't let the continuous mentioning of INFJs being creative fool you. I think they just needed a filler. It's just as true for INFPs. I'm sure you're familiar will all of this stuff anyhow.

 

[PeaceBaby]

Me:

Where to begin ... you're touchy on this topic; sorry to have upset you.

And really, I find you fascinating.

Tell me what has colored your perceptions of INFP in such a negative, 2-D, rather bitter way. I imagine you will just ignore this request, but if you are brave, tell me who has broken your heart.

You:

This entire last post is why Fi bugs the crap out of me.

... (lots of reply I have cut out for the sake of brevity)

Why didn't you bother responding to any of my Fi/Fe comparisons? You completely ignored the useful and relevant content to focus on your own unfounded theories of emotional dynamics--that is why you are annoying.

You are so cute. It's so easy to get you worked up.

Relax; I was setting up a little Ne / Fi demonstration, just as you enjoy using your razor-sharp Ne / Ti. Can you see from your knee-jerk reply that you make so many assumptions about my starting point that it blinds you to a 360 degree perspective about me? That's what I wanted to point out to you, primarily, and you totally took the bait. Not debate Fi / Fe, or provide fodder for your "why Fi users are so annoying" replies. See how your own "pair of glasses" distorts a clear picture of the world around you, and just as you wear a pair, so do we all, of course. Generically, I find NT's like to be able to claim some sort of pure objectivity in all situations that they cannot possibly possess, as NONE of us do. Me included of course. And us NF's like to be able to claim we have this magical emotional insight in all situations. That we can't really have - often close perhaps, but not purely. But it's hard to admit, just as you will find it hard to admit you cannot be purely objective, even if you get really, really close sometimes.

I believe though that you do have a way of using language that can stand out as seeming critical towards Fi. And I know you do it with intention, then stand back and chuckle when INFP's cry foul. And bear in mind that I believe words carry a heavier emotional weight and more connotation to INFP's in general, which you might bear in mind when (or if) you want to coexist peacefully. Perhaps I'll go back through some posts and grab a few short phrases as examples.

Anyways, keep on being you, cause I love your irreverent posting style. You could just be a little softer sometimes and you would get your points across more effectively, hmm?

 

[Lauren Ashley]

Hmmm, I'm not seeing what's so heinous about his distinction. Would it make things better if he also mentioned that the external community standards by which Fe operates are also arbitrary? Is it not true that morality comes from within, for an Fi dom? Is it not true that this morality is pretty independent of externally imposed standards or systems of ethics? Is it not true that attaining the most moral perspective (i.e., finding a personal worldview that is the most ethical) is an end in itself for an Fi dom?

It seems that this is all a matter of perspective. I didn't see anything to be happy about in the Fe description either. The bolded parts, especially, are nothing to clap over:

Perhaps one most basic question to determine INFP/INFJ would be:

Do you consider ethics/attaining the most ethical viewpoint possible to be a goal in itself? For INFPs, Fi's morality comes entirely from within and is self-validated according to arbitrary internal standards. Fi wants to possess perfect internal ethical understanding as an end unto itself (even if it doesn't directly apply to anything external...Fi is objectively certain of what is moral and what is not, and neither wants nor requires any external validation for it.)

Or do you consider ethics merely as a means to an end? INFJs use Fe, which needs external validation for its ethical beliefs. For INFJs, morality is merely a means to some other goal, and is defined according to external community standards. There is no rigid internal conception of ethics because ethics exist only to facilitate communication and cooperation between people in order to complete external world goals--Fe requires that it serve an external purpose.

One could read that as implying that Fe can't stand on it's own ground; it needs external validation. Also, "a means to an end" seems as if the person doesn't actually feel anything, they are just using feeling as a route to get what they want. The Fi description is a lot more appealing, in my opinion. I also don't see myself in the Fe description but I'm Ni first before Fe, so I'm sure that colors things.

Yeah, I would say that I am an INFP, but Fi doesn't make sense to me. The whole concept of "fighting passionately for your beliefs" seems ridiculous and blind, not to insult any Fi users here.

Fe also fights passionately for it's beliefs. Look at angered ExFJs and that will be more than clear. Whether you think it's ridiculous has no bearing on being Fi or Fe. And if you say that you're INFP but Fi makes no sense, it's probably because of inadequate descriptions and not because you're devoid of Fi. Ni I'm pretty sure is not your dominant function, at this point. It might not be Fi, but it's not Ni. I can relate to at least most of what INxJs' write, but I can't relate at all to what you've written in this thread and others.

 

[Lethe]

One could read that as implying that Fe can't stand on it's own ground; it needs external validation. Also, "a means to an end" seems as if the person doesn't actually feel anything, they are just using feeling as a route to get what they want.

I don't see why this couldn't be. Presented as an isolated function, this is what the extroverted judging (Te/Fe) process does. Nobody is completely defined by a single function, and we maintain various degrees of the other seven.

Check out Eric's posts on Fi and Fe in the Archetypes - Functions thread to clarify further inquiries.

Fe also fights passionately for it's beliefs. Look at angered ExFJs and that will be more than clear. Whether you think it's ridiculous has no bearing on being Fi or Fe.

The difference would be in the context. Fe needs external validation (group agreement and cause) to continue on with their passionate beliefs. The meaning Mystic Tater was using in the quotations described the type of belief that catered to the individual.

And if you say that are INFP but Fi makes no sense, it's probably because of inadequate descriptions and not because you're devoid of Fi. Ni I'm pretty sure is not your dominant function, at this point. It might not be Fi, but it's not Ni. I can relate to at least most of what INxJs' write, but I can't relate at all to what you've written in this thread and others.

Mystic Tater sounds very Ni dominant, actually. He or she is right that his/her judgment needs some fine-tuning before their Ni perceptions could be felt externally.

 

[Lauren Ashley]

I don't see why this couldn't be. [...]

I wasn't saying that it couldn't be; you completely missed the point. I was saying that whether one sees the descriptions as disparaging, and/or which description one views as insulting, is based on how one interprets the descriptions and one's perspective.

 

[Lethe]

I wasn't saying that it couldn't be; you completely missed the point. I was saying that whether one sees the descriptions as disparaging, and/or which one views as insulting, is based on how one interprets the descriptions and one's perspective.

Hmmm, I could also see this point, though I am mainly confused as to why the poster should be held responsible for having someone else comprehend their meaning in another interpretation. (Which sounds implied in the previous posts written by other users.) This is an open question not necessarily aimed at any specific person to answer.

 

[OrangeAppled]

Hmmm, I'm not seeing what's so heinous about his distinction. Would it make things better if he also mentioned that the external community standards by which Fe operates are also arbitrary? Is it not true that morality comes from within, for an Fi dom? Is it not true that this morality is pretty independent of externally imposed standards or systems of ethics? Is it not true that attaining the most moral perspective (i.e., finding a personal worldview that is the most ethical) is an end in itself for an Fi dom?

I mean, I'm no Fi user, but those things seem to be pretty much in line with the function definition. But if any of those things is not true in an explicit sense (none of this, "oh well we're all influenced by society so in a way we all get our morality externally"- this is true but useless since the Fi-Fe distinction is purely for conceptual clarity) then I could see why that might be offensive. But as you said, you're just reacting to word choice.

And I don't see how turning the OP off of Fi should be a concern. I'm sure the OP can think for his/her self.

Compare your wording with his. There is a negative tone in describing Fi over Fe. In my first post, I pointed out a few examples of the word choices and phrasing which belayed his bias. The OP can think for herself, but that's not going to remove all potential for being swayed. It's likely a similar reason why some sensors may type themselves as intuitive. Who sees themselves as the stupid, shallow, bland sensors portrayed on MBTI forums?

The below quotes show a definite dislike of INFPs, with no equivalent posts about INFJs in here. I especially like when he tells an INFP how she thinks and where her morals come from. Really? You are in her head? Or excuse me, heart, since apparently that's all we use to determine anything. We just cannot grasp or see what Ni sees. :rolli:

Deeper than that, though, the INFJ's Ni finds it a little ridiculous that INFPs think any sort of "objectively correct" morality even exists at all, but that's another story.

Because that's the Ti equivalent of Fi's belief about objectively correct ethics.
And Ni would tell us that neither is truly objective at all.

Fi doms reject the idea of external morality being imposed on them, but they're laughably stubborn and unyielding whenever anything threatens their arbitrarily imposed/subjectively validated conceptions of ethics. Most are not even remotely ready to accept that there could be anything wrong with these moral conceptions (Fi), but will still outwardly admit that there is in order to keep up an appearance of external flexibility(Ne).

Hence the tragic hypocrisy that all too often results from being an NP: Ne leads INFPs to consider themselves as supreme examples of tolerance and open-mindedness...except when something violates Fi's values, and then anyone who disagrees is a BIGOTED INTOLERANT ASSHOLE AND A TERRIBLE PERSON! "Yeah I'm totally open-minded and ready to accept anyone else's ideas...unless they violate mine! THEN FUCK 'EM!"

Fi isn't really aware of the distinction between subjective/objective ethics because it's so mired in its own internal conception of what is ethical and what is not. Since Fi requires no external validation for these moral beliefs, it ends up drinking its own bathwater through endless subjective self-validation and that's very difficult for outsiders to deal with. (You can see the same thing with INTP's Ti obsession with "logic.")

It's funny how often INFPs will say that and then go right back into dogmatic insistence that their ethical beliefs are the best as soon as anything threatens them (once they get upset.)

That's because you're an INFP and you don't understand the idea of ethics coming from anywhere but "the heart." Your entire conception of morality is contingent upon the idea that it comes from within, not from others, which is categorically Fi.

He is definitely biased against the NFPs that do as he's describing. Lol. He isn't biased against them all... He's been saying that. If you aren't as he's describing, don't post, since it doesn't apply to you (just my opinion on it anyway).

I talk to him a good bit, before I came to the conclusion that I was ISFP he thought I was a "cool INFP", so there isn't really a bias. He's just being aggressive, making it sound that way.

By the way I really enjoy reading these exchanges, it's made me learn a lot about FiNe vs FiSe.

HIS light. Not the light as in... absolute truth. He wants you to see what he sees as the truth. Instead of arguing with him, try to explain why he's wrong versus just personally attacking and blaming emotional attachments on his positions. Actually prove him wrong. That's what he wants you to do.

Congrats to gaining his approval :rolli:. Can't say I want it.

I made my point in my first post in here. There is a clear bias in his views of Fi, and I explained how I came to that conclusion (and why his biased view is not helpful in the context of someone typing themselves). He's the one who will not address that post directly and has tried to make this about inferring emotion that isn't there or about how he hates other types also. I take this to mean I am right, or else he would address the actual issue.

And no, he has lumped all INFPs together in his posts in here (see above), which is why I felt compelled to speak out.

 

[Thalassa]

Yeah, I would say that I am an INFP, but Fi doesn't make sense to me. The whole concept of "fighting passionately for your beliefs" seems ridiculous and blind, not to insult any Fi users here.

The reason I was talking about being a registered independent is that I often imagine the two parties as their respective animals. They fight and trod upon each other, but never actually achieve anything. American democracy isn't even democracy, but that's a whole other story.

I often had social anxiety because I would, for whatever reason, 'know' that people were talking behind my back in certain social situations. This was a product of Ni/Fe. And while it was true, my angry, reclusive behavior was unhealthy.

1) Liking red and blue because they make a balance of purple, or even voting independent because you don't like what the parties do to each other doesn't make you Fe. In fact, it sounds much more like Fi to me. Instead of your trip being a particular party belief, like Democrat, Libertarian, or Republican, your thing seems to be "peace at any price" and passive balance. That can very much be an INFP trait. Like Black Cat said, it also makes you sound like an enneagram 9.

2) Lots of INFPs have social anxiety, and are paranoid that people are talking about them behind their backs.

 

[Lauren Ashley]

1) Liking red and blue because they make a balance of purple, or even voting independent because you don't like what the parties do to each other doesn't make you Fe. In fact, it sounds much more like Fi to me. Instead of your trip being a particular party belief, like Democrat, Libertarian, or Republican, your thing seems to be "peace at any price" and passive balance. That can very much be an INFP trait. Like Black Cat said, it also makes you sound like an enneagram 9.

This is what I was trying to get at, basically. The OP's values and actions, including this one, seem like an outerworking of balancing inner beliefs and integrating them, which is much more like Fi, from what I've learned.

Anyway, I'd be interested in hearing more about Fi from dom/aux Fi users. It seems like an interesting function, and I suspect I have quite a bit of it, but I would like to hear about it in practice.

 

[Prototype]

I have been typed 5 different types in the last few years, ranging from ENTP, INTJ, ISFP, to INFJ, and finally landing on INFP... I would like to believe that has something to do with ones environment constantly changing... Or,... I'm batshit crazy!!

 

[Thalassa]

Congrats to gaining his approval :rolli:. Can't say I want it.

All I know is that he has to stop using that cliche about people drinking their bathwater. He says it about anyone he thinks is wrong. Can't your Ne Ti come up with something a little more original, Simulated World?

 

[Lethe]

Compare your wording with his. There is a negative tone in describing Fi over Fe. In my first post, I pointed out a few examples of the word choices and phrasing which belayed his bias. The OP can think for herself, but that's not going to remove all potential for being swayed. It's likely a similar reason why some sensors may type themselves as intuitive. Who sees themselves as the stupid, shallow, bland sensors portrayed on MBTI forums?

The below quotes show a definite dislike of INFPs, with no equivalent posts about INFJs in here. I especially like when he tells an INFP how she thinks and where her morals come from. Really? You are in her head? Or excuse me, heart, since apparently that's all we use to determine anything. We just cannot grasp or see what Ni sees. :rolli:

I made my point in my first post in here. There is a clear bias in his views of Fi, and I explained how I came to that conclusion (and why his biased view is not helpful in the context of someone typing themselves). He's the one who will not address that post directly and has tried to make this about inferring emotion that isn't there or about how he hates other types also. I take this to mean I am right, or else he would address the actual issue.

And no, he has lumped all INFPs together in his posts in here (see above), which is why I felt compelled to speak out.

This sounds like a case of two ships passing each other in the night. You both have established valid points, but they are directed onto separate paths. There is a need for the other party to understand his or her intention, and because this meaning never entered their frame of reference, it is difficult for them to fully grasp the information the way the original user intended.

Simulatedworld: Possible functional theory interpretations.
Style: Provocative word choice. Logical connection of ideas.
Cause of conflict: Wants the readers to ignore the emotional context.

Opposition: Possible emotive interpretations.
Style: Focus on the emotional content and individual value.
Cause of conflict: Wants the user to recognize the potential insults within their explanations.

 

[PeaceBaby]

Nice post Lethe but sim knows what he is doing, he chooses to post this way, enjoying his provocation. Luring the INFPs into the same trap over and over again. Surely it must get boring, but it seems more like an endless source of amusement to him.

I'm not sure what's to be ultimately gained, except for all the INFP's to think he's an insensitive jerk.

But sim, I see your game and like to play.

 

[Thalassa]

sim knows what he is doing, he chooses to post this way, enjoying his provocation. Luring the INFPs into the same trap over and over again. Surely it must get boring, but it seems more like an endless source of amusement to him.

I'm not sure what's to be ultimately gained, except for all the INFP's to think he's an insensitive jerk.

He admits this whole heartedly if you talk to him. It's not news or anything. He also does it to other people, though, not just INFPs.

 

[Lethe]

Nice post Lethe but sim knows what he is doing, he chooses to post this way, enjoying his provocation. Luring the INFPs into the same trap over and over again. Surely it must get boring, but it seems more like an endless source of amusement to him.

I'm not sure what's to be ultimately gained, except for all the INFP's to think he's an insensitive jerk.

But sim, I see your game and like to play.

I agree that Sim fully understands he is being provocative, but he wants the audience to acknowledge the analytical aspect (Ti) of his approach by stating he could be as equally harsh with any given type. He refused to back down from his style (much like what his opponents are doing) and this non-accommodating behavior can be translated as insensitivity to other's needs.