Does anyone think I'm an ISFJ?

[highlander]

Certain terms - such as "magical" - keyed me into Si. However, I can write like that too, and that's my real point here.

"magical"?? I guess that's a joke right?

Think of these types of things when you think of Si:
“One’s personal past”
• Verifying using personal memory
• Validating the actuality
• Reliving the emotions in sequence

Think of these types of things with Fe
“Harmonious relationships”
• Affirming others
• Enabling affiliation
• Attuning to the group mood

You can see those things in that writing.

Is that how [MENTION=15773]greenfairy[/MENTION]'s thought process seems to work?

 

[greenfairy]

"magical"?? I guess that's a joke right?

Think of these types of things when you think of Si:
“One’s personal past”
• Verifying using personal memory
• Validating the actuality
• Reliving the emotions in sequence

Think of these types of things with Fe
“Harmonious relationships”
• Affirming others
• Enabling affiliation
• Attuning to the group mood

You can see those things in that writing.

Is that how [MENTION=15773]greenfairy[/MENTION]'s thought process seems to work?

Sounds pretty accurate to me. Although I don't think the functions are in that order.

Also I asked him to edit the poll and only ask if I am ISFJ yes or no, because I intended for this to not just be another generic type-me thread. I wanted specific discussion on one type and the associated functions, because two people had proposed it.

 

[Lady_X]

And I can't find just now the quote about me taking things as insults, but consider the following. "Simple-minded" is generally used as an insult. Maybe I read too much negativity into my communication being like sifting through goulash, but usually when someone says something like that I think of a schizophrenic person or someone equally mentally incapacitated. It seems to imply the person's thoughts are incoherent. This sounds kind of insulting, and is not true of me- at least not that anyone has observed outside of this forum. Some people, in particular Jennifer and Mal+ seem to have a difficult time communicating in their posts the difference between a constructive critical comment or neutral observation directed at someone they respect and think well of, and a derisive "observation" directed at someone they believe to be mentally inferior. If it's true that I am widely perceived to be simple minded, then in that context things do seem more insulting in tone.

i don't think they or i took special care not to be insulting but the main point is that the communication style reads different than others of that type.

the goulash comment i took to mean that it was the opposite of concise. everything jumbled together no clear focus etc

i'm sure ti users would say the same about me too...it's not a compliment, it may be an insult but who cares if it's an insult from someone who values different things than you do?

 

[greenfairy]

i don't think they or i took special care not to be insulting but the main point is that the communication style reads different than others of that type.

the goulash comment i took to mean that it was the opposite of concise. everything jumbled together no clear focus etc

i'm sure ti users would say the same about me too...it's not a compliment, it may be an insult but who cares if it's an insult from someone who values different things than you do?

Ok, good point. I'm not sure what I value though, or that it is different.

 

[Mal12345]

And I can't find just now the quote about me taking things as insults, but consider the following. "Simple-minded" is generally used as an insult. Maybe I read too much negativity into my communication being like sifting through goulash, but usually when someone says something like that I think of a schizophrenic person or someone equally mentally incapacitated. It seems to imply the person's thoughts are incoherent. This sounds kind of insulting, and is not true of me- at least not that anyone has observed outside of this forum. Some people, in particular Jennifer and Mal+ seem to have a difficult time communicating in their posts the difference between a constructive critical comment or neutral observation directed at someone they respect and think well of, and a derisive "observation" directed at someone they believe to be mentally inferior. If it's true that I am widely perceived to be simple minded, then in that context things do seem more insulting in tone.

Jennifer and I had nothing to do with the "simple-minded" statement. I already said that that particular poster was negatively stereotyping you into a type, i.e., Sensors are simple-minded. (They're not.)

For another thing, people don't communicate the same way or mean the same things by their communications.

A Feeler is often insulted by Thinkers who are simply stating facts yet are neglectful of the feelings of others (e.g., "can't you do something about your makeup?"). And Thinkers are often confused when they are accused of hurting the feelings of a Feeler, because nothing of the sort was intended whatsoever.

I do not make these things up as I go, this is a fact I've known about Thinker-Feeler relationships for over 20 years. And I have observed it multiple times in action, as every woman I've been with was a Feeler, either as dominant or auxiliary.

Now don't take this as an INSULT, but it's easy to see that, whatever your type, you are at the very first stages of learning about all this. This is your baby-steps period of growth, and you'll make a lot of mistakes in the beginning just like I did long ago. It's simply a matter of getting back up after falling down, and trying again.

 

[Lady_X]

Ok, good point. I'm not sure what I value though, or that it is different.

well for starters if you valued being concise you would be.

 

[Mal12345]

"magical"?? I guess that's a joke right?

Think of these types of things when you think of Si:
“One’s personal past”
• Verifying using personal memory
• Validating the actuality
• Reliving the emotions in sequence

Think of these types of things with Fe
“Harmonious relationships”
• Affirming others
• Enabling affiliation
• Attuning to the group mood

You can see those things in that writing.

Is that how [MENTION=15773]greenfairy[/MENTION]'s thought process seems to work?

Agree about Fe, disagree about Si. In fact, I don't know what 3 even has to do with Si.

But "magical" certainly agrees with Jung's own description of the thinking of the Si-dom.

As for [MENTION=15773]greenfairy[/MENTION], from her very first post she has always seemed like an INFJ to me, and although she can throw a lot of INTP-seeming thoughts to the forum, I immediately saw that they were not up to INTP standards because the logic was flawed, the reasoning incoherent.

 

[greenfairy]

Jennifer and I had nothing to do with the "simple-minded" statement. I already said that that particular poster was negatively stereotyping you into a type, i.e., Sensors are simple-minded. (They're not.)

For another thing, people don't communicate the same way or mean the same things by their communications.

A Feeler is often insulted by Thinkers who are simply stating facts yet are neglectful of the feelings of others (e.g., "can't you do something about your makeup?"). And Thinkers are often confused when they are accused of hurting the feelings of a Feeler, because nothing of the sort was intended whatsoever.

I do not make these things up as I go, this is a fact I've known about Thinker-Feeler relationships for over 20 years. And I have often observed it multiple times in action, as every woman I've been with was a Feeler, either as dominant or auxiliary.

Now don't take this as an INSULT, but it's easy to see that, whatever your type, you are at the very first stages of learning about all this. This is your baby-steps period of growth, and you'll make a lot of mistakes in the beginning just like I did long ago. It's simply a matter of getting back up after falling down, and trying again.

Ok. Fair enough. Thanks for clarifying.

I don't usually get offended by things though, I don't think. I've just had some very negative experiences on the forum and when people don't publicly argue with people who say insulting things it's easy to think everyone agrees, and to then assume the same attitude when the tone is ambiguous. Is that understandable?

 

[Mal12345]

Ok. Fair enough. Thanks for clarifying.

I don't usually get offended by things though, I don't think. I've just had some very negative experiences on the forum and when people don't publicly argue with people who say insulting things it's easy to think everyone agrees, and to then assume the same attitude when the tone is ambiguous. Is that understandable?

I'm having to read that multiple times, and I'm still not grasping your point. "Ambiguous"?

 

[greenfairy]

well for starters if you valued being concise you would be.

I don't know about that. There are a lot of things I value which I don't do according to my standards. But maybe that's a lack of individuation again.

 

[highlander]

Agree about Fe, disagree about Si. In fact, I don't know what 3 even has to do with Si.

But "magical" certainly agrees with Jung's own description of the thinking of the Si-dom.

sigh

 

[greenfairy]

I'm having to read that multiple times, and I'm still not grasping your point. "Ambiguous"?

Your point was that I have a tendency to assume a negative tone when it's not there, right? So I was saying that in cases where the tone (i.e. insulting, neutral, complimentary, etc.) is not clear, it's easy to assume it's negative if I have experienced these things from people in the past. This is about specific people, but I tend to generalize it too because if someone says something negative the tendency for other people on the forum if they don't agree is to just leave it rather than to say so- so that can make it look like they do agree.

 

[Mal12345]

I don't know about that. There are a lot of things I value which I don't do according to my standards. But maybe that's a lack of individuation again.

Individuation is a tricky thing. Every time in my life that I thought I was individuating, I wasn't. I was simply stuck on a growth level because I was going about it the wrong way. True individuation involves periods of destruction and rebirth. The worst thing one can do for individuation is to continue doing things the same old way as always. The best thing one can do is to strike out, seek new paths, and live for the moment while remaining mindful of the future.

 

[Mal12345]

Your point was that I have a tendency to assume a negative tone when it's not there, right? So I was saying that in cases where the tone (i.e. insulting, neutral, complimentary, etc.) is not clear, it's easy to assume it's negative if I have experienced these things from people in the past. This is about specific people, but I tend to generalize it too because if someone says something negative the tendency for other people on the forum if they don't agree is to just leave it rather than to say so- so that can make it look like they do agree.

Ok, well, I already guessed that about you. Or should I say, I already KNEW that about you. It's good however that you're aware of it, because that's the first step in overcoming the assumption that people in the present have the same negative motives as those in your past.

 

[greenfairy]

Ok, well, I already guessed that about you. Or should I say, I already KNEW that about you. It's good however that you're aware of it, because that's the first step in overcoming the assumption that people in the present have the same negative motives as those in your past.

True. I was referring to the same people though, on the forum being negative in the past. I don't know if that was clear. It would be more reasonable in that case, but still not a completely merited assumption.

 

[Mal12345]

True. I was referring to the same people though, on the forum being negative in the past. I don't know if that was clear. It would be more reasonable in that case, but still not a completely merited assumption.

I don't really develop that kind of instant mistrust.

 

[RaptorWizard]

Let's see how many people voted here as of now, ahem, 3!? 3!? 3!?....

hahahahahahahahahahahaha - I got 46 voters!

evidence - Do you think that RaptorWizard is an ISTP?

 

[greenfairy]

Let's see how many people voted here as of now, ahem, 3!? 3!? 3!?....

hahahahahahahahahahahaha - I got 46 voters!

evidence - Do you think that RaptorWizard is an ISTP?

I bow to your powers of greatness.

 

[Zarathustra]

Does anyone (besides [MENTION=16405]Kamishi[/MENTION]) think I am an ISFJ? Post here if you think so, and if you don't, argue with the ones who do. (For the record, I don't.)

Wow.

This sounds so exciting.

Just 'cause I'm bored...

Let's call this for what it is: pure, 100% attention-whoring.

...and there's a thread saying this forum is boring

And this is what's supposed to make it less boring???

Te also rebutts points without looking at a bigger conceptual picture.

/ didn't read thread

/ can't believe it exists

/ boring thread is boring

 

[Society]

@greenfairy -

my first thought was wondering what meaning would the concept of ISFJ even retain if it had to expand so broad as to include both you and every previously typed ISFJ out there... not much.

though something worth mentioning regarding your type - if you really do have aspergers, it creates a problem: not so much if mbti is just a semantical game of standardized metaphors to describe different sorts of people, then no you are very far from isfj - then we'll just find an fe-last or fe-less description for you. but if mbti is viewed as underlining cognitive processes, then this can get really messy: basically we'd be navigating the possible function orders without any knowledge of the wearabout of your Fe or any behaviors resulting from this... which can whack the whole system, i mean trying to define how an FJ without functioning Fe would behave... what aspects shared with other FJ would you even retain, if any? what would then still define you as an FJ? for that matter if your fe and fe manifestations are "invisible", then why not entp? would explain why some people see you as inherently p dom...

you do seem very keen on systematically breaking information down into its building blocks, and you express a discomfort with concepts that don't seem to sit well in your thought process for you until they are completely well defined, which i associate with Ti, while INFPs i know seem to not give a shit about that at all, and quite often even find the very notion of doing so to be annoying.