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

[Z Buck McFate]

Exaggerated and overly harsh to be sure but if we are honest with ourselves, there are grains of truth. Ni doms can be a little delusional and paranoid. There is this overactive imagination and at times a tendency to obsess about things in their head. There is also a tendency to be arrogant and stubbornly cling to these perceptions. I’ve read about it. I have experienced it. It’s ok. Ni is not perfect and it’s important it be balanced with other things. Accept this in ourselves. It’s a little like Enneagram in that way – the perceptions can be distorted and not entirely aligned with reality. Our intuition is not flawless. Having an awareness of this occasionally distorted perspective is what’s important. It is the foundation for addressing it.

As an aside, I see absolutely no evidence whatsoever of @OrangeApplied and Mane being manipulative or trying to push other people’s triggers. I have seen no harmful intent at all. I admire their persistence, honesty and directness. Are their perspectives biased by personal experiences? Sure. All of ours are. I think there might be grains of truth in several of those things in OP's list - for Ni doms in general. It's not that horrible.

I can’t speak for all, but I know for me it isn’t about the list or feeling ‘threatened’ because it doesn’t match my identity. I didn’t particularly have a problem with the list when she originally posted it- even sent an ‘LOL’ rep (I’m pretty sure)- and it wasn’t until it kept coming up with jabs about ‘the INFJs here’ that other INFJs started having a bad reaction as well so I assume it’s not just me. But maybe it is the list that bothers them more, I don’t know. I don’t know how else to say it except she’s poking around in our blind spot and making fun of us for having it. It’s like moving the furniture around on a blind person and then angrily mocking them for ‘pretending’ they can’t see (when of course they can’t fucking see, so it just ends up being mean). It’s the approach.

When I look at that list I suspect not many of us would have a problem with it if the approach were different. <Insert OA mocking that it needs to be said ‘the right way’.>

We aren’t looking for something to pick at “so that we don’t have to take responsibility”- any more than Fi’ers are actively looking for something to pick at when Fe wants to assimilate everyone’s values- there are just things that stand out as problematic and they can’t be ignored. There’s no clear surface story that we “twist” in order to come out smelling like roses…it takes *a lot* of effort sometimes to shave off the possibilities to try to gleam what the surface story ‘probably’ is. As state perfectly articulated earlier in this thread- it is not self evident to us. I spend more time than anyone would believe (outside of fellow Ni’ers, probably) shaving off those possibilities. And as I said earlier on, things really do need to go through a system of filters like a Rube Goldberg contraption; there’s no shortcut and it’s not a choice. Sometimes (the hope is) it picks up insight along the way- things that other people miss. But it can and does go horribly wrong sometimes too, picking up something that isn’t actually there. Either I’m just really lucky with the INFJs I happen to know (bar the few exceptions I’ve mentioned) and it really is more common for things to go ‘horribly wrong’ than I realize, or most INFJs really are SO concerned with the ‘horribly wrong’ that we err on the side of giving people credit when we shouldn’t…..because it is SO hard for us to know when we have reasonable cause to be angry. I guess I really can’t say what ‘average’ is because I don’t have a clue, I’m basing this on the INFJs I know.

The reasonable INFJs I know- if and when we feel paranoia, it centers around whether or not something we’re picking up is actually there…..that’s what I mean by “shaving off the extra possibilities” and we rely on others for a reality check. Worst case scenario- there isn’t anyone directly around us who can help us make sense of it- we become confused, feel kinda insecure in our environment because we can’t invest much energy in any one story until something starts making sense, and we just keep withdrawing until the influence (the source of the mixed signals) is no longer a threat. The batshit NFJs who go ahead and believe the ‘out there’ stuff that pops into their head and can actually aggressively argue it without needing that reality check? I have no idea why that happens. I’ve witnessed it, I agree that it’s breath taking and that NFJs do it with special unprecedented panache. But it’s not “denial”, I honestly do not understand. I really can’t shake the feeling that OA is projecting some Fi dom proficiency into this that we just don’t have- it isn’t that we ‘aren’t willing’ to give an answer, it’s that we probably can’t.

And honestly, I *think* a lot of the bad reaction to her is that she’s just being mean, and taking on the exact “I’m not being mean, that’s just something you need to believe to protect your ego” position that she’s actually accusing INFJs of being so inclined to do. She’s a steaming pile of mixed signals- she’s actually doing a lot of the things she’s accusing us of doing in this thread- and that’s like kryptonite to us. We can’t think when that’s going on. It’s like being expected to follow someone in a conversation- having them constantly throw furniture down on the floor in front of you so that you CAN’T follow them and then having them mock you for not being able to follow them. It’s MEAN. That ‘white noise’ gets so intense sometimes I can’t take in another single word no matter how hard I try. I don’t think she’s doing it on purpose, but it becomes more and more clear in interaction with her why an INFJ would become avoidant towards her. Same goes for mane- I haven’t even read his comments in this read, because I remember the deafening white noise I experienced last time I tried “communication” with him.

We have tried pointing these things out- the specific problematics that surface and prevent us from following the conversation- and she keeps interpreting this as “trying to discredit her so that we don’t have to listen”….again, sounds like projecting a Fi mindset maybe. We don’t go looking for it, any more than Fi’ers go looking for things to get angry at Fe’ers about. It’s just like having furniture thrown in our path and we can not follow when that’s happening.

It seems your sense of self is very much tied to this view of yourself – as a positive influence on others. It’s interesting when viewed in relation to the last point. I wonder what would happen if there was another thread that said one of Te user’s weakness is they are incapable of remorse.

I know this was directed at SilkRoad, but since she’s taking a break- there’s something here I want to point out. INFPs may corner the market on “exceptional humility” (I have no idea if that’s true, but I realize that just because I don’t see it doesn’t mean there isn’t something to it) and being able to discern the surface of events around them well enough to react much faster than we can…..but if there’s one single thing that drives me crazy about NFPs (and NOT ALL, damnit, just some) it’s the red hot alarm that goes off in my head when they are inconsistent in this regard; they can blatantly declare something without putting any thought first into whether they’d still feel the same way if the tables were turned. It’s a Ni thing to recognize “if there was another thread that said <reversed equivalent>”…that is totally a Ni thing. It is the very first thought I have when anything annoys me- I don’t explore how I feel about the thing that annoys me, I immediately focus on considering what the reversed equivalent would be. And incidentally, this is precisely the thing that seems ‘broken’ in the NFJs I know who fit the criteria on OA’s list: they don’t consider that, it’s bizarre. But every other single INFJ I know seems to do this and we do it so much that we don’t even know how we feel about a lot of things ourselves.

And sometimes the hardest part of reading many of these posts is feeling stunned, thinking “Are you even listening to yourself- are you seriously saying that aloud to another person without realizing how it sounds??” <- That feeling in itself gives me an idea of how frustrated people must get with our delayed processing, because it is SO hard for me to believe sometimes that NFPs aren’t *playing stupid*. So I can totally, totally understand how it *seems* like we (INFJs) are just being irresponsibly avoidant. When there’s some kind of vision or clarity we (as humans, of any type) can take for granted, it really makes that shortcoming in others look like they aren’t putting much effort into it.


***

And [MENTION=5723]Tiltyred[/MENTION]’s post- it resonates a lot. She’s not kidding or exaggerating: when the white noise gets to be too much, we can’t take in another word. It’s not a choice. [And Tilty: as chance has it, I finally found a letter from my ex last month that I'd been looking for too- to see if I could finally *read* it when I'm reading it. The answer to that is: getting closer, but not quite yet. Lol.]

 

[Tiltyred]

Deleted

 

[highlander]

There’s no clear surface story that we “twist” in order to come out smelling like roses…it takes *a lot* of effort sometimes to shave off the possibilities to try to gleam what the surface story ‘probably’ is. As state perfectly articulated earlier in this thread- it is not self evident to us. I spend more time than anyone would believe (outside of fellow Ni’ers, probably) shaving off those possibilities.

Being an Ni dom, this makes complete sense to me. It's the delayed processing thing, which clearly is part of the explanation here. It takes a while for you to process and think through things when your worldview changes which is the same for INTJs. It's why people perceive us as stubborn and refusing to listen. We actually do listen a lot more than people give us credit for. We haven't changed our mind yet but we're thinking.

The combination of Ni + Fe is honestly fascinating to me because there is such a similarity in some ways with the Ni + Te combination and such vast differences in others. I have to admit having difficulty understanding your mind works because Fe is pretty foreign to me.

But it can and does go horribly wrong sometimes too, picking up something that isn’t actually there. Either I’m just really lucky with the INFJs I happen to know (bar the few exceptions I’ve mentioned) and it really is more common for things to go ‘horribly wrong’ than I realize, or most INFJs really are SO concerned with the ‘horribly wrong’ that we err on the side of giving people credit when we shouldn’t…..because it is SO hard for us to know when we have reasonable cause to be angry. I guess I really can’t say what ‘average’ is because I don’t have a clue, I’m basing this on the INFJs I know.

The reasonable INFJs I know- if and when we feel paranoia, it centers around whether or not something we’re picking up is actually there…..that’s what I mean by “shaving off the extra possibilities” and we rely on others for a reality check.

That it is kind of similar to what I experience as well though in the Te manner vs. the Fe manner. We're not giving people credit so much as we're giving an alternate point of view credit. We're not looking at cause to be angry either. We're looking at cause to change our opinion. We have little problem getting angry or at least annoyed.

The batshit NFJs who go ahead and believe the ‘out there’ stuff that pops into their head and can actually aggressively argue it without needing that reality check? I have no idea why that happens. I’ve witnessed it, I agree that it’s breath taking and that NFJs do it with special unprecedented panache.

There are for sure people who have a mental health issue but outside of that, I am pretty sure this is a weakly developed or applied auxiliary function (Fe) to balance the dominant function (Ni). I think for some, it's poorly developed which becomes a lifelong problem. With others, they go through periods where they are effectively using it and periods where they are not. Other times, it's situational. There are situations where I have a very strong intuition or feeling about something and it trumps the Te, which is my auxiliary. I will say to myself very consciously, "Damn the facts or lack of outside evidence. I know this thing to be true." There have been a couple of periods in my life where my Te has seemed to have lost some of its influence and it simply causes me to be less functional interacting with the outside world. I believe there was a period when I joined the forum that this seemed to be happening and it showed up in somewhat strange cognitive function test results.

I really can’t shake the feeling that OA is projecting some Fi dom proficiency into this that we just don’t have- it isn’t that we ‘aren’t willing’ to give an answer, it’s that we probably can’t.

That makes sense.

And honestly, I *think* a lot of the bad reaction to her is that she’s just being mean, and taking on the exact “I’m not being mean, that’s just something you need to believe to protect your ego” position that she’s actually accusing INFJs of being so inclined to do. She’s a steaming pile of mixed signals- she’s actually doing a lot of the things she’s accusing us of doing in this thread- and that’s like kryptonite to us. We can’t think when that’s going on. It’s like being expected to follow someone in a conversation- having them constantly throw furniture down on the floor in front of you so that you CAN’T follow them and then having them mock you for not being able to follow them. It’s MEAN. That ‘white noise’ gets so intense sometimes I can’t take in another single word no matter how hard I try. I don’t think she’s doing it on purpose, but it becomes more and more clear in interaction with her why an INFJ would become avoidant towards her. Same goes for mane- I haven’t even read his comments in this read, because I remember the deafening white noise I experienced last time I tried “communication” with him.

It is fascinating how your mind works. I don't disbelieve you at all. It is very difficult to understand though for someone who doesn't think that way.

We have tried pointing these things out- the specific problematics that surface and prevent us from following the conversation- and she keeps interpreting this as “trying to discredit her so that we don’t have to listen”….again, sounds like projecting a Fi mindset maybe. We don’t go looking for it, any more than Fi’ers go looking for things to get angry at Fe’ers about. It’s just like having furniture thrown in our path and we can not follow when that’s happening.

There clearly seemed to be a great deal of energy in the INFJs responses. It seemed like you were taking things seriously. However, it did seem like the INFJs had discounted most of the points, were being defensive and yes were in a sense attempting to discredit her. It might be a disconnect in style of thinking and/or communication more than anything else.

I know this was directed at SilkRoad, but since she’s taking a break- there’s something here I want to point out. INFPs may corner the market on “exceptional humility” (I have no idea if that’s true, but I realize that just because I don’t see it doesn’t mean there isn’t something to it) and being able to discern the surface of events around them well enough to react much faster than we can…..but if there’s one single thing that drives me crazy about NFPs (and NOT ALL, damnit, just some) it’s the red hot alarm that goes off in my head when they are inconsistent in this regard; they can blatantly declare something without putting any thought first into whether they’d still feel the same way if the tables were turned. It’s a Ni thing to recognize “if there was another thread that said <reversed equivalent>”…that is totally a Ni thing. It is the very first thought I have when anything annoys me- I don’t explore how I feel about the thing that annoys me, I immediately focus on considering what the reversed equivalent would be.

I believe there is a fundamental difference in this way of processing things. The Fi type will put themselves in the shoes of the person on the receiving end - how would they feel if they were that person. The higher up Fi is in the stack, the more effective you are in doing this. One of my driving forces in learning about MBTI is that I realized that as hard as I might try, I was unable to do that effectively because if I were them, I would respond differently. So I tried to learn more about how others might think. As an Fe type, I believe you're not really putting yourself in the shoes of the other person so much. It's more like there are objective criteria being applied. You're also looking at the group of individuals as a whole whereas the Fi type will not do this. They will look at specific individuals one at a time. As I write all of this stuff now, I worry about stepping on a land mine in this regard or offending specific people, or rubbing salt in a wound, because of just how contentious and upsetting this thread has seemed to be for some people. I'm thinking about how specific individuals might feel about what I'm writing - not how everybody collectively participating as a whole is feeling about it. I'm raising these questions at the end because it seemed like there was a lot of communication back and forth but I'm not sure a mutual understanding was arrived at.

But every other single INFJ I know seems to do this and we do it so much that we don’t even know how we feel about a lot of things ourselves.

So here are the Fi'ers trying to understand how you specifically feel about things in an interaction and you don't even know yourself. It's fundamental to the disconnect.

And sometimes the hardest part of reading many of these posts is feeling stunned, thinking “Are you even listening to yourself- are you seriously saying that aloud to another person without realizing how it sounds??” <- That feeling in itself gives me an idea of how frustrated people must get with our delayed processing, because it is SO hard for me to believe sometimes that NFPs aren’t *playing stupid*. So I can totally, totally understand how it *seems* like we (INFJs) are just being irresponsibly avoidant. When there’s some kind of vision or clarity we (as humans, of any type) can take for granted, it really makes that shortcoming in others look like they aren’t putting much effort into it.

That does explain a lot. It's especially surprised me when I've seen the ENFPs and the INFJs go at it. On the surface, they both seem to be so understanding, empathetic and with such good people skills that it is difficult to understand why the communication doesn't go more smoothly.

Ahhh, Z Buck, thank you. I was feeling so exposed and twisting in the wind after that long and personal post so it comes as a great relief to hear some confirmation/affirmation that at least one other INFJ processes similarly. I like your metaphor of throwing furniture in the path. Yes. Until we can pick a path around/over/under the furniture, we can't move forward or sometimes even respond.

Tiltyred - Thank you for sharing those things. What you wrote did help to provide a great deal of clarity and understanding to me on the topic under discussion as well as helping us to understand your specific reactions in the thread. You provided a couple of very concrete examples. It seems like there is some similarity between INFJs and ISFJs by the way in terms of that time required for processing.

As fast as I can lash out, you'd be surprised how hard it is for me to attribute bad motive, when it is often immediately apparent to other people. I don't want to go there, and will try to find any other possible reason for what's going on. But I must agree -- it appears mean, it appears like playing stupid, it appears to be manipulative -- it short, it stinks. Smells like fish. And sometimes I've found that lashing out good and proper is the only way to get people to back off and stop throwing sand in my eyes (that's how I think of it -- obscuring my vision) so I can process well enough to deal.

Maybe I'm naive but I didn't see an intentional attempt to be mean, play stupid or manipulative at all. I can see how lashing out would be an effective way to deal with it though. You're like "Whoa! What did I do??"

We don't ever ignore this stuff, either, which I think most people don't realize. If you send out a bunch of mixed signals, we ruminate on that conversation for YEARS -- it will keep popping up in our minds like the puzzle piece that doesn't fit, until we finally see where that piece goes, and the big picture becomes apparent. This makes it doubly dangerous for us to spend time with people suffering character disorders, by the way. We don't have defenses strong enough without training and experience to deal with too much mind game, and it's debilitating at a deep level. This is where we live, in communicating with other people, this is what's most important, what we lose sleep over, what preoccupies us, what comes first. So, y'know ... you're being listened to with a closer attention than you might be used to and we're hearing multiple levels of meaning in everything, not just the note, but the note and the overtone series. Which I say not to make us sound precious, but to make clear that it's cruel to mess with us for the fun of it, and we don't take it kindly.

Edited to add -- yup, we save your letters. I think I'm probably safe to say we save your emails and screen-shot your posts. If you are important in our world at all, we're paying close attention -- in the most positive sense, it's because we want to know you intimately so we can make you happy; we want to know how best to fit in with you harmoniously -- in the most negative sense, we're keeping book. Just because our scope of possibilities is so wide, sometimes the story we come up with that makes things hang together cohesively is off-base, but we're not pulling it out our asses, y'know. And anything we posit is pretty much up for consideration, unless and until you've tried to pull one too many fast ones. Then we pull our pistols out of our pockets and start reading back to you -- or not. Because we've done the math and know your motives are, for us, at least, not something we want to participate in. And then maybe you get door-slammed and stand there not knowing what you did to deserve it. I think it's better you don't know. I think it's kinder that way.

This is exceptionally revealing and very helpful in understanding. A few questions:
1. What do you mean by mixed signals?
2. What is pulling too many fast ones?
3. With regards to being better that we don't know, I think you might be wrong about that. Why do you think that is the case?

I also think for INFJ, it doesn't matter if anyone else sees what we see -- many people don't. That's why we're spoken of in terms of being prophetic and psychic. Sometimes that comes out as paranoid and psycho, but it works well often enough that it's part of the type description, so I'm not ready to stand by and let it be discounted. If enough of us say something stinks, the rest of you should go looking for what's rotten, IMO, not stand there telling us it's our imagination. I'm just sayin'.

I understand this completely. Don't you have a drive though to take these perceptions and to do something with them - to achieve some kind of practical result? I see that as one of the problems with INTJs. You don't care what others think on the one hand yet you crave practical results and the only way to achieve them is to get others onboard which the INTJ may not be as effective in doing as others might be.

 

[Tiltyred]

Deleted

 

[Fidelia]

First, I want to thank you highlander for your efforts. I appreciate them. I think a little injection of NT w/ more dilluted Fi is of use, as you still share more of the opposite perspective, but in less concentrated form. I find your questions in particular are of help.

I thought you had an interesting observation in terms of Fi thinking about individual reactions. I think that Ni-Fe people are always looking for a generalized set of guidelines for interacting with each group of people we interact with (maybe I'm speaking out of term and this is only a personal thing for me). There are several templates that may be laid on top of one another (at least for me) as people belong to a variety of different groups, which allow the interaction to be much more customized to each person (gender, religion, political leanings, profession, class, appearance, family, and a kazillion other even more specialized groupings). So, it's not that I'm thinking only of the reaction of a group, but the reaction of a person who is a member of specific set of groups (keeps narrowing down options or pointing the interaction in a particular direction).

As both Tilty and Z Buck have expressed, I think there are several issues going on that may add to the difficulty in communication:

1) Delayed processing. If there were one thing that I could change about myself to make life easier, that would be it. While I'm stubborn, I'm not unwilling to consider other perspectives. I'm just not going to make my mind up about until I feel like I have everything I need to consider everything. That takes a long time and that time in between is not only frustrating to others, but can kind of finish them on us. Crap - I've been without a car for over a year (I work right near my house and have access to other transpo) simply because I am overwhelmed with how to go about deciding what to pick, how much to pay, which factors to give the most weight to, and when to do it and I have no deadline or confining stipulations. It's stupid and I hate it, but I can't change that. When I am faced with any kind of decision, if the answer isn't clear immediately, I gather information and sit on it for awhile and suddenly things sort of come into focus. The problem is that I don't know just when that will happen.

2) It takes me some time to know what I think and under pressure I get worse. My feelings are usually a sign that I need to pay attention to something, but usually it takes a lot of sorting to decide what things matter most, some discussion with others to articulate what is bothering me or why I feel something is off, and the reactions of a few people to help me decide in myself about the appropriate course of action to take. Sometimes I find Ne-Fi wants to hash it out right away and even when you ask for space or time, it is like someone following you through the different rooms of a house. If refused, they will then say something that will force some kind of reaction in hopes of cutting to the heart of the matter. That shuts us down even more. The more stuff that's thrown in the way to process, the longer it takes, and we usually are asking for space because we already feel hopelessly behind. Trying to force the issue, or doing the bandaid all at once approach is actually shooting yourself in the foot. I can appreciate how frustrating that must be to someone, but I haven't found a way to expedite it.

3) Approach often overrides content for me. I've only been made aware awhile ago of this difference between Ni-Fe and Ne-Fi. Ni-Fe's screening system and Ne-Fi's seem to happen at opposite ends of the process. In the end, we both screen and we both become fairly immoveable at some point. It's just that I start out immoveable and become more open over time, while Ne-Fi (from my perspective) seems fairly open initially and becomes immoveable over time.

It was OA's approach that bothered me, compounded by me not being able to discern what the purpose of her posting in that manner was. By the time she expressed things a little differently a few pages ago, I felt much more open to discussing the issue. Same with Mane. I had a better handle on where both of them were coming from and so was more willing to talk about it.

4) When someone causes too much emotional white noise and talking doesn't seem to improve things, there is a compulsion to either make the person understand what our problem is (therefore seeming to avoid what their initial question or comment for us was), or we need distance, or we just cut off contact if it appears that there is no chance of it ever changing.

5) Ni-Fe screws around with us sometimes to allow us to give people extra chances to a ridiculous extent. Sometimes as a self-defence mechanism, it becomes necessary to reduce the number of variables if it is becoming debilitating and is creating more and more stuff to be processed than can possibly be dealt with. I don't consider myself a pushover by any means and often am aware of what seems like unreasonable or inconsiderate behaviour. However, the problem is that if I can explain WHY it is occurring, it ceases to bother me in the same way. If I have more information to put the behaviour into context, it allows me to see the person in a different light. If the person has earned my trust in the past, it takes some time for me to shift paradigms regarding them. Similarly, if I have had negative interactions with them in the past, it takes time to revamp my previous impressions. In both cases, given enough time, I can change opinions, but it requires restructuring a bunch of stuff that was firmly in place in my internal thinking structure. In both cases, I think this has some relation to the delayed processing as well as deciding which details require the most emphasis.

highlander, I find that it makes a world of difference for you to tell us how it looks to you from your perspective and then ask some clarifying questions. That is a good way of getting the INFJs to talk more dispassionately.

Perhaps this is a fundamental difference in Ni vs Ne approach? I'm not sure, as I don't think it is solely a Fe Fi deal. I noticed that OA and Mane were starting more from the perspective of throwing something out there first to see what stuck and what didn't. Meantime, the way it was raised created enough frustration that it created the reaction you saw because it felt unfair, and like there was no way to explain or reach any kind of understanding because that wasn't the intent. Perhaps I misread the Ne approach as more final than it actually was (as seems to happen with Fe and Te?) when really it was requesting information by making a statement (much as Fe and Te do and are often misinterpreted by Fi and Ti as a result!).

 

[Fidelia]

FWIW, I think OA was on to something when she pointed to Ni as being some of the issue for her. I think that causes more issues that I've given it credit for in the past.

Oh yeah - I also wanted to say that what Tiltyred said really resonated with me. She was talking about the impending death of her mother and working through all of the feelings, foreseeing what life will be like etc etc ahead of time and that by doing so, she will be calm when the very worst happens.

I think this causes a lot of trouble for Ni users at times. Not only are you going through something big alone, but people think you are crazy for feeling something that isn't even happening, yet is very real.

Maybe the last two paragraphs are a bit of a rabbit trail, but I feel like there's something in that thought that borders on the something related to the disconnect we have just experienced. I'm wondering if Ni's preventative/future focus means that we seem overly guarded and closed until we have kind of pre-experienced them (even if only in our minds) and that is a little crazy feeling and frustrating to Ne?

 

[Society]

Exaggerated and overly harsh to be sure but if we are honest with ourselves, there are grains of truth.

yes, and this leads me to a point i feel might be worth making: it is intentionally exaggerated.

the pattern of understanding i observed in my ex, that i found matching the stories the INFPs where telling as well as the stories i got from.. well, honestly a lot of people since i got here, where:

1. before: not asking the thoughtful questions.
2. during: not seen yourself in the action sequence.
3. after: determining reality by self-perceived persona.

i might go into detail later on, its a bit painful to write on but might also be a bit cathartic, even if has no use for anyone else since - given the framing - most people would highly like to distant themselves from the specific behaviors in which these patterns where expressed (as would she, thus the doorslam, but that's besides the point).

now, here's the difficult pill:
1. everyone has lapses of judgement.
2. everyone has reasons for their actions.
3. everyone holds positive beliefs about themselves.

the question is, to what extent do we let this - and our self beliefs in particular - control our understanding of reality? that's what i was looking for, the ability to do those 3 things.

remorse requires:
1. acknowledging you own ignorance.
2. seen your own choice, in spite of your reasons.
3. putting aside a positive belief about yourself.

it doesn't mean you can't do those things without remorse, but remorse provides the strongest evidence that you can. remorse provides for excellent testing grounds for the presence of those 3 abilities, precisely because it is an exaggerated expression of them.

i also don't know if asking for that is "blaming someone for who they are and how they think", i think if that's was the case the plea for stories of remorse would have ended up completely fruitless, and this has clearly not being the case. in some sense, their might be some good accounts here that remorse might be a lot more difficult for INFJs, i am not entirely sure about that or if i understand it, i think trying to frame it as "Fi vs. Fe" thing makes it very confusing for me as the 3rd party TiFe user, but if it is harder, that also increases the value of it when its there.

which is also why, unless i am horribly mistyped (i highly doubt i have any signs of Fi):

I really can’t shake the feeling that OA is projecting some Fi dom proficiency into this that we just don’t have- it isn’t that we ‘aren’t willing’ to give an answer, it’s that we probably can’t.

nope, i don't think that's the case. in fact with xNTPs, remorse on the smaller scale that regards to Fe failures is so frequent that it has become an ongoing joke, the infamous "foot in mouth disease". it does play in a much larger scale though.

i can relate to some extent to the distance affect Tiltyred mentioned, i don't need it, but i experience it when its there, and i can understand how its easier (maybe the line between my tiny Si and shadow Si isn't that big). in my teens there was a time in which Fe was a toy, something i engaged out of curiosity, i was constantly testing to see how people would react to this or that, what happens if you place them in this or that sociological position.. Ti for me is... for a lack of a better word, it's intimate, it's like a sense of touch, and so i felt that i need to poke others from all directions to feel up their boarders, to get a sense of what they are made of. for me, that's.. as [MENTION=5723]Tiltyred[/MENTION] said it.. hiroshima. feels like someone i was in a past life. more so, most other ENTPs i talked too in their mid 20s or older seem to express the same.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ok, so the post ends here, no need to be facing me at the moment, in fact i am going to the bathroom which is right behind you.. *sneaks behind highlander, pulling out a shot of Ti and injecting it to his neck*

My biggest reaction to this thread has been an ongoing confusion as to why the INFJs reacted so strongly to the feedback from a few posters.

"why are we here?" -> what are the different possible drives that can pull someone towards a typology oriented community? what is the most likely answer for the type that is statistically the least likely to know anyone of their own type? in what ways can their functions relate to the way they'd process those reasons (perhaps Fe?), in what ways can those be threatened by what's going on here?

It seems your sense of self is very much tied to this view of yourself – as a positive influence on others. It’s interesting when viewed in relation to the last point. I wonder what would happen if there was another thread that said one of Te user’s weakness is they are incapable of remorse.

in what ways do our functions direct the development of our ego? what will different types of people be more likely to identify themselves as good at and seek esteem in or pride themselves about? to what extent can the functions and function preference/order indicate the way by which we process such pride and the ways by which we are likely to cope and defend it?

to put yourself in their position: how would it feel if instead of something that hindered value judgement, it was a deceleration that Ni-Te hindered competence in planning, or one's capacity to make a rational conclusion, or one's potential for intelligent plans of actions?

i once confronted a specific INTJ that his own lack of openness towards Ne or Ti cognition results, supported by his lack of willingness to explain why he thinks anything that he does so that it can be placed out there and challenged, is akin to someone who will only read political commentators of those who agree with their own view and think the same way they think, or someone who will only read books that say what they already thought. that, in my eyes, makes him... well, dumb. possibly a good computer, undoubtedly broken bad software. it suggests someone who might have the cognition to think of intricate thoughts, but doesn't have the intellectual habits to open them up to discussions, after all, the european age of enlightenment didn't come from lone monks, it came from the coffee house, from the free exchange of ideas, and in devaluing the potential productivity of the process he is shutting himself off from the same exchange, he seeks affirmation rather then feedback and contrast. someone with plainly bad intellectual habits.

now, in his case, i already knew beyond any reasonable doubt that not all INTJs are like that. i am 99% sure my father was an INTJ, as well as my best friend in my highschool 'dork squad' growing up, and neither suffered from anything of the sort. but if that wasn't the case, and then i read the stereotype, and then i came in hearing that other people who encountered INTJs had the same experience and got the same impression, and had a hard time finding the exception, then all my empirical data would have being quite nagging in my mind, and this could have lead to INTJs being on the stand, "hey folks, here's my information so far, please give me contradicting data".

being in the topic of intellectual competence, and you being an NT rather then NF, wouldn't you then find it to more directly conflict with your ego?

 

[Southern Kross]

I go away for 10 days and I come back to all this. Nothing like a INFJ-INFP war to bring in the new year. Forgive me if I'm a little behind.

Just to be clear, I certainly haven't had the same experience with INFJs as some of the other posters but I don't deny the validity of those experiences. I only intend to play the "Harmoniser Clarifier".

I kind of feel like Ni looks at the the data available, looks for patterns or an overall picture emerging (or waits until the patterns develop), then checks it against Ti (which organizes and double checks information) and then if a new structure is necessary, everything gets revamped. Therefore, we'd be very unlikely to make a statement about how things are based purely on our own experience, without checking it with other experiences over the course of a long period of time, or seeing if it holds true for other people. I think that's part of what makes me impatient about the each person sharing their own experience as truth thing - I am inclined to want to point out where it diverges from mine or other's experiences, not to discount it, but to suggest that some restructuring is necessary, because that's what I would want from someone else if they felt that I had missed something important that would skew my data.

I think what you are saying PB is that Fi takes a myriad of other stories to construct the first picture, seeing what resonates as truth with them - maybe a bit like a mosaic? Whereas, we would be more likely to come up with a theoretical model, and then test it for leaks by using other people's information later to either disprove or confirm.

Perhaps also more emphasis is placed with Fi on not assigning validity to any of the stories, but letting the truthometer do that itself (screening happens at that point). I am more likely to only consider those people I consider reliable sources (screening is first rather than later). The flaw I see with my way is that sometimes I discount some things of value because of the source they originated from, and I also tend to be reluctant to discount someone whom I trust, even if their behaviour has changed since I started trusting them.

I don't think for me the family resemblance analogy holds true. Take a real life example: At Christmas time, one person was exclaiming how my nephew looks exactly like my father. Aside from having very different colouring, different facial structure, body type, mannerisms, personalities and interests from my dad, my nephew is the spitting image of his father. He speaks like his dad, walks like him, talks like him and despite disliking him, has very similar mannerisms and interests to him. You couldn't tell that my sister was in any way part of the process of my nephew coming to be! Is it that I don't want to admit that my nephew looks like my dad? Not at all! I just have a hard time considering the other person's perspective as valid, considering the facts at hand.

This is a great explanation and I think it warrants discussion. I totally see what you're getting at. It's the problem with valuing multiple interpretations. People can have a ridiculously inaccurate picture of something, and your rejection of that view is seen as being in denial. INFJs are more inclined to attempt to explain away challenges to their model because if too many flaws appear in the theory a full overhaul will be required, whereas the INFP wants to hear the arguments and counter-arguments to help form the model, then afterwards makes small adjustments as necessary. I think I've seen/used (? - I can't remember) the analogy before of shaping the hole to fit the peg (Fi-Ne) vs. shaping the peg to fit the hole (Ni-Fe). There are pros and cons to both methods but the blind spots of each can cause problems.

I do agree it is important to weigh the importance and reliability of each piece of data. I don't think this is any different with INFPs, except in the direction we approach it from (ie. as in the hole-peg analogy). Example: I hear a lot of movie recommendations from people I know. Some people, no matter how passionate they are about a film, I will never trust their recommendations, because I know that they have crap taste in film we have different tastes in film. On the other hand, I have people whose opinions I have more faith in, and sometimes they'll recommend a film I don't think I'll like. In such cases I often dismiss that opinion and don't watch the film. Later on other people whose taste I also trust might recommend the same film as well and perhaps I read some good reviews and I start to question that dismissal. Even though I still don't see the appeal in the film, sometimes I have to take a leap of faith and watch it anyway. Maybe I'll still not like it but more often than not I do. So there is a degree of selectivity involved. And I suppose what I'm also getting at is how the Si spider web can overcome the incorrect Ne intuition by revealing a pattern I can't deny.

To bring this back on topic, this whole thing is so complicated because it requires taking subjective interpretations that can never really be proven as accurate. We have a problem of intention vs. interpretation too, because both are important.

I have known people that say things I find offensive things and then when I object, they deny they were being so. And this is the sort of thing I imagine [MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION] and [MENTION=15291]Mane[/MENTION] were getting at. There are some people that will deny any wrongdoing for a whole list of reasons, including accusing the other person of being the source of the problem by failing to understand. They will endlessly resist and refuse to accept any degree of blame. It's entirely possible that that person did mean well, but they must also accept the validity of the response to their mode of expression. I've also been that person saying things others misinterpret and know how distressing it can be. You want to explain how they've got it wrong but there's a point where the content and the objective become irrelevant and the effect takes precedence. I have had this problem with Ni-users in the past (again I don't know enough INFJs to speak about them), where they refuse to admit a problem exists, let alone express regret over contributing it. They continually argue that it's misinterpretation. To them it seems, admitting blame (in hurting the other person) is tantamount to admitting to having negative intentions in the first place. The added problem is when the Ni-user persists in explaining him/herself but the other person hears only justification and takes offence at the continued lack of remorse. What the Ni user doesn't realise is the other person doesn't care about whether it was a miscommunication or not, because the offence exists regardless. This is where I think "remorse" might not entirely get at the point. It is a failure to recognise wrongdoing altogether and this is what is most frustrating. Perhaps this particularly aggravates a INFP because it offends their very sense of justice and truth. It would be easier to come to terms with someone does wrong and knows it, yet doesn't care, than someone who continually denies wrongdoing and insists people misunderstand them. I certainly find such people extremely aggravating and in turn become more insistent that they see they're wrong. I just can't let the issue go until I feel some degree of validation of my 'truth'. Of course this then escalates out of control until we're both incredibly enraged and bitterly dissatisfied.

I wouldn't go so far as to say Ni-users never admit guilt, or even that most fail to, but some can be so unbearably stubborn in this regard.

I'm not sure I can say any more on the 'List', other than my earlier posts where I tried to explain why the list approach didn't make sense to me. But to address what you just mentioned here, I think you raise another element that struck me the wrong way; namely, that OA and Mane both came in for highly personal reasons, to try to change their own perceptions of infj's. So given their desire to be 'proven wrong', it wasn't really impersonal/theoretical, imo, because they had specific things they were seeking, and specific 'stories' they wanted to hear. So it didn't seem to be about understanding us, really, it was about them wanting to change their perspective on infj's.

And generally how my mind works... I'm not of a 'prove me wrong' mentality, ever. It's just not how I approach things. So when I'm asked to do that, my initial reaction is.... why? It's not on me to convince you to like me or understand me. Turning it around, with any of my friends, in any of my relationships, I don't ask people to prove something, to convince me, to change my thinking... I don't think that's fair. I let people be who they are, I ask questions to better understand if I'm confused or need more data, and if who they are isn't something in the end I'm ok with, then that's that. I don't ask for them to change, and don't want them to change just because of me.

So the approach is just different. Foreign/confusing to me.

Gotta sign off for a while... other things to do!!

I don't know that it's exactly a "prove me wrong" mentality, at least not with INFPs. With things like this, we expect the reality to be at least slightly different from the picture formed by our limited experience (at least with healthy INFPs). That's why we seek more perspectives. It's like a lump of clay that comes to us relatively formless and after several rounds of moulding it (by ourselves and others) we start to get a sense of what shape it seems to be taking on. But we expect that there will be many more alterations to come and perhaps the speculation will not be very accurate. OA was saying that she was making a guess about that reality based on the vague shape starting to emerge to her. She didn't necessarily believe that to be the whole truth and was prepared to see it take a slightly different form after what others say here. She was inviting you to take part in shaping it in order for her to get a more rounded view.

I can't speak for Mane and the Ti approach, though.

 

[Starry]

She was inviting you to take part in shaping it in order for her to get a more rounded view.

^^I do not believe the above is actually occurring do you?? [MENTION=5999]PeaceBaby[/MENTION] ?

I mean, I believe OA is interested in the INFJ response to her list (she's asked for it enough times). But an invitation to some sort of collaborative effort? That's laughable. I've only ever seen 'Any INFJs want to cop to this?' Come on now. Here is OA's message in a nutshell:

1.) INFJs are not Gods they actually kinda suck - here's why
2.) INFPs are superior
3.) I'm special

I'm not saying the list doesn't have what highlander referred to as 'grains of truth'. But we are never going to be able to discuss it if we keep pretending OA is one of the 'excessively humble'. I'm just trying to put an end to the 'white noise' here - that's all.

 

[Tiltyred]

(comment deleted, on second thought)

 

[Glycerine]

^^I do not believe the above is actually occurring do you?? [MENTION=5999]PeaceBaby[/MENTION] ?

I mean, I believe OA is interested in the INFJ response to her list (she's asked for it enough times). But an invitation to some sort of collaborative effort? That's laughable. I've only ever seen 'Any INFJs want to cop to this?' Come on now. Here is OA's message in a nutshell:

1.) INFJs are not Gods they actually kinda suck - here's why
2.) INFPs are superior
3.) I'm special

I'm not saying the list doesn't have what highlander referred to as 'grains of truth'. But we are never going to be able to discuss it if we keep pretending OA is one of the 'excessively humble'. I'm just trying to put an end to the 'white noise' here - that's all.

I honestly could see much of what OA was saying in a theoretical sense... not that it necessary applied to whole group.

But the whole "INFJs aren't remorseful... tell us your stories" tangent in this thread was seriously manipulative BS under the facade of true understanding and theoretical hogwash. From what I could see it seemed like a major guilt trip and then asking random strangers to be emotionally vulnerable and open. When the personal gets injected, it stops being impersonal theoretical analysis.

 

[Standuble]

(comment deleted, on second thought)

Interesting to see that NJs feel the need to have second thoughts.

As for the rest of you: Are you sure you're not all Si-doms? Get over this conversation. It's the same few points being repeated repeated continuously or begin hostilities immediately. INFJ's suck, INFPs are superior to INFJ (though that's not saying much at all!) and we are special....though dare I say it's closer to special ed at times. How many INFPs have wondered at one point in their lives whether they may be mentally retarded? I know I have!

The repetition is trolling my cerebral cortex. So get on with blowing each other away. Let the two mentally deranged N types wipe each other out, there is something seriously wrong with INFJs and sadly INFPs are fucked up too.

 

[sorenx7]

^^I do not believe the above is actually occurring do you?? [MENTION=5999]PeaceBaby[/MENTION] ?

I mean, I believe OA is interested in the INFJ response to her list (she's asked for it enough times). But an invitation to some sort of collaborative effort? That's laughable. I've only ever seen 'Any INFJs want to cop to this?' Come on now. Here is OA's message in a nutshell:

1.) INFJs are not Gods they actually kinda suck - here's why
2.) INFPs are superior
3.) I'm special

I'm not saying the list doesn't have what highlander referred to as 'grains of truth'. But we are never going to be able to discuss it if we keep pretending OA is one of the 'excessively humble'. I'm just trying to put an end to the 'white noise' here - that's all.

What do you know of humility? Seriously, I have an ENFJ friend who knows a lot about humility, probably a lot more than I do. I know much less about ENFP behavior, though. Are ENFPs known for being humble and in a position to detect whether or not someone is humble? I do, however, see what looks like humility in OA.

 

[sorenx7]

Interesting to see that NJs feel the need to have second thoughts.

As for the rest of you: Are you sure you're not all Si-doms? Get over this conversation. It's the same few points being repeated repeated continuously or begin hostilities immediately. INFJ's suck, INFPs are superior to INFJ (though that's not saying much at all!) and we are special....though dare I say it's closer to special ed at times. How many INFPs have wondered at one point in their lives whether they may be mentally retarded? I know I have!

The repetition is trolling my cerebral cortex. So get on with blowing each other away. Let the two mentally deranged N types wipe each other out, there is something seriously wrong with INFJs and sadly INFPs are fucked up too.

Sadly, I have to agree with most of this. I'd also add that this thread has become more tedious than reading Hegel and that I was a fool for not leaving when I said I would.

 

[Standuble]

Sadly, I have to agree with most of this. I'd also add that this thread has become more tedious than reading Hegel and that I was a fool for not leaving when I said I would.

I just leave, get on with my life and return every couple of days and throw a few grenades. More fun that way.

 

[PeaceBaby]

^ what just happened here? Naughty INFP's, off to the corner with you on a time out!



-----

There's so much added to the thread I can't take it all in atm. [MENTION=7842]Z Buck McFate[/MENTION], [MENTION=7111]fidelia[/MENTION], [MENTION=1206]cascadeco[/MENTION], [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION], [MENTION=5723]Tiltyred[/MENTION] - thanks for all that, but it will take me time to process and deliver a cogent response.

Maybe a response isn't really even needed, just an acknowledgement.

@ all the INFJ's - I hear what you're saying about what's a helpful approach. Thanks for sharing all of that. Maybe that's really the bottom line. To get the result we INFP's want, we need to play in your sandbox. In choosing not to do so, asking you to our sandbox, we do take on the risk of not being able to play with you at all. So, if we care about that, it's something to keep in mind. And I don't want to throw sand in your eyes. That's not enjoyable for anybody. If you're not having fun with me in my sandbox, it's a strong indication that the message really, truly is in a blind spot for you.

I'm not saying that to be provocative at all, just pragmatic. To really explore whether we can play together in the Fi playground was a great premise to check out though.

I do appreciate that to you it's the "white noise" you need to tune out. And I appreciate all the INFJ's who really, really do try to hear, to understand. I know that you are trying, and I know it's because you do care. After all, ultimately I realize that what I need you to do is tantamount to asking you not to be wired the way you are.

So thanks again for a great thought-provoking, awe-inspiring thread.

-----

^^I do not believe the above is actually occurring do you?? [MENTION=5999]PeaceBaby[/MENTION] ?

I mean, I believe OA is interested in the INFJ response to her list (she's asked for it enough times). But an invitation to some sort of collaborative effort? That's laughable. I've only ever seen 'Any INFJs want to cop to this?' Come on now. Here is OA's message in a nutshell:

1.) INFJs are not Gods they actually kinda suck - here's why
2.) INFPs are superior
3.) I'm special

I'm not saying the list doesn't have what highlander referred to as 'grains of truth'. But we are never going to be able to discuss it if we keep pretending OA is one of the 'excessively humble'. I'm just trying to put an end to the 'white noise' here - that's all.

OA and I do tend to differ in approach - I would say she's more abrasive (and she would say I'm more milquetoast, to use an equally undesirable word). But I can totally relate to her need to be unvarnished, as I share that. I've poked around the edges sharing my "Fi truth" here in the past and it wasn't met with as much success as I would have hoped for either. So, I am not going to condemn her attempt.

To answer the question, no, she's not "excessively humble" in this thread. She can sound nasty at times. I don't see that "nastiness" directed towards any individuals though. So, I see her saying #1 in thread, yes. But #2 and #3, no.

I do admire the risks she takes though ... it's not easy.

 

[Standuble]

^ what just happened here? Naughty INFP's, off to the corner with you on a time out!



-----

There's so much added to the thread I can't take it all in atm. [MENTION=7842]Z Buck McFate[/MENTION], [MENTION=7111]fidelia[/MENTION], [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION], [MENTION=5723]Tiltyred[/MENTION] - thanks for all that, but it will take me time to process and deliver a cogent response.

Maybe a response isn't really even needed, just an acknowledgement.

@ all the INFJ's - I hear what you're saying about what's a helpful approach. Thanks for sharing all of that. Maybe that's really the bottom line. To get the result we INFP's want, we need to play in your sandbox. In choosing not to do so, asking you to our sandbox, we do take on the risk of not being able to play with you at all. So, if we care about that, it's something to keep in mind. And I don't want to throw sand in your eyes. That's not enjoyable for anybody. If you're not having fun with me in my sandbox, it's a strong indication that the message really, truly is in a blind spot for you.

I'm not saying that to be provocative at all, just pragmatic. To really explore whether we can play together in the Fi playground was a great premise to check out though.

I do appreciate that to you it's the "white noise" you need to tune out. And I appreciate all the INFJ's who really, really do try to hear, to understand. I know that you are trying, and I know it's because you do care. After all, ultimately I realize that what I need you to do is tantamount to asking you not to be wired the way you are.

So thanks again for a great thought-provoking, awe-inspiring thread.

-----



OA and I do tend to differ in approach - I would say she's more abrasive (and she would say I'm more milquetoast, to use an equally undesirable word). But I can totally relate to her need to be unvarnished, as I share that. I've poked around the edges sharing my "Fi truth" here in the past and it wasn't met with as much success as I would have hoped for either. So, I am not going to condemn her attempt.

To answer the question, no, she's not "excessively humble" in this thread. She can sound nasty at times. I don't see that "nastiness" directed towards any individuals though. So, I see her saying #1 in thread, yes. But #2 and #3, no.

I do admire the risks she takes though ... it's not easy.

She single handedly took on a legion of INFJ and didn't just live to tell the tale but ended up practically coming out on top. Truly admirable, I wish I had her patience and her technique.

I have two questions for you: 1) Who defines what is a helpful approach or not? Does it not depend on situation, circumstance and participant? 2) Is playing in the INFJ's sandbox really what INFP's want? It's not what I want, I feel I understand the theory of how NiFe works from pure study and that their individual facets are not my concern. I do empathise with them but to only a degree and no further than that, understanding them on a personal level has no place in my values at all. My message to INFJs: Just make yourselves useful in creating innovative systems which are accurate and implementable in the real world (if you can) and allow others to implement it if they see the need for it. But some of the ideas and action plans I have seen online INFJs suggest have been terrible IMO (one was built fanatically around moral objectivism and many others have echoes of the same outlook.) Seeing patterns which do not have to be true in only the incoming data you take notice of + auxilary Fe understanding of ethical systems + indefinately out of touch in regards not just how the world works but the subtle nuances of an individual's ethics = The INFJ. This is the INFJ's gift to the world and it is a gift I am very likely to find myself returning to the shop.

Unless you had a different meaning by "playing in a sandbox" than what I determined, I am pretty tired.

 

[PeaceBaby]

Thanks for your questions.

1) Who defines what is a helpful approach or not? Does it not depend on situation, circumstance and participant?

Highly subjective. Yes, it does rely on a variety of factors.

2) Is playing in the INFJ's sandbox really what INFP's want?

That is the question, isn't it?

 

[the state i am in]

i think infps have a much stronger sense of core self. and they're more willing to take responsibility for this core self. sometimes. other times, they love being wrong. their way of acting out is to stay with a core self that even they deem illogical, contradictory, and wrong. sometimes they want to flaunt it, feeling like everyone is against them (i have observed this with 4w5 in particular/ 9w1s use denial more). an infp 4w5 friend of mine does this oscillation sometimes. he shifts between being the most accepting person i know and the least accepting. in knowingly, self-consciously absurd ways. i'm sure there's a corollary for nfj (i think most in typological circles would say that it's usually more pronounced with enfj than infj in part because of the increasing F reliance of Fe dom. like how, when i started here, enfjs were absurdly demonized and treated like they were only the worst of their type in nearly all circumstances because people couldn't deal with or accept the blindspots and negative behaviors that would be part of that range of motion. kind of like how we now demonize S, which is more of a way of relating than an inherently valid critique). infjs tend to be annoyingly precious more than they tend to be domineering. they tend to recede from rather than jump into conflict. F doms have more oomph in this regard (although less so for self-preservational types).

F in general, Fe or Fi, at times loses its continuity and makes strange, abrupt judgments. when we dig in our heels. with Fi, it's i get to be myself no matter the consequences for others. for Fe, it's more whether or not i get to use the expectations (the way we represent things) for my own benefit or not (this notion of the ideas of self that we can attach to and perform and persuade others are the proper representations for what we are within a particular social context). the Fi way can be selfish just like the Fe way can be selfish. they both BEGIN from selfishness. and the only way that changes is development, self-improvement, and realizing the limitations of both methods.

the way southern kross reads oa is so interesting to me. it makes me think within the infp perspective maybe there is something valid to what oa is trying to do. when from other perspectives (tho certainly not all), when from what i deem a broader view of the place of Fi within the scheme of things, it seems hypocritical and contradictory and very baiting (even if there is a way of empathizing with what she's trying to do, when she's also trying to argue that others are unjust for not recognizing the effects on herself and others when she does not seem to find that balance for her actions within this thread). being baiting, however, is very difficult to avoid for me personally, so i can sympathize to some degree. along with having a sometimes narrow view and attaching to a story that has not grasped the story for others (the so perspective) very clearly. it's at these times that it becomes especially noticeable--that we all have presuppositions consciously recognized or not that we employ when we say anything that usually puts our own ways of constructing things in a kind of privileged position. Pe equating itself with "reality" is one of those things. it just means observability. and it's still littered with unreflexive Je. it always is. as soon as you speak it. just like Je is always littered with unreflexive Pe, with details of experiences that have been squashed and ignored in the process of guessing what things are (the process of preparing a message about something that will be intelligible for others to get the gist in the best way. the rhetoric of it all). meanwhile, it can be fucking irritating for Fi types when Fe starts responding to imaginary juries. because dammit, this has affected ME. whether the jury agrees or not. that she wanted to jump in and get some Te work done to establish this and improve upon it is understandable, but it led to a lot of assumptions that showed a lack of listening as well. this is the F trap we all get stuck in, regardless of the underlying politics of socio-cognitive type. but is a very useful point to make to help infjs see what it's like for an infp, when we make our own brand of the same genre of mistake.

moreover, the perhaps all-encompassing Pe that we are accused of lacking often doesn't seem to be working extremely well at getting where we are coming from either. it's not observing us very well. and so it's speed at writing explanations doesn't really matter if it doesn't listen to us. because if it is observing us well, and it's just choosing an approach that seems like it's made to fuck with us, what do we do about that? because it's choosing to do something to us against our will. because if it's aware that this feels like an attack to us and chooses to proceed, it's still potentially useful to us but in a way that does not inspire a desire to share or collaborate or HELP each other that is negotiable and straightforward/sincere. that's the weird paradox we feel when we are accused in the way we have been. maybe it is just an issue of miscommunicating the domains in which we think we have observed something worth testing for generalizable validity. making a kind of knowledge claim that is meant to imply a different status than it sounds like on the page to us. but that's why if oa had just told a specific story and allowed us to posit hypothetical explanations loosely based on type, it would have been much less egregious than making a "just the facts" objective impersonal claim that was loaded with presupposition and pejorative judgment about a general category rather than individuals she had concretely experienced (a community rather than an individual or even a specific behavior, when an experience or set of experiences with an individual from a particular perspective is STILL not enough to define the totality of that person). or even, "i've had some issues with these behaviors, do they relate to you as infjs? could you see yourself running into problems with them?" so much different than how she approached it.

 

[the state i am in]

@ all the INFJ's - I hear what you're saying about what's a helpful approach. Thanks for sharing all of that. Maybe that's really the bottom line. To get the result we INFP's want, we need to play in your sandbox. In choosing not to do so, asking you to our sandbox, we do take on the risk of not being able to play with you at all. So, if we care about that, it's something to keep in mind. And I don't want to throw sand in your eyes. That's not enjoyable for anybody. If you're not having fun with me in my sandbox, it's a strong indication that the message really, truly is in a blind spot for you.

I'm not saying that to be provocative at all, just pragmatic. To really explore whether we can play together in the Fi playground was a great premise to check out though.

I do appreciate that to you it's the "white noise" you need to tune out. And I appreciate all the INFJ's who really, really do try to hear, to understand. I know that you are trying, and I know it's because you do care. After all, ultimately I realize that what I need you to do is tantamount to asking you not to be wired the way you are.

well, it seems like we're negotiating the pragmatics but also the sense of justice at the same time. we're calling behaviors the "Fi playground" and it's difficult to see why you see this as the Fi way rather than as a negative behavior. this is the crux, right? going back and forth between the cases made against infj or against infp? that we both think the other side has behaved unjustly, and we're deciding whether we can find that acceptable as a "typological difference" or whether we can actually build a consensus that allows us to not only validate the other's perspective but also compromise, to find conditions that we both can find mutually acceptable in a way that feels balanced to both parties.

what are the rules of the Fi playground? do you agree that oa's description was lacking neutrality and adding negative value judgments while purporting to be "just the facts?" is that required for the Fi playground to be authentic? is it because that's what is already there and it's simply too difficult to sound out the feeling without these presuppositions? is there a timing to this process that we are not respecting? can we find a common language to critique not the experience of the other but the expression of it, not as a way to invalidate it but to simply TEST it, to allow ourselves to see how it stands up? does Fi just not have the generalizable sensitivity that Fe has, just like Fe might miss out on the particular aspects of another person's story, where they're coming from, that makes it unfair to focus on the generalizability issues of their articulation when their experience, empathetically speaking, makes sense and would be presumptuous to judge when it has its own conditions and factors that we haven't even begun to explore when we, even if just passively, control how things are said/enacted?

OA and I do tend to differ in approach - I would say she's more abrasive (and she would say I'm more milquetoast, to use an equally undesirable word). But I can totally relate to her need to be unvarnished, as I share that. I've poked around the edges sharing my "Fi truth" here in the past and it wasn't met with as much success as I would have hoped for either. So, I am not going to condemn her attempt.

I do admire the risks she takes though ... it's not easy.

what is the admirability of this to you (from an Fi perspective)? going against social norms? against a community's expectations? what is this unvarnished truth that you see? do you see how it is blind in many ways as well? are you trying to communicate to us a particular way in which we are blind that you still feel we do not see? is that communication process itself composed of blindspots that neither of us can see very clearly? does trust not matter in this regard? and is there any reason we shouldn't be able to establish some trust and sense of shared value in what we're trying to do?

maybe there is, but i don't see it.

for what it's worth, i ask these questions for the sake of negotiation. i do feel like i found multiple take-away points from oa's sequence of posts. i feel like we've struggled to identify what behaviors are changeable (we can improve upon) and what we identify with us our core selves. which has made finding a sense of apology difficult. hopefully, the desire for it evaporates when we learn to see the other side a bit more clearly. which probably also has to do with balancing our sense of our own value against the good/bad ramifications we have when in relationship with other ways/functions.

She single handedly took on a legion of INFJ and didn't just live to tell the tale but ended up practically coming out on top. Truly admirable, I wish I had her patience and her technique.

I have two questions for you: 1) Who defines what is a helpful approach or not? Does it not depend on situation, circumstance and participant? 2) Is playing in the INFJ's sandbox really what INFP's want?

is there any sandbox that you find acceptable? what makes a sandbox acceptable to you? with infjs, do you feel judged? untrusting? what defines your actual experience with infjs as you relate to it? i find your posts funny in a kind of ironic, self-conscious showmanship way, but i struggle to see what you actually want. i see this as an e4 issue i relate to, but i just don't know how can anyone do better if you hide the effects that they have upon you. to me much of this feels like an underlying e4 rejection issue that BOTH SIDES have demonstrated in this thread.


i wonder if adding intjs and perhaps a few more enfps would help provide more context to see how the functional and egoic differentiation really overlap. perhaps we just have such strict notions of rights and responsibilities that we miss how we relate to each other in the big picture. we get caught up in a way of registering value rather than in recognizing what we can contribute to value questions that are beyond what we think they are. or perhaps it's the balancing between the big picture and the immediate details that is exactly the problem.