being willing to being wrong

[EJCC]

In a Te-style organization, it is not uncommon for low-level workers to make factual observations about what works and what doesn't, and the higher-ups saying, "Yeah, that makes sense. Let's upgrade our processes like you suggested." And it isn't about trying to make the low-level workers feel better, it's that a good idea (in Te land) is a good idea, no matter the source. It isn't judged based on who says it, but on whether it stands on its own merits.

My office is almost entirely TJ, with one or two FJs, and it is JUST like this. Before that, I primarily worked with Fe-users, so it was simultaneously a shock and a breath of fresh air when I realized just how Te-dominated my new work environment was. The style you describe in this quote fit me like a glove.

I believe this is what I meant with this: I have noticed that generally TJs can be impervious to this in each other, and it all probably doesn't look like that to them- but (as someone who doesn’t experience ‘the attachment to being right’ that particular way, and so I can’t easily empathize*) it’s definitely there. When I say "it's definitely there"- I'm talking about the consequences, not the intentions. I believe more often than not there probably aren't intentions to "steamroll" per se.

It seems to me like we’re just talking past each other at this point, totally missing what the other is trying to say. I can't even tell you how uninterested I am in getting into a "which type is more mindful of imposing their own priorities on others" conversation. So I’d just as soon drop it.

I have this Te/Fe communication issue all the time:

Person: "When you do this, it's perceived as ___"
Me: "Well what I was TRYING to do was ____"
Person: "Not what I meant. I meant, when you do this, it's PERCEIVED as ____"
Me: "But that's not what I was doing! I was doing ____"
Person: "Stop making excuses!" and/or "Whatever, let's drop it."

Problem is, it's hard for me personally to see a comment like "I perceived this as being (insert incorrect assumption here)" and NOT take it as "I had an incorrect assumption that I still believe and thus needs to be corrected -- that incorrect assumption was frustrating me and I would feel much better with some resolution and closure". Not saying that Coriolis or Uumlau were coming from this position (they probably weren't), and not trying to turn this into a "why do Fe users act like this to me" thread.

In short, it seems to me like you're description is a 'best case scenario' of Te. In theory, I totally get what you're saying. [And I am feeling like a hypocrite right now, because I think I actually often do this exact thing with Fe- I'll argue 'best case scenario' of how it works because it'll seem like describing what goes wrong with it is a bad way to define it.] But in practice, I find it too difficult to believe that all Te dom/aux are truly about "my facts 'beat' your facts" without some irrational element/attachment occasionally interfering.

Maybe I'm misconstruing/misinterpreting/misunderstanding/mis-whatever-else... but I'm having a hard time not reading, in this quote and the rest of your post, a tendency towards thinking "unhealthy Te-dom/aux e8 is the norm, and healthy Te-dom/aux is a 'best case scenario' and not the norm". In which case, there wouldn't be much way to refute you? Not for me, anyway, as an e1. But I'll share my thoughts on this and see if they complement the Te-aux input this thread has had so far:

One way that I don't relate to the above post, or some of the things that Uumlau posted earlier in the thread, is that my need to be right is probably as much internal as external, and has very little to do with control. It has to do with control in the sense that, as a Te-dom, I do want to use the information at my disposal to exert my will upon the environment -- I want to use it as ammunition in my fight to achieve my goals -- but control is a means to an end, not an end in itself, and it's not all for the sake of "image". I can't count the number of times when I've been embarrassed by a factual error that no one noticed I made. I wasn't embarrassed because other people saw -- I was embarrassed because I didn't measure up to my internal standards. Generally speaking, based on what I've read in this thread thus far, it doesn't sound like my embarrassment could possibly measure up to INFJ embarrassment in similar situations, though, and it would never deter me from continuing to act. Like uumlau and other Te-users have been saying, it is all about learning, and once the feelings of the moment pass, you have to think "Now I know that was wrong; time to find what's right. Moving on."

As for "my facts beat your facts": I've compared this elsewhere on the forum to a puzzle with similar pieces and little to no way of knowing what the final picture will look like. (This may be specific to Te/Ne.) Let's say someone points out a flaw in one of the puzzle pieces I've laid down -- a dent, a problem with the color -- and then they hand me a new piece that ALSO fits but looks much better than the previous piece. Maybe I get a bit upset for the reasons mentioned above. Maybe I feel a bit jealous that the person clearly knows better than me. But if the person is friendly, 99% of my reaction is "Oh sweet, a better piece! Thanks for your help!" In that sense, all us Te-doms/auxes, in theory, are out to have the best information we can, and when we work together to achieve that goal, it DOES involve competing facts. Which shouldn't matter if/when our egos are put aside.

 

[uumlau]

I have this Te/Fe communication issue all the time:

Person: "When you do this, it's perceived as ___"
Me: "Well what I was TRYING to do was ____"
Person: "Not what I meant. I meant, when you do this, it's PERCEIVED as ____"
Me: "But that's not what I was doing! I was doing ____"
Person: "Stop making excuses!" and/or "Whatever, let's drop it."

This reminds me of a real work situation, in an Fe-ish work environment. This was back in the old days, and the company was using Novell Netware. It had crashed, and so I went into the computer room and started the process to restore from backup. I then went back to my office to work on other projects.

My supervisor said, "<uumlau>, you need to be in the computer room."

"The restore from backup is running. When it's done, everything will be working."

"I know. But you still need to be in the computer room."

"The restore job is running. It doesn't run any faster if I'm in there. That'd be like pushing buttons in an elevator, pretending that it makes it go faster."

"I know, but you STILL need to be in the computer room."

"Why?"

"Because everyone is wondering why you aren't working on the problem."

"I AM working on the problem. It'll be done in an hour or so."

"I know. But you need to be in the computer room."

"That makes no sense to me."

"I know, but you still need to be in the computer room, otherwise people will think you aren't working on the problem."

"In other words, I need to sit in the computer room, wasting my time LOOKING like I'm working really hard, when I could be in here, accomplishing more than one thing at a time, because I can work on THIS project, AND restore the system from backup at the same time."

"Yes, that is pretty much what it amounts to."

"So you want me to waste my time in the computer room."

"Yes. If you aren't in the computer room, people won't think you're working to fix the problem."

Thus the problem wasn't that I wasn't doing my job, but that I was PERCEIVED as not doing my job.

You Fe types out there, if you cannot see how absurd this is, please let me know why the above makes sense to you.

(There was also a strong Si element, too, in that office, so it might not just be Fe. I'm putting this up for feedback, based on my personal impressions, not to denigrate any particular type.)

 

[Werebudgie]

This reminds me of a real work situation, in an Fe-ish work environment. This was back in the old days, and the company was using Novell Netware. It had crashed, and so I went into the computer room and started the process to restore from backup. I then went back to my office to work on other projects.

My supervisor said, "<uumlau>, you need to be in the computer room."

"The restore from backup is running. When it's done, everything will be working."

"I know. But you still need to be in the computer room."

"The restore job is running. It doesn't run any faster if I'm in there. That'd be like pushing buttons in an elevator, pretending that it makes it go faster."

"I know, but you STILL need to be in the computer room."

"Why?"

"Because everyone is wondering why you aren't working on the problem."

"I AM working on the problem. It'll be done in an hour or so."

"I know. But you need to be in the computer room."

"That makes no sense to me."

"I know, but you still need to be in the computer room, otherwise people will think you aren't working on the problem."

"In other words, I need to sit in the computer room, wasting my time LOOKING like I'm working really hard, when I could be in here, accomplishing more than one thing at a time, because I can work on THIS project, AND restore the system from backup at the same time."

"Yes, that is pretty much what it amounts to."

"So you want me to waste my time in the computer room."

"Yes. If you aren't in the computer room, people won't think you're working to fix the problem."

Thus the problem wasn't that I wasn't doing my job, but that I was PERCEIVED as not doing my job.

You Fe types out there, if you cannot see how absurd this is, please let me know why the above makes sense to you.

(There was also a strong Si element, too, in that office, so it might not just be Fe. I'm putting this up for feedback, based on my personal impressions, not to denigrate any particular type.)

For me (INFJ, speaking only for myself here) Fe-aux does include an awareness of any collective context I'm in. In a workplace, this would include the organizational culture. I'm assuming for the purposes of this reply that the direction from your supervisor came from real aspects of the organizational culture. In a situation like the one you describe, I would be aware that at least some part of the organizational culture in that workplace valued the perceived appearance of doing work over actually doing it. I would likely "understand" that what your supervisor was describing to you was part of the cultural environment in this workplace.

However. For me, this understanding would only relate to how I could move within that context. Perceived appearance over substance makes me really viscerally uncomfortable - probably because I viscerally experience stuff like that as deceptive. There would be a lot of initially vague internal struggle in me about how to deal with that part of the culture in my own choices and actions. Could I adapt and be okay? If so, how? If not, then what? If the cultural thread of appearance over substance was strong enough, I would quite likely have to leave that workplace at some point - because I couldn't simply ignore the culture, but it would make being in that environment increasingly unpleasant for me in ways that eventually I wouldn't be able to push aside (sometimes such unpleasantness of experience even shows up in my physical body).

I would not seriously advise anyone else to adapt to that culture as you were advised to do. It would be hard enough (if not eventually impossible) for me to adapt to it. I might have one or more conversations about it with others in the work environment. But if I did, it would be a carefully critical conversation - possibly joking, possibly more serious, but in any case critical at some level.

I have to say, even reading your description of that conversation made me want to have nothing to do with that particular workplace. I really seriously don't enjoy environments where perceived appearance is more important than getting the actual work done.

eta: But now I'm also thinking - you know, there's also an alternative explanation for what your supervisor told you. Maybe it's not about perceived appearance over substance in that environment. Maybe there was some sort of collective lack of trust in general or in people who did your kind of work in particular. Such lack of trust could have roots in past experiences or simply a general distrust in technology (for example). In that case, the problem would simply be lack of information about what was going on, and it seems like putting up a sign saying that the computer was running a restore from backup and if all went as planned would be finished and problem solved around [insert time], and signing your name, could allay concerns. (And yes, if I had been in that environment for enough time, I would quite likely know about such a collective lack of trust, given how Fe-aux attends to the dynamics of the collective environment).

 

[Z Buck McFate]

Okay, it sounds to me like I am triggering frustration with having other people criticize you for simply being TJs. Or perhaps more specifically, maybe I'm triggering frustration with having FJs criticize you for simply being TJs. I TOTALLY understand how agitating it is to have someone explain to you over and over again how irritating/wrong you are for being who you are/not being more like them, and to have lots of petty presuppositions expressed about your behavior (which are so off…..it boggles the mind). And I know how presuppositions expressed can actually serve to consistently affirm the extent to which the person is blatantly incorrect in their assumptions. You’re right, it is truly offensive. Probably especially as an e5, I have remarkable little patience myself for people imposing this kind of drama on me.

It seems to me like I am having the difference between FJ and TJ explained to me though, and I already know there’s a difference. For whatever reason, it must be coming across like I’m not aware of this difference? It’s not that I don’t understand there’s a difference. It’s that *sometimes* it seems clear there’s some irrational core fueling the belief in the ‘facts’: it may very well look like “my fact ‘beats’ your fact” to the person doing it, but on the outside it looks more like “I NEED my facts to ‘beat’ your facts to feel <whatever, I’m not going to presume to know, outside of thinking it looks like an unconscious need>”.

I remember saying this once before in a way that didn’t seem to poke so many nerves, so I’ll just repost it here:

This is how I regard it as well. I buy into the theory that people tend to either prioritize a subjective judgment of T or F (for lack of a better way to say it: they either need things to logistically stack up cleanly and make sense or to…..’feel right’?)- and this is happening whether there’s an effort to ‘develop’ that particular ‘cognitive function’ or not. When a person makes an effort to be aware/conscious of this process (conceptualizing its impact), then they can be aware of why they believe what they believe, and it becomes easier to recognize when we are wrong. eta: it seems more fitting to me to say 'develop awareness of' (or 'integrate conscious awareness of') than to say 'develop' or 'integrate'. (Though that may be nitpicking.)

For example, with NFJs I’ve known- I’ve seen a tendency to jump to conclusions about the meaning of another person’s actions or words. Stories (explanations of ‘why) sort of instantly unzip in our heads for why other people do or say what they say or do- and it takes conscious effort to realize we aren’t actually seeing why *they* said or did it….we’re seeing why *we* would say or do it (iow: what it would mean if we said or did it ourselves). The benefit of pulling Ti ‘out of the shadows’ for NFJs is we can be aware that the way we make sense of the world isn’t necessarily because what we’re gleaming is the irrefutable truth about other people so much as it’s the truth about what it would mean if we were the ones saying or doing it. The less in touch an FJ is with the extent to which the way Ti ‘makes sense’ of others’ behavior according to our own limited experience of the world, the more we impulsively believe the first story (or ‘apparent causation’) that pops into our head is ‘clearly’ the truth.

It seems to me- as an observer- like what TJs have to gain from pulling Fi ‘out of the shadows’ is realizing the influence Fi has over ‘what seems right/correct’. I’ve noticed some NTJs can actually get very emo in defending their position- wholly believing they’re being ‘objective’, when to anyone witnessing their reaction/behavior, their position seems anything but ‘objective’. They can be unreasonable and impulsively argue their position is right in the face of contrary evidence- it’s like there’s some irrational subjective core holding their position firmly in place which is apparent to everyone but themselves and any/all other positions are ‘offensive’ to them by virtue of simply being different. The less a TJ realizes there’s some irrational core attaching them to ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ (or ‘correct’ and ‘incorrect’?), the more they’ll be senselessly and impulsively ‘offended’ by anyone else having a different point of view? [Again- this is just what it looks like to me as an observer of it.]

My point being, the inferior function is there whether it gets ‘developed’ or not- but making oneself aware of how it informs our judgment opens up possibilities that we wouldn’t otherwise investigate because we’d just impulsively assume the initial impression is correct.

That^ is what I’m talking about with my spiel about how sometimes it really seems like TJs experience (just like everyone else) the irrational human ‘state of being’ of wanting to ‘be right’ (not for the sake of learning, but from the unconscious need to ‘be right’). Am I saying I think this is a noticeable problem for every single TJ? Not by a long shot. I’m simply saying I’m pretty sure I’ve seen this particular kind of human frailty exist in TJs.

Maybe I’m not adding “appears to me, as an observer” enough. Maybe there’s too much FJ flavor to my discourse, making it sound like I think you experience something FJ.

Maybe I'm misconstruing/misinterpreting/misunderstanding/mis-whatever-else... but I'm having a hard time not reading, in this quote and the rest of your post, a tendency towards thinking "unhealthy Te-dom/aux e8 is the norm, and healthy Te-dom/aux is a 'best case scenario' and not the norm".

What’s funny about this is that I totally understand- that’s how Fe comments often come across to me too (and it’s annoying). It was not my intention (in the least) to imply TJs do this ‘more’ than most people. It’s something I find frustrating to deal with- and I have noticed, in this forum, people tend to state things about a type that frustrate them in a way that suggests it’s something that afflicts the entire type (e.g. “FPs do ___”). [And that’s when the magic happens.] I think it’s the squeaky wheels that set the annoying stereotype- not the common representative, imo- where mbti is concerned.

You’re right though, that could have been phrased better. I do think there are quite a few TJs who are ‘best case scenario’….I didn’t mean it to sound like it was some ideal that most TJs only aspire to. I’m not trying to make it sound like I think all TJs have one foot on ‘being right’ issues and the other foot on a banana peel- that certainly isn’t the case.

***

eta, further clarification: This ‘learning’ thing- I don’t doubt it’s true about the people posting in this thread. But I also know that Te doms tend to be e8- there is a distinct correlation between e8 and Te- and these statements (from here) are an apt description of what I’m talking about:

They also tend to be domineering; their unwillingness to be controlled by others frequently manifests in the need to control others instead.

… they always retain an uneasy association with any hierarchical relationship that sees the Eight in any position other than the top position.

Or here:

Your idealized image is that you are protective and powerful.


Now granted, this is undoubtably more menacing to me because I’m not Te (and have an insanely hard time empathizing with it, so it doesn’t just roll off my back when I encounter it). But I’m not just projecting some Fe ‘power’ thing (whatever that is). There is a thing that happens with Te and wanting power/authority for the sake of having power/authority- above and beyond simply ‘learning’.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

This reminds me of a real work situation, in an Fe-ish work environment. This was back in the old days, and the company was using Novell Netware. It had crashed, and so I went into the computer room and started the process to restore from backup. I then went back to my office to work on other projects.

My supervisor said, "<uumlau>, you need to be in the computer room."

"The restore from backup is running. When it's done, everything will be working."

"I know. But you still need to be in the computer room."

"The restore job is running. It doesn't run any faster if I'm in there. That'd be like pushing buttons in an elevator, pretending that it makes it go faster."

"I know, but you STILL need to be in the computer room."

"Why?"

"Because everyone is wondering why you aren't working on the problem."

"I AM working on the problem. It'll be done in an hour or so."

"I know. But you need to be in the computer room."

"That makes no sense to me."

"I know, but you still need to be in the computer room, otherwise people will think you aren't working on the problem."

"In other words, I need to sit in the computer room, wasting my time LOOKING like I'm working really hard, when I could be in here, accomplishing more than one thing at a time, because I can work on THIS project, AND restore the system from backup at the same time."

"Yes, that is pretty much what it amounts to."

"So you want me to waste my time in the computer room."

"Yes. If you aren't in the computer room, people won't think you're working to fix the problem."

Thus the problem wasn't that I wasn't doing my job, but that I was PERCEIVED as not doing my job.

You Fe types out there, if you cannot see how absurd this is, please let me know why the above makes sense to you.

(There was also a strong Si element, too, in that office, so it might not just be Fe. I'm putting this up for feedback, based on my personal impressions, not to denigrate any particular type.)

Actually, something that's kinda funny about this to me (and yeah, I'd say that's more Si...I've actually used this 'logic' to deal with a couple ESTJs I know) is that I can relate to it. I can't see myself telling someone else they need to do it- because I realize how absurd it is. But sometimes it's just SO MUCH EASIER to do what I know others won't question- even if it actually gets less done. If it would ultimately create MORE work (in all the explaining I'd have to do to people who won't understand*) to leave the room and work on other things, then yeah, it's totally like me to foresee that and avoid it. As absurd as it is.

My INFJ son and I have actually joked about this- the silly things we do to fall off the radar with certain people, it almost feels like the jedi mind trick sometimes. I've caught him doing this to me....and we have a "ahhhhhh!!!" pointing at each other bonding moment.

eta: And I agree with something [MENTION=20789]Werebudgie[/MENTION] said- stuff like that makes me want to avoid a place. It saps *a lot* of energy when I spend so much time simply figuring out how to manuever around people (instead of simply focusing on getting stuff done).

eta #2: uumlau, was the person who told you to do this an NFJ?


*Whether or not it would actually ultimately create 'more' work depends on how well those people understand what I'm talking about- if it's out of their league, then that would qualify as 'too much work' imo.

 

[yeghor]

...In reality, Ni and Te are a particular frame of mind: think of a landscape with rivers and hills and so on - the hills don't move the water in particular paths focusing on the rivers, but rather water flows in that manner around that layout of land.

So based on that does this ring true? Ni is an engine that uses the aux function to collect patterns from the strata that is tied to the aux function...Ni itself navigates inside the landscape thus formed to find a solution route to any kind of problem...

So INFJs' pattern-based landscape emphasizes Fe-based topography (interpersonal and collective dynamics) whereas INTJs' emphasizes Te-based topography (which is ?)...

Ti-tert in INFJs outlines/highlights the solution route/path making it more visible to INFJs' conscious self...whereas Fi-tert in INTJs marks the solutions with INTJs' own signature/twist/preferences/touch making it personalized somehow?

So tertiary functions in both types only add minor touches/corrections/outlining/polish to the solution path identified inside the Ni landscape...and Fe-aux and Te-aux are actually different layers of the same domain? So superposing both can yield a not necessarily optimum but common path?

No, INFJs use Fe for this purpose. Particularly analytical INFJs swear that they "use a lot of Ti", but really, it's just more Ni, not Ti, in most cases. Ti is a part of the landscape, but it is not a significant part of the landscape.

So Te/Fe checks whether the model proposed works in real world or not? Ti and Fi tertiary are just adding minor finishing touches/tweaks/course corrections?

I believe INFJs use the same kind of filtering mechanism, except the elements of the pattern you guys see is rather different from what I see.

Both of us are focusing on different layers of the topography...

The primary point is that Fe prioritizes the people-concerns over the logistical concerns. In part, that means that they derive much of their clues as to what is true and what is not true from the people whom they trust. This is NOT an irrational approach. In fact, it is generally the most sane approach. No one person can embody the whole of human knowledge, and thus even Te types need to trust particular sources.

The difference is that Te doesn't rely "as much" on personal traits, such as credibility, but more on impersonal traits, such as utility.

Both Ni-Fe and Ni-Te should be evaluating incoming information somehow...Assigning some kind of coefficient to certain external sources of information...If an external information source is consistent in providing Te or Fe information that fits with Ni-Te or Ni-Fe, that source must be given higher priority or focus in evaluation...even when they all of a sudden provide an information that conflicts with Ni-Te or Ni-Fe...

I feel as if there's this insuniation that Fe is more focused than Te on titles etc. of the source, whereas Te is more focused on the information regardless of title...

I think Ni-dom operates the same when it comes to evaluating incoming information be it Te or Fe...It's just the content of the information that it deals with that changes...or the model wouldn't hold true...Perhaps what you are saying applies more to Fe-dom...

I find it interesting that you're thinking in terms of number of survivors, while I was assuming allocation based on there being more than enough (for now), but wanting to avoid the possibility of killing the goose that lays golden eggs.

I would ration food to people in proportion to the demands of their utility in the collective...A member who is engaged with physical labor would get more rations wrt a thinker who (is less mobile) devises techniques to optimize any process in the collective...at least until the distress is over and there's a surplus of food...Till that time, food is not an incentive/bonus but an essential need for survival...I had a distressing situation in my mind when giving that example...

I would wonder why we are so reliant on this single source of livelihood, and look into diversifying our activities for more sustainable income in the future.

Certainly, as a long term plan perhaps...but I rather a had a distress that needs to be dealt with in the short term in mind when proposing the scenario...

I think when we insist on our facts it is less based on feeling than because it is often not clear just whose facts are best. Until this is made clear, the other person's insistance on their facts has no more objective justification than ours, while on the other hand, ours is driven by Ni processes we have learned to trust.

I think Ni-dom has a tendency to point to a singular answer based on available data...So Ni-dom conclusions can change with additional "reliable" data that points towards a different conclusion...

I hope there's not this impression of INFJs that INFJs has a yearning to be "right/correct" and cling on to their wrong conclusions even when shown conflicting evidence...That's not how it works, for me at least...I rather have a tendency/stubbornness to think that my conclusion is correct (because data available at that time points to that conclusion) but will update my conclusion when new data becomes available...I feel bad for my mis-conclusion though...

If the style of delivery is intended to shame or humiliate me somehow, I may show a resistance to the proposed alternative but will eventually analyze and see whether it holds true...I do not know if this has something to do with me or the INFJ type or Fe-aux...I seem to be sensitive to shaming/abusive language...

Is there a style of delivery that INTJs find hard to swallow when their conclusions are challenged?

What's the personal motivation for INTJs that drives them to attain correct conclusions? Being correct makes you think/feel?

This reminds me of a real work situation, in an Fe-ish work environment. This was back in the old days, and the company was using Novell Netware. It had crashed, and so I went into the computer room and started the process to restore from backup. I then went back to my office to work on other projects.

My supervisor said, "<uumlau>, you need to be in the computer room."

"The restore from backup is running. When it's done, everything will be working."

"I know. But you still need to be in the computer room."

"The restore job is running. It doesn't run any faster if I'm in there. That'd be like pushing buttons in an elevator, pretending that it makes it go faster."

"I know, but you STILL need to be in the computer room."

"Why?"

"Because everyone is wondering why you aren't working on the problem."

"I AM working on the problem. It'll be done in an hour or so."

"I know. But you need to be in the computer room."

"That makes no sense to me."

"I know, but you still need to be in the computer room, otherwise people will think you aren't working on the problem."

"In other words, I need to sit in the computer room, wasting my time LOOKING like I'm working really hard, when I could be in here, accomplishing more than one thing at a time, because I can work on THIS project, AND restore the system from backup at the same time."

"Yes, that is pretty much what it amounts to."

"So you want me to waste my time in the computer room."

"Yes. If you aren't in the computer room, people won't think you're working to fix the problem."

Thus the problem wasn't that I wasn't doing my job, but that I was PERCEIVED as not doing my job.

You Fe types out there, if you cannot see how absurd this is, please let me know why the above makes sense to you.

(There was also a strong Si element, too, in that office, so it might not just be Fe. I'm putting this up for feedback, based on my personal impressions, not to denigrate any particular type.)

Your example suggests an environment where people needs to "see" something to believe it and keep tabs on each other...I am currently working, I believe, in a FP heavy environment where people keep track of what other people are doing and compare their workloads to them...and complain if they sense people even in other departments are slacking off...

And, as [MENTION=20789]Werebudgie[/MENTION] also said Fe-aux notices that pattern in the environment and does its best to fit in but Ni-dom would bail out if a compromise on bare essentials could not be reached...

Your manager could've informed disgruntled employees that you are "remotely" working on the issue and you do not have to be in the system room to do that...

...That is what I’m talking about with my spiel about how sometimes it really seems like TJs experience (just like everyone else) the irrational human ‘state of being’ of wanting to ‘be right’ (not for the sake of learning, but from the unconscious need to ‘be right’). Am I saying I think this is a noticeable problem for every single TJ? Not by a long shot. I’m simply saying I’m pretty sure I’ve seen this particular kind of human frailty exist in TJs....

Yes, there needs to be a core motivation that drives us to have the correct information/conclusion...Is this how we arm ourselves against life/adversity...to feel safe/content/superior?

 

[EJCC]

This reminds me of a real work situation, in an Fe-ish work environment. This was back in the old days, and the company was using Novell Netware. It had crashed, and so I went into the computer room and started the process to restore from backup. I then went back to my office to work on other projects.

My supervisor said, "<uumlau>, you need to be in the computer room."

"The restore from backup is running. When it's done, everything will be working."

"I know. But you still need to be in the computer room."

"The restore job is running. It doesn't run any faster if I'm in there. That'd be like pushing buttons in an elevator, pretending that it makes it go faster."

"I know, but you STILL need to be in the computer room."

"Why?"

"Because everyone is wondering why you aren't working on the problem."

"I AM working on the problem. It'll be done in an hour or so."

"I know. But you need to be in the computer room."

"That makes no sense to me."

"I know, but you still need to be in the computer room, otherwise people will think you aren't working on the problem."

"In other words, I need to sit in the computer room, wasting my time LOOKING like I'm working really hard, when I could be in here, accomplishing more than one thing at a time, because I can work on THIS project, AND restore the system from backup at the same time."

"Yes, that is pretty much what it amounts to."

"So you want me to waste my time in the computer room."

"Yes. If you aren't in the computer room, people won't think you're working to fix the problem."

Thus the problem wasn't that I wasn't doing my job, but that I was PERCEIVED as not doing my job.

You Fe types out there, if you cannot see how absurd this is, please let me know why the above makes sense to you.

(There was also a strong Si element, too, in that office, so it might not just be Fe. I'm putting this up for feedback, based on my personal impressions, not to denigrate any particular type.)

Oh man. Maybe not Si, but definitely social instinct and Fe. As social-first and Te-dom, I understood the strategic reasoning behind it (better for others NOT to think you're lazy), but I thought their assumption was stupid, and in your position would have resented the need (yes, need) to accommodate mass ignorance.

Okay, it sounds to me like I am triggering frustration with having other people criticize you for simply being TJs. Or perhaps more specifically, maybe I'm triggering frustration with having FJs criticize you for simply being TJs. I TOTALLY understand how agitating it is to have someone explain to you over and over again how irritating/wrong you are for being who you are/not being more like them, and to have lots of petty presuppositions expressed about your behavior (which are so off…..it boggles the mind).

More of the latter than the former. I'd rather people dislike me for who I am, than who I'm not. At least I don't have to correct them that way.

It seems to me like I am having the difference between FJ and TJ explained to me though, and I already know there’s a difference. For whatever reason, it must be coming across like I’m not aware of this difference? It’s not that I don’t understand there’s a difference.

Can't speak for the others, but in my case it was that you seemed to be mixing up Te traits and 8 traits. See below for more on that.

It’s that *sometimes* it seems clear there’s some irrational core fueling the belief in the ‘facts’: it may very well look like “my fact ‘beats’ your fact” to the person doing it, but on the outside it looks more like “I NEED my facts to ‘beat’ your facts to feel <whatever, I’m not going to presume to know, outside of thinking it looks like an unconscious need>”.

Yeah I can see that. Maybe for 8s, that need DOES have to do with power. But for me, as a 1, I need to always be right because I need to avoid hypocrisy and maintain a flawless modus operandi.

I remember saying this once before in a way that didn’t seem to poke so many nerves, so I’ll just repost it here:

That^ is what I’m talking about with my spiel about how sometimes it really seems like TJs experience (just like everyone else) the irrational human ‘state of being’ of wanting to ‘be right’ (not for the sake of learning, but from the unconscious need to ‘be right’). Am I saying I think this is a noticeable problem for every single TJ? Not by a long shot. I’m simply saying I’m pretty sure I’ve seen this particular kind of human frailty exist in TJs.

Ah -- I see. Thanks for the clarification. Yeah, as objective as I try to be, there are some sensitive topics where personal connection/Fi makes me irrational. That need, in my case and as it relates to Fi, is a need to live by a "right" code. A need to have "right" values. In which case, I can't help but wonder, in much the same way as Coriolis, what the benefit would be of easing up on that. Unless that would entail forgiving yourself for being a hypocrite, because being human means being a hypocrite.

Maybe I’m not adding “appears to me, as an observer” enough. Maybe there’s too much FJ flavor to my discourse, making it sound like I think you experience something FJ.

That'd definitely make me more likely to "correct" you, but it might work for others? I think adding "I understand where you're coming from so I don't mind as much, but unknowing Fe observers see it as ___" might help.

eta, further clarification: This ‘learning’ thing- I don’t doubt it’s true about the people posting in this thread. But I also know that Te doms tend to be e8- there is a distinct correlation between e8 and Te- and these statements (from here) are an apt description of what I’m talking about:

They also tend to be domineering; their unwillingness to be controlled by others frequently manifests in the need to control others instead.

… they always retain an uneasy association with any hierarchical relationship that sees the Eight in any position other than the top position.

Or here:

Your idealized image is that you are protective and powerful.


Now granted, this is undoubtably more menacing to me because I’m not Te (and have an insanely hard time empathizing with it, so it doesn’t just roll off my back when I encounter it). But I’m not just projecting some Fe ‘power’ thing (whatever that is). There is a thing that happens with Te and wanting power/authority for the sake of having power/authority- above and beyond simply ‘learning’.

Thanks for this. The bolded explains SO MUCH about the past few pages of this thread: why you appeared to me to be mixing up 8 and Te traits, and why a trio of non-8 TJs started trying to correct you.

Whenever people ask me what the elements are of ESTJ type descriptions that I DON'T relate to, I cite quotes like that. I'm not domineering, I don't have a need to always be the boss. Isolated from the Enneagram, ESTJs are supposed to be equally gifted at being bosses and being employees -- hence the surprisingly accurate "middle manager" stereotype. Which makes the insertion of tidbits like the "domineering" comment a bit contradictory.

Maybe it's because I'm not an 8. Maybe it's because I am hyper-aware of the mixing of Enneagram and MBTI traits in discussion. (Has been problematic in the past when, for example, asking for ENFP 2 advice and getting ENFP 7 advice.) Either way, that's why I stepped in -- hard to have a discussion about your own type when one of the "givens" doesn't apply to you (and when you don't consider yourself to be an "exception to a general rule" in that regard).

 

[uumlau]

I would likely "understand" that what your supervisor was describing to you was part of the cultural environment in this workplace.

However. For me, this understanding would only relate to how I could move within that context. Perceived appearance over substance makes me really viscerally uncomfortable - probably because I viscerally experience stuff like that as deceptive.

I have to say, even reading your description of that conversation made me want to have nothing to do with that particular workplace. I really seriously don't enjoy environments where perceived appearance is more important than getting the actual work done.

eta: But now I'm also thinking - you know, there's also an alternative explanation for what your supervisor told you. Maybe it's not about perceived appearance over substance in that environment. Maybe there was some sort of collective lack of trust in general or in people who did your kind of work in particular. Such lack of trust could have roots in past experiences or simply a general distrust in technology (for example). In that case, the problem would simply be lack of information about what was going on, and it seems like putting up a sign saying that the computer was running a restore from backup and if all went as planned would be finished and problem solved around [insert time], and signing your name, could allay concerns. (And yes, if I had been in that environment for enough time, I would quite likely know about such a collective lack of trust, given how Fe-aux attends to the dynamics of the collective environment).

The main reason behind it, I think, is that the netware server being down stopped everyone's work. They really had nothing better to do than to check and see if the network was up yet, and probably needed a degree of reassurance by seeing me in the computer room working on it (where they could ask me how much longer). Kind of a morale thing, kind of a fidget.

Actually, something that's kinda funny about this to me (and yeah, I'd say that's more Si...I've actually used this 'logic' to deal with a couple ESTJs I know) is that I can relate to it. I can't see myself telling someone else they need to do it- because I realize how absurd it is. But sometimes it's just SO MUCH EASIER to do what I know others won't question- even if it actually gets less done. If it would ultimately create MORE work (in all the explaining I'd have to do to people who won't understand*) to leave the room and work on other things, then yeah, it's totally like me to foresee that and avoid it. As absurd as it is.

I think this is one of the best explanations I've heard, yet. You're navigating people-obstacles, which often results in behaving in ways that you believe to be ridiculous, but it's just so happens to be the smoothest path to get where you need to go.

eta: And I agree with something [MENTION=20789]Werebudgie[/MENTION] said- stuff like that makes me want to avoid a place. It saps *a lot* of energy when I spend so much time simply figuring out how to manuever around people (instead of simply focusing on getting stuff done).

Good to know. I didn't work there for long. It was a dinky pay-the-bills job I had before I got my PhD in physics.

eta #2: uumlau, was the person who told you to do this an NFJ?

Quite possibly. Hard to tell for sure, though, given that I just have a few flashes of memories from interacting with him.

So based on that does this ring true? Ni is an engine that uses the aux function to collect patterns from the strata that is tied to the aux function...Ni itself navigates inside the landscape thus formed to find a solution route to any kind of problem...

Or rather, the solutions "route themselves".

So INFJs' pattern-based landscape emphasizes Fe-based topography (interpersonal and collective dynamics) whereas INTJs' emphasizes Te-based topography (which is ?)...

Which is logistical and utilitarian considerations, omitting most personal considerations.

Ti-tert in INFJs outlines/highlights the solution route/path making it more visible to INFJs' conscious self...whereas Fi-tert in INTJs marks the solutions with INTJs' own signature/twist/preferences/touch making it personalized somehow?

The tertiary is more tricky.

The tertiary is always in tension, much like the inferior. It differs from the inferior is that it is often the subject of very conscious attention, as if you cannot help but consider the matters typically thought to be the talents of the tertiary. For example, INTJs are often extremely aware of their emotions (Fi), but have no good way to deal with them other than ignore them. ENFPs are extremely aware of the need to organize their lives (Te), but tend to go about doing so in a rather haphazard ways if left to their own devices. Similarly INTPs and INFPs become obsessed with precision (Si), and each of these types can be rather picky about how an idea is expressed. INFJs, I would gather, have a fascination with logic, but often get very poor results when applying it.

In my experience, and I have known a LOT of INFJs both here, other forums, and in real life. INFJs are or have been some of my very best friends, ever. And, as you INFJs are a really intuitive lot, you know I'm about to say something kind of negative. INFJs, in general, aren't that good with logic. They still shine at analysis, and can deal very effectively with all sorts of technical matters, but they aren't using that much logic in the course of things. Most times, an MBTI-savvy INFJ will say he/she is using Ti, I have to shake my head and say, "No, that was Ni-Fe. It was a most excellent analysis, but it was not a Ti-analysis."

Don't get me wrong, Ti is in there, but it comes into play in most INFJs differently than one might think. Just as I as an INTJ tend to link Fi with Se (sometimes called a "baby ISFP" around here), and find my way into things like music and dancing, INFJs have a "baby ISTP", and often tend toward mechanics, cars, motorcycles, sports. Of course, the activities are not equivalent to the function, I'm just pointing out concrete experiences one might envision that would start making the Ti portion of the brain start clicking.

So tertiary functions in both types only add minor touches/corrections/outlining/polish to the solution path identified inside the Ni landscape...and Fe-aux and Te-aux are actually different layers of the same domain? So superposing both can yield a not necessarily optimum but common path?

I'd agree with that. "Different layers of the same domain" is apt.

So Te/Fe checks whether the model proposed works in real world or not? Ti and Fi tertiary are just adding minor finishing touches/tweaks/course corrections?

I would say that, for INxJs (but not tertiaries in general), Ti/Fi represents our "attitude" to the world, kind of the core ego piece of ourselves that doesn't budge very much. As an "attitude" it "colors" our approach more than "refines" it.

I feel as if there's this insuniation that Fe is more focused than Te on titles etc. of the source, whereas Te is more focused on the information regardless of title...

I think Ni-dom operates the same when it comes to evaluating incoming information be it Te or Fe...It's just the content of the information that it deals with that changes...or the model wouldn't hold true...Perhaps what you are saying applies more to Fe-dom...

Actually, I think Z-Buck helped address that, above. It isn't a focus on "title" but on social dynamics, and INFJs will tend to go along with "ridiculous" social dynamics for a time, if only to avoid expending the energy to tell everyone how ridiculous they're being.

Is there a style of delivery that INTJs find hard to swallow when their conclusions are challenged?

In certain political/scientific debates (you know the ones), I dislike having my points refuted not by cogent argument, but by broad assertions that many credentialed experts disagree with me. When the only reason I might be bringing up the point is that I disagree with those experts based on several cogent reasons.

In a more humorous vein, I recall arguing a long time ago on an old physics usenet newsgroup about how the sun, moon, earth, water and gravity interacted to create tides. The other person was arguing that centrifugal force was responsible for the tides, while I pointed out that even if there was no circular motion, the gravitational field itself would create the tide. In the end, the argument resolved on comparing authorities: his was his high school physics teacher. When I mentioned my PhD in physics, he caved. I very much dislike "winning" because I'm automatically the expert whom no one will question. Damn it, I NEED to be questioned!

What's the personal motivation for INTJs that drives them to attain correct conclusions? Being correct makes you think/feel?

I would connect this more to Enneagram type than MBTI type (as you ask for "motivation"). Type 1 just wants to be right, period. Type 5 wants to master a particular topic. Type 8 want to be right in order to get his way. As a type 9, I want to be right because things work way more smoothly if I'm right the first time, cf. the image I posted a while back, saying, "Of course I don't look busy. I did it right the first time."

Your example suggests an environment where people needs to "see" something to believe it and keep tabs on each other...I am currently working, I believe, in a FP heavy environment where people keep track of what other people are doing and compare their workloads to them...and complain if they sense people even in other departments are slacking off...

There's probably more to the example, due to its being so extreme, as discussed above.

Oh man. Maybe not Si, but definitely social instinct and Fe. As social-first and Te-dom, I understood the strategic reasoning behind it (better for others NOT to think you're lazy), but I thought their assumption was stupid, and in your position would have resented the need (yes, need) to accommodate mass ignorance.

In a way, I totally understand it. As Z-Buck said, going along with the demand would only lose me an hour or two, and as ignorant as some impressions might be, if EVERYONE is getting the same impression, it becomes "truth" and is difficult to falsify.

 

[Werebudgie]

[MENTION=9310]uumlau[/MENTION], for me Ti emerges in two ways:

1. Qualitative data coding, data-specific category creation etc, and related analysis, which I've done professionally (and otherwise). I'm reasonably certain Ni doesn't do that kind of fine-grained detailed cognitive analysis. It's at a cognitive/analytical/data-detail level that is really not Ni's thing. It's also not Fe. Fe-aux doesn't do inductive/detail analysis like that, at least not in me.

2. In a broader sense in my life, Ti consistently serves as a corrective for Fe material that I've internalized and that can harm me. Functioning in this way, Ti can help bring me back to center in Ni when Fe-aux external bullshit is messing with me (though the Ti corrective is the long way around). Anyway, this is Ti in service to Ni, with the necessity for Ti involvement raised by distortions that come from Fe-aux.

Comment and question on the topic: As I understand it, Te and Ti approaches to logic are very different, to the point where someone who defines logic in Te terms may not even see Ti as logical analysis. As an possibly related example: my dissertation director was extremely Te-heavy and saw research and analysis in strictly deductive/quantitative terms. I had to delve really deeply into epistemology to get to a point where I could explain to her why inductive/qualitative research is a different approach to knowledge production requiring different assessment standards. For example (I'm doing this from memory): in deductive/quant research, reliability and validity (and related objectivity/lack of bias) are key elements in whether research is valid. But applying those standards to qualitative/inductive research simply doesn't work because those standards aren't relevant. All of which to say: I think it's possible that there are types of Ti logic that don't show up as actual logic to you because they're outside of your Te-flavored understanding of what logic is.

 

[uumlau]

[MENTION=9310]uumlau[/MENTION], for me Ti emerges in two ways:

1. Qualitative data coding, data-specific category creation etc, and related analysis, which I've done professionally (and otherwise). I'm reasonably certain Ni doesn't do that kind of fine-grained detailed cognitive analysis. It's at a cognitive/analytical/data-detail level that is really not Ni's thing. It's also not Fe. Fe-aux doesn't do inductive/detail analysis like that, at least not in me.

Check out Dario Nardi's "Neuroscience of Personality". Its descriptions of the functions are among the best I've seen area, especially in that they would appear to be very concrete, and remove a lot of the mysticism around functions like Ni and Fi. (Even Nardi's earlier works often played up the mysticism/mystery angle.)

Yes, I use Te instead of Ti, but when I look at the typical descriptions of Ti, I can easily end up saying, "Well, I can do that. And that. And that. ... Hmm, I must be using Ti, too."

Except I'm not. I really really really do not think like an INTP. I get the same kind of analytical results, in the end, but the processes are so very different.

And even Te doesn't suffice to explain it. Te, when I reflect upon it, is mostly used to find corrections, to collect and organize data, and so on. But it isn't really how I think.

Eventually, I realized, my thinking isn't "Te" or even "Ti". I realized, "Holy shit! My thinking is mostly Ni!!"

See, I'm always able to explain my reasoning ... except, um, that wasn't how I reasoned it. Ni figured it out, in a snap. But in order to actually get work done, I end up using Te to organize the Ni-thoughts and execute appropriate actions. But the mental model I am using to think, all the time, is an Ni-based model. It has no words. It isn't even that visual. But I can go into this mental state that is very much NOT the Ti mental state, and just figure things out. Often by NOT thinking about them. (You know what I mean, as an Ni dom.) The answers just fall into place.

Te refines that, and in particular finds errors. But Ni is the one that sees the patterns that predict what is a good answer and what is a bad answer, and Te is really just choosing between a few good answers.

Now, I'm not going to insist that you aren't using Ti at all. Of course you are. I'm just pointing out how much you very likely use Ni to do the tasks that one would normally attribute to Ti. Ti, from Nardi's observations, uses a mental state that has a higher energy than Ni. It excels at calculations, at classifications, at estimating probabilities. In your case, Ni is very likely guiding where and how you apply your analysis, where you intuitively see the most productive avenues of research. Fe probably also plays a role if the kind of data you're analyzing is related to the social sciences: Fe knows what the categories are. Ti's role will be more in terms of determining consistency, in these kinds of cases.

2. In a broader sense in my life, Ti consistently serves as a corrective for Fe material that I've internalized and that can harm me. Functioning in this way, Ti can help bring me back to center in Ni when Fe-aux external bullshit is messing with me (though the Ti corrective is the long way around). Anyway, this is Ti in service to Ni, with the necessity for Ti involvement raised by distortions that come from Fe-aux.

That totally makes sense. Ti is the balance for Fe. As you say, it's the long way around. Ti (and Fi) are fairly slow in execution, even among Ti/Fi doms.

Comment and question on the topic: As I understand it, Te and Ti approaches to logic are very different, to the point where someone who defines logic in Te terms may not even see Ti as logical analysis. As an possibly related example: my dissertation director was extremely Te-heavy and saw research and analysis in strictly deductive/quantitative terms. I had to delve really deeply into epistemology to get to a point where I could explain to her why inductive/qualitative research is a different approach to knowledge production requiring different assessment standards. For example (I'm doing this from memory): in deductive/quant research, reliability and validity (and related objectivity/lack of bias) are key elements in whether research is valid. But applying those standards to qualitative/inductive research simply doesn't work because those standards aren't relevant. All of which to say: I think it's possible that there are types of Ti logic that don't show up as actual logic to you because they're outside of your Te-flavored understanding of what logic is.

I would suspect that was your Ni/Fe arguing with his Te, not your Ti. Inductive and qualitative are characteristic of Ni, not Ti, in my experience. Also, Fe deals well with qualitative reasoning/analysis. Ti is much more deductive and quantitative, though not in the Te way. Rather, Ti internalizes all of the logic and reasoning, and thus theoretical logic gains a prominence over empirical logic in the Ti approach.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

Thanks for this. The bolded explains SO MUCH about the past few pages of this thread: why you appeared to me to be mixing up 8 and Te traits, and why a trio of non-8 TJs started trying to correct you.

Whenever people ask me what the elements are of ESTJ type descriptions that I DON'T relate to, I cite quotes like that. I'm not domineering, I don't have a need to always be the boss. Isolated from the Enneagram, ESTJs are supposed to be equally gifted at being bosses and being employees -- hence the surprisingly accurate "middle manager" stereotype. Which makes the insertion of tidbits like the "domineering" comment a bit contradictory.

Maybe it's because I'm not an 8. Maybe it's because I am hyper-aware of the mixing of Enneagram and MBTI traits in discussion. (Has been problematic in the past when, for example, asking for ENFP 2 advice and getting ENFP 7 advice.) Either way, that's why I stepped in -- hard to have a discussion about your own type when one of the "givens" doesn't apply to you (and when you don't consider yourself to be an "exception to a general rule" in that regard).

It’s an interesting question- whether, just because Te correlates strongly with e8, it’s ‘fair’ to claim the downsides of e8 are gripes about Te. People do this a lot with e2 and Fe. I always want to point out that it isn’t Fe that pushes to ‘help’ where it isn’t asked for and then expects help in return. Because there’s a reason e2 correlates strongly with Fe dominance- yet it isn’t some inherent characteristic of Fe. As an e5 Fe aux, I actually really resent obligations being given to me without my clear consent and I don’t do it to others.

So yeah, where the correlation is strong (between mbti and etype)- I don’t know, I guess it’s reasonable to make generalizations but there’s still something about it that lacks accuracy. [And honestly? The reaction in this thread has actually been validating for me because I'm usually the one on the other side of this. It makes me feel a bit more reasonable.]

In a way, I totally understand it. As Z-Buck said, going along with the demand would only lose me an hour or two, and as ignorant as some impressions might be, if EVERYONE is getting the same impression, it becomes "truth" and is difficult to falsify.

Yeah, I'm always keenly aware of the personality types- not any specific system, but I've always been aware of different temperaments- around me and I anticipate reactions before they happen. It's not consciously done, it's just something that's 'obvious' to me. And in some environments I have found that it can actually eat up an enormous amount of my cognitive 'bandwidth', constantly formulating solutions to extinguish problems before they happen- and it's the kind of thing that's invisible to most people. Such places are toxic to me because it's exhausting and the benefits get taken for granted anyway.

But yeah, at the bolded- I don't even bother explaining the absurdity to people I'm pretty sure won't begin to understand it (which is to say, most people), but it truly does ultimately cut down the work load.

eta: My point in mentioning the Si is that I can imagine feeling especially inclined to do this in an environment where there are a lot of Si dom/aux working- because if they take vague note of it, it's very hard to undo, as you said. But in an environment of Pe dom/aux....if they noticed at all, it'd be gone five minutes later (i.e. not hard to undo that impression). And anyway, it seems like NFJ direction to me- that's why I asked about the type.

 

[yeghor]

Actually, I think Z-Buck helped address that, above. It isn't a focus on "title" but on social dynamics, and INFJs will tend to go along with "ridiculous" social dynamics for a time, if only to avoid expending the energy to tell everyone how ridiculous they're being.

So you've revised your initial position on that after Z-buck's post?

And there's something in your example that doesn't ring true for me and I have this feeling that you've been too eager to associate it with INFJs...

Yeah, I may navigate/surf on social dynamics so as not create disharmony and optimize collective gains but I do not want to engage in enabling behaviour towards the collective either...

I don't know...there's something off...

...Eventually, I realized, my thinking isn't "Te" or even "Ti". I realized, "Holy shit! My thinking is mostly Ni!!"

See, I'm always able to explain my reasoning ... except, um, that wasn't how I reasoned it. Ni figured it out, in a snap. But in order to actually get work done, I end up using Te to organize the Ni-thoughts and execute appropriate actions. But the mental model I am using to think, all the time, is an Ni-based model. It has no words. It isn't even that visual. But I can go into this mental state that is very much NOT the Ti mental state, and just figure things out. Often by NOT thinking about them. (You know what I mean, as an Ni dom.) The answers just fall into place.

Te refines that, and in particular finds errors. But Ni is the one that sees the patterns that predict what is a good answer and what is a bad answer, and Te is really just choosing between a few good answers.

Now, I'm not going to insist that you aren't using Ti at all. Of course you are. I'm just pointing out how much you very likely use Ni to do the tasks that one would normally attribute to Ti. Ti, from Nardi's observations, uses a mental state that has a higher energy than Ni. It excels at calculations, at classifications, at estimating probabilities. In your case, Ni is very likely guiding where and how you apply your analysis, where you intuitively see the most productive avenues of research. Fe probably also plays a role if the kind of data you're analyzing is related to the social sciences: Fe knows what the categories are. Ti's role will be more in terms of determining consistency, in these kinds of cases.

I think Ti, even though tertiary, does for me what you described as Te does for you...Ni-dom jumps to a conclusion which feels right (or wrong) but doesn't readily know why...I need to think on it really hard and gather some external data (from the net) so as to bring the Ni conclusion to the forefront (making it visible to the conscious self as well as communicable to the external world)...This is a delayed process...(perhaps relatively faster for you, which may make you more articulate about it)

This came up in a dialogue with a friend...Ni conclusions feels likethis to me...I am at point A (the question/problem) initially and Ni makes a (relatively quick) conclusion and jumps to point B (conclusion) which feels right...But I do not know why B feels right at that moment so cannot explain either to myself or others why it feels right...So Ti starts backtracking the solution route all the way to A, after which I can tell myself and others why it feels right (or wrong)...So Ni acts like teleporting all the way from A to B whereas Ti acts like going that path on foot back from B to A...

I've always imagined it was Ti-tert responsible for this delayed process (to flesh out, backtrack the route)...And I've associated it with cause and effect style reasoning...And I really need to force myself to bring my conclusion from the depths of Ni domain, perhaps that's why it may be consuming more energy...?

1. Qualitative data coding, data-specific category creation etc, and related analysis, which I've done professionally (and otherwise). I'm reasonably certain Ni doesn't do that kind of fine-grained detailed cognitive analysis. It's at a cognitive/analytical/data-detail level that is really not Ni's thing. It's also not Fe. Fe-aux doesn't do inductive/detail analysis like that, at least not in me.

2. In a broader sense in my life, Ti consistently serves as a corrective for Fe material that I've internalized and that can harm me. Functioning in this way, Ti can help bring me back to center in Ni when Fe-aux external bullshit is messing with me (though the Ti corrective is the long way around). Anyway, this is Ti in service to Ni, with the necessity for Ti involvement raised by distortions that come from Fe-aux.

That totally makes sense. Ti is the balance for Fe. As you say, it's the long way around. Ti (and Fi) are fairly slow in execution, even among Ti/Fi doms.

I am with Werebudgie on this one...Ni-Fe conclusions are collective oriented and may sometimes compel me to abandon my own distress/needs etc. in favor of others/collective...which may become detrimental to my "self" cause I may end up using myself as the primary agent to catalyze the positive change that Ni-Fe envisioned for the collective system...If other people do not commit themselves to the new collective system, the burden of its upkeep falls on my shoulders and I get stubborn and do not want to abandon that ideal...Some people may even notice and try to abuse this reflex in me...

So I've started noticing this habit of mine and other people and started producing alternative narratives to counter this reflex in me without infuriating my supergo (and thus not feeling bad about myself)...And I've associated Ti-tert with the thing that produces these counter narratives...

So Ti-tert works in tandem with Ni to make Ni conclusions more tangible, and works against Fe-aux to enable me to cater more to myself than the collective sometimes...(cut myself some slack)...and I believe it has an essential role for INFJs' sense of self and well-being...

Fi-tert in INTJs perhaps adds some personal coloring/preference/signature to Ni-Te products that doesn't significantly affect the end result...some kind of fingerprint perhaps...Is this related to why people code viruses and similar things? To create something unique with their imprint in it? They identify themselves with their product/construct?

What's the personal motivation for INTJs that drives them to attain correct conclusions? Being correct makes you think/feel?

I would connect this more to Enneagram type than MBTI type (as you ask for "motivation"). Type 1 just wants to be right, period. Type 5 wants to master a particular topic. Type 8 want to be right in order to get his way. As a type 9, I want to be right because things work way more smoothly if I'm right the first time, cf. the image I posted a while back, saying, "Of course I don't look busy. I did it right the first time."

Yeah that's the what of it...why does type 1 wants to be right, why does type 9 wants to be right? What do you experience if things do not go smoothly? The why of it should be tied to the ego, sense of self or something primal...

 

[Coriolis]

Problem is, it's hard for me personally to see a comment like "I perceived this as being (insert incorrect assumption here)" and NOT take it as "I had an incorrect assumption that I still believe and thus needs to be corrected -- that incorrect assumption was frustrating me and I would feel much better with some resolution and closure". Not saying that Coriolis or Uumlau were coming from this position (they probably weren't), and not trying to turn this into a "why do Fe users act like this to me" thread.

To me, there is no substitute for substance and results. Still, if someone has a perception problem with me or something I am doing, I am more than willing to consider this. I will ask them to describe what specifically about my actions is creating this incorrect impression, and then evaluate whether it makes sense to adjust. This only works, however, if they are able and willing to give me this kind of feedback. Otherwise, I do tend to dismiss their comments as pointless complaining.

This reminds me of a real work situation, in an Fe-ish work environment. This was back in the old days, and the company was using Novell Netware. It had crashed, and so I went into the computer room and started the process to restore from backup. I then went back to my office to work on other projects.

Good grief. I think I would have made a big sign for the door of the computer room reading "Restore from backup is in progress; will be completed by HH:MM."

It’s that *sometimes* it seems clear there’s some irrational core fueling the belief in the ‘facts’: it may very well look like “my fact ‘beats’ your fact” to the person doing it, but on the outside it looks more like “I NEED my facts to ‘beat’ your facts to feel <whatever, I’m not going to presume to know, outside of thinking it looks like an unconscious need>”.

There is an irrational core fueling belief in the facts: namely, one of our core values. We value demonstrable facts more than other kinds of information. This subjective valuation, however, will also cause us to come to value someone else's facts over our own if we are shown that they are more accurate, or more complete, or somehow preferable according to the (mostly) objective standards we value (more subjective considerations). At least for an E5, it's not so much that we need our facts to beat yours, we need to figure out whose facts are better and more reliable. If we have done our homework in aquiring our own, and they also fit in with our Ni perceptions, you will have to make a very good case for us to abandon them in favor of yours. We will, though, if you do.

That^ is what I’m talking about with my spiel about how sometimes it really seems like TJs experience (just like everyone else) the irrational human ‘state of being’ of wanting to ‘be right’ (not for the sake of learning, but from the unconscious need to ‘be right’). Am I saying I think this is a noticeable problem for every single TJ? Not by a long shot. I’m simply saying I’m pretty sure I’ve seen this particular kind of human frailty exist in TJs.

I won't disagree that we have a unconscious desire to be right. We are more likely to satisfy that, however, by correcting a wrong position than by clinging to it once its error has been demonstrated (demonstrated, not claimed without substantiation).

Now granted, this is undoubtably more menacing to me because I’m not Te (and have an insanely hard time empathizing with it, so it doesn’t just roll off my back when I encounter it). But I’m not just projecting some Fe ‘power’ thing (whatever that is). There is a thing that happens with Te and wanting power/authority for the sake of having power/authority- above and beyond simply ‘learning’.

This does sound more E8. For E5, the power is power to affect outcomes, to implement our ideas in the world, rather than power over others. If you see us trying to achieve that, it is usually just a means to an end, not a goal in itself.

Ti-tert in INFJs outlines/highlights the solution route/path making it more visible to INFJs' conscious self...whereas Fi-tert in INTJs marks the solutions with INTJs' own signature/twist/preferences/touch making it personalized somehow?

I would say tert Fi in INTJ keeps goals and solutions consistent with our values and priorities, and motivates us with the feeling that what we want to accomplish is worthwhile and good.

Is there a style of delivery that INTJs find hard to swallow when their conclusions are challenged?

I have no patience with anything involving sugar-coating, beating around the bush, etc. Also challenges that contain no supporting justification or evidence. If you disagree with me, I prefer to hear: "I think you are wrong because of x, y, and z." I may disagree with your reasoning and tell you so, which precipitates a (hopefully) constructive and respectful discussion.

What's the personal motivation for INTJs that drives them to attain correct conclusions? Being correct makes you think/feel?

For me, it is being able to accomplish things. If I make plans based on faulty conclusions, I cannot expect them to work. In more casual discussions/debates, I want to get to a correct conclusion because that seems the best way to understand whatever the topic is. If I am left with a conclusion that is incorrect, that indicates I am misunderstanding something. Of course I cannot understand everything out there, but hopefully I can at least recognize that I don't have enough information to make even a tentative conclusion, and simply study that issue more before trying to do so. I suppose it all comes down to my desire for accomplishing what I want in the world, and understanding at least those things necessary, important, or interesting to me (another subjective personal value).

Yeah, as objective as I try to be, there are some sensitive topics where personal connection/Fi makes me irrational. That need, in my case and as it relates to Fi, is a need to live by a "right" code. A need to have "right" values. In which case, I can't help but wonder, in much the same way as Coriolis, what the benefit would be of easing up on that. Unless that would entail forgiving yourself for being a hypocrite, because being human means being a hypocrite.

The closest feeling I think I have to this is when I have to proceed in the absence of enough supporting information; when I know the facts are sketchy or shaky at best, and I'm not even getting a clear heading from Ni. I really avoid acting in such conditions, and when I do, I end up in a draining treadmill of frustrated fact-checking and endless contingency mapping (I can't narrow down the solution, so have to plan for very many possibilties). I have actually become better at just letting go in these situations and taking it one step at a time, allowing the new information to come to me bit by bit and making course corrections as needed. Sort of like actually steering rather than running on a well-programmed autopilot.

 

[Werebudgie]

Now, I'm not going to insist that you aren't using Ti at all. Of course you are. I'm just pointing out how much you very likely use Ni to do the tasks that one would normally attribute to Ti. Ti, from Nardi's observations, uses a mental state that has a higher energy than Ni. It excels at calculations, at classifications, at estimating probabilities. In your case, Ni is very likely guiding where and how you apply your analysis, where you intuitively see the most productive avenues of research. Fe probably also plays a role if the kind of data you're analyzing is related to the social sciences: Fe knows what the categories are. Ti's role will be more in terms of determining consistency, in these kinds of cases.

This is really interesting! I think I can maybe pinpoint Ti (as opposed to Ni) by how much energy it takes me to do it - energy not necessarily in the Nardi sense (not sure) but energy at least in the sense of my dom process (natural as breathing) versus tert process (painstakingly energy intensive).

And not sure if this is what you meant by consistency, but all that detailed data work, comparing what I sense is going on with the actual data - that would be the specific part that is Ti-heavy in my research processes..

And yes, Fe helps with - not the categories, exactly, but maybe something about what the data categories mean or ... something along those lines. I guess I just take that part for granted. The problem with Fe-aux in me is that it's not critical of the external value material. Quite the opposite - it assigns it a default high legitimacy that then comes into conflict with Ni a lot of the time. So the colder critical analysis part has to be something other than Fe. And Ni is a perceiving function, underneath consciousness as you point out.

Anyway, I think there's merit in looking at the role that Ni has played in some aspects of my formal and informal research processes. When I think about it with Ni in mind, the thing I can see right up front is the Ni capacity (being discussed in another thread right now, actually) to shift perspective in particular ways. And yes, Ni is qwuite likely guiding where and how I apply the analysis, I can see that when I think about the experience of how I navigate huge masses of data.

See, I'm always able to explain my reasoning ... except, um, that wasn't how I reasoned it. Ni figured it out, in a snap.

This resonates for me. I think there is a sort of disconnect between the research experience as it flows for me, and the ways I can clearly show the reasoning that go there. But Ti is part of that, at least in the background. It's like, Ti's painstaking intensely detailed data tracking/coding and analysis gives a sort of analytical legitimacy that - well, even if no one wants to see all the data coding and details and running of different categories etc etc to show that the data does in fact yield the conclusions, I know it's there and that probably helps with any Fe-aux pull to discount whatever approach I may take or analyses I might offer.

Which actually brings me back to the one function of Ti that is most obvious to me and the one that seemed to actually make sense to you in reading what I wrote - Ti as a counterbalance/foil for Fe-aux:

That totally makes sense. Ti is the balance for Fe. As you say, it's the long way around. Ti (and Fi) are fairly slow in execution, even among Ti/Fi doms.

I would suspect that was your Ni/Fe arguing with his Te, not your Ti. Inductive and qualitative are characteristic of Ni, not Ti, in my experience. Also, Fe deals well with qualitative reasoning/analysis. Ti is much more deductive and quantitative, though not in the Te way. Rather, Ti internalizes all of the logic and reasoning, and thus theoretical logic gains a prominence over empirical logic in the Ti approach.

On reflection, I can see Ni/Fe in how I made the argument: For example, Ni providing the easy (for me) perceptual comprehension that we're dealing with two completely different sets of assumptions about how anyone knows what we know, and Fe giving me the willingness to engage to some extent with the alien logics I had to put up with from her (my diss. director) in order to do the work that I felt drawn to do.

If you have some citations for Ti being deductive and quantitative, I'd like to see them. I've never been entirely sure that my Ti/inductive/contextual/qual vs Te/deductive/universalizing/quant mappings are correct but I haven't come across anything suggesting Ti as deductive and quantitative. If Ti is in fact more top-down theoretical, though, that could take it out of the inductive/contextual/qual realm.

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

My musings above may not make clear how much I appreciate your comments here. If Ti isn't as intimately connected with my reseacher-layer, if Ni plays a bigger role in that process than I thought, then that opens up a possible small paradigm shift for me in how I understand where I'm headed from here. I'm shifting away from certain core aspects of Fe-aux, a cognitive process that I developed as a mode of survival and communication in my younger years. If Ti's main role in my life has been in relation to Fe-aux, and if Ni has been more involved in my researcher-mode than I believed, that opens up a door I didn't even know was there. Don't know what it means, but .... awesome.

And with this ^ ^, maybe this comment is coming back to the initial topic of the thread in some way. I may very well have been wrong in key aspects of my understanding of how Ti functions in something as major for me as my researcher-layer. What I feel about being wrong in this is ... excitement at what seems like it could be a really promising little paradigm shift for me. Thank you!

 

[Werebudgie]

So I've started noticing this habit of mine and other people and started producing alternative narratives to counter this reflex in me without infuriating my supergo (and thus not feeling bad about myself)...And I've associated Ti-tert with the thing that produces these counter narratives...

This resonates for me to some extent. As I see it, judging functions produce narratives, while perceiving functions don't. Fe-aux in me assigns high initial legitimacy to narratives external to myself, and this can do me harm. As a foil to this Fe-aux situation, Ti plays some sort of role in counter-narrative, but in the end it's exhausting, not solid ground and I need to get back to Ni (Ni-Se is best) perception to really feel well. It's like Ti can provide a temporary patch that allows space for a return to center.

I feel like I just had an experience like this a few days ago. Since I've been tracking stuff like this lately, I watched it happen as it unfolded in me. Someone I care about was in pain and lashed out at me and pushed a framework that I, organically, don't share and in fact experience as alien and disorienting in its assumptions about cause and effect. I had an immediate visceral Ni-Se response of "that feels nasty/icky/ugh" but Fe-aux still moved to accept the external narrative as valid despite my visceral reaction. However - I've had enough experience with this framework, collected enough detailed data over time, done enough painstakingly detailed analysis of that data, that I was able to patch in a counter-narrative from that detailed data-analysis space. It was like waves inside of me: Fe-aux pushing that external/alien framework as valid, the counter-narrative (largely Ti-sourced) rising up to push back, and underneath it all, the Ni-Se perception that is organic to me. I rode out the waves and came back to center. The counter narratives aren't organic to me and are only temporarily useful. But useful nonetheless.

 

[yeghor]

This reminds me of a real work situation, in an Fe-ish work environment. This was back in the old days, and the company was using Novell Netware. It had crashed, and so I went into the computer room and started the process to restore from backup. I then went back to my office to work on other projects.

My supervisor said, "<uumlau>, you need to be in the computer room."

"The restore from backup is running. When it's done, everything will be working."

"I know. But you still need to be in the computer room."

"The restore job is running. It doesn't run any faster if I'm in there. That'd be like pushing buttons in an elevator, pretending that it makes it go faster."

"I know, but you STILL need to be in the computer room."

"Why?"

"Because everyone is wondering why you aren't working on the problem."

"I AM working on the problem. It'll be done in an hour or so."

"I know. But you need to be in the computer room."

"That makes no sense to me."

"I know, but you still need to be in the computer room, otherwise people will think you aren't working on the problem."

"In other words, I need to sit in the computer room, wasting my time LOOKING like I'm working really hard, when I could be in here, accomplishing more than one thing at a time, because I can work on THIS project, AND restore the system from backup at the same time."

"Yes, that is pretty much what it amounts to."

"So you want me to waste my time in the computer room."

"Yes. If you aren't in the computer room, people won't think you're working to fix the problem."

Thus the problem wasn't that I wasn't doing my job, but that I was PERCEIVED as not doing my job.

You Fe types out there, if you cannot see how absurd this is, please let me know why the above makes sense to you.

(There was also a strong Si element, too, in that office, so it might not just be Fe. I'm putting this up for feedback, based on my personal impressions, not to denigrate any particular type.)

uumlau's plight uumlau, does this look familiar?

 

[small.wonder]

So you don't care to win an argument or make a friend, you only care for the truth.

I do not care to win an argument or make a friend at the cost of truth.

But the truth will never hold your hand. The truth will never look into your eyes. The truth will never kiss you.

Someone who likewise values truth can though! No others need apply.

 

[Mole]

I do not care to win an argument or make a friend at the cost of truth.

Someone who likewise values truth can [kiss me] though! No others need apply.

It is small wonder that I prefer to be told beautiful lies.

For the more lies the more kisses.

And the more beautiful the lie, the more beautiful the kiss.

 

[Ginkgo]

there's something that frustrates me still about this topic. i feel resistant to allowing others to choose for me, but part of that is simply that i don't always realize the responsibility to choose for myself.

being willing to being wrong is the willingness to stay with yourself when you no longer agree with the choice you have made. it is a fundamental commitment you have to make as a person. only through that can you truly respect yourself as a real person. only through that commitment to both know yourself and to let go of yourself can you continue beyond yourself. it is the relationship you have to commit to in order to truly accept what you can control and let go of the rest. it is the way you both accept and challenge yourself at the same time, how you can be both what you are and what you are not at the same time.

If you try, but fail to evaluate your past behaviors, then you will remain, unknowingly, in a stalemate, with the false hope that you've missed the solution to your problem. You would carry hope because it gives you shelter in the solving of the problem itself. Not only would this seem to lift you up above clarity and knowledge, it would also seem to drag you below it. Being unwilling to being wrong pains you because you are in a tangle, unable to see where you fit in to what is "right". You grasp for straws, using one diction or another as a crutch. Until you realize that you're better than the struggle to carry that ill-fitted crutch, you don't grow. If you should decide that you're better than the struggle, then that crutch becomes an unused relic. Though it remains, you see it and know that it is less than your full potential.

 

[the state i am in]

This is where INFJs really get Te wrong. It feels like "steamrolling" to you, the same way Fe feels smarmy to Te. The communication of each side (Te/Fe) happens on a different qualitative level, and each side is usually (but not always) blind to the other side's concerns.

The reason you don't see Te types complaining about "steamrolling" from other Te types is that Te types find a logistical consensus together, a kind of consensus to which a lot of Fe types appear to be blind. Te types communicate their "Te needs" to each other, get buy in, and move forward. Replace Te with Fe in that sentence, and it works the same way. The problem is that the "Te needs" aren't "people-motivated", if you will, are not "personal." So it looks like the Te types are just bumping and bruising their way through the world, to the Fe types: there is no obvious concern for people, for courtesy. There is, if you look for it, but it is very hard for Fe to see. Similarly, Te types are blind to Fe-style consensus: they can move forward with a plan, thinking everything is OK, but it falls apart because while there was a Te consensus, the Fe consensus was missing. In a business setting, wise managers learn to accommodate both styles (not that they recognize them by their typological terms).

i have an easier time jumping in here than your previous question, so i'd like to add my two cents here.

i remember you used to reference the four agreements. i found the description of the mind compelling, but i had trouble with "don't take anything personally." from an Fi perspective when i focus on empathizing with underlying needs and stay away from intention, this kind of makes sense. and i recognize how Te can be helpful here to secure specific, logistical agreements, a kind of methodological process that selects more singular, specific criteria for making shared judgments and moving forward in terms of concrete behaviors accountable to the agreements.

where i struggle, however, is that a big part of me desires feeling connected. sharing more than infrastructure. my default is to feel that everything is shared, every part of us, which is partly why i think i have struggled with boundary issues in the past. at times, for this e5, this sense of feeling like everything is shared can also colocate a kind of ghostly paranoia, when you feel like you can see more than you can and struggle to ground yourself in your own version of reality in a way that is still but only semi-permeable to those of others.

one of the things we want to share in our sense of consensus is sharing the good in ourselves and seeing that in each other, helping connect to that in a way that brings it into focus. when that doesn't happen for me, i don't feel heard. all that middle territory between my needs and the exact specifics between what is said and done feels empty. where we can simply like each other and our weird musicalities (which i think the infps i know totally get too, and why i have so many awkward, quirky writer friends). at times, to me, without this middle range of who we are, empathy feels reduced to a function that can be used to accomplish a specific thing rather than a process that is itself enough, that is simply part of the process of constructively sharing and enjoying the process of characterizing ourselves together.

granted, even as a teacher, i can see how sometimes these motives are messy, unclear, confusing, or can potentially cross boundaries. it's really difficult to hold a kind of legalistic accountability to anything in this way. i mean, it's choosing a different type of knowledge than epistemological knowledge. it's a kind of tacit knowledge, a kind of underlying belief, an aesthetic knowledge that we use to make ecological decisions based on what feels beautiful to us. most of the time, we don't even get to claim this as a form of knowledge, when its formalization is there, just difficult for our disembodied, disconnected from ourselves society to even respect. we have no patience to wait for our knowledge to be revealed to us, to arrest our minds.

Right. And I bet "drama" isn't quite the right word for it, in your mind: it's about being courteous, finding consensus, and working with people instead of through them. Right? Te isn't steamrolling, it's instead a different kind of courtesy, a different kind of consensus, and a different way of working with people. But it feels like steamrolling because it lacks that personal touch, it lacks that moral sense that an Fe type is looking for.

this feels right to me. the part of Te i have struggled with is that it feels like the negotiations about the negotiations behind the negotiations don't start from a sense of common ground. that's why it feels like it's working through me rather than with me. i want to identify with how a shared sense of who we are predicts where we can go together, rather than isolating ourselves and instead stressing taking responsibility to assert our own needs and expecting others to do the same without feeling any obligation to consider them beyond what they say and do. i do see why both are necessary. i appreciate the clarity that Te offers in terms of focusing on behaviors and objective criteria whose accountability can survive translation and create the needed boundaries for respecting choice in a way that sometimes i know in my own life i have obscured.

The reason for the distinction appears to be that Fe is personal, and therefore interactions via Fe deal more with willpower than interactions via Te. Te is impersonal (though not impartial), so there really isn't any feeling of forcing one's will upon the world. The world is already there, the world is fact, and all Te types can do is strive to know the facts. If my facts "beat" your facts, that isn't me imposing my will upon you, I just happen to have the better facts in that case. In a Te-style organization, it is not uncommon for low-level workers to make factual observations about what works and what doesn't, and the higher-ups saying, "Yeah, that makes sense. Let's upgrade our processes like you suggested." And it isn't about trying to make the low-level workers feel better, it's that a good idea (in Te land) is a good idea, no matter the source. It isn't judged based on who says it, but on whether it stands on its own merits. For whatever reason, it's difficult for some INFJs to see this, but I know it's not impossible, because when I get a chance to explain it to INFJ friends in person, most of them seem to get it, or at least explaining it somehow develops a rapport with them such that I can say things in Te ways and they don't get offended.

bolded feels e5/head type to me more than an inherent Fe quality. just focusing on mentation, identifying with information quality rather than the force of it, but having the force of it be sublimated by a lack of connection to ourselves and how we use it and it uses us. it certainly wouldn't seem to characterize an e8 etj accurately.

in my class, i am extremely open to student feedback. i pride myself in choosing what feels true to me, and that attempt to honor the truth is as central to me as a person as anyone i've ever known. i don't think i'm just biasing against certain types. at times, the models i have of individuals may create some needless construction traffic, and i knowingly admit this, but i choose to still employ models in general because it at times allows me to see so much further into the truth i would not be able to see solely through my own perspective. it's what allows me to share myself in the way that i do. it's what allows me to listen to others, which isn't always perfect, but in my tangible real-life relationships, is as big a part of who i am there, with others, as any other.

to me, this Fe quality, this way of organizing thinking based on embodied meanings/models, is not an inherent problem. the inherent problem is not checking in with myself to try to fully own the rest of me, so that i don't unknowingly create the perfect conditions for my biases to cross-multiply. so that i can have some T accountability to recognize the story of what is happening and how the story of what i am bringing to this moment can define how to walk the tightrope without losing my balance.

(even now, when you've written a series of very balanced posts, i still am working on not taking things personally. that's just because a need of mine is to feel proud of who i am. i am acutely sensitive of this, so it drives my behavior even when i lose awareness of it. i know what it's like to feel the drops that are associated with having to grieve your own limitations. i have searched endlessly for a way out of having limitations, of having to come to terms with being a finite, fallible being. i've experienced the pitiableness of being, of selfhood, and have to work really hard to find acceptance for that. that's also why i think, in some of the previous infj/infp threads, with so many e4s and critical e1 energies falling backwards into us and watching the pile up that ensues and wanting to blame to avoid feeling what we feel, the need for compassion is so high but so hard to actually create enough space within ourselves for. i say this simply because this is a part of me that wants to feel heard, and also because i believe it provides more evidence that in some respects, i think we were both on the right track in pointing out the perhaps greater relevance of the enneagram's psychosocial factors than jung's socio-cognitive ones).