Video: INFJ Communication Style

[Fidelia]

Taking it a bit broader - question to the INFJs - what is it exactly that results in the INFJ extending that trust and opening up? I don't know that it has anything to do with internal consistency but it seems like it is certainly something. Time? Behaviors over time? Is there some kind of inflection point that occurs? What builds up that trust over time and what tears it down?

I'm not sure if it's so much a choice for me, but an instinctual feeling that develops over time as I continue getting to know someone. Some factors probably would be:

- Ability to make me feel that we are on the same team, even if we have differing views. I think that partly is done by starting from points of commonality before venturing to points of difference.
- Not playing devil's advocate when I'm feeling upset about something that seems unfair to me or that involves other people until after I have calmed down. Ask questions instead about what is going on and find out what the underlying issue seems to be.
- Loyalty and general kindness - Especially in how people act in public towards others or what they say about people in front of a group/listen to what others say about those individuals without commenting. If they treat other people badly, I'm not likely to trust them with me. If I feel publicly embarrassed by information they've shared that was private, by teasing me in front of people whose regard matters to me, by devaluing what matters to me, or by allowing other people to talk about me negatively when I am not present without saying anything, I sure am not going to open up more to them.
- How much common ground we have to begin with. Is communication a constant uphill climb? Do we have differing views on a lot of subjects, especially fundamental ones to the way we see and interpret the world? If so, it's not a matter of shutting people out, but just not getting a lot closer to them.
- Consistent behaviour. I like knowing what I might expect from someone and how then to interact with them in a way that is mutually satisfying. If I am getting mixed messages, don't receive any feedback on my own interaction, receive information that doesn't match up with the image they are trying to portray to me, if they act very differently around different people, or if they seem really unpredictable, I am going to feel uneasy a lot of the time and it also takes up huge amounts of my mental and emotional bandwidth.
- I open up much more quickly to people who seem to make efforts to understand my internal world without trying to direct it first. One of the greatest compliments I could have is someone who asks me why I work the way I do, or who wants to know more about me and what makes me tick.
- Good listeners/awareness of reciprocation - I tend to attract a lot of people who want to feel cared for, but who don't have the resources/interest to reciprocate. Someone who is actually interested in knowing me will see more of the inner layers sooner.
- History - I am more open to anyone who is familiar. However, someone who has proven in the past to be caring, loyal, thoughtful, insightful, an expert in a certain area that I am seeking help in, or stepped in when they were really needed, etc will be someone I will trust more.
- Awareness of what is most important to me and treats those areas with care and respect.
- Appreciation. Someone who verbalizes that they value me and what they specifically value about me - helps me to know how they see my role in the relationship, and also that I have something of value to provide to them, which makes me more trusting of them.
- No sudden negative emotional surprises. It's not that I won't forgive, but if I get a hit that I didn't see coming that indicates the other person sees me radically differently than anything they indicated to me before (particularly publicly), I won't be coming back for more of same soon. It takes a LOOOOOONNNNG time to regain trust after something like that.
- The person's character and general treatment of the people around them. Their decision-making. If I trust their judgement generally, I'm more likely to open up to them.
- Someone who can get me to try new things or who can draw me into a group. I'm kind of tentative in some ways, although rigid in others. I like the counterpoint of someone who is able to get me to trust them enough that I will allow them to take me out of my comfort zone.
- Who they are close to - often says a lot about their own inner world that can't always be seen just by knowing the person. What are they drawn to, what negative qualities are they indulgent of and to what extent, do they act differently around certain people, what traits they value, commonalities between their different friends, how they feel about family, etc. Gives me a better idea of whether I want to be part of their world and to what extent I would like to allow them into mine.
- Affinity to the other person - Ni connection or some other trait that allows for unspoken communication or feeling of closeness or understanding naturally.
- Good listener - I don't talk people's ears off and try to be sensitive to their interests. If they get distracted easily during a conversation, share way different amounts of information than I do, or don't ask about something I was talking about that was important after we get interrupted, I take it as an expression of disinterest and I am unlikely to share more.
- Perceptivity - decent judge of character and of changes in emotional temperature in a room or in a social situation.
- Someone who seems to understand me accurately without it being too much effort for either of us to get there.

 

[FemMecha]

Taking it a bit broader - question to the INFJs - what is it exactly that results in the INFJ extending that trust and opening up? I don't know that it has anything to do with internal consistency but it seems like it is certainly something. Time? Behaviors over time? Is there some kind of inflection point that occurs? What builds up that trust over time and what tears it down?

Consistency in how a person treats me over time, although my need to connect with a few people closely can outweigh my uneasiness about trusting, so I sometimes take really big risks. I've entered relationships where I was so certain the person wouldn't hurt me that I couldn't see that they were hurting me and manipulating me for a while. I don't really hate the people who hurt me either.

I tend to like people and hope to find reasons that explain (and in some cases excuse) hurtful behavior. I don't know if I feel absolute trust for anyone, including myself. I think of people as being like animals and mostly reactionary. I see people as kaleidoscope patterns in which there are some underlying core ways of being that continually reconfigure based on circumstance, both inner and outer experiences. Even people who have said and done scarring things to me I can still like and be helpful with, and in some cases re-establish a deepest connection. I get rather obsessed with the rift analyzing all possible reasons it happened, and when I can come up with one or more plausible explanations, then I can put it to rest.

I often feel pretty disconnected from the world and have a feeling that I think quite differently, which makes me feel a bit estranged from others socially, even if I can participate in a pleasant chat or helpful endeavor, or shared project. A deep connection has to do with finding someone who I think will both understand me and be consistently kind to me. My normal self is rather non-reactive emotionally and not invested in the same things most people are. The way I think is extremely speculative and nebulous which is one enormous difference I find when trying to communicate with others who tend to have crystalized opinions and view certain ideas as facts and certainties.

 

[FemMecha]

Can you describe what you mean by normative communication?

Normative communication is about sharing assumptions with a cultural group. In my closer cultures I find it includes certain types of competitive talk, certain social games of distance/friendliness, flattery, specific responses expected when there is a baby, a graduation picture, ways of reacting to religious ritual, things that are said to show romantic involvement - but not to much, ways of communicating the way you wish to connect with another person, etc.

People who excel at this create one large, nuanced, inner system to account for all the conscious and unconscious expectations of that social norm. It is difficult for most people to change to another norm quickly. For me I have numerous, smaller inner systems to account for different sorts of people, but no one system is as well developed as the one big one is for most people, so I rely on a lot of approximation and underlying principles that tend to apply to humanity in general. Because of this I can be seen to have moments of unusually clear insight that most people overlook, and at the same time be a huge social duffus.

This seems like a really important point. It helps to explain some of the conflict I've seen on the forum between INFJs and other types (especially NFPs). It just like this huge trigger.

These are always unfortunate, I think, for everyone.

 

[Ene]

I don't mean trust as in opening up to others. I mean a trust in the other person's motives and giving them credit without needing behaviors to align with a model that person may not even be aware of.
I feel read 100% wrong by INFJs much of the time. It's very disappointing, because there can be an illusion of understanding at first. It seems INFJs, being more deliberate regarding an outcome, seem to put feelers out there & use responses to align someone with the some expectation - but if you are unaware of this, then you may not respond with the same outcome in mind. This is a matter of framing things correctly, framing which INFJs say they may shift, but how is the correct frame chosen?

The mentioned "randomness" is not random to me - everything has some greater significance than its surface or I'd not bother with it. I don't tell rambling stories with no point (and have never had such a reaction lodged at me). These pictures of INFPs don't resonate with me, which shows me there is a communication gap going on. Perhaps it is the idiosyncrasy of IxFPs, where it's hard to find a common thread to build expectations, but I suppose from the inside view, I don't see us as that unpredictable. Whatever archetype the INFJ finally concocts for us feels ill-fitting. It's not necessarily insulting or negative, it's just wrong. I'm wondering what is getting lost in translation.... I know some of it is that we are not adhering to the general model, but as I said, there IS a model, & a quite consistent one, but it's our own (the inner ideal). I don't know how much of that needs to be known to be accepted or if it ever can be - hence the "trust" question.

Thank you for helping me understand what you meant by trust. I need to brainstorm, think at the keys, as if we were having a conversation in real time. So, I'm literally going to ramble off what's going through my head.

Let's see... Ne and Ni can work well together but coupled with Fi and Fe and Ti and Te and Si and Se, you can see how we are...um quasi-identicals. Similar interests but entirely different ways of perceiving, understanding and experiencing. We rarely truly connect, I think. It's like some sort of cognitive language barrier. So, you're right in saying that something is getting lost in the translation. But I wonder if it is possible that we can discover what it is and learn to compensate for it's inevitable occurrence.

So, now I'm thinking that it's possible that an INFJ may not have the ability to frame you correctly as you know you truly are, because we come form different realities. Also, the framing isn't deliberate. It's simply a navigation tool. Like constellations named after things they don't actually look like in order to help ancient sailors navigate. They were inaccurate in their descriptions, but useful to the sailors in there generalities. A framed reference is not all a person is, and a general category doesn't define a person's existence or essence. It's important to realize that language is never sufficient to tell you how a person really sees you. And it may be that you can't be framed (that no model can be formed) and so will always be analyzed anew every time, which can be exhausting for both parties, eventually. Ni and Ti are like that together. Everything gets analyzed, sorted, categorized by characteristics, but it doesn't mean you're not seen as individuals or unique. It's just the way we have of navigating the world of people. I don't think there is an actual model that a person must ascribe to in order to be trusted, to be heard in actuality, so much as there is a lack of familiarity in functions. The INFJ may be genuinely trying to hear, but their entire way of listening is foreign.

Even though an INFJ may truly trying to hear you, to understand you, he or she may lack the ability to understand your exact meaning. INFJs may never speak INFP language because its alien to them, just as INFPs never truly speak INFJ for the same reason, but again, we can realize the barrier exists and be lenient with one another, allowing that stuff gets jumbled in translation.

In regards to the bolded area of your response, I think you have stated the crux of the matter by referring to the inside view. I believe that is where we loose each other in the translation. We have difficulty seeing through each other's eyes.

I want you to know that I sincerely appreciate this conversation and that you took the time to come back and discuss it.

I may miss the mark on many points, but if I don't offer a non-defensive, truthful look at my own cognitive functions, then truly I am guilty of putting people into ill fitting categories. Maybe that's how frames are shifted and reformed, how the correct ones are chosen, by free-flowing conversation where both parties show a level of emotional and mental maturity, where neither is worried about how they come across more than getting to the real heart of the matter. I don't know about other INFJs but I know that I search for truths on which to build my frameworks. If my perception of those truths are flawed then I wish to alter them.

 

[Fidelia]

I don't mean trust as in opening up to others. I mean a trust in the other person's motives and giving them credit without needing behaviors to align with a model that person may not even be aware of.
I feel read 100% wrong by INFJs much of the time. It's very disappointing, because there can be an illusion of understanding at first. It seems INFJs, being more deliberate regarding an outcome, seem to put feelers out there & use responses to align someone with the some expectation - but if you are unaware of this, then you may not respond with the same outcome in mind. This is a matter of framing things correctly, framing which INFJs say they may shift, but how is the correct frame chosen?

The mentioned "randomness" is not random to me - everything has some greater significance than its surface or I'd not bother with it. I don't tell rambling stories with no point (and have never had such a reaction lodged at me). These pictures of INFPs don't resonate with me, which shows me there is a communication gap going on. Perhaps it is the idiosyncrasy of IxFPs, where it's hard to find a common thread to build expectations, but I suppose from the inside view, I don't see us as that unpredictable. Whatever archetype the INFJ finally concocts for us feels ill-fitting. It's not necessarily insulting or negative, it's just wrong. I'm wondering what is getting lost in translation.... I know some of it is that we are not adhering to the general model, but as I said, there IS a model, & a quite consistent one, but it's our own (the inner ideal). I don't know how much of that needs to be known to be accepted or if it ever can be - hence the "trust" question.

Do you think, OA, that there is perhaps more individuality and less across the board similarities between INFPs generally? I've wondered about this in the past, but don't have a way of really finding out. I realize that enneagram certainly would play into it, but wonder if there is more to it as well. What do you think? Does each INFP have a separate inner model rather than more generalized traits?

As to the first paragraph, I'm not sure yet what I think. I believe you are right that we tend to read INFPs wrong. It seems like there's potential, but we consistently miss each other. I don't know if it is helpful or not, but for what it's worth, the set of expectations I have aren't ones that I am consciously choosing. They are not even just Fe values, but more fundamental to the process of me learning to know and trust someone else. It's not that I want to be all unfair and judge someone against a set of standards they don't even know exist. It's more like I need that feeling of safety for the relationship to progress. As Ene said, it's not even that I'll consciously let people in closer according to what I think they deserve, so much as layers unpeel themselves on their own in response to...something.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't mean trust as in opening up to others. I mean a trust in the other person's motives and giving them credit without needing behaviors to align with a model that person may not even be aware of.
I feel read 100% wrong by INFJs much of the time. It's very disappointing, because there can be an illusion of understanding at first. It seems INFJs, being more deliberate regarding an outcome, seem to put feelers out there & use responses to align someone with the some expectation - but if you are unaware of this, then you may not respond with the same outcome in mind. This is a matter of framing things correctly, framing which INFJs say they may shift, but how is the correct frame chosen?

The mentioned "randomness" is not random to me - everything has some greater significance than its surface or I'd not bother with it. I don't tell rambling stories with no point (and have never had such a reaction lodged at me). These pictures of INFPs don't resonate with me, which shows me there is a communication gap going on. Perhaps it is the idiosyncrasy of IxFPs, where it's hard to find a common thread to build expectations, but I suppose from the inside view, I don't see us as that unpredictable. Whatever archetype the INFJ finally concocts for us feels ill-fitting. It's not necessarily insulting or negative, it's just wrong. I'm wondering what is getting lost in translation.... I know some of it is that we are not adhering to the general model, but as I said, there IS a model, & a quite consistent one, but it's our own (the inner ideal). I don't know how much of that needs to be known to be accepted or if it ever can be - hence the "trust" question.

Do you think, OA, that there is perhaps more individuality and less across the board similarities between INFPs generally? I've wondered about this in the past, but don't have a way of really finding out. I realize that enneagram certainly would play into it, but wonder if there is more to it as well. What do you think? Does each INFP have a separate inner model rather than more generalized traits?

As to the first paragraph, I'm not sure yet what I think. I believe you are right that we tend to read INFPs wrong. It seems like there's potential, but we consistently miss each other. I don't know if it is helpful or not, but for what it's worth, the set of expectations I have aren't ones that I am consciously choosing. They are not even just Fe values, but more fundamental to the process of me learning to know and trust someone else. It's not that I want to be all unfair and judge someone against a set of standards they don't even know exist. It's more like I need that feeling of safety for the relationship to progress. As Ene said, it's not even that I'll consciously let people in closer according to what I think they deserve, so much as layers unpeel themselves on their own in response to...something./

 

[OrangeAppled]

Do you think, OA, that there is perhaps more individuality and less across the board similarities between INFPs generally? I've wondered about this in the past, but don't have a way of really finding out. I realize that enneagram certainly would play into it, but wonder if there is more to it as well. What do you think? Does each INFP have a separate inner model rather than more generalized traits?

Yes and no. Each INFP has a separate inner model for themselves, but the fundamentals are the same, because the inner human landscape is not all that different from the human body, if we use that as a metaphor. The essential structures are the same, even if a nearly infinite variety of appearances exist. This means there is enough similarity in these inner models for some predictability, which is why we can identify INFPs to begin with (and why we IxFPs are able to feel similarities between ourselves & use the self as a mostly reliable prototype for "human").

I'm less interested in explaining the workings of IxFPs than understanding if INFJs pick up on this alternate model and give it validity. The answer seems to be "no". The frustration with the INFP is "I must be always be the one to adapt", which we do a lot more than people realize. But maybe others do it more than we realize to, and maybe it's with that "framing" INFJs seem to do.

The only reason I even want this model validated is because people don't respond to the soundness of reasoning - they respond to their view of someone & how that person affects them. But these feelings are according to that model, which they use to interpret things. How they rate someone & how they are affected is in relation to this model.

I don't know if it is helpful or not, but for what it's worth, the set of expectations I have aren't ones that I am consciously choosing. They are not even just Fe values, but more fundamental to the process of me learning to know and trust someone else. It's not that I want to be all unfair and judge someone against a set of standards they don't even know exist. It's more like I need that feeling of safety for the relationship to progress. As Ene said, it's not even that I'll consciously let people in closer according to what I think they deserve, so much as layers unpeel themselves on their own in response to...something./

Well, as noted, I am not seeking to be "let in" by any INFJ. I am seeking to be heard (by anyone & everyone) and have what is expressed judged on its own merit, not an evaluation of my demeanor - to not be invalidated because I don't meet their unknown model for what means what.

For example, in those discussions, the focus often becomes "what is her motive?" not "what is her point?". I suppose this is because I am not meeting some model (unknown to me) for someone with respectable motive. But I meet my own model just fine, experiencing myself as transparent, and it seems other FPs experience me similarly.

I feel like "The Idiot" all of sudden.

 

[Fidelia]

I wasn't suggesting you were trying to be let in. Just conveying what things look like to me as far as process. I think part of the problem is that INFJs find the motive so fundamental to the interpretation of the point that it is almost impossible to separate the two. It tells the INFJ how to proceed in communication, what aspects are going to be useful or relevant to the other person, what they would find satisfying out of the exchange, where to start from, and whether they consider themselves a friend or foe. Without that information, it feels like being stuck in the middle of the ocean with a limited water supply and a rudderless boat. I don't know how to proceed.

I know that is not how INFPs see the world, and my best way of bridging that gap between is developing working coping skills for some situations and generally choosing someone with more common ground to be close to because it is not fair to ask the other party to do all the adjusting and I can't conduct a close relationship feeling constantly ill at ease, even though I recognize the inherent value and worth of the other person.

Must mull over the first part of your response more.

 

[Eilonwy]

Internal consistency? Very little to none I'd wager. They don't read that space, not the way you and I read it. So, as a con it means your internal constancy means little to nothing for establishing trust, but as a pro, that space in you remains inaccessible and thus can stay mostly private, or as private as you wish it to be.

You're right, I didn't see that space or know it existed until some months ago. But once I realized it was there, I could see just how solid and trustworthy it can be. Perhaps even more trustworthy, in ways, than the outward consistency I tend to look for.

I think for the most part you'll still be able to to keep that space private. I don't think I can read it, only know that it's there.

 

[chubber]

I think INTJs are very focused on influencing long term direction and outcomes. People are a necessary part of that but persuading them is not necessarily a super strong gift. It's more of a brute force approach. We don't say words for specific effect really.

Just like that. Oh you didn't want me to phone her, just text with your exact words? I did get you the result, didn't I?

 

[PeaceBaby]

The only reason I even want this model validated is because people don't respond to the soundness of reasoning - they respond to their view of someone & how that person affects them. But these feelings are according to that model, which they use to interpret things. How they rate someone & how they are affected is in relation to this model.

I hear you and I do not yet fully know why it has mattered to me this much either. Understanding the why of this is a place I've extensively explored inside myself. You see, I think INFJs see themselves as having the deepest insights into people, and they take a certain pride in that, wrap some ego identity around that. In presenting this type of persona to the world, I've bought into it, I too have felt that INFJs could possibly see our model and then system-build with that new knowledge? Knowledge that's more about ... what we know about? As Ene said above, she wants the truth. Isn't that what we all wish for? So, I (mistakenly) thought if I open that place, what I call the Fi place and let it be seen raw and open and honestly bare, that once seen, it would be incorporated into the Ni systems and accounted for. But 99% of the time that has not happened, mostly the opposite happens - active rejection. As you have, I have taken great social risks in trying to make that connection (which aren't even recognized as such) only to be interpreted as having axes to grind myself, which is very far from the truth. And frustrating as hell sometimes.

Part of this issue stems I think from egoic Ni. Each introverted function carries an attractive self-delusion, and the Ni delusion is that they see the whole picture, that their perceptions are the deepest and widest and wisest. Rationally, in order for this to be true however, they would need to be able to perceive everything. And since they can't perceive that deep inner human space (and we have a lot of evidence to support this assertion because we know they don't see us or "get" us) we already know that they aren't the deepest or widest or wisest. It's probably not fair for us to be disappointed about that, but it does kind of make me feel sad which signals to me that this ideal of connection I held will go unrealized.

(And no, I am not saying Fi is that super-wise space either - but Fi-doms already inherently KNOW we as individuals aren't privy to the whole picture, and that therefore no individuals or collectives are, so it generally isn't a lesson geared to our cognitive space. We have to get knocked on the head in different ways.)

So, this is where I am now. I have come to understand more deeply that some people's internal constancy is dictated only by my (internally driven) external one, and this isn't a "failing" on their part, it's just the way it is. This is not much different than me being internally assisted by other people's external orderliness from time to time. Many people just do not have an internal capacity to self-manage that internal space. And honestly, needing to control the external is alien and feels shallow to me but at least I know what they need and why they need it and it's not because they are some sort of "problem". And I can provide at least a good simulation of external constancy in many cases, BUT I will add this is at great effort. It's not my natural strength.

However, if someone's opinion of me is founded solely on that one-way transaction, if they cannot see past my occasional yet inevitable lapses in external reliability and grace me, assign me some positive intent for the massive efforts I undergo to provide external clarity when my wiring tends me more to the internal realm, then that has to be their problem and not mine. I am doing the best that I can, which is all that anyone can reasonably expect of any human being. I cannot take ownership of everything. So I am trying to show more of my inner space, the order of that and if I am not accepted, then so be it. If you only like me because I am nice and make your life easy, then take a hike. I can no longer afford to spend so much effort on this process, I owe more to myself than that.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

Interesting. I've seen this sort of thing in SPs and never thought as being a connection to Ni precision. My ISTP Dad is the worst delegator for this reason.

While I have noticed that SPs make the most convincing mistyped INFJs (I’m just saying there’s a similarity- that Ni ‘blankness’ shows up in them), I think that specific reticence is probably more about a lack of Te. Because I don’t see it in INTJs.

You keep saying there is an attempt to assert superiority and that someone (obviously this is directed at me) is trying to "prove" something.

But that is not my motive, and I will not have it attributed to me simply because you choose to frame my posts that way. It's an incorrect estimation of what is going on, period.

I was not interested enough in the topic to start a new thread. The post was an off-hand comment and is only growing into a larger conversation because others keep responding to it & its offshoots.

I really don't know what else to say; but you don't have to like or read my posts.

Whether or not they know it, it shows when someone is coming from a place of being superior- regardless of whether they know they’re coming from a place of feeling superior. I don’t know if the phrase “assert superiority” is what’s a problem here. It doesn’t matter if that’s the intention- if that’s what’s happening, then that’s what’s happening. I guess just take the action of someone showing up when they feel they’ve been misrepresented and trying to ‘fix’ that misrepresentation by stating how superior they are…..if “asserting superiority” doesn’t work to describe that, then use whatever phrase you like.

It’s not just you, it’s the Fi elitism that quite a few people have. And I wouldn’t say you deliver the passive-aggressive slights, you are relatively direct- and I’m not being facetious when I say it’s actually something I appreciate about you. You don’t preface your elitist condescension with “I love INFJs.”

People here are forever bitching and moaning about how INFJs simply disappear instead of trying to point out what isn’t working for them in some situation: I’m trying to point out how there’s something in this forum that doesn’t work for INFJs and makes them shut down/back away. I think it’s something worth discussing- because it does interfere with the quality of discussion, and because INFJs have left the forum because of it- but yeah, it is interrupting the flow of the rest of the thread so I’ll stop.

 

[Forever_Jung]

Humour them, when they ask why

That seems true, in my experience.

I work with an INFJ who always needs to know why she's doing things at work, and my ESFP boss finds it very unnerving. She will often withhold her rationale and make a dismissive comment to the effect of "you're not paid to know why" (not that she's ever explicitly said this, that just seems to be her attitude). I wouldn't characterize their relationship as prickly (they're generally courteous to each other, even if they'll never be friends), but there is certainly some real tension that crops up from time to time.

The funny thing is, I always ask why too, but my boss doesn't seem to mind it when I ask. I suspect it's because when I ask why, it comes across more like a 5 year old's idle curiousity. With the INFJ, there's a real sense of intentionality and discernment to her questions, which I think unsettles my boss. If I had to speculate, I would say that she feels like her instructions are being judged, evaluated, and questioned. I don't think it's as threatening as she's taking it though. I think Miss INFJ just needs to know why in order to motivate herself to do the task. I bet a lot of tension would be eliminated if the boss just relaxed a little and showed her some of the big picture. Also, the INFJ would probably be more motivated and feel better about her work.

Also, if they had better communication the INFJ would be very useful in terms of understanding her staff. She has a pretty good feel for "how things work" in the workplace (morale, interpersonal dynamics, people's strengths and weaknesses), and the boss would do well to value her insights rather than dismiss them out of insecurity.

Interesting video, anyway.

 

[PeaceBaby]

I'm just going to say it: the only people I imagine dubbed as Fi "elitists", the ones who purportedly see themselves as "superior" are the INFPs who actually speak up and get involved in these difficult yet often productive discussions. The out-loud INFPs. Am I proud of myself for speaking up, a person who historically "goes along to get along" and have done so all my life? Yes I am. You can easily see my evolution looking backwards. In my first two years here, how naive I was thinking that by being positive and facilitative I could handle any disagreement presented. Thinking that by handling all of the difficult emotions that have arisen over and over again silently and on my own was helping the situation and not hindering communication. How wrong I was!

IN THIS PLACE, on this forum, I get to be Fi-dominant. I get to disagree when people talk about my functions wrong, I get to say that my functions have value anywhere or anytime I choose in any thread that strikes me as an issue. I am an equal at this table, and I get to feel a little positive for a change and not apologetic about a functional stack that is regularly ridiculed or devalued or appears to have no practical use in day-to-day life. I do not assert this VALUE at anyone else's expense, and anyone here can search the thousands of posts I've made and despite this very challenging interaction that seeems to happen in INFP/INFJ-land, you will find NOTHING that I've written that devalues INFJs as real human beings with their own intrinsic value and worth. Even if understanding each other is hard sometimes, and each type has our little peccadilloes that can be frustrating, these are people I see as my EQUALS, like every other person in the universe who has individual strengths and weaknesses but who in reality is no better or worse than me for that.

If anyone feels that my assertion of my functions makes them feel smaller, then go look in the mirror at why you need to diminish my voice in order to make yourself feel better about yourself. That is what is happening in these situations.

OA flat-out says superiority is not her motive, and in reply it's not accepted or believed and she's told at least her elitist condescension isn't served up passive-aggressive style. How's that for back-handed strategic insulting?

I am done with commenting here for now. I reserve the right to return if or when the mood strikes.

 

[OrangeAppled]

Whether or not they know it, it shows when someone is coming from a place of being superior- regardless of whether they know they’re coming from a place of feeling superior. I don’t know if the phrase “assert superiority” is what’s a problem here. It doesn’t matter if that’s the intention- if that’s what’s happening, then that’s what’s happening. I guess just take the action of someone showing up when they feel they’ve been misrepresented and trying to ‘fix’ that misrepresentation by stating how superior they are…..if “asserting superiority” doesn’t work to describe that, then use whatever phrase you like.

So I'm either lying or I don't know my own feelings or motivations?
I mean, that's what it comes down to (and that's the only thing I've found insulting in this thread). This is what I am talking about - my credit has been removed, and I am dealt with suspiciously, even though I've been more transparent and blunt and direct than most, and I've outright stated my motivations.

It also seems to me many INFJs (not all, as this thread refreshingly shows) interpret any negative comment about their type as someone creating a competition or being attacked. Most other types can be discussed critically and not respond in such a touchy manner. I discuss ALL types in this tone, so there is no special criticism reserved for INFJs, as people seem to think.

So here's another question: How in the world can criticism be offered to INFJs? Because instead of hearing it, they seem to prefer to invalidate the person it is coming from so it doesn't have to be heard. The "trusted" people are more like ear-tickling sycophants. Yes, that's my outside perspective of what happens.

It’s not just you, it’s the Fi elitism that quite a few people have. And I wouldn’t say you deliver the passive-aggressive slights, you are relatively direct- and I’m not being facetious when I say it’s actually something I appreciate about you. You don’t preface your elitist condescension with “I love INFJs.”

People here are forever bitching and moaning about how INFJs simply disappear instead of trying to point out what isn’t working for them in some situation: I’m trying to point out how there’s something in this forum that doesn’t work for INFJs and makes them shut down/back away. I think it’s something worth discussing- because it does interfere with the quality of discussion, and because INFJs have left the forum because of it- but yeah, it is interrupting the flow of the rest of the thread so I’ll stop.

There is far more Ni & Ti elitism than anything around here & on the internet in general. The feeling & sensing functions easily get the most flak. So I don't see a Fi elitism so much as pointing out actual strengths, as we're the only ones who do it, really. This is not done to tear others down, and does not need to be interpreted as "better" because there is no competition. I find this GOOD, as IxFPs in general are more likely to be too self-deprecating (I don't mean ME in this case). I am not going to apologize for positive Fi self-talk or choose to interpret it as negative because it threatens some other type's ego.

If you want any discussion or comparison of other types & especially FPs kept out of INFJ threads, well you can state that preference. But the past threads were not INFJ only discussions (but explicitly referred to INFPs, FPs, or asked for criticism of INFJs), so it's not really accurate to say this is a trend.

 

[á´…eparted]

These discussions between INFJ and INFP almost always boil down to Fi vs. Fe. Interestingly, it seems that almost any type comparison comes down to the judging functions. Either way since Fe is my dominant function, maybe I can give a bit more insight here.

The fact of the matter is, in my experience, Fi and Fe don't mix well, and it's very hard for it to do so. IRL I but heads the most with Fi types. Communicating with them can be a significant challenge. As outlined in this thread there are major differences between internal and external motivations (I'm also blunt and force them to externalize, but that's another discussion) tend to be the biggest stress points. When Fe sees someone (well, "see" is usually a subconscious thing) working purely under internal constraints, it gets frustrated quick. The reason? It's seen as inefficient, bias, illogical, and selfish. It doesn't think that works or is possible. This is completely independent of whether or not it's true. The issue taken is the internal aspect. Fe is completely incapable of functioning without an external reference, and distrusts its own internal references (they get used, just not often or well). When Fi is in use by someone, Fe really doesn't "see" it. It just sees the output. Sort of like someone publishing a paper with no citations. They're also rather firm/solid stances (often because they're thorough) and as such feels kinda haughty/snooty. These are the core reasons I butt heads with IxFP's because I don't "see" what they're doing. I'll wrongly assume my way of processing is the best way to do it, and if someone doesn't do it in that way then it's wrong. The truth is, both work just fine. That's why Fe gets upset over Fi though, it simply is unable to see how it's working since it's internal. Since INFJ's use aux-Fe, this grates them. They want things external, and if they go about it wrong, they're going to piss off the Fi user.

Another issue is the nature of Fi doms (and this does link to 4 a little). There is a self-focus because their internal network is how they function, so when pressed frequently eventually they are forced to show it externally to others. This isn't natural, easy, or wanted, so when it comes out it can appear unpolished and missing of tact (and lack of tact is not something Fe takes well to). This is what [MENTION=5999]PeaceBaby[/MENTION] just did and I think it highlights it well. Eventually, they have to express what they think and feel, and it is going to be about who they are and what they are doing (and in this case it is justified). Want me to operate how you want me to so you understand? Fine, strap yourself in because it's gonna be a bumpy ride and I am not apologizing for it (and they shouldn't have to). Interestingly, I responded to this at first (and please don't kill me PeaceBaby) quite poorly while reading it at first. I thought "ugh... all this self importance, it's all about "me me me, this is how I am and you just have to deal with it!", and is very accusatory. And oh good lord Fe hates that kinda stuff, like really hates it. Every time I come across some kind of stuff I nearly always knee-jerk react to it, get pissed at the person, and want to shut them up. But, I always try and take a step back before I say something, because most of the time the person is being reasonable, or has good justification for it. They're just different. The worst thing someone could do is go and devalue what the Fi user just did by opening up. You do so, and you're in for a world of hurt. Sadly, Fe often wants to do exactly that.

Fe also has this pesky little "us vs. them" mentality. I have it bad, and I try to stay aware of it as much as I can cause it can cause problems (hence the common stereotype of Fe = drama). Fi is quite allergic to this (what I could imagine them to describe as) bullshit. INFJ's from what I have observed seem to be less inclined to fully slip into this us vs. them mentality so strongly as Fe-doms can. However, they tend to be a little less aware of it happening at all. Even if it's stated bluntly as "I have no ulterior motives, do not read between the lines", that is going to happen anyway. It's very, very hard for them to turn that off as it's such an essential tool for them since they are Ni-dom. Also, because there almost always is something between the lines. However small, all humans will have that present. When Fe is pushed and it's sensibilities are pressed, it will press back. If it's pricked, it's going to look for external things to validate, and Ni will keep sniffing until it finds something, even if it's imaginary.

Another thing I have noticed in these discussions, is that it's not so much that each "side" (there I go with the us vs. them again ) is putting the other down, but building themselves up. Thus it's that one side builds a tower, the other sees that, copies that, and builds theirs a little higher. Then the other dislikes that, and builds theres to match or higher, then the other must match or go higher. Ad infinitium. Neither likes this, and they're felt in totally different ways: INFP sees the INFJ's devaluing the INFP's by not properly acknowledging what they bring to the table and only using external metrics. The INFJ's sees the INFP's as being haughty and self-important in their language and internal focus, which they see as a back-door put down (thinking: they aren't talking me down, they're talking me down by talking themselves up), and there in lies much of the contention.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

Taking it a bit broader - question to the INFJs - what is it exactly that results in the INFJ extending that trust and opening up? I don't know that it has anything to do with internal consistency but it seems like it is certainly something. Time? Behaviors over time? Is there some kind of inflection point that occurs? What builds up that trust over time and what tears it down?

I’ve underlined the parts of fid’s list that apply to me:

I'm not sure if it's so much a choice for me, but an instinctual feeling that develops over time as I continue getting to know someone. Some factors probably would be:

- Ability to make me feel that we are on the same team, even if we have differing views. I think that partly is done by starting from points of commonality before venturing to points of difference.
- Not playing devil's advocate when I'm feeling upset about something that seems unfair to me or that involves other people until after I have calmed down. Ask questions instead about what is going on and find out what the underlying issue seems to be.
- Loyalty and general kindness - Especially in how people act in public towards others or what they say about people in front of a group/listen to what others say about those individuals without commenting. If they treat other people badly, I'm not likely to trust them with me. If I feel publicly embarrassed by information they've shared that was private, by teasing me in front of people whose regard matters to me, by devaluing what matters to me, or by allowing other people to talk about me negatively when I am not present without saying anything, I sure am not going to open up more to them.
- How much common ground we have to begin with. Is communication a constant uphill climb? Do we have differing views on a lot of subjects, especially fundamental ones to the way we see and interpret the world? If so, it's not a matter of shutting people out, but just not getting a lot closer to them.
- Consistent behaviour. I like knowing what I might expect from someone and how then to interact with them in a way that is mutually satisfying. If I am getting mixed messages, don't receive any feedback on my own interaction, receive information that doesn't match up with the image they are trying to portray to me, if they act very differently around different people, or if they seem really unpredictable, I am going to feel uneasy a lot of the time and it also takes up huge amounts of my mental and emotional bandwidth.
- I open up much more quickly to people who seem to make efforts to understand my internal world without trying to direct it first. One of the greatest compliments I could have is someone who asks me why I work the way I do, or who wants to know more about me and what makes me tick.
- Good listeners/awareness of reciprocation - I tend to attract a lot of people who want to feel cared for, but who don't have the resources/interest to reciprocate. Someone who is actually interested in knowing me will see more of the inner layers sooner.
- History - I am more open to anyone who is familiar. However, someone who has proven in the past to be caring, loyal, thoughtful, insightful, an expert in a certain area that I am seeking help in, or stepped in when they were really needed, etc will be someone I will trust more.
- Awareness of what is most important to me and treats those areas with care and respect.
- Appreciation. Someone who verbalizes that they value me and what they specifically value about me - helps me to know how they see my role in the relationship, and also that I have something of value to provide to them, which makes me more trusting of them.
- No sudden negative emotional surprises. It's not that I won't forgive, but if I get a hit that I didn't see coming that indicates the other person sees me radically differently than anything they indicated to me before (particularly publicly), I won't be coming back for more of same soon. It takes a LOOOOOONNNNG time to regain trust after something like that.
- The person's character and general treatment of the people around them. Their decision-making. If I trust their judgement generally, I'm more likely to open up to them.
- Someone who can get me to try new things or who can draw me into a group. I'm kind of tentative in some ways, although rigid in others. I like the counterpoint of someone who is able to get me to trust them enough that I will allow them to take me out of my comfort zone.
- Who they are close to - often says a lot about their own inner world that can't always be seen just by knowing the person. What are they drawn to, what negative qualities are they indulgent of and to what extent, do they act differently around certain people, what traits they value, commonalities between their different friends, how they feel about family, etc. Gives me a better idea of whether I want to be part of their world and to what extent I would like to allow them into mine.
- Affinity to the other person - Ni connection or some other trait that allows for unspoken communication or feeling of closeness or understanding naturally.
- Good listener - I don't talk people's ears off and try to be sensitive to their interests. If they get distracted easily during a conversation, share way different amounts of information than I do, or don't ask about something I was talking about that was important after we get interrupted, I take it as an expression of disinterest and I am unlikely to share more.
- Perceptivity - decent judge of character and of changes in emotional temperature in a room or in a social situation.
- Someone who seems to understand me accurately without it being too much effort for either of us to get there.

That last one is huge, probably the biggest for me.

Time and reliability (and internal consistency, to some extent) will nurture trust, but there are many people I trust who I wouldn’t open up to simply because communication is too much of an uphill climb (as per fid’s list). I trust quite a few people for many different things- but there aren’t many people I can bounce reality off of and get helpful feedback in return. Getting unhelpful feedback is an alienating experience for me, I find it causes more distress than simply trying to work something out by myself. This is why I’m extremely particular about who I go to. Though reciprocally, having someone I can bounce reality off of and get helpful feedback really does shave an incredible amount of time off the process.

The funny thing is, I always ask why too, but my boss doesn't seem to mind it when I ask. I suspect it's because when I ask why, it comes across more like a 5 year old's idle curiousity. With the INFJ, there's a real sense of intentionality and discernment to her questions, which I think unsettles my boss. If I had to speculate, I would say that she feels like her instructions are being judged, evaluated, and questioned. I don't think it's as threatening as she's taking it though. I think Miss INFJ just needs to know why in order to motivate herself to do the task. I bet a lot of tension would be eliminated if the boss just relaxed a little and showed her some of the big picture. Also, the INFJ would probably be more motivated and feel better about her work.

Damn straight! At least for me, if I don’t know why I’m doing something- how the piece I’m working on fits into some bigger picture- it can be ridiculously hard for me to concentrate on it or do it well.

Is it just curiosity, the reason you ask, or do you need the bigger picture it fits into to stay focused too? (I suspect it’s curiosity, because that would explain it having the tone of idle curiosity.)

And [MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION]: Nevermind. Even highlander said that initial post 'felt like INFP is better than INFJ talk'- but whatever. I'm sorry I even tried. I will leave you alone. eta: Realizing that tone isn't conveyed very well with text, I want to point out that I am sorry. I do not understand where you got a lot of things in that last post, so it's clear to me we are talking right past each other on several points- that's why I said I'd leave you alone.

 

[highlander]

I'm not sure if it's so much a choice for me, but an instinctual feeling that develops over time as I continue getting to know someone. Some factors probably would be:

- Ability to make me feel that we are on the same team, even if we have differing views. I think that partly is done by starting from points of commonality before venturing to points of difference.
- Not playing devil's advocate when I'm feeling upset about something that seems unfair to me or that involves other people until after I have calmed down. Ask questions instead about what is going on and find out what the underlying issue seems to be.
- Loyalty and general kindness - Especially in how people act in public towards others or what they say about people in front of a group/listen to what others say about those individuals without commenting. If they treat other people badly, I'm not likely to trust them with me. If I feel publicly embarrassed by information they've shared that was private, by teasing me in front of people whose regard matters to me, by devaluing what matters to me, or by allowing other people to talk about me negatively when I am not present without saying anything, I sure am not going to open up more to them.
- How much common ground we have to begin with. Is communication a constant uphill climb? Do we have differing views on a lot of subjects, especially fundamental ones to the way we see and interpret the world? If so, it's not a matter of shutting people out, but just not getting a lot closer to them.
- Consistent behaviour. I like knowing what I might expect from someone and how then to interact with them in a way that is mutually satisfying. If I am getting mixed messages, don't receive any feedback on my own interaction, receive information that doesn't match up with the image they are trying to portray to me, if they act very differently around different people, or if they seem really unpredictable, I am going to feel uneasy a lot of the time and it also takes up huge amounts of my mental and emotional bandwidth.
- I open up much more quickly to people who seem to make efforts to understand my internal world without trying to direct it first. One of the greatest compliments I could have is someone who asks me why I work the way I do, or who wants to know more about me and what makes me tick.
- Good listeners/awareness of reciprocation - I tend to attract a lot of people who want to feel cared for, but who don't have the resources/interest to reciprocate. Someone who is actually interested in knowing me will see more of the inner layers sooner.
- History - I am more open to anyone who is familiar. However, someone who has proven in the past to be caring, loyal, thoughtful, insightful, an expert in a certain area that I am seeking help in, or stepped in when they were really needed, etc will be someone I will trust more.
- Awareness of what is most important to me and treats those areas with care and respect.
- Appreciation. Someone who verbalizes that they value me and what they specifically value about me - helps me to know how they see my role in the relationship, and also that I have something of value to provide to them, which makes me more trusting of them.
- No sudden negative emotional surprises. It's not that I won't forgive, but if I get a hit that I didn't see coming that indicates the other person sees me radically differently than anything they indicated to me before (particularly publicly), I won't be coming back for more of same soon. It takes a LOOOOOONNNNG time to regain trust after something like that.
- The person's character and general treatment of the people around them. Their decision-making. If I trust their judgement generally, I'm more likely to open up to them.
- Someone who can get me to try new things or who can draw me into a group. I'm kind of tentative in some ways, although rigid in others. I like the counterpoint of someone who is able to get me to trust them enough that I will allow them to take me out of my comfort zone.
- Who they are close to - often says a lot about their own inner world that can't always be seen just by knowing the person. What are they drawn to, what negative qualities are they indulgent of and to what extent, do they act differently around certain people, what traits they value, commonalities between their different friends, how they feel about family, etc. Gives me a better idea of whether I want to be part of their world and to what extent I would like to allow them into mine.
- Affinity to the other person - Ni connection or some other trait that allows for unspoken communication or feeling of closeness or understanding naturally.
- Good listener - I don't talk people's ears off and try to be sensitive to their interests. If they get distracted easily during a conversation, share way different amounts of information than I do, or don't ask about something I was talking about that was important after we get interrupted, I take it as an expression of disinterest and I am unlikely to share more.
- Perceptivity - decent judge of character and of changes in emotional temperature in a room or in a social situation.
- Someone who seems to understand me accurately without it being too much effort for either of us to get there.

That is an excellent and very thorough response. Thank you .

Consistency in how a person treats me over time, although my need to connect with a few people closely can outweigh my uneasiness about trusting, so I sometimes take really big risks. I've entered relationships where I was so certain the person wouldn't hurt me that I couldn't see that they were hurting me and manipulating me for a while. I don't really hate the people who hurt me either.

I tend to like people and hope to find reasons that explain (and in some cases excuse) hurtful behavior. I don't know if I feel absolute trust for anyone, including myself. I think of people as being like animals and mostly reactionary. I see people as kaleidoscope patterns in which there are some underlying core ways of being that continually reconfigure based on circumstance, both inner and outer experiences. Even people who have said and done scarring things to me I can still like and be helpful with, and in some cases re-establish a deepest connection. I get rather obsessed with the rift analyzing all possible reasons it happened, and when I can come up with one or more plausible explanations, then I can put it to rest.

I often feel pretty disconnected from the world and have a feeling that I think quite differently, which makes me feel a bit estranged from others socially, even if I can participate in a pleasant chat or helpful endeavor, or shared project. A deep connection has to do with finding someone who I think will both understand me and be consistently kind to me. My normal self is rather non-reactive emotionally and not invested in the same things most people are. The way I think is extremely speculative and nebulous which is one enormous difference I find when trying to communicate with others who tend to have crystalized opinions and view certain ideas as facts and certainties.

Consistency really seems to be a big deal.

Normative communication is about sharing assumptions with a cultural group. In my closer cultures I find it includes certain types of competitive talk, certain social games of distance/friendliness, flattery, specific responses expected when there is a baby, a graduation picture, ways of reacting to religious ritual, things that are said to show romantic involvement - but not to much, ways of communicating the way you wish to connect with another person, etc.

People who excel at this create one large, nuanced, inner system to account for all the conscious and unconscious expectations of that social norm. It is difficult for most people to change to another norm quickly. For me I have numerous, smaller inner systems to account for different sorts of people, but no one system is as well developed as the one big one is for most people, so I rely on a lot of approximation and underlying principles that tend to apply to humanity in general. Because of this I can be seen to have moments of unusually clear insight that most people overlook, and at the same time be a huge social duffus.


These are always unfortunate, I think, for everyone.

Again, you guys are so analytical . It makes me feel a little stupid at times.

Part of this issue stems I think from egoic Ni. Each introverted function carries an attractive self-delusion, and the Ni delusion is that they see the whole picture, that their perceptions are the deepest and widest and wisest. Rationally, in order for this to be true however, they would need to be able to perceive everything. And since they can't perceive that deep inner human space (and we have a lot of evidence to support this assertion because we know they don't see us or "get" us) we already know that they aren't the deepest or widest or wisest. It's probably not fair for us to be disappointed about that, but it does kind of make me feel sad which signals to me that this ideal of connection I held will go unrealized.

I don't think this is the right way to look at it. As much as it might not seem l like it, of all people, us Ni-doms realize just how much we don't know. We seek depth of understanding and insight however. It's just how we're built. Yes, we have a great deal of confidence in our perceptions, but they are just that - perceptions. Those perceptions can be changed with new evidence. Can you imagine living life like this - to have this constant quest for evolving your insights about things and realize that there is no possible way you can ever come close to knowing enough? That's what it is like.

And honestly, needing to control the external is alien and feels shallow to me but at least I know what they need and why they need it and it's not because they are some sort of "problem". And I can provide at least a good simulation of external constancy in many cases, BUT I will add this is at great effort. It's not my natural strength.

It's probably exactly how Ti doms think about Te-doms and Te-auxes.

I'm just going to say it: the only people I imagine dubbed as Fi "elitists", the ones who purportedly see themselves as "superior" are the INFPs who actually speak up and get involved in these difficult yet often productive discussions. The out-loud INFPs. Am I proud of myself for speaking up, a person who historically "goes along to get along" and have done so all my life? Yes I am. You can easily see my evolution looking backwards. In my first two years here, how naive I was thinking that by being positive and facilitative I could handle any disagreement presented. Thinking that by handling all of the difficult emotions that have arisen over and over again silently and on my own was helping the situation and not hindering communication. How wrong I was!

Well, I believe that INFPs tend to be pretty much on the idealistic side. When you combine that with dominant Fi, it can lead to what can be perceived by others as an ivory tower mentality. Maybe that is where the Fi elitist reference comes from? Again, there is the analogy I can provide that INTJs can feel the same way about INTPs. The difference is that it is about thinking and intellectual perspective rather than values. Then again, ESTJs probably think that about INTJs so...

IN THIS PLACE, on this forum, I get to be Fi-dominant. I get to disagree when people talk about my functions wrong, I get to say that my functions have value anywhere or anytime I choose in any thread that strikes me as an issue. I am an equal at this table, and I get to feel a little positive for a change and not apologetic about a functional stack that is regularly ridiculed or devalued or appears to have no practical use in day-to-day life. I do not assert this VALUE at anyone else's expense, and anyone here can search the thousands of posts I've made and despite this very challenging interaction that seeems to happen in INFP/INFJ-land, you will find NOTHING that I've written that devalues INFJs as real human beings with their own intrinsic value and worth. Even if understanding each other is hard sometimes, and each type has our little peccadilloes that can be frustrating, these are people I see as my EQUALS, like every other person in the universe who has individual strengths and weaknesses but who in reality is no better or worse than me for that.

If anyone feels that my assertion of my functions makes them feel smaller, then go look in the mirror at why you need to diminish my voice in order to make yourself feel better about yourself. That is what is happening in these situations.

Sometimes, I think this forum is like a laboratory. People get upset about things and then actually talk about why they are upset because of the type of forum it is. We know what type they are so we get a chance to see how the interaction works. It's unfortunate that some INFJs feel driven away by certain types of interaction. I also feel badly that you seem upset.

One thing about our forum that is fundamentally different than other forums is that it is centered on interaction across types. The other forums focus more heavily on facilitating interaction within types. So, INFJs interact with INFJs. INTJs interact with INTJs. That's the culture they foster, even if the forum has all different kinds of types. We're different. I see this as a positive thing. We get to see how these inter-type conflicts play out.

I know some people don't really like conflict but we can learn from it. It's useful at times. It can be a good thing.

 

[Forever_Jung]

Damn straight! At least for me, if I don’t know why I’m doing something- how the piece I’m working on fits into some bigger pictures- it can be ridiculously hard for me to concentrate on it or do it well.

Is it just curiosity, the reason you ask, or do you need the bigger picture it fits into to stay focused too? (I suspect it’s curiosity, because that would explain it having the tone of idle curiosity.)

I feel the same way. I need to know the underlying principle or pattern, so I can do it well. Now, if I didn't know why I was doing something, I'm sure I could grind out an adequate job, but I couldn't work in the dark, doing menial pointless tasks for a long period of time. But when I'm interested in a project, see the point of it (in big-picture terms), and can put my own personal spin on it, I really go all out.

As for my curiousity, sometimes it is idle, but in these matters I will often affect a sort of casual disinterest to lower the perceived "threat" of my inquiries.

 

[highlander]

These discussions between INFJ and INFP almost always boil down to Fi vs. Fe. Interestingly, it seems that almost any type comparison comes down to the judging functions. Either way since Fe is my dominant function, maybe I can give a bit more insight here.

The fact of the matter is, in my experience, Fi and Fe don't mix well, and it's very hard for it to do so. IRL I but heads the most with Fi types. Communicating with them can be a significant challenge. As outlined in this thread there are major differences between internal and external motivations (I'm also blunt and force them to externalize, but that's another discussion) tend to be the biggest stress points. When Fe sees someone (well, "see" is usually a subconscious thing) working purely under internal constraints, it gets frustrated quick. The reason? It's seen as inefficient, bias, illogical, and selfish. It doesn't think that works or is possible. This is completely independent of whether or not it's true. The issue taken is the internal aspect. Fe is completely incapable of functioning without an external reference, and distrusts its own internal references (they get used, just not often or well). When Fi is in use by someone, Fe really doesn't "see" it. It just sees the output. Sort of like someone publishing a paper with no citations. They're also rather firm/solid stances (often because they're thorough) and as such feels kinda haughty/snooty. These are the core reasons I butt heads with IxFP's because I don't "see" what they're doing. I'll wrongly assume my way of processing is the best way to do it, and if someone doesn't do it in that way then it's wrong. The truth is, both work just fine. That's why Fe gets upset over Fi though, it simply is unable to see how it's working since it's internal. Since INFJ's use aux-Fe, this grates them. They want things external, and if they go about it wrong, they're going to piss off the Fi user.

Another issue is the nature of Fi doms (and this does link to 4 a little). There is a self-focus because their internal network is how they function, so when pressed frequently eventually they are forced to show it externally to others. This isn't natural, easy, or wanted, so when it comes out it can appear unpolished and missing of tact (and lack of tact is not something Fe takes well to). This is what [MENTION=5999]PeaceBaby[/MENTION] just did and I think it highlights it well. Eventually, they have to express what they think and feel, and it is going to be about who they are and what they are doing (and in this case it is justified). Want me to operate how you want me to so you understand? Fine, strap yourself in because it's gonna be a bumpy ride and I am not apologizing for it (and they shouldn't have to). Interestingly, I responded to this at first (and please don't kill me PeaceBaby) quite poorly while reading it at first. I thought "ugh... all this self importance, it's all about "me me me, this is how I am and you just have to deal with it!", and is very accusatory. And oh good lord Fe hates that kinda stuff, like really hates it. Every time I come across some kind of stuff I nearly always knee-jerk react to it, get pissed at the person, and want to shut them up. But, I always try and take a step back before I say something, because most of the time the person is being reasonable, or has good justification for it. They're just different. The worst thing someone could do is go and devalue what the Fi user just did by opening up. You do so, and you're in for a world of hurt. Sadly, Fe often wants to do exactly that.

Fe also has this pesky little "us vs. them" mentality. I have it bad, and I try to stay aware of it as much as I can cause it can cause problems (hence the common stereotype of Fe = drama). Fi is quite allergic to this (what I could imagine them to describe as) bullshit. INFJ's from what I have observed seem to be less inclined to fully slip into this us vs. them mentality so strongly as Fe-doms can. However, they tend to be a little less aware of it happening at all. Even if it's stated bluntly as "I have no ulterior motives, do not read between the lines", that is going to happen anyway. It's very, very hard for them to turn that off as it's such an essential tool for them since they are Ni-dom. Also, because there almost always is something between the lines. However small, all humans will have that present. When Fe is pushed and it's sensibilities are pressed, it will press back. If it's pricked, it's going to look for external things to validate, and Ni will keep sniffing until it finds something, even if it's imaginary.

Another thing I have noticed in these discussions, is that it's not so much that each "side" (there I go with the us vs. them again ) is putting the other down, but building themselves up. Thus it's that one side builds a tower, the other sees that, copies that, and builds theirs a little higher. Then the other dislikes that, and builds theres to match or higher, then the other must match or go higher. Ad infinitium. Neither likes this, and they're felt in totally different ways: INFP sees the INFJ's devaluing the INFP's by not properly acknowledging what they bring to the table and only using external metrics. The INFJ's sees the INFP's as being haughty and self-important in their language and internal focus, which they see as a back-door put down (thinking: they aren't talking me down, they're talking me down by talking themselves up), and there in lies much of the contention.

I just want to say this is a really good and insightful post. Thanks for describing all of that.

 

[PeaceBaby]

Interestingly, I responded to this at first (and please don't kill me PeaceBaby) quite poorly while reading it at first. I thought "ugh... all this self importance, it's all about "me me me, this is how I am and you just have to deal with it!", and is very accusatory. And oh good lord Fe hates that kinda stuff, like really hates it. Every time I come across some kind of stuff I nearly always knee-jerk react to it, get pissed at the person, and want to shut them up. But, I always try and take a step back before I say something, because most of the time the person is being reasonable, or has good justification for it. They're just different. The worst thing someone could do is go and devalue what the Fi user just did by opening up. You do so, and you're in for a world of hurt. Sadly, Fe often wants to do exactly that.

[MENTION=20829]Hard[/MENTION], of course I won't kill you. I appreciate you, your whole post and your insight to realize how invalidating it is to Fe-shut-people up. The extroverted judging function does feel it is in the right! But here's the difference, you and I could battle it out, I would take you on and we could go toe-to-toe (although I am at a natural disadvantage). But if it was important enough to us both, we would sort it out! From your vantage point, why can't it get sorted out in INFP-INFJ-land?

(And as an aside, how Fi sounds to you just makes me want to cry lol. First, because I think I expressed myself sincerely and eloquently, and second, because "me, me, me" is not the locus of my life. Being in second, third, fourth place is very familiar in caring for my family and friends and giving to other concerns. So, to articulate that out loud, putting me "first" is so huge to me, to speak to my individuality is such a big deal, for it to be called a lack of tact is pretty horrible to read actually.)

Even if it's stated bluntly as "I have no ulterior motives, do not read between the lines", that is going to happen anyway. It's very, very hard for them to turn that off as it's such an essential tool for them since they are Ni-dom. Also, because there almost always is something between the lines. However small, all humans will have that present. When Fe is pushed and it's sensibilities are pressed, it will press back. If it's pricked, it's going to look for external things to validate, and Ni will keep sniffing until it finds something, even if it's imaginary.

Well, here's how I look at this. Everyone has a variety of motives for expression at any given time. It's not that I don't see them, but I don't place much faith in motives, because I see a whole bunch that just have higher and lower probabilities and some that are in conflict or alignment with each other. (eta: this could be partly a social-dominant thing, I'm not sure all INFPs would agree with seeing that stuff.) To me, it's not necessary to hard-boil it to one because there's a bunch of possibilities, so I orient myself to a certain action both taking them into account and regardless of their existence. I place more faith in the internal read I guess. Which leads me to this:

Another thing I have noticed in these discussions, is that it's not so much that each "side" (there I go with the us vs. them again ) is putting the other down, but building themselves up. Thus it's that one side builds a tower, the other sees that, copies that, and builds theirs a little higher. Then the other dislikes that, and builds theres to match or higher, then the other must match or go higher. Ad infinitium. Neither likes this, and they're felt in totally different ways: INFP sees the INFJ's devaluing the INFP's by not properly acknowledging what they bring to the table and only using external metrics. The INFJ's sees the INFP's as being haughty and self-important in their language and internal focus, which they see as a back-door put down (thinking: they aren't talking me down, they're talking me down by talking themselves up), and there in lies much of the contention.

I do see your point and I think you've likely hit this straight, and I myself have freely admitted I can sound holier-than-thou. But here's the rub: how do you show value when what value you have is internal and kind of hidden? I tried opening all that up, showing the inside (which isn't that pretty really at times) and it didn't help? I can just choose to live my life as an expression of my values and remain silent. (Actions speak louder than words and all.) But we're here on the forum and all we have is words. So how do I even build a tower when those blocks are invisible to the other party? I have no interest in knocking down INFJ blocks either, but I see some of the issues in what they are building and I can't help but point them out. Don't people want to know? I sure want to know when I'm building something inefficiently, even if having it pointed out smarts.

So if you can help me cut to the chase, throw out these stumbling blocks when dealing with INFJs, I'd appreciate it. And I've tried just doing Fe speak, it doesn't work because I can't keep it up forever, the Fi pokes out.