Am I as terribly impractical as people tell me? Or is this normal for an INFJ?

[Athenian200]

I was just thinking about a unique tendancy I have. I'm very bad at dealing with the world around me in literal terms, but I'm great at analyzing situations, emotions, theories, and grammar. For instance, I once had a dilemma in class because I knew that I was supposed to sit down before the bell rang. However, I couldn't sit down, because there was an object obstructing my desk. I couldn't move it because I hadn't been given permission to move it. I couldn't ask someone else to move it, because then I would still be liable for the object's movement, which might not be permitted. I couldn't sit at another desk, because I hadn't been given permission to do that either. I couldn't continue to stand there, because I was supposed to be seated. According to someone else in the classroom, I just stood there, ringing one hand and tapping my head with the other, looking very confused and nervous. Thankfully, someone else saw me staring at the object with confusion, and moved it for me without my asking. I sat down as quickly as possible, realizing that since I hadn't asked them to move it, it wasn't my responsiblity, and I was free of guilt, because I had met expectations, and not done anything I wasn't allowed to, and I internally rejoiced, but I also felt a little guilty because I knew that their helping me might get them into trouble. Another time, I raised my hand and told my teacher that "My desk isn't working, I can't sit down." Afterwards, she give me directions that allowed me to sit down. I got the impression that most people already know what to do in that situation, even though it wasn't written in the Student Handbook or the Syllabus, both of which I had memorized. I've rechecked them since, but there is no procedure for what to do when something causes your desk to be inaccessible, which I found confusing, since there were plenty relating to how and when work should be completed.

Also, I have trouble describing things in concrete terms. For instance, I once tried to enter the classroom, but the door wouldn't open. When I tried to explain the situation, all I came up with was. "This door doesn't work." Thankfully, the person figured out what I meant, and unlocked it. All that my mind could come up with was that a door was a metaphor representing both accessibility and security, and that this metaphor was reminiscent of the Roman god Janus, and that the Latin word ianua meant door, but I had no idea what to do with a door other than just engage my standard procedure for opening it, and to request assistance when that failed.

The point is that somehow, despite all my ability to deal with theories and such, the physical world baffles me to the point that I wouldn't be able to function if I didn't know how to get other people to take care of those aspects for me.

 

[ptgatsby]

Hmmm, I've read this more than a few times... and all I can come up with is "I am pretty sure this is not normal, but I have no idea what else to say on it"!

Normally I'd suggest taking a behavioural test but I don't think that'll offer any insight. However, I am curious if you have any spatial awareness issues - catching balls, playing tetris, even pouring liquids into other containers/measuring portions.

 

[Athenian200]

As a matter of fact, I'm pretty bad at all those things. I have to pour liquid back and forth several times to stop it in the right place, and even then it's hard to tell where the water should be relative to the line, because if you move, the position of the water to the line appears to change, so you don't know if you got it right. I can't get past the third level in tetris, and I just hold my hands out in front of me when playing catch, hoping it will land near them, and I manage to catch the ball about thirty percent of the time. For some reason, this doesn't affect my ability to type on a keyboard, insert and remove disks, or write with a pen.

Interestingly, I did take a test like that just recently. Here were the results:

Verbal/Linguistic
100%
Intrapersonal
65%
Logical/Mathematical
45%
Musical
45%
Interpersonal
25%
Visual/Spatial
25%
Naturalist
20%
Bodily/Kinesthetic
0%

 

[Totenkindly]

I empathize with the passivity aspect of it (I have felt similar constraints on my behavior, especially when younger, like I was powerless to act or do anything because I was too aware of all the expectations on me and had no intuitive sense of what to do to get out of it)... but just not to this extent.

It is like you are so aware of all the expectations that you find yourself in a quandary, being able to do nothing whatsoever because you are perceiving ALL the potential limitations placed on you by others or the environment.

The thing is that the expectations are not that rigid, and that you have power to override them. Some of the expectations are not correct. (For example, a teacher wants you to ask permission for most things; but he would more likely want you to move an object and sit during class, rather than wait for permission.) You did not either have a sense of how to prioritize these things, or you were afraid in the face of having to choose which expectation to throw out because you did not want to do the wrong thing.

So you were thinking far too much, and the damage from that was worse than just breaking a few seeming expectations and realizing that either the punishment was not bad or that you wouldn't even be punished.

I don't know if the spatial issues are involved in this or else signify something completely different. [I am actually very good spatially, despite having the mentioned problem above. My reflexes are so good that something can fall off a shelf nearby and I'll see it out of the corner of my eye and catch it immediately, before I even realize what I'm doing... So I don't know what that says about your situation.]

 

[cafe]

Unless I was already in a very agitated state, I think I would have been able to deal with those situations and articulate what I needed.

I do recall in PE once deciding that there was no point to my attempting to hit the volley ball. I simply stepped out of the way whenever it came my direction. Past experience had taught me that the only thing accomplished by my hitting the ball was that I got hurt. The ball never went over the net when I hit it. Hitting it seemed pointless.

 

[The Ü™]

Yes, I have trouble explaining things in detail, as well. Maybe it's an Ni thing, because they tend to be forgetful and have poor attention to detail. Of course, it could also be an Se thing, since they may notice the generality of their surroundings but not focus on anything in particular.

Si is the one who will probably notice things better because of their singular focus which involves attention to detail. Ne could also notice details but would probably devise a way to make it better.

On another note, I have come up with a thought about irrational functions.

 

[ptgatsby]

That answer was perfect! Second question;

For some reason, this doesn't affect my ability to type on a keyboard, insert and remove disks, or write with a pen.

Do you do anything like paint? Any form of art? Have you ever done anything like architecture (drawing or otherwise)?

If not, do you play video games? Mario kart or similar?

 

[Athenian200]

That answer was perfect! Second question;



Do you do anything like paint? Any form of art? Have you ever done anything like architecture (drawing or otherwise)?

If not, do you play video games? Mario kart or similar?

Hmm... I have drawn something once or twice. Here it is. When I try to draw something, this is the type of thing I can think of. I know it's boring, but it is how I draw.

I can't play Mario Kart very well, but I'm pretty good at RPG's and simulators like Final Fantasy, ADOM., or SimCity.

 

[ptgatsby]

Hmm... I have drawn something once or twice. Here it is. When I try to draw something, this is the type of thing I can think of. I know it's boring, but it is how I draw.

I can't play Mario Kart very well, but I'm pretty good at RPG's and simulators like Final Fantasy, ADOM., or SimCity.

Hmm, as far as the drawing goes, do you draw by hand? (or paint by hand)

That drawing suggests technical forms of drawing - abstractions - have you ever tried recreating a physical scene (people, places, stuff)?

 

[Athenian200]

When I draw by hand, it looks exactly the same, except it's in pencil instead of pixel. (Get it?)

Occasionally I draw scenes, but they're very simple. They have a lot of detail representing all the aspects of the thing, but according to my art teachers, they're all disproportionate and the small details look as prominent as the big ones.

 

[ptgatsby]

This may sound funny, and cut me off if you find this boring/irritating/pointless... but I'm trying to get a handle on something in particular.

Let's say that you were going on a picnic - just you and one other person. Standing in the kitchen, you are going to make sandwhiches. With no idea how hungry or what the other person wants or likes, what kind of sandwhiches do you make and how many? How do you make that determination?

Sitting at a table, you are drawing away, really into your work. All of a sudden, assuming you are using a mechanical pencil (can replace with paint or ink ) and distractedly, you fill the pencil up with lead. Except this time, without noticing it, you were able to fill it up without any problems and continue on. Would this happen? Is the common situation where you needed to fill up the pencil with lead difficult for you?

 

[Totenkindly]

Let's say that you were going on a picnic - just you and one other person. Standing in the kitchen, you are going to make sandwhiches. With no idea how hungry or what the other person wants or likes, what kind of sandwhiches do you make and how many? How do you make that determination?

Oh, goody! can I use this question in the JGBPT? [Jenny-Gatsby Balanced Personality Test]

 

[Athenian200]

I would make four sandwiches, because I believe that two sandwiches apiece should be plenty to satiate a normal appetite. I would make peanut butter and jelly because most people like that type of sandwich. Unless of course they were allergic to them, and then I would make ham and cheese sandwiches, because those are the second most common.

It isn't impossible for me to fill the pencil, but I would never be able to do it without thinking. I would follow the following procedure if I ran out of lead in my pencil, and had some in reserve:

1. Remove the eraser from the end of the pencil, and place it on a stable surface, noting it's location for later.

2. Remove the container of spare lead from the location where it was stored, and open it.

3. Remove one stick of lead, and hold it in the hand opposite the mechanical pencil.

4. Using this hand, place the lead into the end of the mechanical pencil, all the while ensuring that the pencil is held with the writing end facing downward.

5. Take the eraser back from the stable surface, and place it into the socket on the end of the pencil.

6. Close the container of spare lead, and place it back into it's storage place.

7. Take the pencil in my dominant hand, and resume writing./drawing.

Usually I would just take a new mechanical pencil out rather than go to all this trouble, however.

 

[ptgatsby]

Usually I would just take a new mechanical pencil out rather than go to all this trouble, however.

Damn, your answer and style of answer completely killed my theory. Well, one las shot;

In your OP, you said that you couldn't sit down because something was on your chair. What would of happened if you had been reading (ie: in your own world) and came to sit down at your desk - you were already sitting, still trying to read, and there was something there... Would you of stopped reading or would you of moved the object without it even registering?

 

[Athenian200]

Damn, your answer and style of answer completely killed my theory. Well, one las shot;

In your OP, you said that you couldn't sit down because something was on your chair. What would of happened if you had been reading (ie: in your own world) and came to sit down at your desk - you were already sitting, still trying to read, and there was something there... Would you of stopped reading or would you of moved the object without it even registering?

I would probably ignore the object unless it started to push on me or injure me, and then I would probably freak out, and/or run away from the object. If it were something dangerous like a snake, I would probably scream the moment I noticed it.

 

[Totenkindly]

I would probably ignore the object unless it started to push on me or injure me, and then I would probably freak out, and/or run away from the object. If it were something dangerous like a snake, I would probably scream the moment I noticed it.

Yikes! Is this a typical INFJ intuition/imagination?

I would have never even imagined a "snake" being the object, or the object being dangerous... not in the context of a classroom (!)

 

[ptgatsby]

I would probably ignore the object unless it started to push on me or injure me, and then I would probably freak out, and/or run away from the object. If it were something dangerous like a snake, I would probably scream the moment I noticed it.

My simple explanation; Your OP suggests that what happens is that you overapply a certain 'structure' to your ruleset. You over-process a situation in advance and form an abstraction of the information you have taken in. This transposition becomes your new reality, your world... and when a situation comes up that doesn't meet that expectation, a form of cognitive dissonance triggers. This results in you being unable to grasp the situation and process it into a solution that isn't present in your abstraction.

[/complete and total Ne theorytime. Grain of salt, believe me]

--------- Background thoughts -----------


Can you conceive of a situation in which you would do something without even realising you were doing/did it?

For example, if I was reading and I sat down on something, I'd move it... and it would never even register. In the extreme, I'll sit on something alive, like my dog, and simply tell her to move... if my GF was to tell me that I sat on the dog (as a joke or something), at best it would be a hazy memory, like a dream.

All of the stories that I gave you were trying to find the balance between external presence and internal determination.

What I see happening is that you are unable to instinctively/intuitively (not the MBTI definition) able to react to a situation - that every situation requires it to come to your attention to be dealt with.

The problem is that certain situations create a paradox that can only be resolved in relative terms - for example, in Mario Kart, one doesn't just drive by measure distance required to drift, time to boost and angle of attack, etc. These things cannot be measured objectively by a human mind and more importantly, they cannot be abstracted. To use a math analogy, when playing mario kart, the proper strategy for each corner is to drift when you are able to powerboost at an angle that will take you close to the inside of the track. This cannot be abstrated to a higher level - a representive level, if that makes sense. The purest form of "Mario Kart" exists in the ability to use the full formula.

In a similar way, tetris requires a way of arranging blocks and knowledge of how certain pieces manage to fit together. There are two types of tetris players - the ones that play the perfect game - typically highly spatially developped people - and those that play an imperfect by highly conditional game - the "NP" style of using smaller strategies that simply work well together. Neither can be abstracted.

RPGs, however, can. So can simulators. FPS cannot. Most RTS games cannot. Racing games cannot. Some puzzle games can. What you need is a discrete set of numbers and rules that create the abstracted patterns.

Your attention to detail in art was surprising, but reframing it another way - the relative amount of detail is something you may not be able to instinctively understand. In other words, the relative importance of detail. Essentially, in my theory, you are looking at an object and creating an abstraction image on top of it - what you see is what you focused on... but the focus can't be universal. That means that certain areas as highlighted while others are not.

The technical drawings suggest something similar - these are forms that fit together. Each can be measured and transposed whole. You probably excel in recreating smaller objects (geometric shapes especially) in perfect detail... and you can probably create them both from RL situations and from your imagination.

The same thing applies to rules. A rule that is discrete and tangible can be applied to a similar problem. As soon as a problem comes up that cannot be solved directly - mostly because it was so incidental that the solution would normally be obvious - your mind draws it's focus onto the abstraction layer that you built up and focuses only on a single item.

 

[The_Liquid_Laser]

I was just thinking about a unique tendancy I have. I'm very bad at dealing with the world around me in literal terms, but I'm great at analyzing situations, emotions, theories, and grammar. For instance, I once had a dilemma in class because I knew that I was supposed to sit down before the bell rang. However, I couldn't sit down, because there was an object obstructing my desk. I couldn't move it because I hadn't been given permission to move it. I couldn't ask someone else to move it, because then I would still be liable for the object's movement, which might not be permitted. I couldn't sit at another desk, because I hadn't been given permission to do that either. I couldn't continue to stand there, because I was supposed to be seated. According to someone else in the classroom, I just stood there, ringing one hand and tapping my head with the other, looking very confused and nervous. Thankfully, someone else saw me staring at the object with confusion, and moved it for me without my asking. I sat down as quickly as possible, realizing that since I hadn't asked them to move it, it wasn't my responsiblity, and I was free of guilt, because I had met expectations, and not done anything I wasn't allowed to, and I internally rejoiced, but I also felt a little guilty because I knew that their helping me might get them into trouble. Another time, I raised my hand and told my teacher that "My desk isn't working, I can't sit down." Afterwards, she give me directions that allowed me to sit down. I got the impression that most people already know what to do in that situation, even though it wasn't written in the Student Handbook or the Syllabus, both of which I had memorized. I've rechecked them since, but there is no procedure for what to do when something causes your desk to be inaccessible, which I found confusing, since there were plenty relating to how and when work should be completed.

Also, I have trouble describing things in concrete terms. For instance, I once tried to enter the classroom, but the door wouldn't open. When I tried to explain the situation, all I came up with was. "This door doesn't work." Thankfully, the person figured out what I meant, and unlocked it. All that my mind could come up with was that a door was a metaphor representing both accessibility and security, and that this metaphor was reminiscent of the Roman god Janus, and that the Latin word ianua meant door, but I had no idea what to do with a door other than just engage my standard procedure for opening it, and to request assistance when that failed.

The point is that somehow, despite all my ability to deal with theories and such, the physical world baffles me to the point that I wouldn't be able to function if I didn't know how to get other people to take care of those aspects for me.

Wow what an amazing and interesting story. Thank you for sharing.

To me it sounds like you aren't using any developed extraverted function (excpept for maybe Fe). It sounds like you are using Si or Ni to perceive a situation and then it is being processed by Ti which spits the info back at Si/Ni and you are basically caught in one big loop in your head. Your only possible extraverted function is Fe, but if you are caught in a situation that violates etiquette or protocol then you are stuck.

This also explains any possible lack of spatial sense. Se, Ne, and Te all can give a person a practical way of dealing with the physical world, and also spatial sense. Your mind seems to work a lot like a computer. Your data is internal (Si or Ni) and your processing is internal (Ti) and you have syntax and other rules that you must logically follow (Fe working with Ti). But a computer doesn't have any perception (Se or Ne) of the outside world, so often times it will spit back an error that will seem obvious to a user. Also it has no judgements about the outside world (Te) other than the program rules that the programmer allowed it to follow (Fe). (Nice avatar btw I can now see why it is appropriate.) So I would think if you developed your Se, Ne or Te functions more then you should have a stronger spatial sense and also be able to better deal with the situation that you described above.

A different solution would be to reprogram yourself (Fe) so that in the future you would allow yourself to do some of the actions that you are not allowing yourself to do in the present. A rule like "Unless explicitly forbidden or morally objectionable you are allowed to take simple actions (duration less than 5 seconds) which would aid you in achieving the goal given to you by the authority figure".

Hmm...or maybe there is a better solution. What do you think?

 

[Athenian200]

The other interesting thing about my processing is that I usually accept data given to me by other people through facial expressions, intonation, verbalization, or hand gestures, all of which I can interpret. I also learn through reading. It's as though unless it is communicated through language or math, I can't comprehend it.

One of the most interesting things I learned in Geometry was that the shortest distance between two points was a straight line. It explained why so many people I saw tended to cut across the lawn rather than follow the sidewalk precisely.

I guess now I know why I like "Short Circuit" so much. I identify with "Input. Need Input!" very well.

We're all in agreement that my extraverted function is most similar to Fe, correct?

 

[ptgatsby]

We're all in agreement that my extraverted function is most similar to Fe, correct?

What I think I can safely say, if I'm at all correct in my theory, is that you are extremely J, at least on one of the sub-traits. I think it is also likely that you are extremely N.

I'd expect you to be an INFJ (dominant Ni) for sure. I've seen similar traits in other INxJs, though not as expressed. You sound like my counterpart (extreme NP), which is why I was thinking it out here.

I don't think I can comment on the F bit... I think it is likely that you are F over T... but I'm unsure about Fi over Fe (though dominant Ni would mean Fe within MBTI, I'm not sure I could identify Fe over Fi without that.)