[NF] Question for NFs.

[Noel]

The Sorrows of Young Werther

 

[cafe]

I've always thought of Werther as being an INTP.

 

[Noel]

I've always thought of Werther as being an INTP.

How so?

 

[cafe]

How so?

I see a parallel between him and the way a lot of young INTPs appear to deal with their infatuations. Seems like they idolize the person, idealize the love, but are often afraid to broach the subject or take any action that could make a relationship possible. Then they become despondent and bitter, etc.

 

[Littlelostnf]

We didn't fight (yes, I got your joke; thank goodness SW is not my babydaddy, however) over "quixotic" though I was/am personally feeling annoyed about the aim of the thread and SW's responses to answers to his question. He seems to have a very precise aim for what answers he wants, but that aim has only somewhat become clear as he has responded in the thread, rather than being clear from the start. As a learner, I find that very frustrating. Though this is obviously not school, it's a good reminder for how I should design exercises.

[And I STILL don't know what the problem was with "quixotic" if "visionary" is now not an appropriate response; see, it's all arbitrary according to SW.]

If we were together, there's a fun way to do this sort of activity, though. We'd all have a post-it pad, and SW would say, "What adjectives describe a quintessential NF?" And we'd write down all the adjectives that we could come up with, and then we'd compile our post-its together. We'd have a lot of words that were the same, or that could fit in the same category. We'd go to the task of sorting words into concept piles, and then when we had distinct piles, we would find a word with which to classify those piles. So, for example, we might have "quixotic," "idealistic," "big-picture," "visionary," and "speculative," which could go together in one category (perhaps "VISIONARY" but perhaps not). This is called "affinity diagramming" and it is great fun.

That sounds like a very cool exercise and I'm wondering if 5th graders could do that on a scaled down type level...bet they could. I think I'll be teaching 5th grade next year (as opposed to Transitional first grade this year) if so I will DEF try something like that exercise...I think I like it! Danke, Merci, Thanks for the idea

 

[SolitaryWalker]

That sounds like a very cool exercise and I'm wondering if 5th graders could do that on a scaled down type level...bet they could. I think I'll be teaching 5th grade next year (as opposed to Transitional first grade this year) if so I will DEF try something like that exercise...I think I like it! Danke, Merci, Thanks for the idea

You all have missed the point again... I never worry about whats practical... just about figuring things out for their own end... regardless of what good they may be in the external world...

 

[Littlelostnf]

You all have missed the point again... I never worry about whats practical... just about figuring things out for their own end... regardless of what good they may be in the external world...

Nah we didn't miss your point...we just turned your "for the sake of knowledge" idea into one that can be used in the external world for good. Thanks for helping us out.

 

[Eileen]

You all have missed the point again... I never worry about whats practical... just about figuring things out for their own end... regardless of what good they may be in the external world...

Nobody's missed any points--except, in this case, you. You proposed an intellectual exercise, but the way we were to go about it might not have been the most effective, even if it was the only way we could do it on a forum. Thought exercises are great, man, but if you're going to get the most out of them, you've got to consider the path to "figuring things out for their own end." I didn't suggest affinity diagrams for any reason other than to say that this concrete method may have worked better than this thread for this particular exercise; littlelostNF took hold of that comment and appreciated it as something useful to her. That reaction was independent of whatever reactions she has to your exercise.

And *I* did not miss your point. I get that you're not concerned with actually coming up with five words, but the thought exercise still could have been presented in a more effective way so as to be less frustrating. That MY point is different from YOUR point does not actually indicate that I don't understand you. It only indicates that we value different things.

 

[nightning]

You all have missed the point again... I never worry about whats practical... just about figuring things out for their own end... regardless of what good they may be in the external world...

Practical? That's neither here nor there... since when is redefining temperaments when perfectly adequate descriptions already exists practical?

Anyways... let's start over again. I like Eileen's idea, shall we all find concepts relating to NFs? Perhaps it will be easier to find that for each of the four types... then based on those, find connecting themes behind the temperament. I believe that way we can be more constructive then just throwing random words on the table. Te approach works for somethings too you know...

 

[Noel]

I see a parallel between him and the way a lot of young INTPs appear to deal with their infatuations. Seems like they idolize the person, idealize the love, but are often afraid to broach the subject or take any action that could make a relationship possible. Then they become despondent and bitter, etc.

Hmm. Perhaps Werther is an INXP? I can see now how he could be either a T or an F.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Nobody's missed any points--except, in this case, you. You proposed an intellectual exercise, but the way we were to go about it might not have been the most effective, even if it was the only way we could do it on a forum. Thought exercises are great, man, but if you're going to get the most out of them, you've got to consider the path to "figuring things out for their own end." I didn't suggest affinity diagrams for any reason other than to say that this concrete method may have worked better than this thread for this particular exercise; littlelostNF took hold of that comment and appreciated it as something useful to her. That reaction was independent of whatever reactions she has to your exercise.

And *I* did not miss your point. I get that you're not concerned with actually coming up with five words, but the thought exercise still could have been presented in a more effective way so as to be less frustrating. That MY point is different from YOUR point does not actually indicate that I don't understand you. It only indicates that we value different things.

I would agree that we just value different things and that neither one of us is right/wrong here. This is quite fitting since our judging functions are diametrically opposed to one another.

 

[Eileen]

Practical? That's neither here nor there... since when is redefining temperaments when perfectly adequate descriptions already exists practical?

Anyways... let's start over again. I like Eileen's idea, shall we all find concepts relating to NFs? Perhaps it will be easier to find that for each of the four types... then based on those, find connecting themes behind the temperament. I believe that way we can be more constructive then just throwing random words on the table. Te approach works for somethings too you know...

sweet! we can do it without SW's permission.

I think it will be hard, though, in this format to go "backwards" to a category. Any suggestions for a process before we jump into something totally confusing?

 

[nightning]

sweet! we can do it without SW's permission.

I think it will be hard, though, in this format to go "backwards" to a category. Any suggestions for a process before we jump into something totally confusing?

Who needs HIS permission.

Hmmmm, it might be easier if we remove our existing generic descriptors of NFs from our minds and start off thinking about how different types perceive and respond to different things. It wouldn't be that much different from creating mind maps.

Let's start off with INFJs since that's probably the easiest for us to work with.

Ummmm inner vision with paradoxical beliefs comes into my mind. So does the need for a purpose in life and striving to achieve personal goals. Very internally focused with a humanistic bent.

 

[Eileen]

Let's come up terms like "personal goals" and "internally focused" which we could sort of move around (though that's the really hard part - where do we move them? How do we do that together?).

The end that I see might have some kind of... diagram or graph? In the center would be the "quintessential traits" of NFs, and on the sides, somehow, there would be the traits of the individual types (with maybe a place for shared traits that are not quintessential, like between INFJ and INFP).

Damn it, where's Melody when you need him?

 

[nightning]

Let's come up terms like "personal goals" and "internally focused" which we could sort of move around (though that's the really hard part - where do we move them? How do we do that together?).

The end that I see might have some kind of... diagram or graph? In the center would be the "quintessential traits" of NFs, and on the sides, somehow, there would be the traits of the individual types (with maybe a place for shared traits that are not quintessential, like between INFJ and INFP).

Damn it, where's Melody when you need him?

Diagram/graph would be good... I came up with a little something back in INTPc... didn't get much response on it. But we can use that as a starting point. Oh and please ignore the little point on ENTP. That has been resolved, but I haven't corrected it yet. Hope you can read it...

 

[Eileen]

WOW, nightning, that's TOTALLY NEAT! I was envisioning something more geometric, but yeah, let's work with what you've already got.

 

[nightning]

WOW, nightning, that's TOTALLY NEAT! I was envisioning something more geometric, but yeah, let's work with what you've already got.

It'll be great if we can start filling in the gaps. Any thoughts or ideas on "personal goals" and "internal focus" of different types? Anything that your mind can come up with... we'll leave organizing and making sense of everything later.

 

[MacGuffin]

Can you make that pic a bit bigger nightning?

I'm old and can't see well.

 

[nightning]

Can you make that pic a bit bigger nightning?

I'm old and can't see well.

Yes... I always respect the old folks...

Is this big enough?

Darn it! file size too big... here...

 

[MacGuffin]

Thanks! I saved it.