it is a judgment once it's communicated as "evidence" that controls what can be considered the truth. it's a way of controlling an interaction. there's no such thing as "exploration" apart from judgment. there is only couching that judgment in "self-evident facts" that can be observed by direct perception. this works best with newtonian physics and not complex socio-symbolic behavior. or in law to establish an event happened. but not to explain the meaning of an event. literary criticism is much more complicated.
I certainly disagree with that, at least as far as I interpret your meaning of judgement. I can categorize my own experience, but that's not categorizing yours. You're applying the Je manner to Ji here...
I figure you can either deny my experience or assert that my connection to the theory is not correct.
I can't accept the former, because that's asking me to be delusional, but I don't hear any argument for the latter. If there is no connection to Ni, which I definitely more than suggested there is, then WHY NOT? Where is the missing piece? OR, perhaps there is a connection to Ni, and I have not categorized incorrectly, but these categories are broad & may not always involve such extreme behavior. So what do YOU categorize under these Ni descriptions?
However,
most (not all) of what I hear is, "I refuse to talk about this, so instead let's analyze you & your motives, Orangeappled, & discredit YOU so we don't actually have to make an argument against your points".
it's not that interesting to me.
Then why respond?
i appreciate that you want "credible" evidence, facts that you can use to control how we describe what is "actual." but as i've said, that's only useful to prove something happened. it's not really useful to prove that something means something else. with that, you can only falsify things that it is unlikely to mean.or express what it meant for you (which ranges based on well-being from a great Fi skill to a common Fi generalization error that happens especially when the Fi user gets angry).
Why not do that? I expressed what it meant for me, and I'm asking - What do those points about Ni mean for you?
In avoiding that it comes off like denial of any negative facets of Ni. And YES, that is one of my major complaints of INFJs, not set up as a trap, but a statement to answer the question of the OP.
or depressive e4 issue? an ability to wallow in self-pity does not produce authenticity. it produces an ability to relate to other's wallowing in self-pity and to understand the pitfalls that come from building a storehouse of negative thoughts and bad habits to cope with the emotional sinking that depressive types know so well. the intention to me feels like bringing others down to your level.
You can make a separate "What drives you nuts about Oranges who are Appled?" thread if you like, but this is a derail. In offering up that INFPs can have a distorted view of themselves, I was only hoping to soften my own criticism by allowing people to be human.
this is something that bothers me. true, you may say, you are childish, or you may say, i find your behavior childish. the latter is not better if you still use a pejorative identity marker that is obviously supposed to be a negative representation. in this case, you are saying others are immature and suggesting that you alone are mature. and they are immature because they do not agree with you. they are emotional like a child and issue "cries" that are not as rational as you presume to be, when you keep your emotions at bay (by sticking to "the facts" that you deem "the facts"). why you see yourself as employing mature emotional communication strategies is simply beyond me. you are affecting them as well but deny your role in doing so. how is this any different? it only works for you because you presume to have access to "reality" that makes you right be default of being the one who is right. this is circular in its own way. and you just want to use typology to justify it rather than using it to clarify the larger pattern that exists outside of you as well.
No, I am saying complaining is immature when the context has ASKED for commentary like mine. I'm not claiming any superior maturity, but a justification in speaking up at all. I
said I was seeking to affect others, to get some reaction to start a discussion. So I'm well aware I have a role here. I just don't think that role is the villain others would like to make it out to be. I know my motive & won't have it distorted.
Pe is tricky. ultimately everyone's responsibility is defining what is actual for them. you can't use someone else's Pe. Pe cannot be communicated without Je. it can only be performed. enacted. actualized. as it gets communicated, it loses its sense that it is yours. the truth is organized by what emerges. and you are denying that.
We'll have to disagree on that. Pe in the dom/aux is organized by Ji, not Je. That's why IxxPs use indirect & informing communication much of the time. We're not inclined to judge for others (although I keep seeing how my post was incorrectly interpreted that way). You're interpreting with Je though, which is why you keep insisting there's so much "judgement" here. The facts of my experience are a truth, and the theory provides a framework, but the way I fit it together is very much mine. If I thought otherwise, then I wouldn't be disappointed with the lack of discussion. I'm not looking for agreement or consensus; I thought that was clear as well.
No one seems to get that I'm saying: go ahead, question this. But they're not questioning the points I made, they're questioning
me & my motive.
your argument is that infjs inferior Se at times is hugely problematic for them and leads to mistakes in judgment regarding the emotions of others? that not attending to the story of where others are coming from leads to poor guesses at times?
I think it leads to mistakes in seeing the big picture because pertinent details have been put aside when forming it. The big picture becomes a narrow lens, then. It appears that in order to avoid a certain answer when asking themselves a question about what is what, they don't assimilate certain facts into their view. I say "assimilate", because it seems they note them (they may even
say them aloud), but the info is disregarded when connecting the dots. This can be many things, and sometimes it is others' feelings or emotions.
In attempting to connect these dots, the person may become angry that you're including this information, because it forms a picture they don't like (or I assume that is why). To a degree, that has happened here as well; certain points are ignored & the picture is being formed without them, and as I keep bringing them up, people are getting mad. So then, why are these points not relevant? I ask, how does the Ni description NOT apply to you when you claim to be Ni-dom? Of course, not all of it will apply, but it's interesting how little to none of the negative does apply.
or that you've met infjs (including 3w4s, who i believe are enfjs), who exhibit especially negative e3 issues that you do not like so all infjs should realize that they are condemned to be completely full of shit unless they take Pe types word for it that they are wrong much of the time? i mean, what's a concrete situation that you see this happening in?
No, this is certainly the defensive interpretation though. Since I've explained my motive countless times, I won't bother to again.
because MY Pe types tell me that i need to learn to trust myself to determine what is real. and that they're glad to support me when i ask for story help, but that i need to keep trying to become more present on my own, to take responsibility for myself to deem what is real and what is not, so that i can relate to the interiors of others with my own sense of actuality, my own experiential truth. (rather than just submitting to theirs...)
Well, great, that's your experience then. I get the impression that people here think I have not noted when attempts have been made to answer: What do those points about Ni mean for you?. That is not true. I responded to your earlier posts where I got the sense you were doing that, & I noted Fidelia's response as well.
but it sure feels like you're just trying to railroad others. if you know you're right, why do you need their confirmation? why do you have to have them see it your way if you won't see it theirs? you're still assuming that Pe IS reality and that Pi is illusory, secondary, and ultimately full of shit. the fact is we are negotiating what the "correct" context is. when you assume that you inherently have it because you believe your "type" is blessed with a greater connection to reality. when your focus on what can better be labeled "actuality" is only to say that you focus on a different scale of perception that is like a hand moving from a distance to right in front of your face. but you miss context because of this near-sightedness as well. this is why it must be negotiated.
I know I am right about
my experience; how could I not be? I'm not asking for confirmation of that. I'm asking to hear how your experience relates to these points I quoted (& connected to my own)
.
I defined the context because in this case it's my motive; that is not always the case, just now.
I will accept the context I have been given for INFJs not discussing flaws, which is not arrogance then, but it doesn't mean I have to like the behavior any more than anyone here has to like my manner.
furthermore, and this is my reading of what is happening, you create a split that is logically untenable. you perpetuate the j/p bias because you don't grasp the diversity of Je, instead reducing it to a caricature of what it is. Ji focuses on the directly observable. this often results in missing out in the unity that binds things together. especially as you cross over from one scale to another and make logical type errors as a result of domains that are irreducible to each other because the paradigms are simply incommensurable and cannot be bridged by direct observation without also observing the observer.
i don't know how to explain this to you further, but Je functioning is a necessary aspect of all intelligent systems. Je is the recursive language system that binds organizations together across different orders of experience. its usage develops the communicational conditions for perception to be shared and engineered into complex constructions. not just between people, but in the very creation of (self-)consciousness in all forms. you may think this is a secondary point. but you are missing the Je context.
Again, I disagree with you on Ji, which you continue to interpret with Je (it always just sounds like narrow Je, much as I may make Pi sound like narrow Pe).
But have I not asked - when & how does Fe come into play with these Ni issues? But that can't be addressed when the Ni issues won't be discussed. I said - hey, when does Fe save the day? Because for the millionth time,
my complaints were about Ni. I'm not saying "develop your inferior". I think I explained that already.
There is no corner I'm backing anyone into when I complain that INFJs don't admit their flaws. No one
needs to prove me wrong or right. I'm at a loss as to why my opinion should be so upsetting, if it's just my opinion. Do they fear the INFJ rep being tarnished or something?
If it bothers people that they'd "have" to discuss flaws to "prove me wrong", then that does sort of support my complaint. I didn't set it up that way, it's just the nature of that flaw. The misconception is that I'm saying you
must cop to
the same flaws I've experienced in INFJs. I made a connection with my experience & a theory, not a full equation of the two, as if that's always how Ni plays out. I was interested in discussing how those points about Ni connect to others' experiences. And while I hoped for that, I honestly did expect
this. Did I have suspicions & were they confirmed? Yes, but I didn't set anything up with that purpose. Rather I included my disappointment & frustration in my post, even as I hoped otherwise.
Rather, I am the one who is being pushed to "admit" I'm either a troll or lashing out emotionally, neither of which is true. If this has been railroaded, then it was not according to my motive. This certainly has not gone in the direction I hoped for.
even as many infjs readily admit their inferior Se and even provide examples of when it works against them. why this is not enough for you is very strange to try to comprehend.
It's strange to me that you say "many" & "readily", because I've seen "few" and "reluctantly". But I
am satisfied with that discussion when it does occur, as I've noted several times.