[INFJ] Common INFJ issues

[PeaceBaby]

The real me is a thing that watches to see what you will be like in order to gauge what it will be like.

Which makes me feel like you want me to assume more of the risk. Is that true?

 

[Seymour]

As long as we are talking about INFP/INFJ dynamics (and we kinda were, right?) I though I'd share one difference I see. My xNFJ acquaintances tend to share there enthusiasms in a way that makes it seem like they expect me to reflect their excitement back at them. That is, they seem to share partially with the intent of me sharing their excitement because I might already like X (whatever it is) or that I will get excited because they like X and give it a try (and that they are doing me a service by sharing something good with me). Or even that I should get excited about their excitement (for its own sake) in X.

As an INFP I tend to take in their enthusiasm, understand it (to some degree), but not necessarily reflect it or take it up myself. This sometimes leads to some awkward pauses, as though I'm an actor who just missed a cue. Is that just me, or do you find the non-reflecting, absorbing quality of INFPs sometimes throws you off stride, slightly? I think INFPs tend to react to social cues less, relative to INFJs.

I do understand what cascadeco and fidelia were getting at with having layers, although I more feel like I'm either entirely holding back or entirely open and vulnerable. If I feel like I'm likely to be judged (or feel like I'm still being actively evaluated) I do tend to hold back showing my true self. I can see where this could lead to a failure to connect with some INFJs, which is shame from my perspective

Hope you don't mind yet another INFP butting into the "Common INFJ Issues" thread.

 

[cascadeco]

to inspiration!

Thank you for so clearly revealing your methods of communicating. It's a wonderful and illuminative post; I appreciate the detail and it is mind-expanding to read and ponder. I am still engaging with it on a number of different levels.

Aww, thanks.

I want to share some more on this topic, and as an INFP to an INFJ. In case it didn't appear clear, I adapt to the people I am interacting with as well, in a similar manner you describe - except if I diverge too far from a certain locus, or am around a great number of people, the chameleon-like nature of my interactions starts to seem false to me, as though I am losing my core self in there somehow. (That I am merging too far and will lose the essence of me, to all these people who need / enjoy different aspects of me.) The core is what I want to stress here though. The way I choose to interact in the world IS an expression of who I am. I don't view it as layers, I see it more as a set of concentric circles, where the closer you get to know me the closer to the core you get. But the core is always ... there. Does that illustrate any difference between how I see myself and how you view yourself?

To the bolded...yes, I think it does. I think it does, because I cannot say I identify a 'core' within myself. Being totally honest here!! Re. my contrasting 'layers' --> perhaps it would make more sense in this comparison to utilize the word 'pieces'/elements/components, instead. I have these various components, all connected in a whole, but there isn't a 'core' to any of it, I don't think. I don't believe you dig deeper and deeper to find an essence or nugget right at the center - all of the pieces are conglomerated in one mass - Me - and they all, in a sense, carry the same weight. It's just that Person A might only relate to and see a handful of the pieces, and Person B might see a different set of pieces. More pieces = closer, as you know more elements of what constitutes who I am, and it means more of myself can be engaged in the interaction with you, and our relationship.

And to add some extra nuance to this, if I am "reading" you and also adjusting my interaction to connect with you, but you are ... staying neutral, remaining uncommitted to a path of interaction, I will likely not pursue a relationship with you over time. It won't be overnight, and I will try again to connect, but if I sense you reading more than you are giving I will simply emotionally block you and not permit any exploration of my psyche, nor will I feel willing to lay down a pattern you can piece together. I will block you before you block me (generally speaking). Which saddens me, because I don't meet many INF's in the "real world" ... but, I just can't chameleon around someone trying to get a bead on me at the same time and taking notes.

This seems completely fair to me. If I were to meet you, or anyone else, and over a length of time I continued being more 'neutral' and obviously wasn't engaging deeply, then it *might* indicate that I haven't gotten a sense of you yet, OR it might indicate that I've kind of decided already that I don't see a deep connection being possible. And, I think it would be fair/reasonable for you to 'block' me.

As you rightly concluded, cascadeco, I am not judging the authenticity of Fe / intent at all, but - and here's the big but - the price of really connecting with you will feel too ... insecure to me. If our time communicating is like water, then I need to know where the shore is located. Also, the sense I generally receive - that you are storing a library of our past "moments" to use in the present - can feel disingenuous to the reality of NOW. I don't know how else to explain that at the moment, so forgive that. I will expand on this and try to clarify later.

To the bolded, this might tie into what a few were discussing earlier in the thread, re. myself / infj's having difficulty in the Moment, and not necessarily placing as much value on present emotions/etc, and placing more weight on consistency and overall patterns in a person or relationship. Needing to make sure that any 'new' data or any new turn in the relationship's dynamic is there for the long run, and isn't just a temporary thing. So might not 'trust' in the present or the moment until it seems a certain thing?

I guess what I am saying is that ... if you are trying to watch me all the time, I will just block you out. Then you will likely drop trying to read me (thus place me in whatever category you wish on the Fe rate-o-meter) without me having to do the dirty work of avoiding you.

Again, I don't think this is unreasonable. Any relationship takes two people to make it work, and if one or the other just isn't connecting, isn't prioritizing, or doesn't see it, then there will be active blocking or passive/neutral/apathetic blocking.

On my end, while I have known a few INFP's irl and find them to be interesting, cool people, they remain the one INxx type I haven't really bonded deeply with, and don't really know how to; we just seem to approach and see things from such vastly different perspectives - and it's not even just big things, it's just little ways of going about everyday life details or making plans or the like - very different. It isn't a 'natural'/spontaneous process for me as it can be with other types. I dunno. I wonder whether one reason may be INFP's being driven by that 'core' and my not identifying with that concept in the sense that you are? Other reasons of course, too. I mean, if we're gonna talk theory (of which I'm not a huge fan, haha), we don't share any functions.

As an INFP I tend to take in their enthusiasm, understand it (to some degree), but not necessarily reflect it or take it up myself. This sometimes leads to some awkward pauses, as though I'm an actor who just missed a cue. Is that just me, or do you find the non-reflecting, absorbing quality of INFPs sometimes throws you off stride, slightly? I think INFPs tend to react to social cues less, relative to INFJs.

I'm really thrown off without cues/feedback. If I don't get any responses or whatnot, I can almost feel immobilized, or like the other person doesn't care, or *isn't even listening.* That, in turn, makes me clam up and not feel comfortable sharing more. [The response doesn't have to reflect the level of what I'm expressing - any response -- eye-contact with head nod, saying uh-huh or 'Ah, I see', will suffice. I just need to know that you're in fact listening. It's one thing I've noticed with INFP's specifically (not to pick on you guys, it's just something I've encountered with all 3 I've known) -- poor eye contact or lack of, as well as lack of much response half the time, either verbally or with body language, such that I have a hard time knowing whether they're listening or are instead off in la-la land. It definitely throws me off. But when I've brought this up with them they say they are in fact listening, and that if they actually looked at me while I was talking, they'd be more distracted than without looking. I'm still thrown off though; it's distracting for me when they don't give a cue, just as it's distracting for them when they do? haha. ]

This also ties to what was being discussed earlier re. INFJ's responding very well to questions, and actually desiring that, rather than volunteering information.

 

[Domino]

Admit it, INFPs. You just want to eat our brains!!

 

[Seymour]

Admit it, INFPs. You just want to eat our brains!!

No thanks! I'm still full from dinner. Understanding your brains, though...

 

[21%]

As an INFP I tend to take in their enthusiasm, understand it (to some degree), but not necessarily reflect it or take it up myself. This sometimes leads to some awkward pauses, as though I'm an actor who just missed a cue. Is that just me, or do you find the non-reflecting, absorbing quality of INFPs sometimes throws you off stride, slightly? I think INFPs tend to react to social cues less, relative to INFJs.

I might be entirely wrong here, but I think when Fe people do that (show enthusiasm about something and try to convince you it's good), they always leave a way for you to back out gracefully. When you don't seem to see the way and they sense awkwardness, they might even try to nudge you towards that way. One of the weird things Fe does

 

[Z Buck McFate]

You know what's interesting to me, if this were a real-life scenario ... I can feel you "feeling me" and trying to get a read on me, and I find this generally uncomfortable and makes me put my guard up against your "observations". And, can also make me feel a tad insecure ... like I am on "pins and needles" around you ... I'm not sure what the right thing is to "do" around you, what is the right thing to "be".

You are watching to see what I will be like in order to gauge what you will be like, and what I want is the real you from the get-go. It's almost counter-productive.

What Cascadeo wrote fits me pretty well too. The 'real' me is just a pile of thoughts. And watching people is kind of about figuring out which language to translate those thoughts into for the most effective communication.

edit: It's also worth mentioning that when I have to act before I've sized someone up- that's exactly when they're not getting the 'real' me. That's just me slapping together any ol' answer I can to be polite- but it least reflects the 'real' me because I haven't had time to translate the 'real' me yet. When I'm just improvising like that, the stuff I say is least attached to my real opinions.

Which makes me feel like you want me to assume more of the risk. Is that true?

Not really. I don't really expect others to initiate interaction. There's really not much I can do about being slow myself, and I certainly don't expect others to move at a faster pace than they can handle either.

Actually, I usually kind of feel like I've met a kindred spirit when I cross paths with someone who needs to size things up as much as I do. I feel like the pressure's off, because the person already understands and needs that space him/herself.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

These particular questions were branching off of the behavior I have observed in INTJs lately. They are neat as they share my Fi/Te judging functions but dont share my perceptive modes-they are Ni/Se like you guys.

So I am sort of carrying across the diffs to see the contrasts once all four functions are opposite.

Have you asked a pile of INTJs these same questions yet? (Is there a thread around here somewhere with this in it?)

 

[uumlau]

These particular questions were branching off of the behavior I have observed in INTJs lately. They are neat as they share my Fi/Te judging functions but dont share my perceptive modes-they are Ni/Se like you guys.

So I am sort of carrying across the diffs to see the contrasts once all four functions are opposite.

Have you asked a pile of INTJs these same questions yet? (Is there a thread around here somewhere with this in it?)

What Cascadeo wrote fits me pretty well too. The 'real' me is just a pile of thoughts. And watching people is kind of about figuring out which language to translate those thoughts into for the most effective communication.

edit: It's also worth mentioning that when I have to act before I've sized someone up- that's exactly when they're not getting the 'real' me. That's just me slapping together any ol' answer I can to be polite- but it least reflects the 'real' me because I haven't had time to translate the 'real' me yet. When I'm just improvising like that, the stuff I say is least attached to my real opinions.

Interestingly, this is exactly how I approach things, but I there's a distinctly different flavor with Te instead of Fe. With Fe, I suspect that what other people are sensing is a "tentative connection." Fi doesn't do "tentative," it's just there, which is why ENFPs seem so "in your face" and INTJs are usually completely closed off, emotionally. Fe adds shades of connections, for which Fi needs much more time and training to learn.

In my younger days as an INTJ, I made no connection. I wasn't interested in a connection. I was too afraid to make a connection. (For you INFJs, imagine if you're trying to gauge a person with Ni/Fe, but your Fe stopped working: you try to make predictions and they just don't work. That's what it's like to be a young INTJ trying to connect with people.)

And when I said "approach things", I meant things literally: I use Te with my Ni. I study and plan and figure out the ins and outs of the system before actually doing anything with it. This is what others feel from INFJs: they sense the studying and planning and attempts to figure out how another person "works". The reason most people don't feel that from INTJs is that it's aimed at things, not people, because we've mostly given up trying to figure out people (or more accurately, we still try to figure out people as if they were things - following objective, consistent rules - and thus the most one "feels" from an INTJ is the "INTJ stare.")

Actually, I usually kind of feel like I've met a kindred spirit when I cross paths with someone who needs to size things up as much as I do. I feel like the pressure's off, because the person already understands and needs that space him/herself.

Yeah, I think this is why INTJs and INFJs who meet in real life generally get along just fine. I've had some of the best discussions with INFJs because they delve deeply with an ever-so-slightly different intuitive perspective (due to Fe) than mine, but we can explain each others' points-of-view extremely quickly (so long as we don't get lost in a Fe/Te context shift).

 

[Z Buck McFate]

^Interesting.

So Orobas & uumlau, what would your answer to this look like:

Would you say people provide the context for situations you are in? If you were presented a people problem, but the people were not specific people, but rather abstract people, would it be harder for you to decide what the right or wrong decision was? For instance "person A and person B walk into a room. Person A does this...Was that wrong/right?"

It seems to me like 'the truth' is A LOT more relative to Ti/Fe. In fact, I'm hesitent to say 'the truth', because it sounds so final.

 

[Tiltyred]

Which makes me feel like you want me to assume more of the risk. Is that true?

Why are you people so paranoid?

 

[Z Buck McFate]

No, I just dissect their brains as I am an official INTJ emo stalker.

If you ever get so far as to building your own secret evil laboratory in which to store and experiment on INTJs- for the sake of poking them with varying degrees of Fi to make them giggle like Pillsbury Doughboys- would you please videotape some of it for us?

You could lure them there by... well, telling them it's a secret evil laboratory.

 

[Sailboat]

Common issue with me: feeling guilt when I say "no" to hanging out with people, because it means I am putting myself first. It's pretty annoying sometimes.

 

[mochajava]

-Feeling guilty about INFJ withdrawal

-Not speaking up until things have built up so much that I withdraw/shut down/otherwise cannot speak up easily.

-Not wanting to see people, wanting social contact through writing (ahem!)

 

[Sailboat]

Being an INFJ:

Almost 7 years ago I went to New Orleans and met some great people and we hung out for a few days together. We didn't keep in touch because our meetings were brief, but I have always thought about them and wondered if they were okay. So yesterday I looked them up on the internet, and found two of them, and they were okay. And they were happy and beautiful and I was so happy and I am even getting choked up writing about it. I am not going to say anything because it's been so long and I doubt they remember me and I wonder if I seem creepy, but I am so happy for them.

Today I read about a boy who went missing after he was dropped off at school early in the morning and his picture was taken by his science project at school right before, and they included the picture. I was in public so I didn't cry, but I wanted to really bad.

Sometimes when I see old people I almost start crying or I do because they remind me of my grandparents and I love my grandparents.

I don't know where else to put this.

 

[mochajava]

More -

I randomly thought of an old co-worker. Someone who had interviewed me actually, and then I lost contact with her after that. She had died, right around the moments I thought of her. Creepy, huh? But apparently this stuff is part of the usual INFJ descriptions.

 

[sculpting]

I'm not very clear on what Ne does or how. I know that it's about taking random bits of information from outside sources and drawing it all together into something interesting or meaningful, but I don't have a very real sense of how that's done or what it means in practical terms. For Ni, despite it being my primary function, I think I'm close enough to it that it's hard to be aware of when I'm using it and how. (I actually found highlander's stars beside Ni related points quite useful!) I'd be interested in what you could say about NeTe or NiTi because I don't think I have a very good grasp of how it would affect interactions between people.

Fidleia had asked above about what NiTi might do...Entropie posted the below quote about his INFJ on another thread that sheds light on what NiTi might do in a people situation...

To me it has always been impossible to understand other people in any way at all. I am good at reflecting the emotions they show or recognizing recurring patterns in behaviour I can then associate to a somewhat understanding of a person, to get along with said person very good on a friend basis but I was never able to really deeply understand a human being or to even see what made this human being.

After I met my girlfriend, of whom I think she is infj, I was presented an outstanding knowledge of the human nature. She like looks a person ion the face and she can tell you the whole persons story. It's amazing and the most amazing thing about it is it works in reality for her on a daily basis and she doesnt even recognize it as a talent. So this is like active applied sciences and not only grey theory like mbti.

But: when I confronted her with mbti, she thought of it as bullshit. This deeply alienated me from mbti theory, cause I've seen her talent and if a capable person makes the call, I trust her. So I ran through the world typing everything and noone really understood wtf I'm talking about really.

Perhaps this is how INFJs use NiTi...they bring contextual information via Fe and analyze with Ni....but they use Ti to turn the indivisual into a logical system of points? But as entopie noted, it happens instantly or as the other INFJs pointed out through a series of questions that add more and more precision and resolution to understanding that particular individuals needs. So NeTe in an ENFP will generalize everyone into patterns and derive global approximate solutions. NiTi in INFJs will focus in on one individual, and then derive a very individualized, precise, contextually dependent understanding of the issue.

(Please comment on these thoughts and correct if they seem incorrect or I have misunderstood nuances....My goal is to leave them as a possible starting idea, a skeleton, one of many, that may be of value to INFJs, since the question was asked by Fidelia earlier in this thread....)

 

[uumlau]

Fidleia had asked above about what NiTi might do...Entropie posted the below quote about his INFJ on another thread that sheds light on what NiTi might do in a people situation...



Perhaps this is how INFJs use NiTi...they bring contextual information via Fe and analyze with Ni....but they use Ti to turn the indivisual into a logical system of points? But as entopie noted, it happens instantly or as the other INFJs pointed out through a series of questions that add more and more precision and resolution to understanding that particular individuals needs. So NeTe in an ENFP will generalize everyone into patterns and derive global approximate solutions. NiTi in INFJs will focus in on one individual, and then derive a very individualized, precise, contextually dependent understanding of the issue.

(Please comment on these thoughts and correct if they seem incorrect or I have misunderstood nuances....My goal is to leave them as a possible starting idea, a skeleton, one of many, that may be of value to INFJs, since the question was asked by Fidelia earlier in this thread....)

I'm fairly sure that this is just normal NiFe, not NiTi. Ni instantly delves in and figures everything out, in Fe terms. Fe then can tell the person's "story." Ti comes into play by internally editing and making sure that things are self consistent, and can lend an air of precision to the story, but it is difficult to say this is somehow "NiTi" as some sort of distinct entity or process.

Rather, I think of it as several parallel processes:

1. Ni "just knows" something, in its own magical way (assume fairly mature Ni developed with real experience).
2. Fe is the preference for Ni to develop towards understanding people rather than things. So that "just knowing" works really well with people, not so good with "things."
3. Ti is the preference to be consistent and logically precise in one's definitions and facts, which, along with Fe, acknowledges that "no one really knows all of the truth." It will "color" the Fe-style descriptions, but it will not predominate. Compare with INTPs, where the logical precision dominates, but is occasionally "colored" by Fe sarcasm, for example.

In the ENFP case

1. Ne "experiences" one or more abstract connections based on any of a number of real sensory inputs. This is done without thought.
2. Fi is the preference to gravitate towards experiences that generate internal feelings. Logical self-consistency isn't required: each experience is its own thing valid in it's own way. Rather, the Ne experiences become the bases for self-understanding (Fi), as opposed to the INFJ pattern of Ni experiences becoming the basis for understanding of others (Fe).
3. Te is the desire to make some sort of "sense" out of the very real chaos generated by Ne/Fi. It doesn't require self-consistency, but it does require that any sort of idea or process "works." It colors the Ne/Fi understandings in such a way as to be very "blunt" or "harsh".

Ne vs Ni is just a matter of focus. Both are attitudes that believe there is always "something more" than what is immediately observed.

Ni focuses on the internal workings of that which is observed, and becomes very knowledgeable of its processes, of how it works. When a similar thing is encountered (e.g., another human being), that knowledge is applied to be able to make predictions, to "magically know things."

Ne doesn't delve deeper within the object itself, but rather sees patterns repeated through many different things in the world. For instance, an Ne insight would be that if one is observing X here, there are all these other things that are "kind of like X" and thus this one observation here implies truths about all those other things to which X is abstractly connected. In the case of Ne with Ti, this would be the (quite true) observation that waves in water are like waves in light are like waves in springs are like waves in sound. We can use water wave behavior to understand light wave behavior, and so on. (There are nitpicky differences of course, but this is the Ne starting point.) NeFi does the same thing with feelings, people and other typically Fi concerns. In both the Ti and Fi cases, the Ne connections are applied to enhance personal understanding, not to "know" or "predict" as in the Ni case.

 

[skylights]

Ne vs Ni is just a matter of focus. Both are attitudes that believe there is always "something more" than what is immediately observed.

Ni focuses on the internal workings of that which is observed, and becomes very knowledgeable of its processes, of how it works. When a similar thing is encountered (e.g., another human being), that knowledge is applied to be able to make predictions, to "magically know things."

Ne doesn't delve deeper within the object itself, but rather sees patterns repeated through many different things in the world. For instance, an Ne insight would be that if one is observing X here, there are all these other things that are "kind of like X" and thus this one observation here implies truths about all those other things to which X is abstractly connected. I
n the case of Ne with Ti, this would be the (quite true) observation that waves in water are like waves in light are like waves in springs are like waves in sound. We can use water wave behavior to understand light wave behavior, and so on. (There are nitpicky differences of course, but this is the Ne starting point.) NeFi does the same thing with feelings, people and other typically Fi concerns. In both the Ti and Fi cases, the Ne connections are applied to enhance personal understanding, not to "know" or "predict" as in the Ni case.

wow, uumlau, i was just reading this again, and i have to say thank you so much for this explanation. i have a pretty good sense of what Ne feels like, but it's extremely pleasing (and helpful) to have it expressed so well in concrete terms. on the other hand, i have very limited sense of Ni, and this helps me to understand it a lot better.

i get the whole Ne understanding vs. Ni prediction thing now. because Ne is directed into an introverted process, while Ni is directed into an extraverted process. Ni delves in and follows the pattern out, while Ne senses the pattern from without and delves with it within.

and your example resonates well, it seems to me that theoretical physics is very much an NeFi concern too... you know, everything being connected, ultimate meaning, and all that

anyway --

my point in this thread was just to post this wonderful quote that made me immediately think INFJ, and fortunately i think it seems fairly relevant given the discussion of iNtuition...

To see a world in a grain of sand,
And a heaven in a wild flower,
Hold infinity in the palm of your hand,
And eternity in an hour.

yay iNtuition

 

[sculpting]

I cannot really comment regarding the INFJ scenarios above...that for them to comment on.

As for the ENFP ideas, I figured Id get the heck out of the INFJ thread as I dont think they want us to keep talking about ourselves here

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/nf-idyllic/33266-common-enfp-issues-26.html#post1276782