[INFP] dating

[Pionart]

The statement I quoted most definitely was, in the logic-based definition (I dislike Wikipedia but still :In logic, a tautology (from the Greek word ταυτολογία) is a formula or assertion that is true in every possible interpretation. An example of a tautology is "(x equals y) or (x does not equal y)". A less abstract example is "The ball is green or the ball is not green". It is either one or the other - it cannot be both and there are no other possibilities.).

Ironically in expanding your point to make it not tautological, you took it from one definition to the other. Though maybe that isn't entirely fair, since you're not being redundant in a single statement, you simply said the same thing twice i.e. the "no, not tautological" at beginning and end.

This is sly of me, though, as it is missing the broader picture of the discussion.

The point being is if type can even help with relationships, not in the a priori position you've adopted, but in a measurably useful way. I've found no evidence that it can, beyond the placebo effect of influence people are liable to afford it. That's the specious reasoning again.

I took what you mean to imply that I had said nothing of substance, when I believe that my post contained legitimate insight.

Also, yes it's amusing that I started and ended the post with the same thing, but it was in the sense of "this is what I'm about to show / this is what I've just shown" as an introduction/conclusion.

I think it's beyond the topic, but I am quite accustomed to mentally splitting things into "A, or not A" and then holding both as possibly true, possibly false, or as a spectrum, to see what things hold in either case, and what things would change depending on which the true condition was; a means of living with ambiguity.

Anyway, I think I made my point.

Maybe this will undermine my point and condemn my character to accusations of bias, but I've never noticed any patterns in my attractions. However this is likely because I have never been intimately involved with anyone, romantically or otherwise. Truth is I'm terrified of other people and their motivations, and I'm caught between hoping I'm wrong, but constantly being proven right. That's the never-ending fight between reason and emotion. Emotionally I want to trust others (and those motivations I mentioned are not necessarily consciously engaged with; a big problem) but reasonably I desire a reason to, and that requires evidence, which is sorely lacking. Sadly my sexual drive is not strong enough for the former to override the latter.

People can do a lot of damage both personally and professionally in the pitfalls of intimate social relations, because of this I prefer emotional superficiality, not because I'm scared of the emotional fallout (though this certainly is a cost) but the permanent logistical and reputational fallout that can destroy a life and any future you thought you might once have had.

I have a lot of fear of people too, and have had much damage done to me at various times in life through relationships intimate or otherwise, and I'm sure I've done damage to others too.

Still though, it feels like a big part of moving forward in life is sharing it with other people, and intimacy is something I crave, although I am admittedly something of a loner.

This isn't just about risk, but a certain type. And I'm not one to take pointless or stupid risks and right now, the social milieu of intimate relationships is all about stupid risks and uneven perspectives. Until that shifts, there seems no good reason, beyond the very understandable and human failing of emotional indulgence, to sacrifice the earned comforts of a lifetime for one moment of very temporary pleasure. It is like a Sisyphean hell of evolutionary impulses.

Sadly a pushover like me (who is working very hard on the issue) would be eaten alive in that kind of social culture. Until it shifts to a new paradigm, perhaps one of wise ignorance and relaxed tensions, there is no place there for me.

I'm against casual sex; for me, an intimate relationship should be a precursor for marriage. So it's a risk where one lifetime is traded for a different lifetime - single life versus married life, or marriage to one person versus marriage to another (which is one reason that I'm interested in the notion of compatibility).

One purpose of having a partner, and the reason that compatibility is important, is because they are to make up for something you lack, thus giving you insight into the other side of the story which you're living out. So it's important to select someone whose half of the story fits well with your own, and hopefully avoid stories which will clash. With casual relationships, or less intimate forms of relationships, it's less important because you can end the relationship, or maintain the proper distance, so that things work out, but for a partner you want to find the right chemistry (and as I said, chemistry is more than just matching up your cognitive functions, but I do think that that's a very significant component of it).


And unfortunately, many people don't act with good intention, so pushovers and other similar types can be taken advantage of. It happens to me. I don't play the "social game", I hold onto the ideal that people can work together, making each others' lives better, and creating something fantastic through contributing different gifts.

As for typology, it just looks like another placeholder to soothe the fears of a neurotic species. But this could just be my projection; what do you think?

I don't know what the overall purpose of typology is, but I see it as being like anything in science/psychology: a model of how things work, although this particular model holds an obsessive sway over myself and many others. The purpose is to understand people in an abstracted sense, and I'm actually scared for what that kind of knowledge could result in. I'm skeptical of psychology as a whole because by understanding people too well, but not on a deep level, it allows for people if they so choose to manipulate others based on simple and efficient rules.

It also, however, shows ways in which the current workings of society are out of touch with the way people actually work, and people who are being discriminated against for having particular temperaments, and suggests ways in which people can be brought into harmony so that we are each able to utilise the gifts of the members of the community and work towards something.

Also, I've found it to be a rather useful tool for self-understanding and self-development. I sometimes use it to shift my personality from one form to another, or to notice when something has caused my personality to shift.

Basically it's a way of understanding people, and can be used for good or for bad.

PS: I hope I don't come across as a contrarian, I like these back and fourths, because even if I'm proven wrong, all it really means is that I can learn something.

It's fine. I can be sensitive to criticism, but I like a good debate/discussion so long as it's done with good intention.

 

[Indigo Rodent]

I'm sceptical about attraction within group. From my perspective other NFs have nothing to offer to me.

 

[Grusdytre]

Isn't kind of hard dating INFP? Like you have to keep things interesting. It gets tiresome at some point.

 

[SgtP3pper]

Imaginary types.

Platonically I get along most with NFs, mostly INFJ & ENFP. ENTPs sometimes too, once they come to terms with the fact that they're not going to trick me into debating with them.

I doubt it'll work often with a Sensor. Too philosophical and idealistic/abstract.

 

[Indigo Rodent]

I find ENFJ most attractive. But a specific subtype.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I find ENFJ most attractive. But a specific subtype.

Have you ever been with any ENFJs? Out of all the types you've dated, which is your favorite?

 

[Indigo Rodent]

Have you ever been with any ENFJs? Out of all the types you've dated, which is your favorite?

I have never dated anyone.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I have never dated anyone.

Sorry, didn't mean to be insensitive with that question. I've been feeling very stressed out this past week, and needed to take a break. That was why it took me a bit to get back to you.

I know how that feels. I didn’t lose my virginity until I was 25. I know that made me feel unworthy and like there was something wrong with me, that I couldn't do this thing that everyone else somehow seems to be able to do. I felt extremely defective and it made me unhappy. I know a lot of other guys tried to push me to try PUA, but it was never something I felt that comfortable doing.

Anyway, I am now of the opinion that this was not the successful strategy people wanted me to believe. I'm convinced that all the incels emerged out of the failure of PUA which was extremely popular in the late aughts.

So I guess what I'm saying is don't be like Elliot Rodgers, and maybe start thinking about how you can change your situation. I believe more and more as I get older that it's usually not too late for things. I still think it's possible that someday, you can find the right woman for you.


But the difficulty for me romantically is that I think I get turned on by a very specific sort of person. I realize this term sounds very pretentious pompous, but I think it would not be unreasonable for me to describe myself as a sapiosexual. If anything, I would probably rather not be this because it would make my dating life easier. But, it is what it is. I just find myself drawn to women who are extremely nerdy. As an example, I saw a bespectacled women in the grocery store with a Starship Enterprise tattoo and… I'm not going to lie, it turned me on so much. I am a massive dork and I really think I need to be with another massive dork.

My friend who I went to California with called me a massive dork in an affectionate way and she's not wrong. I take the word "dork" as a compliment. I want someone who will hang out on a beach with me and look at tidepools together; that's my definition of romantic. I realize that's hard to find and this is probably why I am single.

 

[LightSun]

What would be the best types to date if you are INFP

This is from Professor David Keirsey, Please Understand Me, 1998. According to Professor Keirsey, “The choice of a Rational mate seems to hold the best promise of success for idealists.

The NF’s and NT’s both live primarily in the world of abstract concepts. The world of theories, possibilities, insights and symbols.

Idealists feel the strongest attraction to Rationals. Idealists share with Rationals a rare compatibility of mind, a deeply satisfying mutual interest in abstract ideas.

I am an INFP. I married an ENFJ. Coincidentally a retired psychologist colleague is a female ENFJ. Her spouse many years is an INFP.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

This is from Professor David Keirsey, Please Understand Me, 1998.
According to Professor Keirsey, “The choice of a Rational mate seems to hold the best promise of success for idealists. The NF’s and NT’s both live primarily in the world of abstract concepts. The world of theories, possibilities, insights and symbols.

Idealists feel the strongest attraction to Rationals. Idealists share with Rationals a rare compatibility of mind, a deeply satisfying mutual interest in abstract ideas.

I am an INFP. I married an ENFJ. Coincidentally a retired psychologist colleague is a female ENFJ. Her spouse many years is an INFP.

I think Keirsey says that rational-idealist pairings can work well, but so can idealist-idealist or rational-rational pairings. Apologies if I am not recalling this correctly, but I think he says that while there are favorable aspects to this, it can hold the danger of stagnation because there is too much similarity.

But I personally wonder if this is only something that holds for types that haven't developed their tertiary and inferior very much. Some people are vey "self-directed" in their personal growth and so seek out experiences that will do this. I think idealist-idealist pairings or rational-rational pairings like this could work pretty well.

 

[LightSun]

I think Keirsey says that rational-idealist pairings can work well, but so can idealist-idealist or rational-rational pairings. Apologies if I am not recalling this correctly, but I think he says that while there are favorable aspects to this, it can hold the danger of stagnation because there is too much similarity.

But I personally wonder if this is only something that holds for types that haven't developed their tertiary and inferior very much. Some people are vey "self-directed" in their personal growth and so seek out experiences that will do this. I think idealist-idealist pairings or rational-rational pairings like this could work pretty well.

That’s my initial thought too Julius. As I said I married an ENFJ. Nonetheless I have the book with me and according to his research, “The choice of a Rational mate seems to hold the best promise of success for idealists.” Pg. 238.

With my closest intellectual colleagues I have numerous intuitive’s, both NT and NF. I am primarily an INFP. However my father was an ENTJ. My brother is an INTJ.

The quote describing an NT, “The NT feels as if they are in an ivory tower of a castle lost in deep abstract thought. Seemingly surprising by a sea of aliens.”

This description describes me perfectly. As an NF, I am an idealist and visionary. If I have to describe any NT characteristics, I’d say I am stoic, pragmatic, reason orientated and rational.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

That’s my initial thought too Julius. As I said I married an ENFJ. Nonetheless I have the book with me and according to his research, “The choice of a Rational mate seems to hold the best promise of success for idealists.” Pg. 238.

With my closest intellectual colleagues I have numerous intuitive’s, both NT and NF. I am primarily an INFP. However my father was an ENTJ. My brother is an INTJ.

The quote describing an NT, “The NT feels as if they are in an ivory tower of a castle lost in deep abstract thought. Seemingly surprising by a sea of aliens.”

This description describes me perfectly. As an NF, I am an idealist and visionary. If I have to describe any NT characteristics, I’d say I am stoic, pragmatic, reason orientated and rational.

Oh, I see. Perhaps I came up with that theory on my own, then.