[ENFP] ENFP+INTJ=Disasterous Combo o' love

[sculpting]

LOL...ahhh I *still* remember the moment Edgar replied to me with that quote. It's epic

It's one of my all time favorites. Edgar is pretty damned funny.

Yap Yap!

 

[Amargith]

I gotto say, I'm also quite a fan of these..though I cannot precisely say why...

ENFPs, especially if they�re also 4s, can crack your emotional codes better than any other type. Almost right off the bat, you feel like you can tell them anything, all your secrets you�ve never told anyone else. It�s not something ENFPs even have to think about, it comes naturally, effortlessly; look what Vesper (a clear cut ENFP) did to James Bond (a hardcase ISTP) in Casino Royale; he was totally in her power by the end of that movie.

INTJs are especially vulnerable because ENFPs connect with and activate the INTJ�s tertiary Fi, which is like their Achilles heel; before he knows it, the INTJ "mastermind" is in her thrall. INTJs are vulnerable in the emotional realm; even for more emotionally aware 5w4 INTJs, it�s still alien terrain. A mysterious and fascinating moonlit world to explore from the armchair, to be sure. But it unravels them, causing them to lose their bearings, when they�re forced to experience it firsthand with someone who reigns supreme there.

Put simply, INTJs are out of their depth with ENFPs.

ENFPs are enchanting and seductive, but deadly..

 

[Thalassa]

Where is Edgar, anyway?

 

[Xellotath]

This thread is kinda like the circle of life, except we dont actually eat each other.

Anyways, its too bad SS and Z got kicked off, and well Z I shall miss your insight on the forum in general (Go to INTJf-"The shadow function" thread is waiting for you. And you Sim. But you have to be very well behaved there.)

Anyways I noticed an Ne-ism on this thread (A correlation between different yet parallel topics)

In this thread Z speaks towards Time and suggested that Time's perspective was a phase. This would suggest:

Z has a very well developed Fi and is seeing the world an emotions as more than just a pattern to analyze-a game to figure out. NiTeFi?

Time is still young and the world is just a pattern-thus what is the point of doing anything since all aspects of the pattern are well understood and predicted. Why act if there is nothing outside of the pattern? NiTe?

It interestingly correlates to a thread at intjf in which the question-define love-was asked. Several NFs promptly jumped in with scientific definitions and tried to dissect it the topic and definition into controllable pieces-TeSi or SiTe I'd suggest. Many younger INTJs all took the approach Mr time seems to be taking-a very mechanistic view.

But three older INTJs took a very holistic approach. One suggested that taking a logical approach to love is orthogonal to the purpose of love in the first place.

So, I dunno, just an Ne-ism-but it kinda suggest a developmental INTJ pattern as Z put forth a few pages back. When young love is something chemical and mechanical. As Fi grows in-love becomes something beyond simple biochemistry-perhaps Fi allows you to extra dimensions that were missed upon the preliminary analysis?

This leads me to pose the a divergent question-when Fi is used in conjunction with a perceiving function-it seems to add layers to the way the probelm is understood-extra dimensions, aspects that could not be understood without Fi...hmmm, i do not know...

I think it's miserable that it looks even remotely like the circle of life. It un-necessarily validates the title of this thread. I for one, would like to believe that the INTJ + ENFP union doesn't automatically equate disaster.

// On the ban.
Personally, I think the banning was well-deserved. While "arguments-from-experience" yield a superficial explanation, they hardly provide new information for any debate due to their unfalsifiable nature: They could easily be part of the person's internal narrative - and those structures can be filled with error and self-protective biases, an ocean of inaccessible theoretical uncertainty that I would rather avoid. Reasons that don't connect with my personal experience or with my logic, are properly classified as hearsay (hope that's not an irrational response). Given that it's not the best explanation, it was the -only- explanation those two provided and proceeded to viciously defend... driving me to speculate on whether they had any personal involvement in the matter (as in perhaps trying to validate their relationship online to total strangers), but I will abstain from hypothesizing further on their motives - that would be simply counterproductive to the conversation.

// Zarathustra as mature
I'm not an Ni dom, so this is not my expertise, but Antisocial's definition as a feeling-killer /immediately/ reminded me of something both an INTJ friend and an INFJ ex mentioned. Unfortunately my pool of Ni-doms is limited (I can attest to the rarity of those personality types in my population sample.). All this to say, ah-hah! That's the third time I've heard that statement, fourth, taking Lex into account.

I know this will probably sound like an ad-hominem against Zarathustra, especially since I concurred with his suspension, but I think it would be unwise to assume his behavior was the behavior of a mature INTJ for several reasons. (I pray that this conversation doesn't de-volve into loyalty-flag-waving, Fe-style. I am only referring to Zarathustra because he is the current object of analysis [Orobas' at least], please take my comments impersonally.)

The first reason, is his utter denial of antisocialone's reference, of course, this means my first reason is the fallacy of argument-by-numbers but it really looked like he absolutely couldn't relate to it, or perceive how an INTJ might come to experience the world at any point in time. As far as the stereotype goes, INTJs are not fluffy balls of joy (that's us - I'm kidding, sorta).

Second, his advice was fragmentary and merely suggestive. I was under the impression (please correct me) that INTJs naturally preferred a clarity of language for ideas. I am a philosophy major myself, I have read the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus by Wittgenstein and few of his essays, yet I found nothing about logical positivism that would contribute to existential tensions as described by both Lex and Mr.Time. In fact, the way in which he name-dropped Wittgenstein reminded me of a well-known accusation made against Ne-doms, that is, naturally dropping fragments of information rather than complete ideas.

Thirdly, developing your tertiary function, is in my opinion, akin to finding the holy grail. I mean, the task looks easy on paper: Use more Te if you're an ENFP, use more Fi if you're an INTJ. But these are massive movements in a person's life and sometimes people never develop them fully, although their bodies are fully matured and having experienced the traditional phases of a human being (including the inevitable loss of virginity, as an example). There are people who can reach the third age and be totally imbalanced and look like they were unable to develop that tertiary function in their lifetimes. (gross generalization, I dont have a degree in geriartry. But in my defense, typological theory states that the key to psychological health is the development of that function.)

Perhaps all I have are intuitions holding me back from judging Zarathustra as an INTJ exemplar for maturity and that's a fair point. I just would be more careful to draw such a dichotomizing line.

// Love and Meaninglessness
More constructively, I would like to address the problem that got the thread into such a mess to begin with:
Love.
Mr. Time suggested that INTJs are more likely to fall into existential despair than ENFPs, while we in turn, would cling to traditional visions of love resulting in the inevitable parting of ways. My Ni is probably underdeveloped and thus I can't claim to say he is wrong, assuming Antisocial's claims, it could very well be that the feeling killer lands them sooner into existential angst. Again, not my area of expertise.

But what does fall within the range of my experience, is his claim about ENFPs and love: there is -hardly- a traditional bone in the skeleton of my personality. Generally, we dont care for the overt actions of feeling (Fe) or the sensory representations of love. We always want something that stands beyond how many love letters a person writes to you and how "earth-shattering" the sex might be. It's hardly the crux of anything and neither of these dimensions brings safety and trust into the relationship.
Now the heart of the problem is how to marry this non-physical, non-representational form of love to existential concerns.

Existentialism / nihilism rejects value, logical or felt. In my introductory years to philosophy, I struggled vividly against this fact, my Ne went crazy with "no its not -that- final, look there's always a possibility for x to occur" while my Fi ate itself alive. To the degree where I found myself asking on these boards if there were ways to step out of one's own construct. My natural optimism was torn to shreds.

My solution was to accept the confines and boundaries of my own personality: I can't help but formulate value in the things I perceive and the visions conjured from that sensory data. To put it into technically, I will operate with value regardless and in spite of the logical structure of the universe. If my heart feels like transcending and telling me " this person feels this, the main idea for this moral is that " or to put it more Fi-like "I will stand for what is right in my heart, no matter what".

Of course, this requires courage and generally changes the dynamic of trying to -justify- Fi and trying to desperately see an indicator in life, a mission, if you like. Existentialism allows you to find it in yourself to become your own nucleus and genuinely stand, regardless of external indicators. Which was a -daunting- task at first, because I was used to constantly appeal to people's justice and backtrack when that failed, when no one connected- a natural product of extroversion.
The point I am trying to make about this experience is as follows: if its true that an INTJ naturally lands in that theoretical position, then its important to inform the other party. Thankfully, existentialism is an idea, to varying degree its a system of thought that can be transmitted to someone else. Perhaps, it is an INTJ bias to assume ENFPs are emotionally unflexible, but I guarantee that most of us can live in non-traditional love dynamics. Play with us, we're not partners for nothing : ) .... [ unintended pun ]

That being said, there is no rational solution to meaninglessness. Paraphrasing Camus: "Why haven't you killed yourself yet?". Acquiring an answer to existence is something every person has to go through and no one can help you with. Existential love is probably best regarded as a form of companionship as you meander in the void of an impersonal universe, someone, who in his or her own way is looking at some form of the void and formulating his/her own answer.

I hope this was somewhat useful.

 

[uumlau]

on the topic of INTJs and cute, my INTJ explained that hugs follow the commutative property yesterday, thus once you hug one person, as long as they hug the other people, you do not have to keep hugging anymore. *snickers and giggles over our mutual dorkiness*

I would like to suggest this gets applied to toasts as well as all the clinking of glasses gets old.

You seriously do not understand INTJs.

Let's say there is a table of seven, and everyone clinks glasses with everyone else.

Don't you want to know exactly how many clinks that is? No?

The INTJ does!

The formula is (n/2)*(n-1). Easy math. You tell everyone how many glass clinks it is, and freak them out by being right.

If they're facepalming at the utterly ridiculous nerdiness of it even better.

If the ENFP chicks are swooning ... that's best of all ... ENFPs love that nerdy stuff, right?

*snickers*

*M&Ms*

 

[sculpting]

Hey Xello!

As a representative example of a mature INTJ-let's study Uumlau:

You seriously do not understand INTJs.

*snickers*

*M&Ms*

Do you see what Fi does to their brains??? Scary huh? All the robotic taking over the world stuff goes out the window and they get all CUTE!

In all seriousness I have known very few younger INTJs except through the forum. My pool of IRL INTJs-about 20-are all 30+. And they all have soft, gooey, silly centers if you can dig them out and can be caring and paternilistic to those they care for. Learning to explore Fi really seems to alter their outlook on life. (However on the surface they of course can look VERY stern and uncompromising. I just hug em.)

I think it's miserable that it looks even remotely like the circle of life. It un-necessarily validates the title of this thread. I for one, would like to believe that the INTJ + ENFP union doesn't automatically equate disaster.

Sorry m'dear, I was just being silly. People have been quite cranky the last few months round the forum. A bit more biting than usual. Actually this combo can turn out amazingly well, even though the thread has been a riot.

// On the ban.
Personally, I think the banning was well-deserved. While "arguments-from-experience" yield a superficial explanation, they hardly provide new information for any debate due to their unfalsifiable nature: They could easily be part of the person's internal narrative - and those structures can be filled with error and self-protective biases, an ocean of inaccessible theoretical uncertainty that I would rather avoid. Reasons that don't connect with my personal experience or with my logic, are properly classified as hearsay (hope that's not an irrational response). Given that it's not the best explanation, it was the -only- explanation those two provided and proceeded to viciously defend... driving me to speculate on whether they had any personal involvement in the matter (as in perhaps trying to validate their relationship online to total strangers), but I will abstain from hypothesizing further on their motives - that would be simply counterproductive to the conversation.

A bit off topic-more an enfp question-So you will take your personal exepreinces as fact but not the personal experiences of others as fact? How can you be certain that your personal experiences are also not filled with error? No argument meant, purely seeking your thoughts. You comments are indicative of reflecting into an Si database of info collected via people observations.

As for the two of them-I mostly ignored the argument details and just watch the trends. Banning is just a fact of life, so I contain no strong feelings either way.

// Zarathustra as mature
I'm not an Ni dom, so this is not my expertise, but Antisocial's definition as a feeling-killer /immediately/ reminded me of something both an INTJ friend and an INFJ ex mentioned. [B]Unfortunately my pool of Ni-doms is limited (I can attest to the rarity of those personality types in my population sample.). All this to say, ah-hah! That's the third time I've heard that statement, fourth, taking Lex into account.
[/B]
I know this will probably sound like an ad-hominem against Zarathustra, especially since I concurred with his suspension, but I think it would be unwise to assume his behavior was the behavior of a mature INTJ for several reasons. (I pray that this conversation doesn't de-volve into loyalty-flag-waving, Fe-style. I am only referring to Zarathustra because he is the current object of analysis [Orobas' at least], please take my comments impersonally.)

The first reason, is his utter denial of antisocialone's reference, of course, this means my first reason is the fallacy of argument-by-numbers but it really looked like he absolutely couldn't relate to it, or perceive how an INTJ might come to experience the world at any point in time. As far as the stereotype goes, INTJs are not fluffy balls of joy (that's us - I'm kidding, sorta).

Wow, you are doing exactly what I do-referring back to your direct experiences and remembered comments from the particular type, to them make predictions or establish correlations to current discussions about people of that type. Cool, I havent seen many other do this so clearly. You even mention a sample pool. awesome! This is the ENFP strong point-observing for patterns in groups of people-check out the ENFP patterns thread for more perspectives.

I think it may be all about the sample pool size and watching them over time and age range. How old were your INTJs? How long have you been watching them? What I am very interested in understanding is how their worldview evolves as they learn to use Fi. I think something really weird happens in their brains when they do this-Z may be a good example. (Miss you Z!)

Over at INTJf, there is a whole thread in which the INTJs discuss having to relearn how to feel. They are so good at repressing emotion, that they quench it totally. I do believe that many INTJs may possibly never "feel" the way an ENFP might wrt emotion thus one aspect that may be very important in an ENFP:INTJ relationship is proper expectations on the parts of both of what "Love" may feel like-and acceptance of how each may show and demonstrate that love. It may never be the same-and that should be okay. (But perhaps this is what your last paragraph is exploring?)

Z did mention feeling like MrT several years in the past-making me assume he has went through some sort of life altering event that has changed his perspective subsequently.

Second, his advice was fragmentary and merely suggestive. I was under the impression (please correct me) that INTJs naturally preferred a clarity of language for ideas. I am a philosophy major myself, I have read the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus by Wittgenstein and few of his essays, yet I found nothing about logical positivism that would contribute to existential tensions as described by both Lex and Mr.Time. In fact, the way in which he name-dropped Wittgenstein reminded me of a well-known accusation made against Ne-doms, that is, naturally dropping fragments of information rather than complete ideas.

Ah, I cant honestly stay with you too much here as I am a biochemist and am thus ignorant of philospophy. My apologies. Z's mode of language is fairly clear-albeit he shows more tendency for debate here than other INTJs-but not using Ti at all. Z bleeds Te everywhere in his language. But i cannot speak to name dropping or relevance. A mannerism I have noted in Te users is appealing to authority, although it seems most common in Te doms.

Thirdly, developing your tertiary function, is in my opinion, akin to finding the holy grail. I mean, the task looks easy on paper: Use more Te if you're an ENFP, use more Fi if you're an INTJ. But these are massive movements in a person's life and sometimes people never develop them fully, although their bodies are fully matured and having experienced the traditional phases of a human being (including the inevitable loss of virginity, as an example). There are people who can reach the third age and be totally imbalanced and look like they were unable to develop that tertiary function in their lifetimes. (gross generalization, I dont have a degree in geriartry. But in my defense, typological theory states that the key to psychological health is the development of that function.)

Actually-one of the divergent paths of development can be overdevelopment of the tert to protect the aux function. But most people seem to be tapping into the tert by 25-30. But my area of interest has been Ne doms up until this point-thus my interest in tert development in INTJs in still nascent...you have a fair amount of Te btw.

Perhaps all I have are intuitions holding me back from judging Zarathustra as an INTJ exemplar for maturity and that's a fair point. I just would be more careful to draw such a dichotomizing line.

I wonder if it can be a bit unsettling to INTJs as Fi begins to emerge. A mid life crisis sort of point, except a bit earlier.. Maybe thats what we see in Z? I dunno...But maturity has no boundaries-in this particular case Fi is the thing of interest, thus formed an arbitrary definition.

Existentialism / nihilism rejects value, logical or felt. In my introductory years to philosophy, I struggled vividly against this fact, my Ne went crazy with "no its not -that- final, look there's always a possibility for x to occur" while my Fi ate itself alive. To the degree where I found myself asking on these boards if there were ways to step out of one's own construct. My natural optimism was torn to shreds.

My solution was to accept the confines and boundaries of my own personality: I can't help but formulate value in the things I perceive and the visions conjured from that sensory data. To put it into technically, I will operate with value regardless and in spite of the logical structure of the universe. If my heart feels like transcending and telling me " this person feels this, the main idea for this moral is that " or to put it more Fi-like "I will stand for what is right in my heart, no matter what".

Of course, this requires courage and generally changes the dynamic of trying to -justify- Fi and trying to desperately see an indicator in life, a mission, if you like. Existentialism allows you to find it in yourself to become your own nucleus and genuinely stand, regardless of external indicators. Which was a -daunting- task at first, because I was used to constantly appeal to people's justice and backtrack when that failed, when no one connected- a natural product of extroversion.

Do you find that you molded new "values"? Or that you choose to value "logic" or a distanced perspective-understanding that in the moment it may not "feel" like Fi, but that it results in the greatest benefit, ie Fi return on investment in the long run?

Thus in doing so you could "step out of the construct" that Fi bounds you into?

At some point i learned to Fi "value" logic over immediate compassion. My prime Fi objective appears to be to prevent pain and suffering for others. I learned that from an Fi perspective, the logical answer normally provides the best solution for all-my prime Fi objective-even if in the short term there is discomfort or unhappiness for some.

Even weirder though...I learned that my own Fi will induce bias in my rational Te arguments-a defensive Fi response of annoyance and anger if others dispute my rational argument-thus I learned to quell/suppress that Defensive Fi-and then focus on learning from others.

Why?-I value the Truth as being of the most benefit to all involved. Fi "values" truth. So I seem to have developed a weird way to cimcumvent the worst of value based contamination of logic-via an intricate web of Fi values.

yeah, I dont quite understand it yet, but am poking at the edges... But it does speak for how the individual nature of Fi based values can induce great amounts of flexibility and diversity in the same personality type.

 

[sculpting]

SW and feelings in INTJs:

III.Ni-Fi axis

INTJ, of all four rationals, is most in tune with the Feeling aspect of their psyche. Essentially, their visions are meant not only to be oriented around impersonal agendas, but also make a powerful appeal to the human element. Corrupt introverted judgment, however, as explored in depth in the INFP profile leads to radical egocentricity. This can be a particular menace with types operating on auxiliary Introverted Judgment whereas it will be powerful enough to inflict serious harm on the external world. Least harmful perhaps in types with inferior introverted judgment. We know that the less properly a function is utilized, the more corrupt it is likely to become. Hence EJ types, with inferior introverted judgment are most likely to have such a faculty corrupted. INJs are less likely, though their introverted judgment is more powerful than that of the EJ types indeed. This places the introverted judgment in a very peculiar position. The EP types may not be corrupt enough to become egocentric, but INJs have shown to be far more likely to succumb to this malady. As the three greatest proponents of ethical egoism, Hobbes, Nietzsche and Sartre were INTJs.
The inner life of the INTJ tends to be chaotic as aforementioned due to the lack of proper use of introverted judgment, and Introverted Feeling appears far too soft-hearted to bring about the inner order the INTJ longs for. INTJs are most adept at scrutiny of aesthetics and the human element as their Feeling function is the strongest out of all Thinking types. For this reason we often observe INTJ novelists and poets competing with the Intuitive-Feeling types in the literary arena. In that regard the visions of the INTJ become even more forceful than that of the ENTP, as they primarily rely on hunches and sentiments to convince others to embrace their vision. In that regard, they are supreme.

As Jung noted about the ENP..


”He brings his vision to life, he presents it convincingly and with dramatic fire, he embodies it, so to speak. But this is not play-acting, it is a kind of fate.”

The ENTP is much skilled at expression, or presenting his external vision to others. Yet the INTJ is not, his vision is far richer and more profound than that of the ENTP, but in mere essence should affect the individual in the same fashion—the impact, however, should be much more profound as Introverted Intuition focuses more intensely and is far richer in imagination than the Extroverted.

The nature of Feeling for the INTJ is predominantly negative, as they tend not be comfortable with this function. Much more comfortable than the rest of the Thinking types, however, not to the extent that the dominant or auxiliary Feeling types tend to be. Feeling is also subordinate to their Intuitive and Thinking faculties. For this reason their visions are often fraught with sentiments romanticizing their abstract notions about the world and celebrations of their successful by the conventional standards endeavors. Feeling, very rarely has an autonomous voice of its own and merely cheers to what the Ni-Te axis considers desirable, and frowns at what it considers undesirable. But when it does acquire autonomy of its own, the INTJ almost infallibly overcomes his ‘existential crisis’ and his life is radically altered for the better. As then his visions will be satisfactory by virtue of their significance to the inner being and not the seemingly hollow external standard. Often INTJs will distort their perceptions of their feelings to better accommodate their hunches or logical reasoning.

 

[superman]

Several comprehensive MBTI tests shows I am in the borderline of T and J. Sometimes I score like an INTJ and sometimes I score like an INFJ. I am more INTJ when I am working on something serious and being in front of people that I dont like. I am more like INFJ when I like someone.
Nasty INTJ are those who are too T and too J.
I do naturally attract to ENFP for its...well...their charm, fun,joy and spontanous. Hahaha. The bubbly nature of the person.
ENFP likes the supportive, sweet-mouth and the emotional depth of INFJ.
ENFP also likes the surprises and mysteries that INTJs seems to hold in their minds.
One problem for INTJ/INFJ dating with ENFP is constant seeking novalty and might not be able to settle down to the right person.

 

[skylights]

i think INTJs are generally really attractive and slightly infuriating.

but, see, the infuriating keeps it interesting. and the Fi, when it chooses to present itself, soothes my Fi, so i feel a connection despite the occasional assholery. similarly, i believe they feel a connection given my N-Te abilities despite my occasional Fi rampages and slight NFP loopiness.

at best, we are nerdy compliments. at worst, we severely injure one another.

i imagine makeup sex would be pretty good though.


i'm not sure about INFJs, though. i don't think i know any INFJs i've been attracted to IRL, but that's because i don't really know how many INFJs i know IRL. i can't even think of any off the top of my head.

 

[Tigerlily]

They are vindictive, cold, insensitive

They can be, but any unhealthy/unhappy type would be undesirable and should be avoided.

<------ is mean

I'm mean too, but we'll never be meaner or outargue an INTJ. Even if they're dead wrong they'll likely not see it your way, not even a little and if they do they'll never admit to it.

 

[Amargith]

Really? I've found that outarguing an INTJ really isn't that hard with their need for closure

 

[Tigerlily]

Really? I've found that outarguing an INTJ really isn't that hard with their need for closure

It goes without saying that anything is possible when sex is involved.

 

[InvisibleJim]

I'm one of the advocates against this partnership. Satine is busy trying to convince me otherwise and failing. For information on why I find this an unnatural pairing feel free to contact me.

A lot of the points in this thread do address many of the positives and negatives from the pairing in good detail.

 

[stormyapril]

It works okay. Perhaps the ISTJ:ENFP match might be even easier but would lack the abstract intuitive conversations.

The Te/Fi bridge simplifies communication and value judgment. There may not always be agreement, but the shared language and frame prevents confusion during discussion of the disagreement.

The biggest challenge is the Ni:Si difference. The Si locks the INTJ into one, isolated Ni context, trapping them, leaving them feeling as though the Ne dom thinks they are always right. The INTJ keeps trying to displace core Si generalized rules with changing Ni contexts, thus giving the impression of ignoring previously agreed upon definitions or well understood Ne patterns. This leaves the Ne dom with no set Si foundation from which to Ne expand upon and perceiving the Ni dom as being dismissive.

On the positive side, the Ni Dom can pass new universal Ni truths which can replace old Si generalized truths, yielding whole new Ne playgrounds to explore. The Ne dom can pass the Ni dom Ne-isms which morph into new Ni contexts to view the problem through.

Word has it that the honesty, integrity, innocence, the direct, straightforward, open communication, the touching and holding, the commitment, the simultaneous ownership of responsibility and individual emotions, all make up for the perceptional differences.

 

[InvisibleJim]

The biggest challenge is the Ni:Si difference. The Si locks the INTJ into one, isolated Ni context, trapping them, leaving them feeling as though the Ne dom thinks they are always right.

Perhaps I'm being dumb, but you mean INTJ -> Se, right? Or are you throwing Socionics at us?

 

[stormyapril]

Perhaps I'm being dumb, but you mean INTJ -> Se, right? Or are you throwing Socionics at us?

INTJs, dumb?

See clarification:
"The biggest challenge is the Ni:Si difference. The (ENFP's) Si locks the INTJ into one, isolated, overly detailed Ni context, trapping them, leaving them feeling as though the Ne dom thinks they are always right."

Please feel free to clarify of course as you know your own mind best and the above can only be an approximation based upon observations.

 

[InvisibleJim]

INTJs, dumb?

See clarification:
"The biggest challenge is the Ni:Si difference. The (ENFP's) Si locks the INTJ into one, isolated, overly detailed Ni context, trapping them, leaving them feeling as though the Ne dom thinks they are always right."

Please feel free to clarify of course as you know your own mind best and the above can only be an approximation based upon observations.

Thank you, it all makes sense now!

 

[stormyapril]

Hi Jim,

Assuming sarcasm....here let me try again....very early in this thread the Si question was raised...this is an attempt at an answer.

Before getting in a relationship with an INTJ, I assumed it would be fairly trouble free based upon interactions I had in the past with INTJ friends. It retrospect that was premature. I was in a LTR with an ISTP for 8 years, so I had already learned how to give an introvert time and space alone and how to be less sensitive to intentional or unintentional sarcasm or logical critique. I/E vs T/F diffs had been worked through and learned, so these were not an issue.

The Te and Fi make things really simple (as compared to trying to date an Fe/Ti person). It drastically simplifies emotional and logical communication with no misunderstandings about motive or intent arising. Of course the same can be said for two XNTJs dating as well.

Emotional communication is actually very simple and easy. It just flows. I suspect we bring out the innocent child inside of INTJs because we just dump Fi at them via Ne.

It can become harder when trying to have logical Te discussions, especially if the subject is one in which you both have a very strong interest and knowledge base due to the diffs in N and S.

Things I have had to learn:
1. Give the INTJ space to use Ni without Ne jumping off topic. This means being quiet at times and following the Ni.

2. Give the INTJ space to use Ni, even if it conflicts with my Si-hardbound version of the idea. This can be really hard on topics I am very well versed in. Learning about Ni context shifting was very valuable, as it first it seemed like all of my past knowledge had been disregarded in one swoop. It kind of was, but just for the time being...

3. The INTJ likes to go out and do physical activities-Se. I like to stay home and read-Si. Because I love him, I try and do the things that he enjoys, even if they wouldnt be my first choice in hobbies.

4. I have to detach emotionally from my ideas and recognize that discussions are not arguments. This is a bit tricky but doable. It can feel very stressful trying to debate an INTJ, as you guys can appear angstful or demanding on the surface which I will read as frustration or anger. I also have to ignore how VERY dismissive Te can sound on the surface, as even when you guys brainstorm, you are still being highly assertive via Te quality assurance tactics.

These are a few areas of learned growth, but because NeFi is innately like a chameleon, once we understand how to adapt, it isnt very hard to do so.

 

[InvisibleJim]

Hi Jim,

Assuming sarcasm....here let me try again....very early in this thread the Si question was raised...this is an attempt at an answer.

No, I did actually mean it made sense now.

Thanks for more detail, I'm sure others might find it useful.

 

[stormyapril]

No, I did actually mean it made sense now.

Thanks for more detail, I'm sure others might find it useful.

Oh. whoops Enfps get used to mean people after awhile. The directness of the intj is quite delightful.

But just for fun, i found this quote from Z up and over there>>> somewhere which might explains my first point perhaps a bit more....

1. Give the INTJ space to use Ni without Ne jumping off topic. This means being quiet at times and following the Ni.

Just a week or two ago, in describing to my girlfriend why I and other Ni doms sometimes have a somewhat "blank" look on our face, I said it was because my thoughts on the matter are still forming.

The stuff inside my head has still not congealed into any solid substance, it hasn't yet reached that crystallized state, the lightning has not yet struck. But then, all of a sudden, *boom* it's there. And I've got something in mind.

Any pushing or forcing, either by ourselves or by external sources, tends to cause whatever had been forming to now be perturbed and, in general, creates some perversion (in my case, often tinged with resentment and anger for having its natural process be disturbed) of what had already been forming, that is now less insightful and valuable then what had been forming in the first place.

I believe this explanation came in the context of asking her to just let me finish figuring out what it is that I had to say, with the necessary time and silence in order to do so.