[ENFP] ENFPs and Being Controlling

[Moiety]

^just a note on absolutes and ENFPs. I personally have a BIG problem with quantifying my opinions. And when people point out I'm being too extreme it pisses me off to no end, because they I have to explain how I really feel, but the things is I don't want to explain how I really feel because my statements are usually very political and are meant to produce an effect to balance other people's opinions out and also to make me believe I DONT live in a completely relative world....

Okay, I'm making no sense. Just forget it

 

[digesthisickness]

^just a note on absolutes and ENFPs. I personally have a BIG problem with quantifying my opinions. And when people point out I'm being too extreme it pisses me off to no end, because they I have to explain how I really feel, but the things is I don't want to explain how I really feel because my statements are usually very political and are meant to produce an effect to balance other people's opinions out and also to make me believe I DONT live in a completely relative world....

Okay, I'm making no sense. Just forget it

heh.

was i supposed to be reading 'thinking' instead of 'feeling' about these subjects? because a person asking you how you feel and what you think are two different questions. one doesn't require personal information.

 

[Moiety]

I think I used the word feel correctly. From an emotional standpoint I'm usually a very compassionate guy. But I'm not a slave to my emotional and I understand people aren't swayed by my personal feelings on matters. I mean I'm just one guy. It's much easier to come to a consensus via thinking than it is via feeling.

I'd be much more agreeable if I expressed my true feelings on things. I'm usually more theatrical as if I had passionate views on everything....when really what I want is to influence the course of the conversation. I start by saying "I hate yuppies!" when I don't really, to evolve the conversation into the basic idea that success and money are not important.

But yeah, just disregard my posts, this is probably my very personal experience. I'm a bit of a contrarian ENFP.

 

[cascadeco]

This is a REALLY interesting point. For me, if I present an idea, I always assume the other person will be capable of thinking through and evaluating it. Thus I would never not share an idea, even a total bullshit one. There is no danger or worry in my mind that an incorrect idea might take root. If it sucks, the idea will be dismantled and rebuilt, discarded, or might serve as a tidbit to give fruition to someone else's idea.

However I have ran into a few of INTPs and INFJs over the last few months who do exhibit concern. Simply by sharing the idea, it seems they cant assume the other person is actually able to think independently thus there is a sense of worry. Almost like the idea is a pathogen, and once released people will just believe it because it was spoken? I am seeing shades of this in your above quote as well.

Right...well, I think the problem is that half the planet, when they speak, will only speak when they've already formulated what's in their mind and they fully believe in and have put thought into what they're saying, and it's a 'done deal', so to speak, whereas the other half of the planet will be a bit more freeform in what they say and apparently don't always believe what they're saying or it's at the very least not solid at all, yet, and the act of speaking/discussing is partially what causes structure to form. I had always thought the latter was a bit more of an E thing, or more of an Ne thing specifically, but apparently there's more to it than that.

For myself, to be totally honest I have a harder time grasping people who aren't committed to what they say, so I don't deal as well with solving for things externally, i.e. reaching clarity through this external process...

-----------

Re. ENFP's and being controlling... I tend to think P's have a special flavor of control... it's very subtle but very different from J's, which is why it's so disconcerting to me. I think it's tied to the Fi or Ti (dom/aux introverted function) being placed in some sort of danger or being dismissed on some level. It can be more of a passive aggressive controlling... really relying on that Fi or Ti and diminishing/belittling the other person for not having that internally rigid Fi/Ti value or logical contruct, questioning motives, emotional manipulation, and the like - striking inwardly, in the persons' psychae, basically attacking their [lack of] internal framework - more of an internal/identity attack...trying to change the internal landscape of the person. Whereas J's, with Ni or Si as the dom/aux introverted function, lacking in 'structure' to begin with (in comparison to Fi/Ti), will impose control by striking outwardly - in more external ways, i.e. organization, specific behaviors that are expected, & etc...trying to change the external landscape of the person.

This of course is a generalization, but it does support what pretty much all of the ENFP's in this thread have said - that they hate controlling others, and only control themselves. If we're talking external control, in terms of behaviors, etc, yes, I'd agree. But if there is a clash with the Fi, the ENFP will be quite controlling in the sense of more personal attacks/judgements to the other - going more towards internal character questioning and diminishing the others' sense of self. Their motivation might be from a good place, but the act of challenging/questioning in effect reduces/invalidates the other person and their own beliefs and sense of self. Moiety even sort of said it... that he likes to challenge people and 'likes to help others become better'. Well... 'better' according to you? According to your values, that would be. That's fine, but again, with a values clash, that comes across as exceedingly controlling in the sense of a lack of acceptance/toleration of someone who views things differently. Anyway... this is the gist of how I experienced Control with an enfp I dated a long while back. He was trying to change me, and some of my views were unacceptable/unfathomable, and I felt quite boxed in by him.

I think any type is going to feel controlled when someone tries to impose structure/order on ones most unstructured aspect - because the unstructured aspect is 'freeing' for us, even elemental, as it's necessary and balancing out the more structured aspects. So, a P trying to impose some sort of order on the internal aspect of a J is going to seem quite controlling, and *limiting*, just as a J trying to impose some sort of order on an external aspect of a P is going to seem controlling and limiting. And, a P may not care so much if another P tries to impose unwanted internal structure (or at least won't deem it controlling), because the first P already has solidity internally and the other P isn't going to be as much of a threat. Just as a J isn't going to see another J imposing external as as much of a threat, because the first J already has his own external system in order that works for him and isn't going to care so much if the other tries to change him - because he either won't change and is solid enough in that in the first place and isn't influenceable (lol.. I don't think that's a word), or the external piece doesn't matter and any sort of structure is desired.

Eh..sorry..that was one big tangent that may not have much validity.

 

[digesthisickness]

just to be clear, i state outrageous crap all the time as if i believe it, but it's done 'theatrically' as was stated above. it's meant to be understood that i'm deliberately spouting bullcrap in an overblown way.

i'd probably never speak if i couldn't start conversations that way at least sometimes.

 

[Esoteric Wench]

...the Fe/Ti user expects you to get it logically right and cordial the first time you speak and you don't, and then they get pissed. and you're like JUST WAIT A SECOND WHILE I FIGURE OUT WHAT I MEAN. :sad:

Yessirree Bob! That's exactly what I do. Sometimes I'll say something, THEN I'll figure out if it's true.

This, of course, reminds me of one of my favorite lines from one of my favorite movies: The Royal Tenenbaums. The irascible Royal is trying to cajole his ex-wife into forgiving him for lying to her about him having terminal cancer.

Royal: Look, I know I'm gonna be the bad guy on this one. But I just wanna say the last six days have been the best six days of probably my whole life.
Narrator: Immediately after making this statement, Royal realized that it was true.​

I always figured it was the Ne thing coupled with my diarrhea of the mouth extraversion. Perhaps it is my Te articulating my Fi.

 

[XYZ]

ENFP would be amongst the types least likely to be seen as controlling.

However, as Si is their inferior function it is often approached in an obsessive way as it's the hardest for us to master i.e. in your mother's case it seems being obsessed that certain standards are being adhered - if she is an ENFP it would be very draining for her to keep this up for long (unlike an Si-dom) as using the inferior function has the highest energy cost.

Most of the Ne dom's I know their Si fetish takes the form of rich detail note taking about a particular interest or a collecting hobby ...

I posted a bit more about inferior function manifestations here.

 

[sculpting]

With respect to Digest's experiment about the narrator saying a dino was the first mammal:

My immediate response would be a series of giggles. I would find it hysterical as I would read it as a broken, silly Ne misconnection and laugh. Then I'd figure somebody was going to get their asses kicked over that screwup. Possible some little kids are going to go around a bit confused for awhile, but eventually it will get sorted out. HOWEVER-the sorting out relies upon having many, many ideas all equally available for consideration. If I read in ten books that dinos are reptiles, but hear on one show that dinos are mammals, I dont disregard the show outright, but I question it and place it in the "doubtful" box. I would immediately request data to support the assertion that differs so drastically from what I have known in the past or just ignore it if I dont feel like following up on it.

One important aspect-note I said "books" and not people. If I am setting at lunch or a conference and everyone in the room agreed that dinos were mammals, I would assume they were ridiculously stupid, then go find source materials to prove if I was correct or incorrect.

Also-ideas are separate from the person who had the idea. Thus it doesnt matter WHO has an idea-Jesus, a nobel laureate or the bum on the corner...the idea still is mostly considered in isolation from me or them.

Yessirree Bob! That's exactly what I do. Sometimes I'll say something, THEN I'll figure out if it's true.

This, of course, reminds me of one of my favorite lines from one of my favorite movies: The Royal Tenenbaums. The irascible Royal is trying to cajole his ex-wife into forgiving him for lying to her about him having terminal cancer.

Royal: Look, I know I'm gonna be the bad guy on this one. But I just wanna say the last six days have been the best six days of probably my whole life.
Narrator: Immediately after making this statement, Royal realized that it was true.​

I always figured it was the Ne thing coupled with my diarrhea of the mouth extraversion. Perhaps it is my Te articulating my Fi.

Oh, this will give Digest seizures ....but...

My teenage ENFP son and 3 yo INTJ son were in the car with me. The INTJ loves Thomas the Train and went to visit Thomas at a recent event. The ENFP, being a mean teenager, starts down the path of saying "Well you know Thomas is only on TV right?"

INTJ: "No, Ethan, I SAW Thomas, Thomas travels on Rails."
ENFP: "That's not the REAL Thomas, it wasnt REAL."
INTJ: "No Thomas can go back and forth on the tracks"
ENFP: "No stupid, Thomas isnt .....(muffled) real" as I slapped my hand over his mouth

I told the older kid-"Dont tell him that he isnt real, he loves Thomas"

INTJ-"What isnt real mommy? Thomas is real, he lives on Sodor island surrounded by water. Is something not real?

Me-"Oh, honey, Thomas is real, you saw him....Umm, Islands aren't real."

This sort of insanity always stops the little INTJ. He gets the "INTJ Violation of the Laws of Reality" look. The best I can figure this look means that an NiTe cognitive train wreck has occurred. While the INTJ tries to untangle the mess, the ENFP can smile and skip away. The best I can figure it is a subconcious diversionary tactic.

Later the little INTJ pulled me aside to educate me.

"Mommy...Thomas lives on an ISLAND. ISLANDS are surrounded by water. Thomas' shed is on the ISLAND." I said "Oh, that makes total sense!" and he seemed satisfied that he had correctly my defective reasoning and went back to playing with his toys.

 

[skylights]

Yessirree Bob! That's exactly what I do. Sometimes I'll say something, THEN I'll figure out if it's true.

This, of course, reminds me of one of my favorite lines from one of my favorite movies: The Royal Tenenbaums. The irascible Royal is trying to cajole his ex-wife into forgiving him for lying to her about him having terminal cancer.

Royal: Look, I know I'm gonna be the bad guy on this one. But I just wanna say the last six days have been the best six days of probably my whole life.
Narrator: Immediately after making this statement, Royal realized that it was true.​

! i know right!!

i haven't seen that movie but that sounds like something i would do lol.

I always figured it was the Ne thing coupled with my diarrhea of the mouth extraversion. Perhaps it is my Te articulating my Fi.

i actually don't even talk a ton - i'm one of those more introverted extraverts lol - but i'm with you on both counts. i guess it can upset people because (1) Ne can see a huge amount of possibly contradicting ideas and if they seem really relevant, we'll tend to voice them, regardless of whether they contradict or not, and (2) Fi is really freaking hard to vocalize in a succinct manner. but the Fi things are the most important to talk about, so we're kind of stuck in a shitty corner there.

for example, whenever i write an emotionally charged post on here i have to edit it tons of times before i'm satisfied that i've unearthed my real meaning. sometimes i feel like i get an intuitive grasp of "something is not right here" (Fi) but i don't know what it is, and logically organizing it on paper (or out loud) helps me dig through to figure out what it is. that's the other part of me talking/yelling a ton when i get upset. i'm one, trying to protect myself, and two, trying to explain what's going on in my mind, because i figure both parties will appreciate the clarification. they usually do, once i'm done being a raging fireball of RAWR. (working on that... :blushing

For myself, to be totally honest I have a harder time grasping people who aren't committed to what they say, so I don't deal as well with solving for things externally, i.e. reaching clarity through this external process...

haha i have the same trouble with the other half. it's strange to me because it feels like they want all words set in stone... it's so restricting, and it makes it feel like i'm always about to make a mistake.

Re. ENFP's and being controlling... I tend to think P's have a special flavor of control... it's very subtle but very different from J's, which is why it's so disconcerting to me. I think it's tied to the Fi or Ti (dom/aux introverted function) being placed in some sort of danger or being dismissed on some level. It can be more of a passive aggressive controlling... really relying on that Fi or Ti and diminishing/belittling the other person for not having that internally rigid Fi/Ti value or logical contruct, questioning motives, emotional manipulation, and the like - striking inwardly, in the persons' psychae, basically attacking their [lack of] internal framework - more of an internal/identity attack...trying to change the internal landscape of the person. Whereas J's, with Ni or Si as the dom/aux introverted function, lacking in 'structure' to begin with (in comparison to Fi/Ti), will impose control by striking outwardly - in more external ways, i.e. organization, specific behaviors that are expected, & etc...trying to change the external landscape of the person.

well said, and i agree.

though i hate the designation passive-aggressive, because it's not meant to be kept hidden, or to be vindictive, or to go behind anyone's back. i do get why it comes off that way. the way i see it personally, is that in general, everyone should be allowed to act as they please without redirection and interference from others. social standards shouldn't be restricting; everyone should be able to act as they please - up until the point where they are hurting others. that's the line that i see that others cross in my mind, and that's when i'll get controlling.

it also doesn't feel like identity attack to me as much as "hey, are you really sure that makes sense?" i feel like some people have very peculiar external standards that they seem to enforce without really knowing why. they see it as the best way, because it's effective in some way, but haven't really questioned its grounds. this is especially relevant for a Ne dom/aux because we see so many different options.

i also don't feel like my internal structure is restricting... i feel like it's necessary. how could i be confident in myself if i didn't have the internal me somewhat figured out? i guess maybe external structure feels the same way for Js - necessary, instead of restricting. what does it feel like to not have a solid internal structure?

And, a P may not care so much if another P tries to impose unwanted internal structure (or at least won't deem it controlling), because the first P already has solidity internally and the other P isn't going to be as much of a threat. Just as a J isn't going to see another J imposing external as as much of a threat, because the first J already has his own external system in order that works for him and isn't going to care so much if the other tries to change him - because he either won't change and is solid enough in that in the first place and isn't influenceable (lol.. I don't think that's a word), or the external piece doesn't matter and any sort of structure is desired.

that's really interesting. i was trying to figure out the whole thing about internal changes because i don't feel very internally threatened by other FPs or TPs. i mean it can be annoying, but not threatening.

to me it's still strange to get how external systemization could be less of a threat than internal systemization - because there's a huge difference in that i can never really change your internal world. it's entirely inside of you. it's not grounds i can ever really be threatening on, because i don't even have access to it unless you let me. the external world, on the other hand... to use the extreme example - hitler, and the crazy-ass external system he was the mastermind of. that system hurt and killed countless people, and they often had very, very little control over it. they just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. maybe internal restrictions seem as threatening as external restrictions, but i can never crack open your brain and change anything. the person who is creating external restrictions, on the other hand, can and does permanently affect everyone's lives.

which is not bad, persay. i know plenty of Fe doms who make the world a wonderful place, and i Te streamline, myself, to a certain extent. i just think external systemization is harder to escape, and so i try not to enforce my own personal preferences on others until i feel like they are hurting someone else. of course, i suppose the problem there is that "hurting" to me might be positive in others' minds. like trying to suppress or change anyone who's LGBTQ - which is cruel and petty in my mind, but fixing a threat to "good society" according to some politicians and religious leaders.

i guess don't really feel bad about being controlling in that way, though...

 

[cascadeco]

i also don't feel like my internal structure is restricting... i feel like it's necessary. how could i be confident in myself if i didn't have the internal me somewhat figured out? i guess maybe external structure feels the same way for Js - necessary, instead of restricting. what does it feel like to not have a solid internal structure?

What does it feel like to not have solid internal structure? It means I don't have solid views on many things, and I find most viewpoints - the essence of them - highly subjective (well, duh) and therefore somewhat 'baseless' in the grander scheme, because Person A has such and such views, and Person B has a set of different views, I can see both peoples' perspectives, and because I can see both, I can't really commit. They're both 'Right' in different ways, thus there's no Absolute Right. (Or, maybe worded differently, I'm ever trying to nab that 'Absolute Right' for myself and views on the world. ] That sort of thing. That's a tiny example.

that's really interesting. i was trying to figure out the whole thing about internal changes because i don't feel very internally threatened by other FPs or TPs. i mean it can be annoying, but not threatening.

to me it's still strange to get how external systemization could be less of a threat than internal systemization - because there's a huge difference in that i can never really change your internal world.

Ah..but see, you can. That's a distinction. That's why it's a potential threat - because I know since I'm not solid in the first place on many things, and simply switch how I look at things, I'm potentially easily swayed. [Assuming it's not one of my own personal beliefs that I've put a lot of thought, contemplation, research, etc on] From what I just said above - at the flip of a switch I can tweak my brain to look at it from another angle, and I fear that 'influence' others might have -- even if it's temporary -- because I might see their point, but a few weeks later I might have thought more on it and decided in fact that's not in the end something I can stomach. Or whatever. Basically without the initial internal solidity - values framework, whatever - I'm quite malleable and it's often a very Delayed Response where I figure out what *I* actually believe in. A lot of it might be trial and error or sitting on something for a while and realizing in the end it doesn't make sense to me or whatever. But it's not something I know, or am totally solid on, initially.

[To be clear, though, no, you can't change many aspects of my internal world, in terms of how I process things, basic personality traits, etc - but the content? Oh yes.]

It's kind of why I was trying to break it down into P's and J's -- not that we're all going to be as extreme in one way or another -- but just that distinction between the Internal being the threat for J's, and the External being the threat for P's.

 

[cascadeco]

:it also doesn't feel like identity attack to me as much as "hey, are you really sure that makes sense?" i feel like some people have very peculiar external standards that they seem to enforce without really knowing why. they see it as the best way, because it's effective in some way, but haven't really questioned its grounds. this is especially relevant for a Ne dom/aux because we see so many different options.

Also, you're right re. this. There ARE many different external options -- so in a sense, the external is pretty arbitrary. We just happen to have put thought into why we have chosen one of these ways over another. (usually there's a lot of reason behind it, but you're right, sometimes there's not much at all and it's just habit and there's a much better way)

Flip this around. You can say the same thing about internal things/values - there are 'many different internal options'. So they too are arbitrary, in much the same sense you might view external behaviors being arbitrary. But again, doesn't mean a lot of thought isn't put into the why behind why you've chosen one internal 'way' of viewing things. It's just that the J's are going to concentrate efforts on honing external things and making that precise/solid, and P's are going to focus efforts on internal solidity.

(urg... I'm kinda making this up as I go so I'm sure it isn't entirely accurate)

Basically it's just two sides of the same coin (well, sort of ) -- and thank heavens everyone isn't solely internally perceiving without any external judgment, or solely internal judging without any external perceiving. And... it's why J's and P's can learn & gain from one another.

 

[Fidelia]

This has been a very interesting and valuable thread to me. Thank you Orobas, EW and skylights in particular for your contributions.

Because Ti is big on accuracy and only speaks about things it is totally sure about, it is irksome to hear someone state something in absolute terms and then flip flop and still think they're right. What I didn't realize is that whether it's ENFP style Te or Te dom Te, they are actually much more open to restructuring information or an idea than I am. Kind of like putting puzzle pieces right into the spot before deciding whether they should remain because they fit, or something else is better. Ti users would instead examine the colours, the bumps and indents on the puzzle piece, compared with the prospective home for it and reject it much sooner if it didn't work because they are less likely to change it once it is actually in place.

This was (and to some extent continues to be) news to me that Te users don't really believe half of what they say as dogmatically as they express it, so it doesn't seem like they are either inaccurate or bossy. They give their listener the credit of evaluating and contributing to the stated idea or theory. To a Ti user, we tend to make sure we trust the source of the idea first, but then are more likely to accept what they say without as rigorous of verbal sparring. Therefore, if I listen to a documentary on dinosaurs from a reputable source, I will assume that I can relax and assimilate the information being given because it is reliable. Otherwise, I would not waste my time on it. I think this is part of what makes me seem kind of inflexible to some people - if I can tell what something is not, I don't want to see what it would look like in my internal system.

This is also why you find Ti users often quantifying everything, which some Te users find wordy and annoying. They assume that they will evaluate the ideas that are stated. We assume that if they trust us, they may not as rigorously and we want to distribute accurate information.

I think I find Te from Te doms less frustrating because I am expecting it. ENFPs can seem kind of easy-going and loosy-goosey at first glance and then they come along with the Te hammer and it makes me bristle! They seem like they are sure of what is true and what is best, and are telling me what to do, at the same time as being all flip-floppy themselves. It makes me not trust them as a reliable source of information.

While NFs don't generally ignore people as a defense, I do think that Fe has a tendancy to politely ignore if it deems the situation not condusive to iniate conflict in. When the ENFP metaphorically follows us into the next room telling us what to do, Fe users tend to get less diplomatic and if pushed further, extremely blunt and direct. This surprises and hurts the ENFP who doesn't realize what it is that we are reacting to and who only had the best of intentions. It feels like we are being needlessly aggressive and vicious when they were only defending themselves or trying to help.

I'm not really stating this in the right terms as I'm still processing some of it. I'd like to say though that all three of you ladies have during your time on the forum been enormously helpful in me better understanding and communicating with NFP Fi users/ENFPs. I still think I'd tend to mess up in real time, but at least theoretically I understand now where the snags are occurring and how to better address them.

 

[Esoteric Wench]

Awwwwwwww Fidelia! I've been practically hopping around my house after reading your post. It makes me so happy to think that a real glimmer of understanding has been achieved by a group of people on this forum who are separated by geography, experience, and cognitive function hierarchies. I don't even know your real name, but I do know that if you were here, I'd give you a huge hug and I'd tell you that this thread has helped me understand how what I do is received by others. And, it will allow me to better tailor my approach.

 

[sculpting]

This has been a very interesting and valuable thread to me. Thank you Orobas, EW and skylights in particular for your contributions.

Because Ti is big on accuracy and only speaks about things it is totally sure about, it is irksome to hear someone state something in absolute terms and then flip flop and still think they're right. What I didn't realize is that whether it's ENFP style Te or Te dom Te, they are actually much more open to restructuring information or an idea than I am. Kind of like putting puzzle pieces right into the spot before deciding whether they should remain because they fit, or something else is better. Ti users would instead examine the colours, the bumps and indents on the puzzle piece, compared with the prospective home for it and reject it much sooner if it didn't work because they are less likely to change it once it is actually in place.

This was (and to some extent continues to be) news to me that Te users don't really believe half of what they say as dogmatically as they express it, so it doesn't seem like they are either inaccurate or bossy. They give their listener the credit of evaluating and contributing to the stated idea or theory. To a Ti user, we tend to make sure we trust the source of the idea first, but then are more likely to accept what they say without as rigorous of verbal sparring. Therefore, if I listen to a documentary on dinosaurs from a reputable source, I will assume that I can relax and assimilate the information being given because it is reliable. Otherwise, I would not waste my time on it. I think this is part of what makes me seem kind of inflexible to some people - if I can tell what something is not, I don't want to see what it would look like in my internal system.

This is also why you find Ti users often quantifying everything, which some Te users find wordy and annoying. They assume that they will evaluate the ideas that are stated. We assume that if they trust us, they may not as rigorously and we want to distribute accurate information.

I cant help but wonder if the I replaced Ti with Fi, if I could identify the reverse pattern in some way... For instance I would want to make sure I trust the Fi honesty/integrity of the other person first, before I allow myself to be open to their feedback on my Fi values or feelings. I need to sort of scope them out first as being "Fi knowledgable"? I dunno... Once I know they can be trusted, then I can relax and open myself up to their feedback on my Fi value judgments. Once inside the circle, once trusted, they can hurt me very much with their judgments.

My entp at lunch told me how her husband and her mom-both ISTJs-also think it is very funny when their tiny kids say weird things that are factually/logically incorrect, rather than correct them, they tell them something funny or just laugh at the little kid. . She said you might "ruin the little kid for life and make him stupider". She said you are making a joke of the little kid. This very much took me by surprise. It confuses me-as I would never make fun of another person's feelings-but if they say stupid ideas, I would think they were rather funny and laugh. I would be a terrible ENTP mom it seems.

I think I find Te from Te doms less frustrating because I am expecting it. ENFPs can seem kind of easy-going and loosy-goosey at first glance and then they come along with the Te hammer and it makes me bristle! They seem like they are sure of what is true and what is best, and are telling me what to do, at the same time as being all flip-floppy themselves. It makes me not trust them as a reliable source of information.
.

This is excellent feedback. Thanks!!

 

[Fidelia]

When you see Fe/Ti users not engaging as much, often it is a sign that there is some snag that you've hit. If you continue speaking to them and they seem a little bit edgy, this is a good place to go back and mentally try to figure out where the snag occurred. If given some space, they may re-evaluate and extract the useful parts from your conversation and give you the benefit of the doubt. They may also be willing to just let it drop as is. If you persist though, particularly if your input was not invited in the first place and seems directly critical of them or those close to them, you will push them into getting increasingly direct and blunt, much as cafe did in that INFJ thread. Then when you request honesty, they'll give it to you, but in a form that feels rather hurtful to you even though it's not intended that way. It is a defensive reaction when it feels like you are on the offensive and are not taking what they believe are clear signals that there is deep danger ahead. (Remember, their ideas ARE them just as your values ARE you and have been deeply thought out. Group dynamics are also important to them - if you disregard the hassle you are creating for them in compensating for the ripples you bring, they will feel resentful and put upon.)

Don't know if any of that is helpful, but maybe it articulates some things.

What about for you? It appears to me that Te especially comes out as a defensive reaction for you, but because it appears strong, it may not be interpreted as you just acting in self-defense or trying to solve a difficult situation. How can we avoid these kind of clashes happening? For me, I need space at the first hint of danger and staying on the doorstep until you have been invited in. What is it for you? What sparks those kinds of reactions for you?

I'm actually really glad that the couple of threads where there were conflicts did happen because they serve as useful examples to reference and figure out. For me, my reaction happened because it felt like the way the OP had been framed was not only being ignored, but a Te solution was being offered (with increasing force) when there had been no request for it. For you, did it feel as if there was a solution in sight but that we were not willing to look at the issue from both sides and try to understand each other? I think maybe that's how umlauu saw it as a Fi onlooker.

It's only been this year that I've really started thinking about how similarly Fe and Te operate as well as Fi and Ti. It's also been interesting to realize that functions are interactive with each other, so it is not enough to look at Fe or Fi individually, but rather what it acts in conjunction with.

 

[Fidelia]

Oh! One other thing I thought of - with Ne constantly updating new models, sometimes I've heard others express this and I've occasionally thought it myself: it seems at times like the ENFP is wasting our time with a bunch of theories or ideas that they haven't taken the time to do the homework on. It would be like indiscriminately handing us all kinds of puzzle pieces, willy-nilly saying enthusiastically, "Hey! This one. This one will work for sure! I know it!" when it's obvious that it's not the right shape or the colours are wrong etc. I think to myself, "Did you even think about this before saying it. And NOW you want me to take the course of action you reccommend even though you clearly keep changing all the time yourself?

I believe the same issue is at play when ENFPs change their plans often. They really, really do mean it at the time when they say something, but then everything changes again and they have to reacquaint themselves with the new reality. For an INFJ who doesn't enjoy emotional surprises especially, but also takes adjustment time when changing plans and so on, it can be hard to deal with.

I assume this is a Te-Ti issue in combination with the jumping aroundness of Ne. On the other side of the spectrum, you guys consider many things I never would and I sometimes tend to over-eliminate. It allows you to be more open and innovative as well as accept change and new ideas in a group without needing the same kind of mental adjustment time.

I think you're onto something with the Ti-Fi thing, Orobas. This is one of the reasons why we actually do believe it's HARMFUL to put false information out there. If it comes from a trusted source, it has power to damage, just as an indisciminate person given access to a Fi users innermost feelings could wreak havoc.

My entp at lunch told me how her husband and her mom-both ISTJs-also think it is very funny when their tiny kids say weird things that are factually/logically incorrect, rather than correct them, they tell them something funny or just laugh at the little kid. She said you might "ruin the little kid for life and make him stupider". She said you are making a joke of the little kid. This very much took me by surprise. It confuses me-as I would never make fun of another person's feelings-but if they say stupid ideas, I would think they were rather funny and laugh. I would be a terrible ENTP mom it seems.

I completely identify with her. I would way rather have my feelings made fun of than my thoughts. I would feel horrifically rejected and embarrassed if someone were to respond with laughter to my thoughts, even though I wouldn't as much if they got a kick out of how mad I was about something etc. Even as an adult with more perspective, I would find this really hard to deal with. I remember when I was about six talking at the table with my parents about what year it was in the Chinese calendar as our friends were Chinese. I said that it was "the year of the pony" and I remember being absolutely mortified when my parents looked amused and corrected me. They weren't even mean about it, but I still remember the complete embarrassment and sadness I felt. That's been a huge thing as I've gotten older in learning to separate myself more from people's reactions, realizing that they are not trying to make me feel badly. Music I like, people I like, pursuits I enjoy - they are all extensions of me and so rejection/mocking of them is felt as rejection/mocking of me.

I guess this is another example of the Fi-Ti dichotomy. It also explains why the NFPs would get wound up by Sim every time, even though he consistently would manipulate the situation in the same way and then call them whiny, butthurt etc. They were reacting to his laughing at their feelings (and by extension, rejection of their values and essence of who they were) just as we would to someone mocking our thoughts and ideas that had been painstakingly developed.

 

[Esoteric Wench]

When you see Fe/Ti users not engaging as much, often it is a sign that there is some snag that you've hit. If you continue speaking to them and they seem a little bit edgy, this is a good place to go back and mentally try to figure out where the snag occurred. If given some space, they may re-evaluate and extract the useful parts from your conversation and give you the benefit of the doubt. They may also be willing to just let it drop as is. If you persist though, particularly if your input was not invited in the first place and seems directly critical of them or those close to them, you will push them into getting increasingly direct and blunt, much as cafe did in that INFJ thread. Then when you request honesty, they'll give it to you, but in a form that feels rather hurtful to you even though it's not intended that way. It is a defensive reaction when it feels like you are on the offensive and are not taking what they believe are clear signals that there is deep danger ahead. (Remember, their ideas ARE them just as your values ARE you and have been deeply thought out. Group dynamics are also important to them - if you disregard the hassle you are creating for them in compensating for the ripples you bring, they will feel resentful and put upon.)

Oh I know I've gone down this perilous path a few times. I think you did a great job of explaining the dynamic here. And, it also gives me road map for how to better handle such situations in the future. (Yeah, I really have been pretty bad about doing this. ) Looking back on things, I can't believe how much I didn't understand what the Fe/Ti user was doing. I'm pretty good at reading people, but this dynamic completely went under my radar. <Insert self-directed ugh here.>

So Fidelia, after giving the other person some space, I often want to then hash out what happened so I can better understand it and be a better friend in the future. My guess is that this wouldn't necessarily sit well with most Fe/Ti users. Am I right? How would you suggest approaching an Fe/Ti user who was in avoid mode? I want to respect other people's boundaries, but gosh darn it, sometimes Fe avoid mode needs to be bypassed to get things done. (Boy is that a Te driven statement, but it's true nonetheless.)

What about for you? It appears to me that Te especially comes out as a defensive reaction for you, but because it appears strong, it may not be interpreted as you just acting in self-defense or trying to solve a difficult situation. How can we avoid these kind of clashes happening? For me, I need space at the first hint of danger and staying on the doorstep until you have been invited in. What is it for you? What sparks those kinds of reactions for you?

I'm not sure who this was directed at, but I'll take a stab at this:

I think that for many ENFPs including me, Te comes across with it a self-confidence due to its forthrighted-ness that’s somewhat misleading. This makes sense because to get things done quickly and efficiently (which is what Te strives to do) you need to be confident in what you’re saying and doing. Te is action oriented. And, just like Orobas, if required, I’m very comfortable giving Te direction to those around me (also as long as it doesn’t make them uncomfortable.) But forthrightness does not necessarily mean lack of feeling or lack of vulnerability.

For example, in the INFJ Common Issues thread, I had several people PM me and tell me they were so surprised when I said I was personally distressed by the conflict in which I had unwittingly become entangled. This puzzled me because it seemed to me so obvious that I was distressed. But this was a projection on my part. I ASSUMED they knew what I knew which was that I was clicking into Te mode BECAUSE I was stressed out. So I think you bring up a very good point, Fidelia, that when defensive Te comes out, it can seem offensive (in the sense of it being on the attack) because the auxiliary Te user (i.e., ENFPs) seems so confident and assured in what he/she is saying.

How to avoid such conflicts? I’m not really sure. I know that with my new knowledge, I’m going to be much more forthcoming about my hurt Fi if I judge the other person has good intentions and will give my Fi some space. My natural behavior in such situations is to talk things out and to gently push the other person to talk them out with me… which is apparently the absolutely the LAST thing I should do with an Fe/Ti user. So I guess all I can say is that I’m open to suggestions from you and/or others. How can I respectfully give the Fe/Ti user some space and yet honor my own need to “work through it?”

It's only been this year that I've really started thinking about how similarly Fe and Te operate as well as Fi and Ti. It's also been interesting to realize that functions are interactive with each other, so it is not enough to look at Fe or Fi individually, but rather what it acts in conjunction with.

Same here. I think I finally understand a bit of what it’s like to be introverted by understanding my own Fi. And, I see sooooo many parallels with Ti. I’m still sorting all through this, but there is much to be learned by thinking about these parallels.

 

[Fidelia]

It took me literally years to understand that my ESTJ was not as confident as he appeared to be. There were several times when I realized months or even a couple years after the fact that I had made him feel badly or he had felt unsure of himself, yet I never would have guessed it because he was a Te dom and as such, all I saw was action and complete assurance of his rightness.

Same thing in that INFJ Common Issues thread - usually we wouldn't attack someone who looked like they were actually hurting. The bluntness stemmed from the fact that it wasn't at all apparent that your Te was coming out because you felt like people were not giving you the benefit of the doubt. It looked like you were not getting it when stated in polite terms, so we restated the same thing in blunter terms (and of course exaccerbated the situation, because you were already feeling badly and thought that was obvious!!!). To me (who felt annoyance more than hurt because I was reading the problem as unawareness rather than defensive reaction), it seemed kind of surprising to discover that our exchange had affected you that deeply.

Your intentions also seemed kind of irrelevant, since I thought I had stated what was provoking my bluntness and you kept on. Of course though, your intentions were completely relevant if you believed that you were being attacked for being you and merely stating an idea. (Remember that ideas would be read by us as an outgrowth of you, rather than something that was up for discussion, change, debate etc. Ti users also highly value the source of information. If they feel the course is credible, they will accept the information readily. If they don't, they will resist it to the end. As a result, the criticism you offered without "credentials", previous history, and in some cases even a past track record of bad INFJ exchanges felt not only like a criticism of us, but a criticism coming from someone who wasn't qualified. It seemed presumptuous, even though I recognize now that was not the case. What I was missing is that you have a different system of processing information that depends less on the giver of it and more on haggling over the idea and being open to it morphing before you adopt it.)

Similarly, we did the same thing to you by devaluing your feelings/values, which to us are more negotiable, much like ideas are for you. We did not place as much value on accuracy with them, nor on your intentions because to us they were less relevant to the outcome (don't do X and we won't react with Y). I can see now how frustrating that would be. Knowing what I know now, I think that if I were in a similar position again, it would help just understanding how you process ideas versus how I do. I think I would also recognize that if you were going into Te mode I would need to back up and find out where we went wrong rather than increasing my bluntness.

I actually do enjoy having closure and getting feelings and misunderstandings talked out, much as you do. The key is to not insist that it be done immediately in the heat of the moment and don't try to spring to the solution before you've heard where we think the problem lies. It is most frustrating sometimes, but if you actually ask us to articulate where things went off the tracks and we believe you want to hear, we'll be honest with you. The earlier you choose to do that, the more gentle we'll be about it too. If you wait until you are in full Te defense mode, we'll just assume that you are not listening or that you are extremely unaware and will step up the bluntness (which won't be helpful!).

Fe/Ti users need to be more direct in stating where the problem is, or else explain that they need some cool off time or what response they need from you in order to be able/willing to talk in a productive manner. This perhaps solves that Te need for knowing a solid course of action to take and allows it to take a back seat for a bit. Then we in turn don't prickle and hiss so badly, which is actually uncharacteristic behaviour for us. You may also have to state implicitly what you are feeling earlier on, because it won't be apparent to us when you are Te mode that you are actualliy feeling badly.

 

[Esoteric Wench]

I'm actually really glad that the couple of threads where there were conflicts did happen because they serve as useful examples to reference and figure out. For me, my reaction happened because it felt like the way the OP had been framed was not only being ignored, but a Te solution was being offered (with increasing force) when there had been no request for it. For you, did it feel as if there was a solution in sight but that we were not willing to look at the issue from both sides and try to understand each other? I think maybe that's how umlauu saw it as a Fi onlooker.

I wanted to break this out into its own post because I think it’s so important.

I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about what happened on the INFJ Common Issues thread and I’ll tell you what I saw from my point of view:

I picked up almost immediately that my input was not wanted nor was my opinion considered valid. Why? Not because what I said wasn’t valid. Not because my feedback was incorrect. But because I was Esoteric Wench. That is to say that some people had decided from my previous posts that I was hostile to INFJs. Thus, they had reasoned that my input was not wanted in an INFJ thread. Furthermore, it felt like I had to be on the approved list to be able to provide input in that thread.

I found this GROSSLY OFFENSIVE and MORALLY WRONG.

A couple of times, Fidelia, you asked what you could have done to better communicate to me that I should not post in that thread. Or at least this seems to be what you were asking. And, implicit in that request is the assumption that if only I had gotten your point that I would have stopped posting in that thread.

Let me gently suggest you are asking the wrong question. I DID get that you were saying my input was not wanted (for whatever reasons). But since I judged this request to be morally wrong, I chose to ignore it. It’s not that I didn’t hear you. It’s that I heard you and decided that to be true to my values I was compelled to ignore you.

I’ll try to succinctly list my Fi values that felt violated.

All People Have Something Valuable to Contribute. Doesn’t everyone bring something to the table? Isn’t this forum a place where people come to learn and exchange ideas? So it seems to me that no one should be excluded in giving their input if they do it in a respectful and considerate manner. Thus, I felt that a little bit of censorship of diverse opinions was going on. Even going back and re-reading the original post, I do not see where anything was framed in such a way that only INFJs should respond. Nor do I think I was the only non-INFJ to respond. Take for example, Uumlau who is an INTJ. I didn’t see anyone post anything that made him feel like he shouldn’t post on that thread. So here again is evidence that I was being told to pack up my toys and go home. Egad! That’s not what this forum is all about.

Let the Best Argument Win. I assumed that you were operating under the same assumption that I was which was that whoever made the best logical argument would carry the day. Under my assumption, who made the argument didn’t matter. Their agenda didn’t matter. All that mattered was validity of their argument. I found it offensive that some people were unwilling to even engage my logic. I had gotten a lot of positive feedback from INFJs on my post in the Doorslam thread to which I alluded. So I felt confident that I was on the right track. Furthermore, in my mind, if anyone read my post from the INFJ Doorslam thread (which I quoted in the INFJ Common Issues thread post), they would know immediately that I was trying to be respectful, considerate, and humble in the matter. I actually adore pretty much every INFJ I know. So I was floored when it was bandied about that I didn’t like / was hostile to INFJs and thus my opinion didn’t matter. Seems like that was throwing logic out the window.

Finger Wagging. I don’t do things because other people think I should do them. I do things because I’ve judged them the right thing to do. So when you said in a subsequent post that you felt very aware of the sharks swimming around me, I was floored… and hurt… and baffled. I felt like people were talking about me behind my back. I even went back and re-read the thread and saw no one else saying anything to discourage me from posting. (Not that I would have listened to them either.) So I had to consider if there had been some thread somewhere that I had been burned in effigy… seriously.

I don’t know if this makes sense to you or not. I’m just trying to be straightforward and honest about how it felt to me. I’d love you to tell me your thoughts on what I’ve said here.

 

[Fidelia]

Okay! This is super important. You're right that I was reacting to you specifically. Not because I thought you were a terrible person, or that I believe leaving people out is right or that it was my intention to make you feel horrible. (In advance, I apologize for the messiness of structure - I really do need your help sometimes with that).

You're correct that I didn't state specifically that I didn't want non-INFJs to respond. However, I had made the thread to give people a window into some common misunderstandings/tendancies that occur to get other INFJ feedback on whether they identified. I also wanted to be of help by offering insight for those other types who were confused as to why we would think that way.

You went into the thread telling why we were wrong to operate in that way (which wasn't the purpose of the thread - remember ideas are an extension of us - this felt akin to criticizing my values without even knowing me). This appeared to me like walking into someone's house that you don't know and telling them that they had painted the walls the wrong colour. If they knew you were a professional interior decorator who had chosen your house to feature a show on and was offering free help, that might change the reaction. If you are someone whose house may or may not be better decorated that my own, that's a completely different story. Rather than suggesting a new perspective with questions and starting with points we agreed on, you started with disagreeing and suggesting a completely different course of action before I had had a chance to feel you out, warm up to you or get to know what you had to offer. I think this is a big difference between Fi/Te and Fe/Ti. Te emphasizes differences to get to the meat of the issue and is much less rigid and detailed, but tends to be more action oriented and practical. The Fi part tempers it by respecting a person's intentions and feelings. Fe insists that you go about doing it in the right way if it is going to be heard and accepted. It needs you to start out with similarities and then branch out from there, taking care to still respect the group dynamic and how it will be affected. Ti needs to know the person is qualified to give advice. Fe's version of Te's approximation is that you take individual preferences and uniqueness less into the account, while balancing the group dynamic.

Judging from the doorslam thread, your previous interactions with at least one INFJ weren't successful and it didn't seem that you were interested in finding out how the world might look from their perspective.

In another thread you repeatedly referred to another INFJ with various versions of their name. Even when corrected, you didn't seem to put much importance on it. This made me feel that you were somewhat unaware of group dynamics and interpersonal communication. Then you went on to say that you were excellent at reading people, but you ignored the changes in my tone that were indicating there was danger ahead. When you further chose to ignore the defensive reaction I was giving off in the thread I had started, it confirmed the bias that I already felt that it must be an unawareness issue, since your intentions didn't seem to be bad.

Even when you wanted to understand better and were trying to be concilliatory, you still weren't willing to do the thing that I felt I was repeatedly and clearly asking you to do - just back off a little and then I can be nice. I wanted to be nice, but I couldn't do it when you were doing that. What appeared to be finger wagging was my way of trying to say that I had taken the time to check that I wasn't just reacting unreasonably. It wasn't meant to make you feel that people were talking about you or that I was trying to socially pressure you. I put very little trust in my own emotions because I know they change. Therefore, (in my Fe-ish way!) I actually solicited opinions from a couple of trusted people whose communication style on here I trust as being respectful and level-headed (again the qualifications matter!). I also went by a couple of rep comments and concluded, "No this isn't just me. I'm not being totally unreasonable and I am clearly stating an alternative course of action that I would deal better with".

Someone like umlauu had had a previous history of contributing useful and credible information to me in other threads. Therefore, I was immediately more biased to trust his judgement. Even if we were to come up against some different perceptions, I'd be more likely to chalk it up to different personality types and try to see where he was coming from. He also had had an INFJ mother (so he had experience with the subject) and he had to some extent developed some pseudo-Fe which made any differences that existed easier to accept because of the the method of communicating them.

I realize now that this was just a Fe/Ti reaction which is almost polar opposite from Fi/Te in how it goes about. The problems was very rooted in our different thought processes.

One of the main issues here lay in how we approach people. I was grossly offensive to you by not considering your contribution just as worthwhile as anyone else's. To me, ideas are highly personal and you seemed to be ignoring the method I told you I would make me more receptive to what you were saying.

I'm not sure if I'm right yet, but would you say the following is true? Politeness in my world would have indicated not commenting if you disagreed until you had had time to further understand what was being presented. When you did comment, you would start with similarities, rather than differences. To you politeness would have been accepting all contributions equally and then honing in on what was workable. This would involve examining differences to come to a place of similarity.