[INFJ] ENFPs or INFPs- Which are Better for INTJs?

[Mia.]

Thank you for mentioning me, or else I would'nt have known that [MENTION=7254]Wind-Up Rex[/MENTION] has been willfully and shamelessly consorting with NFPs. Explain yourself, beau!! .

 

[violet_crown]

Thank you for mentioning me, or else I would'nt have known that [MENTION=7254]Wind-Up Rex[/MENTION] has been willfully and shamelessly consorting with NFPs. Explain yourself, beau!!

[YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlZydtG3xqI"][/YOUTUBE]*

 

[OrangeAppled]

One of the things I face is a desire to just say to hell with the world...I think this may sort of be like when you "devalue the world". How do you remain optimistic, in spite of the world being at odds with your ideals?

I don't remain optimistic.... I'm a rather gloomy person. There are occasional magical moments where something DOES touch on an ideal though, and I suppose this keeps me breathing.

I like the way this Fi description puts it:

...they seem to show signs of disappointment at a very early age, and a certain distrust of life. Owing to their inability to express themselves clearly, and to bring their ideals to reality, there may arise a feeling of impotence and inferiority. They are apt to seek the fault in themselves, and may suffer much from a sense of guilt on this account. Here, also, feelings have a tendency to extend their influence, with the result that their whole being may be plunged into depths of unhappiness; but at other times a genuine emotional contact with someone will once more fill them with a quiet and enormous delight. Now they will look at the world again with new eyes, and with a feeling that is almost religious, will embrace both nature and man.

I dont think this is an insult to enfps at all-but I think deep isnt the best word to use. I like the term "resolution". Kinda like a microscope has greater and greater resolution, the more powerful it is or like in spectroscopy where you seek to get more and more resolution, in order to interpret data. (sorry nerd metaphor ) So not so much deeper or more strongly held, but more clearly understood and less inconsistency or blurriness. (please add extra words as I dont think I am capturing it clearly.)

edit-hmm, maybe on second thought it is more precision in the Fi values and more consistency, but also more refinement..I dunno.

On many of my values I distinctly lack the resolution and refinement that an INFP has. This means that the roots are not nearly so embedded, so I can move them more readily-especially if someones shares with me why my value stance impacts them in a personal way. I am forced to take into account their perspective. It also means I can be flippant or hyper-responsive on very superficial values.

I also think enfps can (on the negative side) plant a few very rudimentary roots extremely deeply, but then never want to "rationally" evaluate them, as it is uncomfortable. However the roots are still generating hypersensitivity and neurosis. INFPs can be such good advisers to enfps here as you guys can help step us through how to explore those topics and rebuild into healthier value sets.

I'm happy with that revising of the phrasing - I agree.

The bolded is something we're called on a lot to do for people in general. It's possibly the defining INFP talent, one that's hard to make a living with unless you become a therapist .

I suppose this is what benefits the xxTJs as well. IxTJs seem to speak of Fi in this magical, mythical way sometimes (Lenore Thompson is a good example; her Fi description is not wrong, but it has that flavor; better than the fluffy crap though ). The first time I perused the INTJ forum, I was really surprised at all the Fi love, as it doesn't get so much of that around these parts. But it was almost put on a pedestal (something people tend to do with their tertiary). ExTJs seem to see their inferior Fi as overly sentimental, irrational, and a sort of fuel for "righteous anger" at best. I think INFPs help them clarify and harmonize their feelings in a rational way, so they can be made sense of & utilized positively & not dealt with suspiciously or reactively or put on a pedestal like they're art to be admired but not fully grasped...

 

[Nicodemus]

There is no game without players.

 

[Zarathustra]

Is that kinda what you are doing or is it something different?

I'm sorry, but weren't you responding to an icanhazcheezburger image?

 

[SoraMayhem]

INFPs hands down.

please love me, INTJs

 

[Zarathustra]

Damn... the guests seem to love this thread...

Never seen a 1 member : 6 guest ratio before...

 

[011235813]

They're probably all INFPs.

 

[sulfit]

TypeLogic has INFP listed as the INTJ's "advisor", which the site says is "having an area of insight that the other lacks". That seems to flip the socionic roles a bit or even it out at least. While the site doesn't go into great detail about this theory, I personally find its brief descriptions of type relations a lot more accurate to my experiences than socionics.

From what I've studied of Benefit relations in socionics, the information flows from Beneficiary (INFP) to Benefactor (INTJ) so the roles aren't flipped. The INFP indeed advises INTJ on matters of their weaker Fi.

There is attraction from both sides. The Benefactor sees Beneficiary as intelligent, wise, knowledgeable (provided similar IQ levels) since Benefactor receives information from Beneficiary, but somehow lacking, incapable of giving the Benefactor what he/she fully needs. In case of INTJs, they see that INFP cannot provide them with Se since it is their unvalued function. INTJs are pensive, sluggish folk and INFPs cannot shake them up and knock them out of these states the way Se-types can (ENFPs are slightly better at this).

My experience is always somewhat opposite (to the INTJ/INFP socionics relation); I'm never quite as interested as they are, or at least to the degree that they claim they are/were interested, so that it seems I'm more likely to be put on the pedestal. A lot of it may have to do with non type related stuff though (ie. physical appearance), and I still think those are huge enough factors to outweigh type theories of what type is the ideal romantic match (otherwise we INFPs might have a chance with no one ).

In relations of Benefit usually it is the Benefactor who takes care to initiate contact or relationship of any sort so it may seem like INTJs are putting INFPs on a pedestal, but long term they grow disappointed at INFP's lack of Se.

Gender differences also come into play; usually the guys are expected to make the first move, so if you are female INFP then you can expect male INTJs to come into contact with you first.

 

[Forever_Jung]

I don't remain optimistic.... I'm a rather gloomy person. There are occasional magical moments where something DOES touch on an ideal though, and I suppose this keeps me breathing.

I like the way this Fi description puts it:

Originally Posted by Conscious Orientation - Fi
...they seem to show signs of disappointment at a very early age, and a certain distrust of life. Owing to their inability to express themselves clearly, and to bring their ideals to reality, there may arise a feeling of impotence and inferiority. They are apt to seek the fault in themselves, and may suffer much from a sense of guilt on this account. Here, also, feelings have a tendency to extend their influence, with the result that their whole being may be plunged into depths of unhappiness; but at other times a genuine emotional contact with someone will once more fill them with a quiet and enormous delight. Now they will look at the world again with new eyes, and with a feeling that is almost religious, will embrace both nature and man.

I have always related really well to that description as well! I remember finding the book it appeared in, and it was almost as significant for me as finding the original Jungian descriptions. I find I tolerate the shittiness out of sheer desperate hope for these moments. I feel trapped and empty and hated and isolated and am ready to wave the white flag to reality, then all of a sudden! Interpersonal magic!

It’s like I am a coin spinning on heaven’s coffee table—I start slowing down and wobbling, but just when I am about to topple over and stop spinning altogether, God flicks me, and I start spinning fast again. I worry one of these days that he’ll forget, and I will fall. And that’ll be it. But until then: WHEEEE!

I also think enfps can (on the negative side) plant a few very rudimentary roots extremely deeply, but then never want to "rationally" evaluate them, as it is uncomfortable. However the roots are still generating hypersensitivity and neurosis. INFPs can be such good advisers to enfps here as you guys can help step us through how to explore those topics and rebuild into healthier value sets.

This describes my relationship with a close ENFP friend. I always wonder why she hangs out with ME, because she has a million friends who do things, and they all go clubbing, and go to huge rock concerts and all that junk. And yet, she spends a lot of time with me, just sitting around and talking to me. It’s like she’s living a double-life. She goes crazy half the week, partying, laughing, drinking, and then spends the other half telling me how stressful, fake, and depressing it all is. I said the phrase “reclaiming your authentic self” once and she got all excited and now uses it all the time.

Conversely, she will kind of drag me out of my introspective muck, and socialize me. She will have small gatherings with familiar people to sort of slowly ease me into it, and hang around me until I seem comfortable. I also tend to wear emotional blinders sometimes, and she just kinda goes: Jeremyyy, come on now. Get your head out of your ass.

It’s a nice relationship.

 

[briochick]

I would suggest we all start trying to type people less and make the difficult decision of actually getting to know the ones we want to interact with and only suss out their type only so long as it will specifically help us interact with them better. And, if a type doesn't describe them well, throw it out and trust your own ability to learn about people through experience and observation.

 

[Edgar]

And, if a type doesn't describe them well...

That means they are mistyped.

 

[briochick]

That means they are mistyped.

Haha, yes, that is one possibility. Or, the MBTI could be flawed.

 

[uumlau]

Haha, yes, that is one possibility. Or, the MBTI could be flawed.

It's more about properly understanding what type means. The errors begin when one takes the stereotype (which is a necessary aspect of typology) and pretends that it explains EVERYTHING about a person. This is why I like Jung's calling types "functions", that map input => perceiving function => judging function => output. We see the output, we use culture as sort of a standard base for input, and figure out the functions from that. But if you change the input - extra stress, different culture, etc. - you get different output. The functions stay the same. In particular, MBTI/Jung doesn't measure anxiety or levels of psychological health, like the Big Five or the Enneagram, so these systems might help differentiate out those aspects which aren't directly described in terms of the functions.

 

[RaptorWizard]

Haha, yes, that is one possibility. Or, the MBTI could be flawed.

I think where the MBTI goes wrong is on the theory of Jungian cognitive functions, as it has made for some pretty awkward arguments for type on this forum, and in an individual's behavior, there is the potential to identify every function on the spectrum put into use, so it could lead to a lot of mistypings in my opinion.

 

[uumlau]

I think where the MBTI goes wrong is on the theory of Jungian cognitive functions, as it has made for some pretty awkward arguments for type on this forum, and in an individual's behavior, there is the potential to identify every function on the spectrum put into use, so it could lead to a lot of mistypings in my opinion.

Isn't it funny how it turns out to be the parts of typology that we don't understand, that make the typology difficult to understand?

 

[RaptorWizard]

Isn't it funny how it turns out to be the parts of typology that we don't understand, that make the typology difficult to understand?

Indeed, recognizing our own ignorance, that is knowledge, and in this case my ignorance could be in the field of functions. Perhaps I was wrong about them being invalid!

 

[uumlau]

Indeed, recognizing our own ignorance, that is knowledge, and in this case my ignorance could be in the field of functions. Perhaps I was wrong about them being invalid!

And this is exactly how I felt about Enneagram for a long time. I still don't completely trust it, but I understand it a lot more than I used to. It just took a while to absorb the whole system and be comfortable with it. I didn't understand functions for about 6-9 months. I thought I understood functions for about a year. These days, I feel like I have a very good understanding of them in principle, though I still need to refine my understanding of Si and Fe, among others. (I can type these but not describe them, because Si is "not Ni" and Fe is "not Te", as funny as that sounds.)

 

[TwelfthNight]

Though rather old, this is quite an interesting thread.

 

[Salomé]

Whichever one hates themselves the most.