Public Service Announcement to Paranoid Fi doms

[BlackCat]

I think that some NFPs just like to piss off NTPs.

 

[sleepy]

This is silly. Some people really have advanced beyond mere type. No need to make a fuzz about this just cause you havn't.

 

[Kra]

This is silly. Some people really have advanced beyond mere type. No need to make a fuzz about this just cause you havn't.

I think he's pointing to the notion that they often make a fuss about it. As per another thread in this sub-forum.

 

[Night]

No, typology is not an evil conspiracy intended to subvert your right to individuality and self-expression.

No, any and all attempts to categorize anything about your belief system or behavioral tendencies do not constitute a malevolent international plot to rid the world of original ideas.

No, you're not so extraordinarily unique and special and unusual that your personality automatically defies all forms categorization and analysis.

No, typology is not turning the world into nineteen eighty-fucking-four.

No, studying typology does not ruin your ability to feel emotion or appreciate others on a personal basis.

Yeah, we get it already--you're so special and original and creative that you can't possibly be boxed into one of sixteen arbitrarily distinguished categories [no matter how broadly defined they might be]! Yeah, we get it--you have paranoid delusions that any such categorization will turn everyone into robotic slaves to the evil Te agenda to squelch all forms of self-expression.

And yes, everyone realizes how emotionally threatened you are by any attempt at categorizing your personality and realizes you're having a histrionic meltdown over nothing when you make these kinds of outlandish claims.

The solution, you ask? Grow up, stop taking everything as a deliberate attack on your super special unique feelings, and get real.


Your friend,

simulatedworld

So, to get back to the OP, does anyone believe that SW's specific charges retain any validity?

Not that I'm asking you to speak for him (ironic, given the thread context), but what basis of thought do you think could give rise to the frustration that he (or another like-minded Ti user) could experience with certain Fi dominants?

Is this phenomenon limited to Ti users?

 

[PeaceBaby]

Indeed ! As a matter of fact, I think anyone who doesnt think differently, never really has thought differently.

Huzzah, a great post LOL!

I think that some NFPs just like to piss off NTPs.

Indeed I agree. The funny thing is that NTP's don't see it or don't believe it possible, duped by a mere Fi user!

When fishing one must use the right bait.

Why do NTP's think they can't be lured and hooked into circular, unwinnable debate? And then, after engaging in fruitless discussion, blame the hysterical, histrionic, deluded, illogical, PARANOID Fi user just because they find a POV frustrating?

I mean c'mon, give credit where credit is due. sim, you got punked. Making this thread is proof-positive.

 

[Laurie]

So, to get back to the OP, does anyone believe that SW's specific charges retain any validity?

Not that I'm asking you to speak for him (ironic, given the thread context), but what basis of thought do you think could give rise to the frustration that he (or another like-minded Ti user) could experience with certain Fi dominants?

Is this phenomenon limited to Ti users?

I don't think it's "Fi" users, since I know more than one INFP that would think that other thread was idiotic. I think perhaps it's inappropriate use of Fi? Or just plain trolling, not sure either way.

That kind of thread drives me insane, too, whatever that equates to on your function question.

 

[Mole]

Rich in High Emotion

Why are forum dramas so interesting to watch?

When we learn, we experience emotion. It's as though emotion lays down new pathways in our brain.

So our antennas are tuned to high emotion. You might say high emotion is feeds our brain.

Normally we go to the theatre or to the movies to safely experience high emotion.

But we can also experience high emotion within group dynamics.

Usually a group experiencing high emotion will draw people in, but will occasionally spin someone off.

So although high emotion feeds individuals and the group, boredom will kill a group.

And fortunately this is a well run and tolerant group, rich in high emotion.

 

[teslashock]

So, to get back to the OP, does anyone believe that SW's specific charges retain any validity?

Not that I'm asking you to speak for him (ironic, given the thread context), but what basis of thought do you think could give rise to the frustration that he (or another like-minded Ti user) could experience with certain Fi dominants?

Ti users like to systematize and categorize. The (healthy) Ti-er's systems are open and highly susceptible to tweaks and alterations based on new data (and new nuances in data) that they discover and analyze. We like things to fit our system to the highest level of "accuracy" possible; it helps us to understand. This is especially pertinent to understanding people, as the typical dom/aux Ti-er does not have a good grasp on Fe, at least not until they've worked on it a bit, so a more impersonal analysis makes things easier for us.

Fi-ers don't like to be put into an impersonal system because it makes them feel like they are just another variable in an equation. They associate systematisation with being "robotic" or "predictable" (and I'm not really sure what's wrong with a person maintaining some level of predictability, as this points to integrity and consistency in thought, but whatev). For us Ti-ers, a concept does not need to be simple for it to go into a system; we are very good at breaking things a part, regardless of its level of complexity, and using each part to build a model. The models help to predict, but many times a piece of information goes against the model, so we change it. The model does not "box" people in (at least not in a confining sense), as it is highly susceptible to change; the model is just a device for organizing information. The "box" that we are making around people when we use typology is not built with bricks and 2 by 4s; it's made with legos or k'nex, so we can take it a part and rebuild it again with ease.

Fi-ers don't seem to understand that everything of any mild significance is a variable in the Ti-er's equation. It's what we do; it's an instinct that we revert to when attempting to make sense of the world. We are not assigning labels to anybody because we think they are predictable or lack depth. We are able to analyze and assign labels even to the variables that are complex in nature (ie, personalities), as we have a natural knack for it. For Ti-ers, you don't have to be simple to become part of our system (so quit associating systematisation with simplicity!), as we readily admit that the system is increasingly complex. It's hard for me to figure out why Fi-ers continually find this insulting to their "uniqueness", as each system has nuances in itself that make it unique.

EDIT: Please note that any Fi-ers to which I'm referring in this post are the same Fi-ers to which the OP is referring. Obviously this is not applicable to every single FP out there, and it perhaps may not be a typical and/or "healthy" use of Fi.

 

[Night]

I don't think it's "Fi" users, since I know more than one INFP that would think that other thread was idiotic. I think perhaps it's inappropriate use of Fi? Or just plain trolling, not sure either way.

That kind of thread drives me insane, too, whatever that equates to on your function question.

Good question, Elaur.

While I can't identify with the exact character of SW's Fi complaints, I can offer my own frustration at having my internal emotional states erroneously dissected and examined by a third party.

Not that this necessarily aligns with an Fi-specific complaint, but when it happens, it often rapidly changes the context of the conversation when my (presumed) anger over a given topic is mistaken for a subconscious, quasi-Freudian projection over some unexplored angst.

It seems terribly pretentious and judgmental. What's more, it sidebars the conversation into a weird psychological space that rarely resembles the fundamental point we'd been discussing up to that point. Talk about obfuscation.

It's a real buzz kill.

 

[FemMecha]

Why does it matter if some people push back against categorization? It is limited and so pushing back can help create balance. People are complex beyond what is quantifiable and the threat of that is the source of many coping behaviors from being overly controlling, shy, overly nice, always pissing people off. It is often an attempt to use a behavior that gets people to respond more consistently. In some ways I think it might upset people to realize that people are complex, unpredictable, and there is not a way to define and predict that behavior with much certainty. MBTI provides a way to systematically think of people and so it can be hard to let go of or to consider other possibilities. MBTI labels or not, people are chaotic. We all have to deal with that fact.

 

[Laurie]

The point is that it's not done in a useful, dialog enhancing way. It's accusatory and negative. That is not the way to go against catagorization.

A real thread about the limits of MBTI wouldn't have the excitement that a thread with flowery language and vaporous arguments does.

 

[Night]

The point is that it's not done in a useful, dialog enhancing way. It's accusatory and negative. That is not the way to go against catagorization.

A real thread about the limits of MBTI wouldn't have the excitement that a thread with flowery language and vaporous arguments does.

The really interesting part is that we're using Fi to complain about Fi.

 

[Litvyak]

2 words: EPIC WIN

 

[Laurie]

I'm actually just responding to the questions with my answers.

I don't care what function I'm using. Are you trying to box me in??

 

[Mole]

people are chaotic.

There are three levels of development - chaos, order and creativity.

It is true we are born chaotic without even the control of our sphincter. But with the help of our parents, our teachers and our peers we learn control over twenty-two years.

So over the first twenty-two years of our life we progress from chaos to order.

And once we are ordered at twenty-two the next step is creativity.

Of course some fail to order themselves and remain chaotic all their lives. And so remain dependent on others.

And some remain controlled and ordered and fail to move on to creativity. These controlled and controlling ones are called authoritarians.

So some are chaotic, particularly the young. But most are ordered, they take orders and give orders, and they are the authoritarians. And a few are creative. Thank God.

 

[Little Linguist]

was that all about? Did I miss something?

 

[FemMecha]

The point is that it's not done in a useful, dialog enhancing way. It's accusatory and negative. That is not the way to go against catagorization.

A real thread about the limits of MBTI wouldn't have the excitement that a thread with flowery language and vaporous arguments does.

I can definitely see this point. There is a great deal of dramatic language and not always a systematic presentation of questioning the system. Even when it doesn't start that way it can degrade in that direction. Meh.

The best way to understand any system is to question it. Once the questioning stops, the understanding can degrade. This is true even in the hard sciences and so much moreso with subjective systems based on observations. Has there ever been a system based on observation that attempted to map to reality that didn't undergo continual revision either in its conception or application?

 

[Qre:us]

Not just an Fi thing...

Good question, Elaur.

While I can't identify with the exact character of SW's Fi complaints, I can offer my own frustration at having my internal emotional states erroneously dissected and examined by a third party.

Not that this necessarily aligns with an Fi-specific complaint, but when it happens, it often rapidly changes the context of the conversation when my (presumed) anger over a given topic is mistaken for a subconscious, quasi-Freudian projection over some unexplored angst.

It seems terribly pretentious and judgmental. What's more, it sidebars the conversation into a weird psychological space that rarely resembles the fundamental point we'd been discussing up to that point. Talk about obfuscation.
It's a real buzz kill.

And, from first hand experience, I can tell you that, as you said, it's not an Fi-specific complaint, as I've been on the receiving end of this from certain Ti-users as well.

Fi, Fe, Ti, Te - emotional is emotional, it's parasitic in that the other needs to feed off of some "emotion" from my end, rather than my ideas, so will irritatingly try to box me and my motivations into an interpersonal emotional realm. Rather than see the emotions as just frustrations with the topic at hand.

It's highly draining to me, dealing with such people.

 

[Qre:us]

To shit or not to shit, that is the question....

There are three levels of development - chaos, order and creativity.

It is true we are born chaotic without even the control of our sphincter. But with the help of our parents, our teachers and our peers we learn control over twenty-two years.

So over the first twenty-two years of our life we progress from chaos to order.

And once we are ordered at twenty-two the next step is creativity.

Of course some fail to order themselves and remain chaotic all their lives. And so remain dependent on others.

And some remain controlled and ordered and fail to move on to creativity. These controlled and controlling ones are called authoritarians.

So some are chaotic, particularly the young. But most are ordered, they take orders and give orders, and they are the authoritarians. And a few are creative. Thank God.

Victor, this may be my favourite post (analogy) of yours.

Learning to control so that we don't shit our pants, and then becoming overly anal, are the two extremes - chaos/order. And, the creatives are what then? Those who create interesting sculptures with their doodoo?

Pics or I don't believe in your "creative control" over your own sphincter!

 

[disregard]

No, typology is not an evil conspiracy intended to subvert your right to individuality and self-expression.

No, any and all attempts to categorize anything about your belief system or behavioral tendencies do not constitute a malevolent international plot to rid the world of original ideas.

No, you're not so extraordinarily unique and special and unusual that your personality automatically defies all forms categorization and analysis.

No, typology is not turning the world into nineteen eighty-fucking-four.

No, studying typology does not ruin your ability to feel emotion or appreciate others on a personal basis.

Yeah, we get it already--you're so special and original and creative that you can't possibly be boxed into one of sixteen arbitrarily distinguished categories [no matter how broadly defined they might be]! Yeah, we get it--you have paranoid delusions that any such categorization will turn everyone into robotic slaves to the evil Te agenda to squelch all forms of self-expression.

And yes, everyone realizes how emotionally threatened you are by any attempt at categorizing your personality and realizes you're having a histrionic meltdown over nothing when you make these kinds of outlandish claims.

The solution, you ask? Grow up, stop taking everything as a deliberate attack on your super special unique feelings, and get real.


Your friend,

simulatedworld

You know what they say..

What you hate in others is what you dislike in yourself.