The dark side of modesty/tact.

[Fluffywolf]

What you appear to be saying is that you have trouble controlling your own emotional outbursts which manifests as bluntness and a disregard for the partner's feelings.

A relationship is mostly about mutual emotional satisfaction. I don't know if a typical NT would find this sort of behavior endearing.

I don't have emotional outbursts, I think.

I just have certain principles.

 

[jenocyde]

Wouldn't it be awkward and sterile for partners to have to explicitly request compliments from each other?

"Please tell me how smart and powerful I am. In return, I'll compliment you on your beauty and anything else you might need affirmation about. Make a list so I don't miss anything."

But that's exactly what these people are doing - awkwardly asking for compliments... and it's annoying and childish, imo. These things happen organically in my life and when I say something, I really mean it.

What you appear to be saying is that you have trouble controlling your own emotional outbursts which manifests as bluntness and a disregard for the partner's feelings.

I don't know how you got to here from what he said. You appear to be projecting.

And speaking of respecting a partner's feelings - where is the respect of *our* feelings in this equation? Forcing someone to lie or bend truths which end up making us extremely uncomfortable, forcing someone to express emotional sentiments that are not present, forcing someone to pretend when it goes against our very grain?

A relationship is mostly about mutual emotional satisfaction. I don't know if a typical NT would find this sort of behavior endearing.

There are many many many ways in which a typical NT finds fulfillment, even emotionally. We are not made of stone.

 

[Kangol]

Yeah, I kinda got fucked up with the 'love' subject in my first relationship. I see love a bit differently now. But that's a whole different story. (I don't see it as me being fucked up myself, but I imagine others do. And truthfully, the whole situation was fucked up.)

I understand where you're coming from though. I think I'm hanging on the apologizing bit myself. If I don't feel I need to apologize, I don't. Unless you count a more clearer explanation as an apology, which should work just as well, but seems to work like putting fire out with gasoline from my experience with most people.

I think clearer explanations do count as apologies as long as it is apparent that you mean to reconcile (which is where tact, verbally and nonverbally, count). However, some people simply don't want to hear the reason why, and from there you have to decide if it's worth pushing further with your case. I typically try to prevent escalation of the argument, because often it's not worth escalating a situation over getting my point across.

Virtual rules are different.

So the tin man got his heart, eh?

It bleeds refined oil.

 

[Not_Me]

I just have certain principles.

I don't know how you got to here from what he said. You appear to be projecting.

Being "true to oneself" is an emotional judgment. You feel good when you speak what you believe to be the absolute truth.

And speaking of respecting a partner's feelings - where is the respect of *our* feelings in this equation?

Why do we value the truth? I think it's because it maximizes the chance of producing the best outcome. If the same outcome could be attained without causing emotional pain to the another, then what reason would there be to inflict the pain? If it's because it feels good, then it implies an antisocial tendencies. These feelings are are negative and SHOULD be suppressed if social harmony is desired.

Forcing someone to lie or bend truths which end up making us extremely uncomfortable, forcing someone to express emotional sentiments that are not present, forcing someone to pretend when it goes against our very grain?

Tact is not dishonesty. It simply involves taking feelings into consideration.

PS: I don't get the impression that either Jenocyde or Fluffywolf takes delight in hurting others. No innuendo is intended by my post.

 

[jenocyde]

Tact is not dishonesty. It simply involves taking feelings into consideration.

I understand that, and I agree. But I am looking at the flip side of someone not taking my own feelings into consideration by pushing me to say something, but then getting upset if I don't take their feelings into consideration in turn.

Again, it all comes down to how things are phrased to begin with and why they are being presented at that time. If I have given no indication that I believe you are "fat" or whatever, why bring it up? And if you feel the need to reassure yourself through your partner, phrase the question in a way that is at least palatable to the recipient and will produce the desired outcome.

PS: I don't get the impression that either Jenocyde or Fluffywolf takes delight in hurting others. No innuendo is intended by my post.

Thank you, duly noted.

 

[Liminality]

I've wondered casually about this before, but never really put much thought in it. Which is odd, because it's really a quite intruiging subject.

Modesty (Tact) is commonly accepted as a good and fair trade to ones skills. Yet modesty in itself implies that the honest true underlying thoughts are merely being surpressed and sugar coated. And thus, the skill of modesty is nothing more than deception. A way to cover up truth. A widely accepted and appreciated method of lying.

To be modest is to project your thoughts in more subtle and generally nice ways.

But why is it so appreciated then, specifically in relationships? No one enjoys being lied too. Everyone wants people to tell the truth. Yet when one modestly coats it with the term modesty, it's all fun and flowers.

Is it a mere matter of perception, or are people truely that easily decepted by what they're told and taught. That common knowledge about modesty being a good thing is enough for them to accept it so?

If interested, I am not a modest person. Except when dealing with customers and from a business point of view, when I see that being modest is rewarding. Whereas on a more personal level, and the most personal level being a monogamous relationship. I would not dare to fall for modesty. I would not dare to fraud and deceit the way I do around the common consumer.

edit: Revised, Modesty -> Tact.

I think a medium is good. 'Dark side' is the excess of it in my eyes.

Everything has a dark side. People like happiness, if truth is good(happiness) to them, they want truth, if happiness is everyone getting along, in a meaningful 'fun and flowers' world, then chancess are they like a fair degree of tact, though not excessive amounts.

I guess there's just a relative desire for it.

I'm not sure what gives you the impression it's commonly considered so preferable to skill(???) and honesty.

"To be tactful is to project your thoughts in more subtle and generally nice ways. " That's not so bad in some cases, surely? You don't tell your kids 'you look so hideous I think you should die' This also seems like a restraint of just flat out telling people you're right and they're wrong, and a conscious realisation that others may see/feel differently; necessary in a balanced stream. Two people charge at one another, they'll just butt heads.

It stems from social self-preservation, it's roots arn't evil (debateable, like all things human related), just something necessary for survival.

Just ma two cents.

EDIT: I should probably note I've not read the whole thread.

Also, if someone's got alot of Fe, it's gotta hurt to be brutally honest all the time.

 

[ergophobe]

I must be an odd NF because I detest sugar coating.

There are such few relationships where I can see myself being vulnerable and seeking someone's opinion on very personal questions. That vulnerability is okay because I trust these people and their intentions. If I have trust, why would I want anything but the honest truth (nothing more, nothing less) from the person. That is exactly why they have been put in that position because I trust them to give it to me like they see it and I respect them for it, even if I may not like what they have to say. True friends/partners don't let you go out looking like an idiot or let you continue saying something you may regret later -- they tell you.

To take this further, I'd be far more hurt learning that the person wasn't completely honest with me than if they were. This includes sugar coating things or giving me a more palatable version to 'protect' my feelings. I'm an adult and take responsibility for my own feelings. When I am on the receiving end of B.S. versions or sugarcoated versions, I end up feeling like I have been patronized by someone who really didn't understand /respect me enough to know that I am perfectly capable of handling the truth as is. They don't/didn't understand me or respect me. That would definitively make me remove my trust from that friendship/relationship.

I don't underestimate the importance of kindness but in my own case, they are synonymous. A person being honest but not being kind would mean looking to intentionally hurt someone for emotional one-upness. If the intention was not to hurt but to help, complete honesty is best.

To give an example, I would never sugarcoat my real thoughts or give false hope to someone with whom I had a romantic interaction and things weren't working out. I would detest that and would not consider it kind. When there is no hope, there is no hope. That's kind - respecting the person and letting them move on.

Also within a relationship, I'll admit to being over-the-top with compliments (I'm an NF - sue me, that's how I romance) but in a moment of seriousness, nothing less than complete honesty would suffice. I'd want to gain the same trust I aspire to have in my partner.

 

[Liminality]

I must be an odd NF because I detest sugar coating.

There are such few relationships where I can see myself being vulnerable and seeking someone's opinion on very personal questions. That vulnerability is okay because I trust these people and their intentions. If I have trust, why would I want anything but the honest truth (nothing more, nothing less) from the person. That is exactly why they have been put in that position because I trust them to give it to me like they see it and I respect them for it, even if I may not like what they have to say. True friends/partners don't let you go out looking like an idiot or let you continue saying something you may regret later -- they tell you.

To take this further, I'd be far more hurt learning that the person wasn't completely honest with me than if they were. This includes sugar coating things or giving me a more palatable version to 'protect' my feelings. I'm an adult and take responsibility for my own feelings. When I am on the receiving end of B.S. versions or sugarcoated versions, I end up feeling like I have been patronized by someone who really didn't understand /respect me enough to know that I am perfectly capable of handling the truth as is. They don't/didn't understand me or respect me. That would definitively make me remove my trust from that friendship/relationship.

I don't underestimate the importance of kindness but in my own case, they are synonymous. A person being honest but not being kind would mean looking to intentionally hurt someone for emotional one-upness. If the intention was not to hurt but to help, complete honesty is best.

What you do value, though, is feeling that the other person is being sincere, and cares for you - this is your happiness. You don't need your feelings babied, like you said, you're an adult.

What if you're not so sure you have trust? What if you don't at all, and don't know how to judge the other person? How can you trust people so willingly? IME these(true friends) are a rare commodity *Totally not a fetid sac of insecure, paranoid and irrational* People are all out for themselves I say! They stop at nothing to reach their ultimately, unavoidably, undeniably selfserving ends!


Yes! And this can depend on both intentions, and reception ime. The question is, how can you know what their true intention is, and how can you know that your recpetion and interpretations are correct? Sounds like you're just somewhat less insecure than some of other(F)s out there in this respect.

You do, you just said it; for you, kindness, and feeling happy comes from honesty from a trusted friend.

I think we hit the nail on the head right there.

It all depends on the person essentially, and their values, and emotional and mental...stuff all fitted together.

Out of curiosity, in every day settings are you honest/blunt? Or do you employ a degree of tactfulness/sugar coating? If so, in what sort of occasions, and how would you do so?

 

[ergophobe]

What you do value, though, is feeling that the other person is being sincere, and cares for you - this is your happiness. You don't need your feelings babied, like you said, you're an adult.

Yep.

What if you're not so sure you have trust? What if you don't at all, and don't know how to judge the other person? How can you trust people so willingly? IME these(true friends) are a rare commodity !

Great question. I'm an ENFP - naive and idealistic about people's intentions but not stupid. Most people get free passes and benefit of doubt without asking for it. Having said that, everyone does not get to see vulnerability. That squishy interior is reserved for only the most deserving. Trust can only be built over time and through experience. In all the cases where I've rushed this, I've been burned, with very few exceptions. Now I know better. Just take it slow, even with friendship and that kind of vulnerability. I am really talking about people I can count on one hand - my brother, my closest friend of 13-14 years, my mom...these are people who wouldn't sugarcoat the truth because they know me and they have good intentions. Even with family, I learned this through experience and working on building these relationships.

*Totally not a fetid sac of insecure, paranoid and irrational* People are all out for themselves I say! They stop at nothing to reach their ultimately, unavoidably, undeniably selfserving ends

You are a funny one. Perhaps you are right. I don't think I'd have much to live for if I really believed this to be true, my belief in basic virtue being such a foundational pillar of my own existence.

Yes! And this can depend on both intentions, and reception ime. The question is, how can you know what their true intention is, and how can you know that your recpetion and interpretations are correct? Sounds like you're just somewhat less insecure than some of other(F)s out there in this respect.

No, I won't pretend to be any more sorted than the next person, F or not. Insecurities aren't an F domain - they may be expressed differently across the two types. I'm not any more secure or sorted. I'm working on getting over the last violation of these strange Fi values I adopted for myself and finding it quite hard to do so. I take responsibility for my own feelings even in that circumstance but still need to work on overcoming them.

All I can say is that you only know this through your gut at the time - whether you should trust the person or not and past experience with them. More information = more confidence generally in most things, similarly in this one too. You only know true intentions in the long run - there's no short cut for it. You also only know the value of an opinion/advice and your reception to it in the long run. That's true. Having said that, if I didn't have the 3-4 people I trusted completely, if I didn't put my trust in them, I would have no external check at all. While I trust myself alone to eventually know what's best for me, I trust these people to provide honest opinions given their knowledge/understanding of me and the circumstances. That is all I can expect - complete honesty. I also value humility - I often miss rather large pieces of the picture so it's valuable to have the external feedback

You do, you just said it; for you, kindness, and feeling happy comes from honesty from a trusted friend.

I think we hit the nail on the head right there.

Respect me by treating me as an equal and strong in every way the person sees themselves and there will be few problems and much to gain.

It all depends on the person essentially, and their values, and emotional and mental...stuff all fitted together.

True.

Out of curiosity, in every day settings are you honest/blunt? Or do you employ a degree of tactfulness/sugar coating? If so, in what sort of occasions, and how would you do so?

Good question. I will need to reflect on this and come back with some examples.

What about you? How much honesty/bluntness do you employ and why? Are there occasions when you would present the blunt truth - what are these?

 

[Liminality]

Thanks for the response, (I do have a tendancy to generalise F as being somewhat emotionally imballanced (kooky) :rolli:.)

Essentially I come from an ISTJ father, and ISFJ (very well concealed anxiety ridden) mother with major high expecctations. Somehow lots of P found it's way in the mix...:yim_rolling_on_the_ Though you could call this a teenager and their parents

I'm preetttyyyy conflict avoidant, debates make me come out in a cold sweat, the shakes and often tears (I'm not even kidding). It depends on the situation really, I've had problems with being way too blunt, where people (usually my family) end up ing, but also the opposite if I'm scared of the outcome, or think it's best.

I'm one of those externally (when in the right company) warm, fuzzy and conflict avoidant INFPs.

Generally it's what feels right/what I'm brave enough to express. Also, I get pretty lost in what 'truth' is, so sometimes(often) I can sit on the fence for an eternity, not being all too sure what I think because everything comes down to the context; there's no objective truth.

If it felt llike it were to violate my sense of ethics, and innate personal goodness I'd be blunt as a skyscraper. It's really quite selfcentered. I don't say this for pity, it's true, it's based around how I feel at the time/respond to the situation/think it'll pan out.

 

[Gewitter27]

I'm very modest except when it comes to my intellect, which I will defend, but that is likely because of my skewed self-perception due to bullying and mental issues associated with genetic factors and mostly childhood traumas.

And I'm not tactful at all. I can't BE tactful even when I try. My Fe is a tube sock that fell behind the dryer, and I think it is too far gone to get back, even with the longest broom in the closet. As it is I'm incredibly blunt.

 

[ergophobe]

My Fe is a tube sock that fell behind the dryer, and I think it is too far gone to get back, even with the longest broom in the closet.

Nicely put. Worthy of adopting as a signature if I actually had one. Pure awesome.

 

[Gewitter27]

Nicely put. Worthy of adopting as a signature if I actually had one. Pure awesome.

Awww thanks.

400th post!

 

[ergophobe]

I'm preetttyyyy conflict avoidant, debates make me come out in a cold sweat, the shakes and often tears (I'm not even kidding). It depends on the situation really, I've had problems with being way too blunt, where people (usually my family) end up ing, but also the opposite if I'm scared of the outcome, or think it's best.

I'm one of those externally (when in the right company) warm, fuzzy and conflict avoidant INFPs.

This is very much in keeping with my experience with INFPs. They won't debate me because they don't like one-upmanship...they're quite good during sharing type discussions but will just shut down when questioned. I can see how INFPs could come across as blunt. It's a different kind of blunt. Sometimes, I think they are so self-focused, they forget that there's an outside world to consider. They are lost in their internal world of feelings like the INTPs and their ideas....need a loud bell sometimes to remind them that authenticity does not preclude consideration of other people's desires/needs

If it felt llike it were to violate my sense of ethics, and innate personal goodness I'd be blunt as a skyscraper. It's really quite selfcentered. I don't say this for pity, it's true, it's based around how I feel at the time/respond to the situation/think it'll pan out.

I see that in the INFPs in my life too and they're just as honest about it being a personality trait. I really enjoy the warm and healing touch you guys have though. When you sense vulnerability, you can be so present in just listening and providing understanding. It always takes me by surprise.

 

[Liminality]

Nicely put. Worthy of adopting as a signature if I actually had one. Pure awesome.

D'aww, seconded. You try, that's very commendable, it'd be like if I attempted to have heavy Ni and Se. *shudder*

Ahh, missed your post there ergophobe, yeah, when I do acctually get into a debate I get really (This sort happened once, -never- again), really, embarrasingly stubborn, explode inside, then sulk if the person even gently tries to tell me I'm wrong.

The INFP lovin' is wonderful...Did I mention that? My overdue, unstarted french homework may as well not even exist.

 

[Lien]

modest != nice

we want to hide our errors, so that we don't get made fun of.
but in reality, by being modest, you are not sharing your gifts.

when i give someone a gift, of course, i would try my hardest on it. but if you are too shy to give someone presents, because you're afraid they will ridicule you, i feel the person is missing the whole idea of sharing -it's not about you.

and even if you aren't a master, you can create handy tutorials.

the immodest make me laugh sometimes, and at least i learn a bit from them.

 

[Giggly]

Fascinating topic. I think tact/modesty has it's place in certain circumstances and with certain people because you may want to protect someone's innocence and self-esteem (like in the case with children). It can, as been said in this thread, be deceptive though, and in the case of someone who values honesty more, it can feel betraying.

I do find it interesting that Fluffywolf finds it easy to be modest in his work relationships but not so much in his interpersonal relationships. At first I thought he cared more about his work relationships and didn't want to upset them, but I think what he meant was that he highly values honesty and cares less about his work relationships people, and therefore, it's not so hard for him to deceive them.

 

[Coriolis]

All one really needs to consider is: what are the consequences of what one is about to say and how one plans to say it; and is one willing to accept them?

 

[iwakar]

Tact or diplomacy is the attempt to unite truth with respect (courtesy) if you care enough about the person that you are imparting it to. If I do not manage this task that I assign to myself routinely, the fault is my own and I hope the recipient does not hold it against me.

IME, people who lack a particular skill are more likely to question its value rather than acknowledge their difficulty with it. For example, I am dreadful with memory and chemistry, but I do not question their merits or suspect they are subversive to the future or spirituality.

 

[Giggly]

iwakar, hi!!!

Welcome back.