Video: iNFJ Naked Soul

[PeaceBaby]

I guess no other type is high on themselves or ever projects on others. Hmmm.... or is wrong with that believe about others on occasions.....

You understand that's irrelevant to the point, eh?

 

[SearchingforPeace]

You understand that's irrelevant to the point, eh?

No, it is on the point.

It sure can be scary for other people interacting with (some) INFJs because one never knows what inaccuracy an INFJ might project onto them and claim as truth. People do tend to feel violated when someone describes their soul space through their own lens, without a sense of sacred space.

And it gets "scary" when INFPs think they can describe someone else too, their motivations, desires, intents, etc, people they have never met, who are very different from them.

And they might be entirely right, oh my! Or not. They could be 100% wrong but stride out boldly claiming authority and vision.

The point is many people project an image on others. Some more than other

 

[Z Buck McFate]

I do find it strange that Fi users try to say Fe users don't have empathy and I have never seen Fe users claim that Fi users don't have empathy.

Hey SearchingforPeace, do you think this would annoy you nearly as much if this were the first thread in this forum you were participating in? I ask because I'm going to guess you're actually reacting to accumulation of convoluted/biased "theories" about the Fe/Fi difference- that infinite little annoyances have built up and you're reacting to the accumulation of them, not simply WUR's post in isolation. This really throws other types off and makes the reaction appear totally irrational.

Maybe it would help to try to realize how all the previous biases noticed have built up (and there are many in this forum to trip over) so that it doesn't effect how you read WUR's posts. <-That's something I need to be reminded of myself sometimes.

WUR's post rubbed me the wrong way too, a little bit- but when it comes down to it, I truly believe that anyone who thinks Fi or Fe is "better" at empathy is missing something. (I'm not even saying that's what WUR meant- that was my preliminary understanding of it, I'm not confident it's correct, and this conversation in the forum is like "the song that never ends" so I don't care to find out if that's what she really meant or not.) Self awareness is what makes someone effectively empathetic, not 'type'. And anyone who wants to claim any 'type' is magically more self aware (and it has happened here), imo, is belying a distinct lack of self awareness in themselves. This is something I believe, and whenever this topic comes up I try to remember that it's okay for others to be delusional about how their 'type' gives them superpowers- I don't need them to believe otherwise. So long as I'm keeping myself in check and not having parallel delusions about Ni, I'm good.

As for the op:

I agree with what people have said (WUR's words because I think she said it most succinctly): it's arrogant for anyone to assume they have a "direct conduit" into someone else's soul. I believe this is a problem that both FiNe and NiFe can have- I think just on account of being idealists and it being an inherent priority to understand others. I believe it was Natalie Quenk who said that NFs project more than anyone else. It's easy to see how that could be true, since "projection" is essentially the same thing as accurate insight/empathy: it's just that the former is someone lacking the self awareness to realize it's actually their own self they're seeing 'into', they believe instead they're seeing 'into' the other person.

[note: I haven't actually watched the video, I'm just going on what others have said.]

eta: As an aside, this is precisely why I liked this forum above others- like per c or the INFJ forum. Back when I joined, at least, this was the only forum that didn't have INFJs chanting empty identity affirmations at each other like the guy in the video (supposedly- again, didn't watch it, just going on how others described it). Those kinds of INFJs might stop by once in a while, but they invariably get bored and leave.

 

[SearchingforPeace]

Hey SearchingforPeace, do you think this would annoy you nearly as much if this were the first thread in this forum you were participating in? I ask because I'm going to guess you're actually reacting to accumulation of convoluted/biased "theories" about the Fe/Fi difference- that infinite little annoyances have built up and you're reacting to the accumulation of them, not simply WUR's post in isolation. This really throws other types off and makes the reaction appear totally irrational.

Maybe it would help to try to realize how all the previous biases noticed have built up (and there are many in this forum to trip over) so that it doesn't effect how you read WUR's posts. <-That's something I need to be reminded of myself sometimes.

WUR's post rubbed me the wrong way too, a little bit- but when it comes down to it, I truly believe that anyone who thinks Fi or Fe is "better" at empathy is missing something. (I'm not even saying that's what WUR meant- that was my preliminary understanding of it, I'm not confident it's correct, and this conversation in the forum is like "the song that never ends" so I don't care to find out if that's what she really meant or not.) Self awareness is what makes someone effectively empathetic, not 'type'. And anyone who wants to claim any 'type' is magically more self aware (and it has happened here), imo, is belying a distinct lack of self awareness in themselves. This is something I believe, and whenever this topic comes up I try to remember that it's okay for others to be delusional about how their 'type' gives them superpowers- I don't need them to believe otherwise. So long as I'm keeping myself in check and not having parallel delusions about Ni, I'm good.

I was just making a modest observation. I wasn't even referencing other Fe/Fi debates. Pointing out my experience, as well as what my ENTJ friend says about his ISFJ wife. Then WUR wrote "That is not empathy", ignored the rest, and it was off.

Then playing a ENTJ game to try and prove her point, at my expense, trying to shape what I wrote into a little box. Yeah, I guess reacted to Te, ha!

Add in PB jumping to pile on, and it appears like the normal forum spat.

I fully believe that empathy is available to both sides. But it appears that one side directly and consistently shits on the other, invalidating Fe, and so forth....

All I wanted was to share my perspective and I all saw was dismissing, ignoring, and then a silly game, with WUR jumping up and down saying, see, I proved my point when she proved nothing....

Whatever..... the forum what it is these days.....

 

[á´…eparted]

The guy in the video is a grade-A self absorbed narcissistic prick. This is what happens when you get sucked into forms of special-snowflakeism and feeling like you can do things others can't while also feeling "different". I can't roll my eyes hard enough at this guy.

Also, fun fact, anyone can have empathy. If 1/2 the population didn't the world would look very different.

 

[á´…eparted]

This is the crux of nearly every problem you experience in interaction - you tend to give back what you BELIEVE you've been given. You are so sensitized to hear Te as harsh that even a tone of normal, civil interaction is misinterpreted by you. Note I am saying by YOU, since you are the person who has made the initial misread. YOU have caused this issue, here.

[MENTION=7254]Wind Up Rex[/MENTION] is correct in saying that you have interpreted the interaction by how it made you feel, not by what was actually conveyed.

This.
[MENTION=25377]SearchingforPeace[/MENTION], you caused all of this by overreacting. No one has objectively done anything wrong.

 

[SearchingforPeace]

This.

[MENTION=25377]SearchingforPeace[/MENTION], you caused all of this by overreacting. No one has objectively done anything wrong.

Sure,, whatever.

 

[PeaceBaby]

I do find it strange that Fi users try to say Fe users don't have empathy and I have never seen Fe users claim that Fi users don't have empathy.

You're doing a classic INFJ thing here, which is re-wording a statement to suit an absolute perspective that has not been stated. NO ONE IN THIS THREAD has said "Fe users don't have empathy". Wind Up Rex said she was skeptical ("I'm skeptical of the concept of Fe-based empathy") sure, and invalidated a couple of your examples. However, that is a far cry from saying what you are saying. Instead of trying to understand her perspective, you are offended and bounce that offense back to her. Instead of asking, "Why would she feel that way, what must she have experienced to see that or feel that?" you lash out, making no effort whatsoever to place yourself in her shoes.

The ability to do that, to put yourself in her shoes is kind of an empathy-prerequisite. What would it look like if you tried?

 

[SearchingforPeace]

You're doing a classic INFJ thing here, which is re-wording a statement to suit an absolute perspective that has not been stated. NO ONE IN THIS THREAD has said "Fe users don't have empathy". Wind Up Rex said she was skeptical ("I'm skeptical of the concept of Fe-based empathy") sure, and invalidated a couple of your examples. However, that is a far cry from saying what you are saying.

No it is not. It is exactly what I am saying. There is no stereotypical INFJ trait, though I know so called twisting bothers you, as you have expressed that before.

In a dialogue, argument, discussion, etc. it requires some back and forth. We have something different.

Party A made an assertion (here about her 8th function), and party B presented a counter point (here about my aux function) based upon experience.

Then party A dismissed out of hand everything Party B stated without rebutting anything, making blanket dismissals, and again Party B provided information, but Party A still ignored it.

Instead Party A decided to make a point with a silly game rather than understand the other point of view, even acknowledging she lacked compassion.

The issue was never whether Fi can show empathy (though again, I question any attempt at empathy without compassion), but whether Fe can.

It was an entirely false attempt to prove a point at my expense that wasn't even at issue!.

This isn't INFJ twisting words around. This is what took place.

So, I called her out on it. And you jumped in, telling me I was wrong, rather than making on effort to actually see my position and instead projected on me what you think I was doing.

Again, if she had some personal experience with Fe users that she has wanted to share as an example, then she could have. Instead, she tried to make me her example.

Instead of trying to understand her perspective, you are offended and bounce that offense back to her. Instead of asking, "Why would she feel that way, what must she have experienced to see that or feel that?" you lash out, making no effort whatsoever to place yourself in her shoes.

I was offended because she wanted to make me her example, put me in her little box, project her ideas on me.

It was her place to provide examples and context if she wanted to have a dialogue, but she dismissed what I wrote, but instead she decided to have prove a point.

I responded accordingly. WUR is a big girl and a ENTJ. She can take it. Besides, she knows already that I can act with compassion instead of invalidating her because we went down that road once, though she might have forgotten.

The ability to do that, to put yourself in her shoes is kind of an empathy-prerequisite. What would it look like if you tried?

Sorry, not playing the game. I have placed myself in too many painful shoes. I have visited dark places you can barely imagine. And been told by too many people that I not only understood them, but I was able to express in words things they felt but could never express.

Again, you have no idea what I have been through.

But that was never the issue, anyway. I wasn't trying to understand WUR, I was discussing her point. She showed she had no desire to really discuss mine.

So, I was supposed to take her little game and say, "oh, great. You proved your point, even though you admitted to acting without "compassion" towards me"?

I didn't think she proved her point at all (which was supposed to be about Fe, anyway), so I felt she needed the response I gave.

You could have come on and stated some profound statement on the differences between Fi empathy and Fe empathy, but instead you just came on to police the thread and tell me I was wrong....

Hmmmmmmmm

 

[HongDou]

A semi-recent quote of mine for the situation:

For me it's not the Fe, but all the INFJs I've known are so far up their own asses that trying to make them come out of their bubble is like pulling teeth.

 

[Tennessee Jed]

Fi looks inside themselves for a corresponding emotion. Fe can feel what they are feeling without looking inside themselves first.

I think you're on the mark here. So are you saying that both of these two processes constitute "empathy" to an equal degree?

Just to expand things out a bit, let me provide my own description of the two processes:

As I see it, Fi-users see something in the outside world, pull it down into an internal laboratory, and imagine how they would react to the same situation if they themselves were in that situation.

Meantime, Fe-users are more immediate and work directly in the outer world and do something akin to "mirroring." They see someone hurting, and they hurt in response.

Again, that's my interpretation of the two functions. So my question would be: Is one function more emblematic of "empathy" than the other?

Here's my own answer to that question: To me it's an academic question, kind of a red herring. The distinction is so small that I don't see why "empathy" has to belong exclusively to one or the other.

Here is why I think that way: As an Fi-Dom, I can be very harsh in my internal laboratory. I can reject another person's emotional state by saying to myself that I think they're simply being too thin-skinned or whatever. In fact, I don't think of myself as a very empathetic (or even sympathetic) person at all.

(ETA: I would say that my own personal Fi internal laboratory is used more for working out values and ethics rather than for just empathizing or sympathizing. Though empathy or sympathy can be part of the process, of course.)

Meantime, sometimes I do the Fe mirroring thing as well (I'm pretty good at Fe in some situations), and at such times I tend be more in tune with the other person because that process results in a more immediate, gut reaction.

IOW, I find Fe to be the more "charitable" and directly interactive version of the two Feeling functions. And I can see where that might equate to "empathy," depending on how one defines those sorts of things.

Anyway, that's just my own spin. Again, I would just highlight the following point: Is one function more emblematic of "empathy" than the other? Because to me it's an academic question, kind of a red herring. The distinction is so small that I don't see why "empathy" has to belong exclusively to one or the other.


As for the video:

I think the dude in the video is kind of obnoxious in his choice of terminology ("naked souls" and all that), but otherwise I agree with him. INFJs are excellent at reading people. Younger INFJs can screw it up, because sometimes they want something to be true so bad that they project their own emotional state onto others. But in my own case, I'm an older INFP, and I hang around with older INFJs. And older, maturer INFJs can be absolutely brilliant at reading people. They take my breath away sometimes.

I recently spent two hours in a small group discussing gun control and the Oregon community college shooting. The discussion leader was an older INFJ. The discussion got a bit heated at times, there were some head games going on, and some people (me in particular) were playing devil's advocate. The INFJ rolled with it beautifully and never missed a step dealing with all the various needs and head games and undercurrents of the group. Again--brilliant. When INFJs are great, they really are great.

 

[Hawthorne]

The video confused me. The discussion threw me off the deep end.

 

[Dr Mobius]

The video confused me. The discussion threw me off the deep end.

The discussion is the start of another round of the infamous fi vs fe war. The thermonuclear detonation of the JFC world. It's best if you run while you still can.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

I was just making a modest observation. I wasn't even referencing other Fe/Fi debates. Pointing out my experience, as well as what my ENTJ friend says about his ISFJ wife. Then WUR wrote "That is not empathy", ignored the rest, and it was off.

This isn't about referencing other discussions here- my point is that NFJs have a tendency to react to the cumulative experience of a thing, rather than a thing in isolation.

I fully believe that empathy is available to both sides. But it appears that one side directly and consistently shits on the other, invalidating Fe, and so forth....

So this is about how that 'side' consistently describes Fe? Not just WUR's post in this thread- in isolation, as if it were being read by someone with no knowledge or experience of how "one side directly and consistently shits on the others" in this forum- but how her post is a link in a bigger 'chain' (a repeating problem) of 'shitting' on Fe?

(Disregard the rest if I'm mis-hearing you.) This is what I'm trying to explain- other types see reactions like this as "overreactions" because all they're seeing is the thing that's directly there. They think you're reacting to a solitary 'link', but you're reacting to the 'chain'. So it looks over-the-top exaggerated to them.

[I think it's kind of funny that [MENTION=20829]Hard[/MENTION] showed up to (emphatically) point out you were having an overreaction- when, at the same time, he has very emphatic reactions to things for this same reason all the time. (I mean, c'mon man, you do.)]

 

[SearchingforPeace]

This isn't about referencing other discussions here- my point is that NFJs have a tendency to react to the cumulative experience of a thing, rather than a thing in isolation.



So this is about how that 'side' consistently describes Fe? Not just WUR's post in this thread- in isolation, as if it were being read by someone with no knowledge or experience of how "one side directly and consistently shits on the others" in this forum- but how her post is a link in a bigger 'chain' (a repeating problem) of 'shitting' on Fe?

(Disregard the rest if I'm mis-hearing you.) This is what I'm trying to explain- other types see reactions like this as "overreactions" because all they're seeing is the thing that's directly there. They think you're reacting to a solitary 'link', but you're reacting to the 'chain'. So it looks over-the-top exaggerated to them.

I was acting in isolation. I was being very personal. My reaction was also extremely personal. I expressed personal experience that was ignored and dismissed and because it didn't fit into her understanding.

I extremely dislike people who want to score points in a discussion at my expense rather than actually consider the subject. And that was clearly the intent, as WUR in fact wrote when she admitted she was lacking compassion.

Sorry, it offends me greatly. And so I react accordingly.

But I don't feel it is an overreaction.

Any larger picture issue was after the fact....not in the discussion at point.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

I was acting in isolation. I was being very personal. My reaction was also extremely personal. I expressed personal experience that was ignored and dismissed and because it didn't fit into her understanding.

I extremely dislike people who want to score points in a discussion at my expense rather than actually consider the subject. And that was clearly the intent, as WUR in fact wrote when she admitted she was lacking compassion.

Sorry, it offends me greatly. And so I react accordingly.

But I don't feel it is an overreaction.

Any larger picture issue was after the fact....not in the discussion at point.

Well I hope what I'm not contributing to that. Personally I think you're both mis-hearing each other here, at least a little bit.

For me it's not the Fe, but all the INFJs I've known are so far up their own asses that trying to make them come out of their bubble is like pulling teeth.

You should know, at the big meetings- we call you people (who push us to come out of our bubble at a faster pace than we can handle) Satan's Hateful Farty-Butt Speed Minions. eta: And we say it really emphatically.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

I blame Kiersey
As soon as the word "psychic" was connected to the INFJ category, we instantly got all the whack-a-do psychic wannabes, which should have been more evenly distributed amongst all the types. Read Jung's description of Ni, and many people would likely glaze over and flip the page to the next description. This doesn't say anything about superpowers knowing the inner workings of every person they meet. It also isn't much about judgment of anything at all, although the intuition can combine with judging functions in a secondary way, but Ni alone judges nothing. Ni in its pure form is mostly observer of the unseen, always watching and internalizing, but knowing and concluding are secondary and sometimes never explored. Here are some examples of Jung's statements of Ni

The peculiar nature of introverted intuition, when given the priority, also produces a peculiar type of man, viz. the mystical dreamer and seer on the one hand, or the fantastical crank and artist on the other. The latter might be regarded as the normal case, since there is a general tendency of this type to confine himself to the perceptive character of intuition. As a rule, the intuitive stops at perception; perception is his principal problem, and -- in the case of a productive artist-the shaping of perception. But the crank contents himself with the intuition by which he himself is shaped and determined. Intensification of intuition naturally often results in an extraordinary aloofness of the individual from tangible reality; he may even become a complete enigma to his own immediate circle.

The pure intuitive who represses judgment or possesses it only under the spell of perception never meets this question fundamentally, since his only problem is the How of perception. He, therefore, finds the moral problem unintelligible, even absurd, and as far as possible forbids his thoughts to dwell upon the disconcerting vision. It is different with the morally orientated intuitive.

Edit: the majority of what I perceive in people is abstract and is non-presumptuous because it is difficult to draw conclusions from it, and it has a neutral, non-judgment based character to it. It can be an intangible feeling that could be compared to a specific shade of color. It is information that would be impossible to gossip about for example. It would be as absurd as saying, "yeah that josie character gives me a real feeling of light coral pink mixed with delicate lines of teal". "You noticed that too?! What a ninny. I just can't believe most people can't see it!" Are these impressions accurate? Most of the time I have no clue and no way to verify, so I avoid that sense of judgment internally, living adrift in a sea of unverifiable information. It is difficult to know what to do with it, so sometimes it can make one obsessed with trying out a bunch of theories or patterns, when a judgment is applied, but in the end, there is this underlying sense that it is all unknowable and everything is just a hypothesis with relative degrees of probability.

Although the pragmatic aspect of living in reality can make it necessary to try to draw conclusions at times and act upon them. Oftentimes that pragmatic sense can lead some INFJs like myself to withdraw because what else can you do?

 

[Forever]

[MENTION=14857]fia[/MENTION] I think it was kind of extracted out of Jung's definition even if it's just a word lol.

seer1
/sir/
noun
1.
a person who is supposed to be able, through supernatural insight, to see what the future holds.
synonyms: soothsayer, oracle, prophet(ess), augur, prognosticator, diviner, visionary, fortune teller, crystal gazer, clairvoyant, psychic, medium; literary sibyl
"the woeful predictions of an ancient seer"
2.
archaic
a person who sees something specified.
"a seer of the future"


And this is very vague remembrance of what I read of his life, he valued the medicine man of the tribal people of Africa and Jung's life was very very very beyond normal lol.

Not saying I'm supporting the mainstream skewed thought of INFJ's but I don't think it's that far-fetched that they'd interpret that from him.

 

[RedAmazoneFriendZone]

I have never seen a "naked INFP". But I still have hope and faith

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

[MENTION=14857]fia[/MENTION] I think it was kind of extracted out of Jung's definition even if it's just a word lol.

seer1
/sir/
noun
1.
a person who is supposed to be able, through supernatural insight, to see what the future holds.
synonyms: soothsayer, oracle, prophet(ess), augur, prognosticator, diviner, visionary, fortune teller, crystal gazer, clairvoyant, psychic, medium; literary sibyl
"the woeful predictions of an ancient seer"
2.
archaic
a person who sees something specified.
"a seer of the future"


And this is very vague remembrance of what I read of his life, he valued the medicine man of the tribal people of Africa and Jung's life was very very very beyond normal lol.

Not saying I'm supporting the mainstream skewed thought of INFJ's but I don't think it's that far-fetched that they'd interpret that from him.

This is a good point. There is an overlap between the concept of "seer" and "psychic".

It think the problem comes when people take the idea of Ni and make it really concrete and specific. When it means the person can 'read their mind', or gain specific "facts" about a person without much effort, then it becomes arrogant and open to drawing incorrect conclusions. I completely understand why that is offensive, and have had other people tell me who I am, what I'm feeling, what I'm thinking. There was a period in my life when a few people would have conversations with me telling me what I thought and felt, why that hurt them, how they feel about it, etc., and I would listen and wonder when I would get to participate in this "conflict" we were having because it was all news to me. I've had people with every judging function Te, Fe, Ti, and Fi do this. It happens when people have fears and/or need certitude. I think the main issue is when you are quiet and blank as an introvert, people will paint upon you their fears. It is difficult for any of us to live with uncertainty.

Freud deliberately used that technique in his therapy sessions, and Freudian therapists are trained to be a "blank slate" to draw out people's natural tendency to project. The therapist sits behind the patient, and the patient lies on a couch, so they can't directly see each other easily. The therapist says almost nothing. Then as the patient explores intense emotional memories, they begin to project the idea of the person who hurt them onto the therapist. Then the therapist responds to the unhealthy dynamic in a reasoned, healthy manner to help give the patient a reset button on their harmful experience. If you want to learn about other people, then be quiet, blank, and mysterious. They will quickly let you know everything they fear when not given information to the contrary. The more blank you are, the more they will make intrusive assumptions. Of course not everyone does this, but it happens.

Anytime an INFJ is doing this to people, then yes, that is hurtful and of course people won't like it. I have done it when I start to feel threatened, but only internally, and my first response is to be reminded of a sense of existential isolation. I work to live by this mantra, "If you can't understand it, then you are not in a position to judge it". Also, when you do understand, you are naturally less likely to judge.