The Many Faces of INFJ
- Thread starter Adymus
- Start date
I don't have to consider anything outside of my paradigm when my paradigm includes what is correct. Considering what is not correct is an exercise in confusion, which INTPs seem to excel at.
I think this theory is very creative, and the intention of it is very good, to promote a deeper understanding of these cognitive functions which we are all focused upon understanding more clearly.
The problem I have with this thread is that it is leading people in a direction that confuses both the nature of type and cognitive functions by delving so far into shadow functions that you're actually describing types other than INFJs in most cases.
I'd be happy to shut down any of the examples you wish with a detailed account. I personally found most of them to be so ludicrous that addressing the entire volume of them would have taken an hour or more of my time which could have been better served doing something less redundant.
But it doesn't include what is correct Nobleheart, it includes a very small scope of what is correct.
Most of your criticism is actually completely ridiculous. I actually gave you an explanation of how the cognitive functions are used to do what I described, and then you just ignored that and said "oh, you're talking about xSFP" or something. Obviously I'm not, as they do not have the same hierarchy of cognitive functions as INFJs do.
Secondly, you can't really say an entire archetype is one specific personality; personalities are not archetypes, the personality is the way we experience reality, what we do in that in that experience is not so set in stone. Everyone in this forum who has not found themselves completely agreeing with a personality type description (Which is damn near everyone) would agree with that. For instance, I talked about the INFJ Revolutionary and why their cognitive functions can lead them to that archetype, Now it is not only the INFJs who can be revolutionaries, but to suggest that no INFJs are Revolutionaries is just plain retarded.
I did not once delve into shadow functions, it was not necessary to delve into shadow functions, because I explained how all of these faces of INFJ work using the top 4 functions.
As for the SP wannabe being only a stress pattern, no, just no. All personality types have sensitivities toward their inferior function, and many of which respond to this by focusing on improving aspects of it in an, as I call it "Fetishy" sort of way. So by your logic, I am in a stress pattern right now because I am INTP and I enjoy doing Fe-like things like acting, speeches, improvisation, dancing, and social gatherings. The personality is far more nuanced than you think it is.
Also, I would be happy to shut down your attempt to shut down any of my examples, so I'll start by give some to work on. Let's do GG allin!
L
Lyra
Bjork is INFJ to the core. Listen carefully to this song:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Onwb4-mEpQ&feature=PlayList&p=15AAA101C5B55861&playnext_from=PL&index=20"]YouTube- Bjork - Wanderlust[/ame]
It's almost a distillation of the essence of the true INFJ.
---
Repost:
Method actor? How about a relevant example: the INFJ whose method acting caused INTPf to close registrations for several months. And who cobra'd her way back in. And whose method acting was originally employed towards revolutionary ends, but then degenerated into 'destroyer of worlds' when the response was inadequate.
You know...
Your OP is just perfect. I'm just happy that somebody out there (i.e. you) recognises that such traits can go together, and that they combine to form a coherent whole, or originate from a common source; if 'INJF' is the word for that coherent whole or common source, then INFJ it is.
I spent a long time fighting the MBTI-- I hated it. But your posts have made me realise that it's not the MBTI itself that I was fighting, but the murky waters of dogma and restrictive and non-dynamic verbal stereotypes which most of its modern practitioners wallow in. That version of the MBTI-- the prevailing version of the MBTI, and the version that typically causes people to reject your posts-- simply does not mesh with an advanced understanding of how people work, and how variable they are. It is infected with moralism, and is calcified and non-dynamic. Typology as you present it has elevated my understanding of myself, and given me a language of human behaviour unmatched by any other systemic conceptual model I've encountered. It works; it fits with my experience, it doesn't force exclusion of a significant amount of contradictory information (as the version of every other internet-MBTI-theorist I've encounter does), and it's a significant contribution to humanity's understanding of itself.
What repels me about typology forums, uniformly, is that the versions of the types generally accepted are surfaces: combination of superficial traits, tendencies, and appearances which adherence to is taken as proof of being an example of. The model is very rarely thought of in terms of its underlying conceptual coherency, and thus somebody who appears to differ from the more common results of the interaction of their type's cognitive functions is assigned to whatever other collection of surface-appearance best fits them (in the opinion of he whom is assigning). The result is a worthless interplay of worn-out stereotypes and parodies of the complexity of humanity, and a place for weak people to come and find a description which gives them a sense of self, and a tepid validation. The vituperation with which systemic attempts at innovation and clarification are met is, I think, a result of this: most people on typology forums are not there for understanding, but because they need to substitute a collection of traits (the meaning of which they do not comprehend, and the overall systemic context of which they do not challenge, regardless of whether they enjoy fantasising that they are ''Architects'' and ''Masterminds'' or not) for genuine character.
Your conception goes beyond that, to the functional language of the model itself, and thus to that which is not bound by superficiality. Or, put another way, to the relationship between the immensely varied surface-appearances which the functions can produce. It illuminates the essence of the model-- which has validity-- and consequently does not place restrictions upon appearance. It also strips people of the comfort which their adopted identity-- their donned superficiality-- gives them, which is why you do, and will continue to, receive highly negative reactions from people whose conceptual understanding you challenge. Most people don't want the truth about themselves.
Lyra.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Onwb4-mEpQ&feature=PlayList&p=15AAA101C5B55861&playnext_from=PL&index=20"]YouTube- Bjork - Wanderlust[/ame]
It's almost a distillation of the essence of the true INFJ.
---
Repost:
Method actor? How about a relevant example: the INFJ whose method acting caused INTPf to close registrations for several months. And who cobra'd her way back in. And whose method acting was originally employed towards revolutionary ends, but then degenerated into 'destroyer of worlds' when the response was inadequate.
You know...
Your OP is just perfect. I'm just happy that somebody out there (i.e. you) recognises that such traits can go together, and that they combine to form a coherent whole, or originate from a common source; if 'INJF' is the word for that coherent whole or common source, then INFJ it is.
I spent a long time fighting the MBTI-- I hated it. But your posts have made me realise that it's not the MBTI itself that I was fighting, but the murky waters of dogma and restrictive and non-dynamic verbal stereotypes which most of its modern practitioners wallow in. That version of the MBTI-- the prevailing version of the MBTI, and the version that typically causes people to reject your posts-- simply does not mesh with an advanced understanding of how people work, and how variable they are. It is infected with moralism, and is calcified and non-dynamic. Typology as you present it has elevated my understanding of myself, and given me a language of human behaviour unmatched by any other systemic conceptual model I've encountered. It works; it fits with my experience, it doesn't force exclusion of a significant amount of contradictory information (as the version of every other internet-MBTI-theorist I've encounter does), and it's a significant contribution to humanity's understanding of itself.
What repels me about typology forums, uniformly, is that the versions of the types generally accepted are surfaces: combination of superficial traits, tendencies, and appearances which adherence to is taken as proof of being an example of. The model is very rarely thought of in terms of its underlying conceptual coherency, and thus somebody who appears to differ from the more common results of the interaction of their type's cognitive functions is assigned to whatever other collection of surface-appearance best fits them (in the opinion of he whom is assigning). The result is a worthless interplay of worn-out stereotypes and parodies of the complexity of humanity, and a place for weak people to come and find a description which gives them a sense of self, and a tepid validation. The vituperation with which systemic attempts at innovation and clarification are met is, I think, a result of this: most people on typology forums are not there for understanding, but because they need to substitute a collection of traits (the meaning of which they do not comprehend, and the overall systemic context of which they do not challenge, regardless of whether they enjoy fantasising that they are ''Architects'' and ''Masterminds'' or not) for genuine character.
Your conception goes beyond that, to the functional language of the model itself, and thus to that which is not bound by superficiality. Or, put another way, to the relationship between the immensely varied surface-appearances which the functions can produce. It illuminates the essence of the model-- which has validity-- and consequently does not place restrictions upon appearance. It also strips people of the comfort which their adopted identity-- their donned superficiality-- gives them, which is why you do, and will continue to, receive highly negative reactions from people whose conceptual understanding you challenge. Most people don't want the truth about themselves.
Lyra.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Nov 12, 2008
- 14,153
- 1,334
- 0
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/so/sp
No I do not agree.
Bjork, and anyone, can very easily make music based on any kind of personality type. I am not even convinced that this song has an INFJ essence to it. A feeler essence to it, but not INFJ. This honestly feels much more ENFP (maybe INFP) to me. Very Ne/Fi based.
I personally feel bjork is an ESFP or ENFP. Her E would be weak though.
L
Lyra
- Nov 12, 2008
- 14,153
- 1,334
- 0
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/so/sp
Hmm, ok I will give you that for the lyrics. They do have an INFJ feel to them (I tend to not focus on lyrics for music), but only slight, I can see INFP in this just as easily. It's more of a mix of Fi and Ni though, with Fi being at the front of it. As such, I do not think this is a pure distilled version of it.
L
Lyra
It's possible that we're working from different understandings of the cognitive functions; that we are using signifiers in common does not mean that we are actually talking about the same thing.
Ni/Fe, by my interpretation, is expressed through lines such as:
'I am leaving this harbor'. (Future oriented/ breaking away from established structures and plunging into a self-generated word of mystery).
'Its habitants seem to [keep on guard?], I cannot stomach their rights and wrongs'. (A rejection of current circumstance and social structure in favour of a Ni-generated model of human experience, and of relation to humanity (through Fe). Also, the direct referencing of 'their rights and wrongs' indicates a direct and confrontational observation of the overarching structure of present society typical to the true INFJ).
'I have lost my origin, and I don't want to find it again...'. (Future orientation, self-created worlds. Essentially: Ni connecting to the external via Fe).
'...we're sailing into Nature's Law'. (Having left one's harbor and lost one's origin, one becomes immersed in the eternal patterns and structures of the cosmos, and conceives of a model of how life can be upon the basis of this quest. Ni through Fe.)
'Wanderlust, relentlessly craving. Wanderlust, peel of the layers. Until you get to the core.' (The mystical quest, as exampled by Jesus' journey into hermitage in the desert, or any other equivalent journey by an INFJ into communion of their Ni with the cosmos itself).
'Did I imagine it would be like this? Was it something like this I wished for? I reach for, I want more. Lust for comfort, suffocates their soul'. (The quest, again, and a referencing of an imaginative pre-figuring which it quintessentially Ni. 'Lust for comfort, suffocates their soul' is a vital line to the overall interpretation, as it indicates a rejection of common, mundane ways of living in favor of the wonder which Ni can generate).
'I feel at home whenever the unknown surrounds me. I seek its embrace. [...] my floating house.' (Ni, including future-orientation).
'Wanderlust, can you start a pattern?' (An INFJ's Ni creates patterns in the world via Fe, in a directive manner).
Additionally, the mystical symbolism of the entire song, including the references to the Tibetan bardos, are the province of the INFJ.
That's just the obvious and exoteric. Then, there's the essence ;-).
And that there is an essence is the point.
Ni is the gateway to the esoteric.
Ni/Fe, by my interpretation, is expressed through lines such as:
'I am leaving this harbor'. (Future oriented/ breaking away from established structures and plunging into a self-generated word of mystery).
'Its habitants seem to [keep on guard?], I cannot stomach their rights and wrongs'. (A rejection of current circumstance and social structure in favour of a Ni-generated model of human experience, and of relation to humanity (through Fe). Also, the direct referencing of 'their rights and wrongs' indicates a direct and confrontational observation of the overarching structure of present society typical to the true INFJ).
'I have lost my origin, and I don't want to find it again...'. (Future orientation, self-created worlds. Essentially: Ni connecting to the external via Fe).
'...we're sailing into Nature's Law'. (Having left one's harbor and lost one's origin, one becomes immersed in the eternal patterns and structures of the cosmos, and conceives of a model of how life can be upon the basis of this quest. Ni through Fe.)
'Wanderlust, relentlessly craving. Wanderlust, peel of the layers. Until you get to the core.' (The mystical quest, as exampled by Jesus' journey into hermitage in the desert, or any other equivalent journey by an INFJ into communion of their Ni with the cosmos itself).
'Did I imagine it would be like this? Was it something like this I wished for? I reach for, I want more. Lust for comfort, suffocates their soul'. (The quest, again, and a referencing of an imaginative pre-figuring which it quintessentially Ni. 'Lust for comfort, suffocates their soul' is a vital line to the overall interpretation, as it indicates a rejection of common, mundane ways of living in favor of the wonder which Ni can generate).
'I feel at home whenever the unknown surrounds me. I seek its embrace. [...] my floating house.' (Ni, including future-orientation).
'Wanderlust, can you start a pattern?' (An INFJ's Ni creates patterns in the world via Fe, in a directive manner).
Additionally, the mystical symbolism of the entire song, including the references to the Tibetan bardos, are the province of the INFJ.
That's just the obvious and exoteric. Then, there's the essence ;-).
And that there is an essence is the point.
Ni is the gateway to the esoteric.
Last edited by a moderator:
L
Lyra
Perfect... I could not have said it any better myself, you are absolutely right. Lyra, this is why I told you before that even an MBTI expert practitioner would have failed to typed you. It is not skill or knowledge level that is the problem, it is the limitation of the conceptual framework that they are working with.
While some of the roots of the MBTI model are solid (ie: The cognitive functions), the understanding of how these functions manifest in people is at best one dimensional. It is exactly as you said, the current approach to analysis of personality is through superficiality alone, what the person "appears" to be expressing. All the while they are completely ignoring, if expressing certain traits are energizing or draining for a person, or if they are difficult or effortless for the person.
People are having difficulty figuring their MBTI type because they don't match up to any of the descriptions. That is because they were never meant to match up to a single set of superficial "symptoms" in the first place. Every personality has an infinite amount of manifestations of how they can use their hierarchy of cognitive functions, and there is no real way to notate this in a single description, because they would eventually begin to contradict each other. MBTI attempts to fit identity into archetypes, but an archetype is not an identity, it is mask. A set of behavioral mode that we fit into in order to adapt to differing environments and tasks.
The MBTI is a conceptual model that has been tainted by stereotyping and false archetypes, therefor I am not going to help expand it, but personally see to it that it is utterly superseded.
- Nov 12, 2008
- 14,153
- 1,334
- 0
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/so/sp
MBTI wouldn't exist if it didn't work.
The difference I see here is we are approaching this from different sides, Ni versus Ne. I won't lie Ne thinking drives me nuts, I can't stand it because it can't be pinned down. The purpose of MBTI is to put people in to boxes. To me it seems like you are trying to open them up to fit more people. The problem is though you are going to do it to the point where you can no longer define people by MBTI at all. That's part of the reason I haven't responded to this in detail. You're trying to break down the walls, which are infact needed in order for MBTI to work.
I understand that not everyone is going to fit MBTI well. However 99% of people can be put into some kind of box with it. Whether or not people agree is a different matter though.
The difference I see here is we are approaching this from different sides, Ni versus Ne. I won't lie Ne thinking drives me nuts, I can't stand it because it can't be pinned down. The purpose of MBTI is to put people in to boxes. To me it seems like you are trying to open them up to fit more people. The problem is though you are going to do it to the point where you can no longer define people by MBTI at all. That's part of the reason I haven't responded to this in detail. You're trying to break down the walls, which are infact needed in order for MBTI to work.
I understand that not everyone is going to fit MBTI well. However 99% of people can be put into some kind of box with it. Whether or not people agree is a different matter though.
This right here?
This is pure Cobra.
Just something to note, you can clearly see she is an Fe user from this alone. Notice that face expression she has at 1:49? Fi users don't do things like this, because Fi is not meant to send expressive messages in the way that Fe does. From that alone we can rule out the possibility of her being an xxFP. Now notice how readily her Fe comes high up on her face, just below the eyes, it is something easy for her to use. Although do note that it never really overtakes her face, she is always watching, always perceiving (Perception First).
For the first half of this video, she is putting on an extra charming show with her Fe, because she is aware of what is approaching: the video of her attacking the Paparazzi.
See that face at 3:00, she is going Cobra. Head jutted forward, absorbing information as it is happening, and constantly checking Ni to see where this is going.
"I haven't even seen it myself" Yeah, that's a lie.
"Will it get me really upset?" You don't want to make me really upset again do you?
As for the video attack itself: This is why you should never ever ever ever touch (Se) or interrupt an INFJ while they are inside their Ni. Because the Se kills their train of thought, and now someone or something is going to have to die. In this case, it is the Paparazzi.
3:46 - That sly grin after watching the video, just priceless.
No, because MBTI is actually seeing and recognizing an existent pattern. The problem with MBTI is that it is not seeing the full pattern, only a very small and superficial point of view. This is why MBTI can only be not more than 75% accurate (I personally would say it is more like 60%), and they can only type people who do not have personality disorders. Because while even people with personality disorders have personalities, their understanding of the functionality behind the personality is very flawed and limited.
And no, I am actually not trying to be overly open ended at all, because I do still think everyone fits into a single one of the 16 types. MBTI's problem is that is not correctly defining what makes a person fit into said type. The only thing that defines a personality their cognitive function hierarchy, and from what functions do they get their stimulation and energy.
For instance, as an INTP, I get my energy from Ti and to a lesser extent Ne. However I am also an extremely talkative, and even somewhat directive person, especially when it comes to my theories. Although that does seem like extroverted, and J like behavior. I am still more energized by my inner Ti world as well as free-form brainstorming, than I am engaging the external world, and creating structure. Furthermore I am still using Ti-Ne-Si-Fe, when I seem more extroverted it is from Ne and Fe, when I seem more J it is from Si and Fe. There are an infinite amount of ways I or another other personality type could behave, but if they are doing it with certain cognitive function, then you know for certain that they are that type.
- Nov 12, 2008
- 14,153
- 1,334
- 0
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/so/sp
As far as the conginitve functions, I don't fit the mold very well for an INFJ. I fit the core of it, but there are some very marked differences that I have. I get what your saying with describing your type and function.
I am going to stop here, because we are not going to see eye to eye no matter what either of us say. Nor will we ever understand each other. All I can say is that I really don't agree with your ideas with the inital post. At the core it is fine, trying to refine a definition within an INFJ, I like that sort of thing. You just go about it in a divergent way and are trying to cover too much ground with it in my opinion. If these are just modes that an INFJ can enter for short periods of time, that's fine. I mean no offence by this either. We just won't get each other.
It is not necessary to cover all ground through description and labeling, nor is it even possible.
I am actually approaching this in a convergent way, I am taking all of these different archetypes and showing you how they are all using the same hierarchy of cognitive functions. How these seemingly paradoxical personality prototypes are all working from the same set of tools, it's actually more Ni than it is Ne.
That's really sad that you are just going to cop out with "We'll never see eye to eye", are you really so afraid of being wrong?
Last edited:
- Nov 12, 2008
- 14,153
- 1,334
- 0
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/so/sp
I won't get my point across no matter how I say it. I have been straining myself to put it together as it is and each time it feel inadequet. Because of that there is no point in me discussing this further. I am copping out, if you want to say I am afraid of being wrong, then so be it.
L
Lyra
heh. That's why I posted it, yes.
There's also something of the persona-adoption which Ni > Fe enables to it; her cuteness is so deliberate, and functions as a kind of created surface-personality used as a tool to interface with the world.
That's something I struggled with for some time: it was almost as if I lacked an actual, stable personality of the kinds that people around me had. I had to create art to fill the void, and I had to struggle to connect all of my various creations together by created narratives designed for external consumption.
It's hard at first, but it matures into a gift-- a weapon, even-- that's hard to match. That most people don't consciously create their personas enables a kind of interaction with them that they don't even recognise is occurring: a mastery over the character one presents in their world of characters. Perhaps that pertains to aspects of the cobra: the persona can be sweet, especially when it is being willfully employed towards a desired end, but whatever monsters aren't contained within its confines can erupt from below the surface and tear apart both it and that with which it was engaged.
There's also something of the persona-adoption which Ni > Fe enables to it; her cuteness is so deliberate, and functions as a kind of created surface-personality used as a tool to interface with the world.
That's something I struggled with for some time: it was almost as if I lacked an actual, stable personality of the kinds that people around me had. I had to create art to fill the void, and I had to struggle to connect all of my various creations together by created narratives designed for external consumption.
It's hard at first, but it matures into a gift-- a weapon, even-- that's hard to match. That most people don't consciously create their personas enables a kind of interaction with them that they don't even recognise is occurring: a mastery over the character one presents in their world of characters. Perhaps that pertains to aspects of the cobra: the persona can be sweet, especially when it is being willfully employed towards a desired end, but whatever monsters aren't contained within its confines can erupt from below the surface and tear apart both it and that with which it was engaged.
I know this is off-topic...but this resonated with me. I think that any time an INFJ wants to employ a strategy for change (doesn't have to be for world peace and such) and is die-hard about it, it's done. I don't understand why people into MBTI think INFJs are this passive little bunch of people. No one INFJ on this site comes across as a doormat to me...
anyway...
the bit about the SP wannabe really hit the spot.
You know, INFJ guys have the hardest time in hell of any type on earth of getting a girlfriend. But go SP for an hour, and suddenly you got girls swooning over you.
Why do the chicks dig twilight so much? I notice that it's one of the few dramas where the main guy heart throb is an INFJ, not an SP. It's amazing. Hopefully society would turn around a little bit and realize that INFJs rock too, not just those SP ADHD morons.
You know, INFJ guys have the hardest time in hell of any type on earth of getting a girlfriend. But go SP for an hour, and suddenly you got girls swooning over you.
Why do the chicks dig twilight so much? I notice that it's one of the few dramas where the main guy heart throb is an INFJ, not an SP. It's amazing. Hopefully society would turn around a little bit and realize that INFJs rock too, not just those SP ADHD morons.
You are saying that Fi user can't smile?
maybe the most ridiculous argument I've ever heard. Every humanbeing is capable of smiling and Fi types even moreso.
I know many IxFP's who are very comfy at expressing their feelings through facial
expressions.
Fe overtakes me all the time and I'm an INFJ. Extraverted feeling is very easily
spotted because it shines trough xxFJ's face and reactions.
Finally you got it right, she is perceiver (P)
Ni isn't constantly checking anything, It's Ne here you are describing. Ne is
extroverted pattern seeking perceiving function.
That is just pure anger which has nothing to do with type. But it's expressed
very spontaneously and without a any sensible reason. (P)
Come on.. The whole essence of Bjork yells Fi. She is maybe the best stereotype
of cuddly INFP. Her singing comes through dominant introverted feeling, you can
just hear how she is in touch with her emotions when she sings, every nuance
and tone comes through that flame. While she is expressing the inner turmoil of
her emotions with her Fi she does it in abstract way using Ne to produce her surreal
music.
EDIT: sorry for the critisism, your theory was very entertaining but some of the
typings were a bit off.
Last edited: