Non-"typical" INFPs

[erm]

Warm? Fuzzy? Irrational? Sensitive? Vulnerable? Am I the only one calling BS on these being typical INFP traits?

Maybe I can describe this with an examples:

I think most, if not all, INFPs possess and use empathy a lot. However, in the case of some person beating a someone else to death, I thought empathy meant you understood/feel both the victim's position and the murderer's position. Instead of selective empathy (which I though was Fe's speciality used to keep the peace) where normally you only feel/care about the victim's position.

The first empathy leads to the observer becoming emotionally neutral to the situation, since you've felt both positions, unless the observer is only in the presence of one of the people, in which case they normally side with them until they hear/think of the other sides.

Being neutral then leaves only logic and ethics, which, because of the lack of emotion for either side, make a cold impersonal judgement on the matter. (This empathy isn't used all the time, nor perfect)

This, along with Fi being so hidden and uncaring about things unrelated to its values, led to INFPs being cold I thought.

In the case of ISFPs I thought Se lead to their Fi caring more about details and what's going on around them, making them warmer and more emotionally revealing. More "in the moment".

Ne only distants a person further from the world, making them less revealing of themselves if combined with the apparently most introverted function, Fi.

On top of this I thought that INFPs were the least practical type generally, meaning in this day and age they learn the hard and fast that details, logic and evidence are very important. This only serves to make them more cold and distant, and view logic and evidence as incredibly important, though their use won't be as natural as it is to T's.

With Fi's hidden/withdrawn nature, on top of the above, sensitivity and vulnerability soon leave when they learn to protect their emotions and feelings from the harsh world. By harsh I mean not what they were expecting, I don't mean they necessarily expect the world to be nice, supportive and cater to their needs or anything like that.

My personal experience has shown INFPs to definitely not be clingy, needy, vulnerable (on the outside), overly emotional (on the outside) and all that.

Am I just being crazy about this or something? I thought INFPs were a hard nut to crack, and what goo comes out when you do is dependent almost entirely on the individual.

[Jack Flak]

In my limited, severely flawed observations, I've noticed that INFPs are true to type, just as everyone else, but the descriptions can be exaggerated. How do you feel about Keirsey's "Healer" description?

[erm]

How do you feel about Keirsey's "Healer" description?

Mostly correct. Especially the repeating of reserved and distant.

"In fact, to understand Healers, we must understand that their deep commitment to the positive and the good is almost boundless and selfless" and all the stuff about community, healing, solving personal conflicts etc.

I thought that, being based on values, was down to the individual. They may all like to help people and things, but the definition of help, well it varies a lot.

Also, I thought huge dislike of conflict was a universal INFP thing along with procrastinating (probably because decisions arise from conflict). They don't seem to get mentioned.

[Jack Flak]

This though: "In fact, to understand Healers, we must understand that their deep commitment to the positive and the good is almost boundless and selfless" and all the stuff about community, healing, solving personal conflicts etc.

I thought that, being based on values, was down to the individual. They may all like to help people and things, but the definition of help, well it varies a lot.

Also, I thought huge dislike of conflict was a universal INFP thing, along with procrastinating. They don't seem to get mentioned.
*shrug* These are all traits I'm aware of. Maybe you or I should write a description and mail it to the internet...tomorrow.

Most of the INFPs I've known had a comfortable distaste with humanity in general*, though they still don't want to see people harmed. It's the internal sense of, to pick one word, "justice" which rules the INFP (versus the internal sense of logic which rules the INTP).

*may be why we got along.

[erm]

Most of the INFPs I've known had a comfortable distaste with humanity

What exactly do you mean by this?

infp.globalchatter.com :: View topic - "The Introvert of Feeling-Type" (http://infp.globalchatter.com/messageboard/viewtopic.php?t=2990&highlight=introverted+feeling)

This description of Fi dominants seems the most accurate to me. Sticking to a simple "morality" instead of love, peace, happiness, puppies and whatever else.

[Jack Flak]

What exactly do you mean by this?
I mean exactly what I said. In other words, perhaps:

They don't like the way society works; they have problems with leaders most of the time; most people turn them off with their personalites and actions; et cetera.

INFP complaints are indeed feeling based, and they tend to be more vague than specific. "I just don't like this."

[erm]

I mean exactly what I said. In other words, perhaps:

They don't like the way society works; they have problems with leaders most of the time; most people turn them off with their personalites and actions; et cetera.

INFP complaints are indeed feeling based, and they tend to be more vague than specific. "I just don't like this."

Well feeling based is a given. Other than that I must just be completely off the mark.

[Jack Flak]

Well feeling based is a given. Other than that I must just be completely off the mark.
You might have missed that I said "Most of the INFPs I've known." It wasn't a general description.

[erm]

You might have missed that I said "Most of the INFPs I've known." It wasn't a general description.

Yes, but the reason I made this thread was because so many people seem to agree with your idea and what I'm objecting to.

I thought wikipedia's description was one of them, though it's been changed to fit my idea more it seems.

Maybe I'm not so off the mark.

[Jack Flak]

Now you have me confused as well. I basically agree with your OP.

[erm]

Now you have me confused as well. I basically agree with your OP.

Hmm. I was going with your "distaste with humanity" remark.

It was unclear sorry.

"Distaste with reality" would be how I describe them.

[Jack Flak]

Speaking of unclear, I should've said "distaste for humanity," shouldn't I have? :doh:

Yes, distaste for reality is probably a slightly better description.

[sleepless]

I think most, if not all, INFPs possess and use empathy a lot. However, in the case of some person beating a someone else to death, I thought empathy meant you understood/feel both the victim's position and the murderer's position. Instead of selective empathy (which I though was Fe's speciality used to keep the peace) where normally you only feel/care about the victim's position.

The first empathy leads to the observer becoming emotionally neutral to the situation, since you've felt both positions, unless the observer is only in the presence of one of the people, in which case they normally side with them until they hear/think of the other sides.

Being neutral then leaves only logic and ethics, which, because of the lack of emotion for either side, make a cold impersonal judgement on the matter. (This empathy isn't used all the time, nor perfect)
This is a really good point. Fi in the first position can bring a sort of all-embracing empathy which is actually impersonal.

Also, the most intellectually sharp person I know happen to be an INFP, so...

Underneath it all they still come across as sensitive and vulnerable, though (not on the outside, as you write).

[Udog]

I prefer the term 'disillusionment'.

Edit: To clarify, I had a disillusionment with humanity more than a distaste for it. I had to get over that, and quit punishing myself and the world for not living up to my lofty ideals.

[runvardh]

Atypical is a typical INFP trait... :rolli:

[Chris_in_Orbit]

Never did like the rainbow and unicorn descriptions I always found. I have no idea why they are like that but...meh, I still believe I am an INFP.

A few things that I don't agree with:

Selflessness: Not sure, maybe at one point I really did think of others first but after being used and trampled over I have learned to assert myself.

Never Find Perfection: This is true enough but it doesn't make me unhappy. I mean, I really have learned to appreciate all the things that I have rather than pining for the things I don't.

Strong dislike for conflict: Um, no. I don't like conflict with myself and someone I am uncomfortable with/don't know but I am notorious for arguing with my friends about their beliefs and calling them out when they are inconsistent...I even secretly enjoy getting into conflicts with friends about things because after it is over we become closer as friends.

Keep in mind that even though I test as an INFP, I do test relatively high on Ti so maybe that makes me less like "normal" INFPs.

[dorareever]

I've been called insensitive by some Fe types because my empathy is all embracing, and, yes, impersonal. I also suppose that the cartoon description of types is always unfair to them, and maybe with INFP's this happens even more often since we tend to, uhm, confuse people. :yes:

But that said it's mostly a matter of semantics; I think that we are indeed prone to smooth things out, but not in a let's all agree and wub each other Fe kind of way,more as in always provide the balance when the balance is off. Sometimes this requires stirring things up. We love conflict sometimes, because it can restore harmony.

[Delphyne]

Keep in mind that even though I test as an INFP, I do test relatively high on Ti so maybe that makes me less like "normal" INFPs.

What´s a normal INFP? It´s true that some INFP descriptions emphasis this dislike for conflict, which doesn´t fit me either. Fortunately, there are other descriptions with far lesser amounts of dancing elves and magical unicorns. Naomi Quenk lists three important features of dominant introverted feeling, which are inner harmony, economy of emotional expression and acceptance of feeling as nonlogical.

Inner harmony explains to me why I sometimes like to start conflicts. The outer harmony isn´t really important to me, but inside I need to be in harmony. If I´m not sure about someone´s motives or my values get attacked I will bring my inner conflict outside. By starting a conflict with someone I try to gain inner harmony.

Economy of emotional expression - The more emotional people will express their feeling values, the colder I will get. Being overtly emotional feels kind of fake to me and I can´t go along.

[Udog]

Enneagram becomes useful at this point. INFP E4s are generally regarded as the most common and, to me, fit the 'typical' INFP description a bit better than other Enneagram types.

I find myself relating to the INFP E4, but at the same time don't handle my emotions the same way they do.

[Delphyne]

I've been called insensitive by some Fe types because my empathy is all embracing, and, yes, impersonal.
Me too. Cold, unfeeling, unsocial and so on. :cheese:

[Chris_in_Orbit]

What´s a normal INFP? It´s true that some INFP descriptions emphasis this dislike for conflict, which doesn´t fit me either. Fortunately, there are other descriptions with far lesser amounts of dancing elves and magical unicorns. Naomi Quenk lists three important features of dominant introverted feeling, which are inner harmony, economy of emotional expression and acceptance of feeling as nonlogical.

Inner harmony explains to me why I sometimes like to start conflicts. The outer harmony isn´t really important to me, but inside I need to be in harmony. If I´m not sure about someone´s motives or my values get attacked I will bring my inner conflict outside. By starting a conflict with someone I try to gain inner harmony.

Economy of emotional expression - The more emotional people will express their feeling values, the colder I will get. Being overtly emotional feels kind of fake to me and I can´t go along.

Well I put it in quotes because I knew it would be questioned :P
I assume the normal INFP dislikes conflict, and by what you say it does seem to be true. I totally agree with you though; my inner harmony trumps outer harmony.

[Delphyne]

Well I put it in quotes because I knew it would be questioned :P

It was a rhetorical question. ;)

I assume the normal INFP dislikes conflict, and by what you say it does seem to be true. I totally agree with you though; my inner harmony trumps outer harmony.
It depends on what you regard as a conflict. I also like to question people and have a reputation for arguing too much, but I don´t think of that as having a conflict. Sometimes it´s just a matter of different opinions.

[Members Only]

I'd agree with a fair few things mentioned in this thread.

I've always wondered if it's just scoring high on T that makes me colder than the INFP type descriptions. This has shed some new light on Fi in the dominant position however.


Economy of emotional expression - The more emotional people will express their feeling values, the colder I will get. Being overtly emotional feels kind of fake to me and I can´t go along.

So true.

[OneWithSoul]

Let's put it this way, and I don't want to narrow it down to just INFPs, but NFs and maybe even F's, abroad, but whenever I feel an emotion, anger, fear, anxiety, excitement, peacefulness, etc. I feel it very very strongly, even though it may be hard to tell. One example is if I get frustrated, then I get very very frustrated, even if my case is wrong. It's not just about feeling sympathetic, but letting your emotions control you, even in the bad ways.

So I don't know if any other INFPs, NFs, or even Fs, get this feeling of not just being sympathetic, but letting your emotions gain complete control over your actions, even if they are negative..and not saying that we go out and hurt people if we are mad..but you get the point.

[heart]

I never like conflict but life demands it, so what is a person to do? Ignore truth and stay quiet or speak up and generate conflict? It all depends on if you want to be able to look yourself in the mirror I suppose.

[SquirrelTao]

In my limited, severely flawed observations, I've noticed that INFPs are true to type, just as everyone else, but the descriptions can be exaggerated.

I know you sandwich your opinion between a couple of caveats, but just for giggles, I'd like to voice what I think may be the problem with not just your observations but anybody's.

First, people who come to a forum like this are likely to be more attracted to and convinced by MBTI if they feel similar to their type description. Those that feel dissimilar are more likely to stay away.

Second, when people here in these forums are exposed to others' expectations of their type behavior, they are more likely to oblige by living up to the expectations.

Third, when they behave true to type, it's likely to be more noticed and remembered than when they do not.

In short, a similar process could happen as with racial stereotypes or gender roles. You have people playing roles according to their type, and you have other people stereotyping them, and these two processes feed each other.

I do identify a lot with the INFP description (and quite a bit but less so with the INTP description and INFJ one). But I also identify quite a bit with descriptions of Cancer, my sign.

[heart]

I don't find much to agree with in the Leo description for myself.

[Jack Flak]

I know you sandwich your opinion between a couple of caveats...
In short, I don't recollect if I've ever had you pegged as a type (Have I?), but I now pronounce you as INFP.

[placebo]

I relate to a lot of the type descriptions I read. But I think that many descriptions emphasize words like 'good', 'peaceful', 'conflict avoidant', 'loyal', 'sensitive', etc etc paints the picture in readers minds of fluffy kitties and angels, when it's all entirely possible that INFPs come off quite the opposite. All these traits are very internally directed and can't be seen from the outside all the time, so I suppose that's what happens when you come across a 'non-typical' INFP.

Anyway I don't actually think that makes any sense, but I agree with what you wrote OP. I HATE being clingy, and I hate being over emotional on the outside. Euggghhh...

And also everything about empathy and using logic as a result I agree with. I always felt uncomfortable when in my mind I would try to understand the 'culprit' or 'villain's side of the story, whilst everyone else sympathized with the 'victim' & condemned the perpetrator.

Anyway, I guess saying this as one INFP to another, this post means a lot of sense to me.

[milti girl]

I think it's true that the INFP empathises with both parties in a quarrel and thus becomes everyone's enemy. Sigh. And then, I find that having to talk logic to a simply unyielding F about why I empathise with the enemy party too can be torture. Then I realise what the INTP's life must be like, and feel glad I'm not one! :D

And I wouldn't deny the Calvin character sketch, not even the teddy bears and rainbows and fluffy kittens in the INFP portrayal, because aren't INFPs primarily dreamers? And yet they aren't too much into physical contact with other human beings, which makes them come across as cold and unreachable and distant.
(Ugh, I hate being hugged. Makes me feel suffocated. Soft, fluffy kittens and teddy bears I can hug. Smelly, sweaty human beings I HATE hugging!)

:smile: I'm sooo cliched an INFP I'm proud of me! And ooh yes, I'm Enneagram 4, with 9 following closely.

[Snail]

I think most, if not all, INFPs possess and use empathy a lot. However, in the case of some person beating a someone else to death, I thought empathy meant you understood/feel both the victim's position and the murderer's position. Instead of selective empathy (which I though was Fe's speciality used to keep the peace) where normally you only feel/care about the victim's position.

Actually, it is almost impossible for me to feel empathy for someone who lacks empathy unless the tables are turned and that person is being victimized. I can only empathize with victims. If a bully is being harmed, that person gains victim status, and that is part of the reason that I am not capable of revenge. I can't even imagine being able to cause intentional harm, hurting someone who is showing obvious signs of submission through tears, begging for mercy, or expressing fear in any way. The closest I can come to having empathy for a bully is when I try to imagine how that individual may have been victimized in the past. Then, in order to gain perspective, I will try to empathize with the idea of having been driven insane by past suffering.

I can't empathize with people who seem evil, because I fear that I will be contaminated by the process of absorbing them into myself. There are certain kinds of thoughts that I do not allow myself to have, because I think that it is evil even to imagine some things. To do so will weaken my conscience and create an inappropriate acceptance. That is the point where the block occurs. In order to empathize with an evil person, I would have to take in the evil thoughts that cause them to commit evil acts and imagine that such thoughts are my own until I actually feel like committing the acts, myself. It is much too dangerous to allow, because I have a lot of hurt that would explode out at the first possible opportunity if I were to let myself think such thoughts. I could easily empathize with the desire to do horrible things, but I would be damaged by it and might not be able to turn it off again. It isn't worth the risk, especially since no good can come out of my empathizing with evil.

The first empathy leads to the observer becoming emotionally neutral to the situation, since you've felt both positions, unless the observer is only in the presence of one of the people, in which case they normally side with them until they hear/think of the other sides.

No, if one were to empathize fully with both the victim and the attacker, one would be overwhelmed by the situation, and would feel it intensely from both sides. That is not the same as neutrality. Also, even if one has felt both positions, one will naturally have a preference for one of the positions, finding it more valid than the other. For instance, I can relate to feeling angry enough to want to commit the sinful act of forcing someone to empathize with my position by putting him in an equally vulnerable position, but I find this feeling to be morally inappropriate. Therefore, even if I could feel things from the perspective of the aggressor, that connection would have less value than being able to empathize with the victim.

Being neutral then leaves only logic and ethics, which, because of the lack of emotion for either side, make a cold impersonal judgement on the matter. (This empathy isn't used all the time, nor perfect)

This, along with Fi being so hidden and uncaring about things unrelated to its values, led to INFPs being cold I thought.

There is no neutrality, nor do I find myself capable of lacking emotion. Any judgment will naturally come from my internal value system, which is derived from a concern with the personal implications of decisions. If something doesn't relate to important values, I may be disinterested, but not cold. This mostly has to do with trivial things, like picking out what times to do things, or what shoes to wear. With any personal situation, I am almost certain to care about the outcome.


On top of this I thought that INFPs were the least practical type generally, meaning in this day and age they learn the hard and fast that details, logic and evidence are very important. This only serves to make them more cold and distant, and view logic and evidence as incredibly important, though their use won't be as natural as it is to T's.

Sure, we can be forced to behave unnaturally by the painful experience of living in a world that we aren't well-suited to deal with in our original form. A left-handed person can usually be forced to use his right hand. Likewise, we can figure out what others respect and pretend to be that. We can even get quite good at it.

With Fi's hidden/withdrawn nature, on top of the above, sensitivity and vulnerability soon leave when they learn to protect their emotions and feelings from the harsh world. By harsh I mean not what they were expecting, I don't mean they necessarily expect the world to be nice, supportive and cater to their needs or anything like that.

Desensitization isn't possible for all of us. I can't protect or turn down my emotions. I can attempt to hide them to make them more difficult targets, but the more pain I take in, the less it takes to hurt me the next time I experience a similar situation. It makes me more sensitive instead of less, like having a bruise that never heals and only gets worse every time something bumps it. No amount of pain can scar me into the shape of a T type. I will be destroyed long before that happens.

My personal experience has shown INFPs to definitely not be clingy, needy, vulnerable (on the outside), overly emotional (on the outside) and all that.

Yes, we can pretend not to be needy and vulnerable, but it will always be an act. It is inauthentic, but allows for survival. We are considered unacceptable and others usually don't respect any of the things that we are. Therefore, if we are to get by, we have to pretend that we aren't ourselves. If we are sincere, we are labeled weak, and many people wrongly feel justified in taking advantage of any who are perceived as weak.

Am I just being crazy about this or something? I thought INFPs were a hard nut to crack, and what goo comes out when you do is dependent almost entirely on the individual.

What you are describing as your interpretation of the hardened INFP is actually a corruption. Damaged INFPs sometimes take on T characteristics in order to protect themselves. In my opinion, authentic T types are much easier to deal with than INFPs who learn to act like Ts, because a damaged INFP can be ruthless with greater intensity. I consider such INFPs dangerous and possibly insane. The damaged version of any type can be difficult to deal with, but ruined INFPs may be some of the worst because they can be stubborn and vengeful, and are easily embittered. All of the best INFP qualities get replaced with near opposites so that a ruined INFP is no longer tolerant, merciful or forgiving, and eventually loses the capacity for empathy to the point where there is no internal block against cruelty, especially when such cruelty is rationalized for the sake of revenge.

I'm 4w5, if it makes a difference to anyone. My 4 and my 2 were tied, but my pathetic little 5 was still stronger than the 1 or the 3, which were both nearly non-existent. I had no 8 at all.

[erm]

Let's put it this way, and I don't want to narrow it down to just INFPs, but NFs and maybe even F's, abroad, but whenever I feel an emotion, anger, fear, anxiety, excitement, peacefulness, etc. I feel it very very strongly, even though it may be hard to tell. One example is if I get frustrated, then I get very very frustrated, even if my case is wrong. It's not just about feeling sympathetic, but letting your emotions control you, even in the bad ways.

So I don't know if any other INFPs, NFs, or even Fs, get this feeling of not just being sympathetic, but letting your emotions gain complete control over your actions, even if they are negative..and not saying that we go out and hurt people if we are mad..but you get the point.

I learnt that when my emotions are storming, I loose control and become likely to break one of my values. Thus I have trained and still am training myself to keep it inside and under control, so I can always act on my values successfully.

Like this:-

Economy of emotional expression - The more emotional people will express their feeling values, the colder I will get. Being overtly emotional feels kind of fake to me and I can´t go along.

What you are describing as your interpretation of the hardened INFP is actually a corruption. Damaged INFPs sometimes take on T characteristics in order to protect themselves. In my opinion, authentic T types are much easier to deal with than INFPs who learn to act like Ts, because a damaged INFP can be ruthless with greater intensity. I consider such INFPs dangerous and possibly insane. The damaged version of any type can be difficult to deal with, but ruined INFPs may be some of the worst because they can be stubborn and vengeful, and are easily embittered. All of the best INFP qualities get replaced with near opposites so that a ruined INFP is no longer tolerant, merciful or forgiving, and eventually loses the capacity for empathy to the point where there is no internal block against cruelty, especially when such cruelty is rationalized for the sake of revenge.

Speculation:-

I would actually turn that around on you. According to all the Fi and most the INFP descriptions they are very distanced and cold, only having a great capacity for caring if you are close to them. This is why I got so annoyed at some of the descriptions and a lot of people's views of them because they seem to forget what Jung and all the others said about them. Also the descriptions seem to emphasise the caring part so the average reader overlooks the "can be caring if" part.

As for the emotional neutrality, I meant a net neutrality. Yes the empathy is intense, but it is in conflict as it realises there are two people in the scenario and in that particular case someone would be hurt no matter what action you take. I myself always realised that the murderer is just doing what their desires are pushing them towards, like myself and everyone else.

The empathy takes on a sort of psychiatrist role, caring for both the murderer and the victim, as well as any other views regarding the situation that on can think of. All-embracing is definitely a good word to describe it. I find it hard to demonize someone, no matter their actions and views, and always view them as another person with differing viewpoints. In fact, I often find myself regarding non-human objects as human, because my empathy tries to relate to everything I think of.

This empathy means they can agree with any point of view presented to them, especially if they can't perceive others at that point in time. This can lead to them being quite fickle.

I thought this was an INFP strength, seeing as how it is what helps them see all sides to a conflict. This, I thought, meant INFPs were quite naturally open minded, refusing to close off sides and always feeling the pain no matter what decision they make. However, this empathy doesn't always function like this, that would be overwhelming, so this leads to even more distance and coldness as they learn to cope with having such a spectrum of views and switch it off on unimportant decisions (hence not caring about them).

As for being needy and vulnerable. I thought most INFPs would realise how ineffective this is, and how difficult moving towards an ideal self is if one is needy and vulnerable. I assumed it was only human to discard these traits, or at least attempt to do so, unless one has been extremely sheltered and never seen the disadvantage to having them. Like I said, it all comes out like a flood gate to those they are close to, possibly because they guard their feelings stronger than any other type and as it is not possible to truly discard them, only control when and where they are showing (normally on the inside).

Strong dislike for conflict: Um, no. I don't like conflict with myself and someone I am uncomfortable with/don't know but I am notorious for arguing with my friends about their beliefs and calling them out when they are inconsistent...I even secretly enjoy getting into conflicts with friends about things because after it is over we become closer as friends.

I also like that, and getting into insult matches with them as well. However, by conflict I meant genuine external and all internal conflict.

Basically this:-

Inner harmony explains to me why I sometimes like to start conflicts. The outer harmony isn´t really important to me, but inside I need to be in harmony. If I´m not sure about someone´s motives or my values get attacked I will bring my inner conflict outside. By starting a conflict with someone I try to gain inner harmony.

EDIT: I suppose I should point out I'm not saying INFPs in general support murder or anything! I'm saying their ethics, which develop outside of empathy, based on internal feelings, take control and normally side with the victim.

[nolla]

Wow, Snail, that was one helluva post! That is about everything I could have said about this matter (after two weeks of contemplation)... There's one thing I feel slightly different about, though.

In order to empathize with an evil person, I would have to take in the evil thoughts that cause them to commit evil acts and imagine that such thoughts are my own until I actually feel like committing the acts, myself.

What I feel for attackers is partly pity for their lives will get very intolerable if they aren't that already. I've seen some basically good but confused people turn into corpses full of hate, and it isn't pretty. On the other hand I hope they will get better, but the fact they might be just fine, and nice people after ten years of growing up, doesn't erase the fact that they are assholes now and should be punished. I don't know if this is exactly what one could call empathy, but I know that the only thing stopping me from getting back to them is self-preservation, fear that is.

[nolla]

I would actually turn that around on you. According to all the Fi and most the INFP descriptions they are very distanced and cold, only having a great capacity for caring if you are close to them. This is why I got so annoyed at some of the descriptions and a lot of people's views of them because they seem to forget what Jung and all the others said about them. Also the descriptions seem to emphasise the caring part so the average reader overlooks the "can be caring if" part.


Yeah, you are correct on this point. For me it goes like, the people who have learned to appreciate me usually go through a period when they are somehow "forced" to be around me. I think this has to do with my cold-ish outside, even though I can't really recognize it myself... Anyhow, the people will probably like me only after seeing some hint of the inside.

As for being needy and vulnerable. I thought most INFPs would realise how ineffective this is, and how difficult moving towards an ideal self is if one is needy and vulnerable. I assumed it was only human to discard these traits, or at least attempt to do so, unless one has been extremely sheltered and never seen the disadvantage to having them. Like I said, it all comes out like a flood gate to those they are close to, possibly because they guard their feelings stronger than any other type and as it is not possible to truly discard them, only control when and where they are showing (normally on the inside).


This is a good reason to select carefully the persons to be needy about.

[erm]

A question to ask is; Are the INFPgc INFPs the majority or the minority? I know almost for a fact that INTPc INTPs are the minority so it wouldn't surprise me if the same were true of INFPgc INFPs.

Yeah, you are correct on this point. For me it goes like, the people who have learned to appreciate me usually go through a period when they are somehow "forced" to be around me. I think this has to do with my cold-ish outside, even though I can't really recognize it myself... Anyhow, the people will probably like me only after seeing some hint of the inside.

I suppose if sitting with people who have no friends because I didn't either means being forced with them, then the same is true of me! Made my closest friends that way back in school.

I think a lot of descriptions of Fi say they don't necessarily hide behind a cold expression (poker face). It can be a childish mask or something, it just doesn't represent what's going on inside.

I think childish mask is given as the most common example.

[Delphyne]

I like to differentiate between showing your emotions and expressing your feeling values. If someone is happy and laughs out loud or if someone is throwing a tantrum, it doesn´t feel fake, because their behaviour is ruled by their emotions. Apart from actually having emotions you can also use feelings as some kind of language. These are based on your values. Especially Fe uses their feeling expressions a good deal to communicate their values. There are appropriate and inappropriate situations to weep or to laugh and special ways to show how much you respect, like or love someone. Fi is also expressing their values through feelings, but it´s much more subdued and Fi ascribes much more importance to little gestures.

I learnt that when my emotions are storming, I loose control and become likely to break one of my values. Thus I have trained and still am training myself to keep it inside and under control, so I can always act on my values successfully.

Yes, I also hurt people if I´m ranging and feel sorry afterwards. That´s one reason why I try to control my emotions, but the more I suppress them the more likely I will explode after a while.

A question to ask is; Are the INFPgc INFPs the majority or the minority? I know almost for a fact that INTPc INTPs are the minority so it wouldn't surprise me if the same were true of INFPgc INFPs.
What does gc and c stand for?

[disregard]

INFPgc (http://infp.globalchatter.com/messageboard) & INTPc (http://www.intpcentral.com/forums)

[Delphyne]

I'm 4w5, if it makes a difference to anyone. My 4 and my 2 were tied, but my pathetic little 5 was still stronger than the 1 or the 3, which were both nearly non-existent. I had no 8 at all.

Are you sure about being a 4w5 or are you just talking about your test results? What you describe about empathizing with evil is in some ways contrary to 4w5, which has a preference for "dark emotions" and likes to foster them.

[Delphyne]

Thanks, Disregard. Are those INFPgc some special kind of INFPs? How do they differ from the other INFPs?

[disregard]

Every place has a unique atmosphere which will affect how the people conduct themselves.

Those INFPs are no different than these INFPs, but their forum behavior may differ. I do not think the INFPgc atmosphere is representative of what INFPs are like. It's a bit coddling.

[GZA]

I like MBTIc because it isn't biased. An INFP forum or an INTJ forum will result in all the members doing there best to be as INFP or INTJ as possible, and the impression you get of people is skewed. It's good here because not everyone even beleives in MBTI in the first place.

[quietmusician]

As I read more on the types I become more and more skeptical. A lot of things I can understand, but to try and categorize everyone and shove them into a box? I think MBTI does an okay job at outlining several branches of personalities, but I don't think anyone can pick a type and say that it's them to a 'T'. I'm sure there are a lot of gray areas in between.

[sonata]

An INFP forum or an INTJ forum will result in all the members doing there best to be as INFP or INTJ as possible, and the impression you get of people is skewed.

YES. Absolutely agreed. I hate that. :yes:

[Cameigons]

Yes, I could say I'm atypical too, or at least I dislike feeling trapped inside this "personality box". But if I was forced to pick one of 16 boxes, that one I would feel less uncomfortable would still be the INFP box.

I'm not a firm MBTI "believer" either. If anything, I stick with Jung's position on the matter, as he would be against such classification system.

[OneWithSoul]

Going along with the non"typical" INFPs, I think a lot of people think of us as "peaceful", passive, not willing to fight, calm, and all these great things, but the truth is not necessarily that. I'm not willing to be a follower, but I will stand up and fight for my values, like my family, and the people I love. At any given second, I'd be willing to fight to the death for loved ones, and I'm not exagerating. It's a classic F trait..making decisions off of values. That being said, we aren't these peaceful, calm, quiet, harmonious little creatures..

[Jack Flak]

Going along with the non"typical" INFPs, I think a lot of people think of us as "peaceful", passive, not willing to fight, calm, and all these great things, but the truth is not necessarily that. I'm not willing to be a follower, but I will stand up and fight for my values, like my family, and the people I love. At any given second, I'd be willing to fight to the death for loved ones, and I'm not exagerating. It's a classic F trait..making decisions off of values. That being said, we aren't these peaceful, calm, quiet, harmonious little creatures..
Oh god...Good INFP friend of mine, I (+ an INFP and INTP...) would give him so much shit. He's the kind of guy who will hardly tell you his political opinion even if you directly ask for it, but he has the "Bush Sucks" calendars and some great t-shirt graphics. Like: A big peace symbol in which the two diagonals are halves of a broken rifle. We call it the "Break All Guns" shirt. And the shirt with two doves and an olive branch I guess in their mouths, with "PEACE" underneath. Of course we'd remind him that the birds are fighting over the branch, and are prepared to kill to win.

[placebo]

Isn't a typical INFP one that thinks he/she is non-typical?

[disregard]

zing

[FireyPheonix]

Isn't a typical INFP one that thinks he/she is non-typical?
LOL!

[FireyPheonix]

I'm glad the OP posted this.
Like most people here, I think I tend to be a lot darker than some of the INFP type descriptions would have you believe.
I'm sensitive, most definitely, but truth be told, people would have trouble picking it.
Hard to pin down IRL, would describe me best, and I'm a tempermental b!@*%, as well. Especially if I dislike some one. I also cut off people dead, if they have annoyed/hurt me. Although this is harder to do if I had been close with them.
I come across warm, to a certain point, but nobody gets too close, unless I let them. Never without my permission. I'm kinda detached as well.