Personality Cafe banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
237 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
For example you can't just go around saying I have known several passive-aggressive INFPs and I have had bad experiences with INFPs so the passive-aggressive people that I meet must be INFPs. I don't believe this about INFPs at all but I have seen this a lot on personality forums (on this forum too) when people derive misinformed, naive conclusions about people like that using MBTI.

Thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,151 Posts
Indeed.

MB is a labeling system of cognition, not of behavior. Websites have a bad habit of oversimplifying the system, to the point of using washed out behavioral indicators as examples of type. While I wouldn't argue there are possibly tendencies, it's not the end all of type.

Tests are the worst culprit watering down the system to essentially "are you nice or are you logical" meaningless questions.

Many different types can come to the same conclusion taking different paths. Functions aren't tools that build the same end product, they are just perspectives, lenses so to speak, of your world view. I don't use Fi when pondering a moral delimma, I have a primary Fi worldview in which I evaluate the benefits of the world around considering the point of view of subject in relation to object. It is just how I see things, being domFi.

A test may ask a question like "I consider the feelings of others" There's no context. Which others and what am I considering? Not to mention it's so obviously a T or F question (because T never think about other people apparently) that I can't even answer the question without bias.

It's why they they act the way they do, not what they do.
 

·
Subterranean Homesick Alien
Joined
·
11,928 Posts
Not that it's very important or that it has anything to do with the conversation, but can you, Psilo(or anyone who might be able to), elaborate on this:

I have a primary Fi worldview in which I evaluate the benefits of the world around considering the point of view of subject in relation to object.
?
 

·
MOTM Jan 2012
Joined
·
6,514 Posts
The subject being the person using Fi and the object being a person, thing, event, etc. separate from the subject...at least that's how I interpreted it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,151 Posts
The subject being the person using Fi and the object being a person, thing, event, etc. separate from the subject...at least that's how I interpreted it.
Sort of.

Sorry, I just wanted something streamline to say since I wasn't focusing on it in my post.

I think that 'values' oversimplify what feeling aims for, and I think that most people have a value system. The difference is when I speak of Fi, the way I see it, is that it's an evaluating, empathizing function. (Contrast: thinking effectively is a systemizing, logical function) Fi views the world by evaluating and empathizing based on the internal of human thinking, feeling, and emotion. The information most readily used by an domFi is what that person understands best, the subjective.

I can tie it in with the original point. I don't use domFi when evaluating, I see the world in domFi. That is, I constantly am observing myself and my workings. Because this is so amplified from my perspective, it seems inherent to me to base decisions from that standpoint either towards my feelings or another person's.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,860 Posts
For example you can't just go around saying I have known several passive-aggressive INFPs and I have had bad experiences with INFPs so the passive-aggressive people that I meet must be INFPs. I don't believe this about INFPs at all but I have seen this a lot on personality forums (on this forum too) when people derive misinformed, naive conclusions about people like that using MBTI.

Thoughts?
You are correct. It's sometimes nicer to be able to label something than to have to examine your own limitations and assumptions.

How do you see this working as an excuse for people's own bad behavior? What I mean is, how do you see it when people say, "I am [tyoe], so I always do this"?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
183 Posts
How do you see this working as an excuse for people's own bad behavior? What I mean is, how do you see it when people say, "I am [tyoe], so I always do this"?
self-mutilating...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
237 Posts
Discussion Starter #9 (Edited)
You are correct. It's sometimes nicer to be able to label something than to have to examine your own limitations and assumptions.

How do you see this working as an excuse for people's own bad behavior? What I mean is, how do you see it when people say, "I am [tyoe], so I always do this"?
Hmmm, good question. I see it as a crutch. "Ohhh, this type fits me so well and the [bad behavior] is my natural tendency so why do I have to change my [bad behavior] to suit other people? Why can't they just accept me for who I am?". It kind of reminds me a little of the naturalistic fallacy. If something is natural, it must be good. So in MBTI terms, it seems like some people think, "These behaviors are part of my natural tendencies, so they must not be THAT bad".

Another possibility could be the "group mentality" thinking. If you are constantly around the same types of people, then you can begin to think, "I do behavior X and 10 other people of the same type engage in the same behavior so if I do it and many other people do it, we must be in the right or we would all look idiotic or if many people engage in behavior X but you don't, you might get a heightened sense that something could be wrong with you. You can sometimes see this if you go to a predominantly [type] forum and maybe a little potentially on the PerC type subforums.

A third possibility could be that some people have such an urge to fit in the box that they will go to extreme lengths to come off as stereotypical poster child of their respective types.

Fourth, some people might do it as a way of getting under people's skin and for the attention.

Fifth, some people may get too stuck into thinking in terms of MBTI, that they can sometimes forget that other outside factors affect how we perceive and react to the world like emotional trauma, economic class, how you are received by your peers, etc.

Sixth, they might potentially equate certain behaviors with certain motives, beliefs, and, or values.

Seventh, some people genuinely might not consider what you think is bad behavior to be bad behavior and use their type as a bogus excuse to engage in behavior that they don't want to explain to others extensively. In their own perspective, they could see the behavior as normal and acceptable. Simply put, differences in values and opinions.

DISCLAIMER: I don't necessarily believe in all of these possibilities... I was just pondering all the reasons that I could think of.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top