You think we have it bad, you should see what people say about SJ's or sensors in general.

 

hmm I'm yet to see that, but I'll take your word for it

 

People stereotype and focus on the negative traits. Instead of compassionate souls, they may interpret us as over emotional doormats. They might focus on our angst and depression rather than our creativity. Maybe they had a bad experience with one of us, or maybe that's just the nature of the Internet.

 

A little advice, don't browse the main MBTI forum... it's a shitfest full of stereotypes and false information. You'll be a lot happier, trust me.

 

Yeah I would've guessed tbh

 

Because INFPs are too lazy to get any work done without being commanded to. So are INTPs, but their intelligence is more valuable to society than INFPs' kindness.

 

I am no less intelligent than any INTP, lazy or not.
Being a feeler instead of a thinker doesn't imply unintelligence.

 

I wouldn't really call it laziness, or at least in my case. If I don't see any value in doing something or it contradicts my beliefs, I'm simply not going to do it

 

I don't hate them.
I've met a lot of INFPs who are super dogmatic and even fanatical about their chosen causes, disagreeable, and self centered. Scroll Tumblr or something for a few minutes and you'll see what I mean.

But I've also known an INFP who talked someone out of suicide. Another who is one of the funniest people I've ever met. Any type is going to have people who are awesome and people who are not so awesome.

Don't beat yourself up over what other people say about your type.

 

I've met a lot of INFPs who are super dogmatic and even fanatical about their chosen causes, disagreeable, and self centered. Scroll Tumblr or something for a few minutes and you'll see what I mean.

The people who probably hate, dislike, are just dont like being around INFPs probably have the reasoning in the quote, and they are not wrong for feeling or thinking that way. Yes INFPs are compassionate but they are also rigid in their morals and have a hard time allowing others to have the freedom to express their individual morals that may go against the morals of INFP. Also from what I have seen it is usually the INFPs eho go around painting everyone as good or evil, and this is obviously going to make people not want to be around people like you if youre going around judging them based off of your subjective morals which differ amongst INFPs themselves. If INFPs would learn to live with their morals without imposing onto the livlihood of others then those people who dislike INFPs may change their outlook on them.

 

INFPs are over-represented on this forum. So if people run into a jerk, the chances are much higher that they are an INFP here than anywhere else.

 

People fear what they don't understand.

 

We definitely aren't the most hated type. I think INFPs in general can get along with most anyone because of our avoidance of conflict. I will say that INFPs are probably among the most underestimated or undervalued.

 

No doubt there have been tons of rude, typist, inappropriate posts in the INFP forum over the years. However, I've seen other types bashed also, when I venture out of this forum. That's not at all what The Myers Briggs Foundation intended with their work. I think once you slap a label on yourself, the Troll Vultures start their circling.

 

 

We aren't, some of us just assume that because we a prone to low self esteem or are sensitive about judgments. :wink:

 

I will not judge you by your type; I will judge you by how you treat other people. Western culture values individualism, liberty, intellect and productivity above all else. Those with highly empathic natures are therefore devalued and discarded by the elitists among other types.

I happen to see INFPs as very beautiful, creative people in the whole. S-types, in the whole, drive my crazy, but I don't hate them. There are people within that category who have been some of my closest companions.

Any type can turn bad. Any type has its downsides. Just don't take in the negativity.

 

That's a bold statement if not inaccurate. But here's the thing...you should listen to Kito. If you go around looking for something, you'll find it. Also, INFP, being one of the most complex personality type the risk of feeling misunderstood is unfortunately high. You feel that way maybe because being an 'idealist', the standards that you set are very high and when other types couldn't quite measure up they get frustrated and wrongly blame you. But nothing could be further from the truth about INFP being the "most hated" type.

 

Their self-righteousness can get annoying, but I don't hate INFP's- I actually enjoy their company. Most of the ones I know are emotionally mature, intelligent, creative, and very good confidants. They're the kind of people you never feel judged around (unless there's an inferior Te meltdown).

 

I will give a very Te answer to that.

The world is dominated by ESTJs, the law is made by ESTJs, the social expectations are led by ESTJs. The totally opposite of an INFP, also known as their shadow process. So I think not only we conflict the world population greatly but we also represent what people don't like or fear about themselves. The part they don't want to face with.

lol I do actually agree with @Tetsuo Shima, it is a correct statement and blunt observation I can approve being in a very INTP field. My IQ says I am a genius but really that doesn't mean much. INTP's intelligence is a logic based one so it -is- more valued in the society (emphasis on -society- doesn't mean it is ideal). Even when my prof says I am quick and was actually stunned by my performance at a highly theoretical course when I apologize telling him I didn't make the course a priority because I didn't have time (I actually thought he was unhappy with the grade but turns out I got a higher one than most INTPs) However they are the ones that are able to complete work and handle developing new methods easily and without complaining about long hours of work. The whole software industry is almost entirely for and by INTPs. Also her reference is right about being lazy too, socionics reference to Si of an INFP

"can be prone to laziness and always seek the most convenient way in doing things. Moreover, rather than prioritizing their tasks based on their level of urgency or/and importance, they prefer to complete the tasks based on their liking and at their own pace. When they are preoccupied with a hobby, they tend to lose track of time and can be late with their appointments with others. As a result, they don't really have good time management skills."

Also meaning that we prefer to feel good or be healthy rather than being a workaholic, always putting priorities about our -comfort- first such as I will start studying after I make myself comfortable with some ice cream and a movie, I will do this later motto. I know that I would never lose my sleep even if I had not studied for an exam. I actually used to tell people it makes more sense to sleep instead of studying before an exam lol.

Also a personal observation, INTPs spend far less time with existential crisis and they don't bring their personal emotional life or whatever is bringing them down at work. When they are stressed though, they can become a mess as well.

So all in all, it is a matter of perspective, if we go by rules of others and by that I mean opposites, naturally we won't match up and since we are the most prone to be misunderstood or not understood people, it does not work the other way. They value-judge on what is effective and have a visible outcome.

I say all the time, I think we are the type that self-evaluate so much, are self-aware that we -feed- this kind of thinking

 

So you're telling me that morals are subjective? So if I see somebody taking advantage of someone else, because the person that's taking advantage of the other person sees nothing wrong, it is ok?

I'm sorry but your concept of subjective morals doesn't make sense to me

 

If you're willing to listen and to understand then I am willing to explain. This is the definition of subjective:

subjective Translate Button
[suh b-jek-tiv]
adjective
1.
existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective ).

And this is a definition of objective:

ob·jec·tive
əbˈjektiv/Submit
adjective
1.
(of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.

As you can see what is objective has to do with whether it is a fact or not, and in no way can it be influenced by personal feelings or opinions. You can also see that what makes something subjective is how a person feels or thinks about events or facts.

So lets take your example and break it down by utilizing these definitions. If you and I come across somebody taking advantage of another, then the facts are that one person is taking advantage over another. This fact isnt subject ti change, and no matter who looks at the situation they will all see a person taking advantage of another person. Now what is subjective is how you feel or think about the facts. If you state that what the person is doing is wrong then you have unfortunately delved into the territory of subjectivity, because facts are not right or wrong, they are objective in the furthest way possible.

Its how you judge the facts or events that is subjective, and to go a little further it is the act of "judging" that is subjective because judgements do not exist outside the opinions and feelings of people. If all feelings and opinions were eradicated then these judgements would cease to exist therefore proving that they are not objective, and are solely subjective. Even the fact that some people will disagree with your moral outlook because of their individual moral outlook is more proof that morals cant be found outside of the feelings and opinions of people.

Now please do not misunderstand me, Im not saying that morals should be eradicated and nobody should have them or share them because they are subjective. On the contrary I understand that morals have a place in human relations and society itself but I also understand the dangers that some individuals morals can have on human relations and society. Just because someone feels a certain way, or has an opinion on something, doesnt make their feelings or opinions universally valid, and this is a problem that I notice some INFPs have. They get so lost in their feelings and opinions that it literally becomes such a reality for them that they have hard time conceiving of an opposing world view without attacking it or being repelled away from it.

Now as to wehter its ok or not that the person is being taken advantage of, well this too is subjective because the idea of deciding whether a fact of an event is "ok" or not is essentially a judgement itself, and not one that would exist if I took away your abikity to have an opinion or feelings on the matter. We could both view the event and have two different moral opinions on the matter, you can call it evil and wrong while I can state that the person deserved it. Bith of our opinions/judgements though would be solely that, an opinion/judgement and nothing more or less.

 

While we're bringing up IQ tests, here's a fun research statistic: Half of all intellectually-gifted adolescents are xNxP or INTJ. Psychological types of academically gifted adolescents: EBSCOhost

Also, this is the LEGITIMATE IQ test scores taken, the Weschler Adult Intelligence Scale IV. I remember asking an INFP friend of mine to answer one of the questions from the test- it was a very high level abstraction part. "How are these two similar: Friend and Enemy?" "They're intimate." He answered it within the specific time frame of the test and got a correct answer. He may have focused on the feelings aspect, but he clearly had strong abstract reasoning. I don't doubt for a second that INFP's are intelligent.

 

@The Incandescent Abyss To be honest your observation sounds more like Fe-Si types and I am not saying this to devalue them but I have yet to see INFPs pushing their moral agendas down other's throats. We do take stance and we are firm on the ground but actively running a propaganda is just not us and this is not because I take it as criticism and am arguing but it simply is false observation. You really get to see that part of an INFP after long interaction with them or when you hit a nerve and even then it is a matter of -staying firm with our stance- not pushing it on others. Some people however, take this as a personal attack, I know a friend of mine does, he can not change my view and since it opposes his, he takes it as criticism and an attack. He is the one that can not live and let live opposing ideas.
@Charl D. Source is right, the one thing about INFPs is that we are judged tremendously without given any credit to our dominant function. Jung says introverted and well developed (dom) functions are the most likely to be able to reach a -universal truth- and that is what we do, when you say subjective morals you put it in a wrong way @The Incandescent Abyss, any introverted function is subjective and like I said only the introverted - dom functions are able to reach the ultimate truth. Most of an INFP's morals are based on universal grounds, really, that is why an INFP is more likely to point out the wrong when -everyone- is wrong. As any other well developed introverted function, being less prone to your immediate environment -does help- reaching a universal value. Get your facts right ;D

 

@The Incandescent Abyss To be honest your observation sounds more like Fe-Si types and I am not saying this to devalue them but I have yet to see INFPs pushing their moral agendas down other's throats. We do take stance and we are firm on the ground but actively running a propaganda is just not us and this is not because I take it as criticism and am arguing but it simply is false observation. You really get to see that part of an INFP after long interaction with them or when you hit a nerve and even then it is a matter of -staying firm with our stance- not pushing it on others. Some people however, take this as a personal attack, I know a friend of mine does, he can not change my view and since it opposes his, he takes it as criticism and an attack. He is the one that can not live and let live opposing ideas.

I too have come across many dogmatic Fe-Si users but the difference between them and INFPS are that the Fe-Si user will change their morals based on majority opinion whereas the infp will strictly and rigidly stick to their morals for the long run. As long as you control the majority opinion you pretty much control what morals an Fe-Si users hold, but an INFP will in no way change their morals (well it would be extremely difficult to do I should say). This isnt really a problem if the INFP doesnt try to impose their morals on to others but many INFPs have a specific issue or group of issues that they will want to change based on morals at the expense of the well being of others because they feel in their heart that they are right and that this should be done.

@Charl D. Source is right, the one thing about INFPs is that we are judged tremendously without given any credit to our dominant function. Jung says introverted and well developed (dom) functions are the most likely to be able to reach a -universal truth- and that is what we do, when you say subjective morals you put it in a wrong way @The Incandescent Abyss, any introverted function is subjective and like I said only the introverted - dom functions are able to reach the ultimate truth. Most of an INFP's morals are based on universal grounds, really, that is why an INFP is more likely to point out the wrong when -everyone- is wrong. As any other well developed introverted function, being less prone to your immediate environment -does help- reaching a universal value. Get your facts right ;D

I never stated that other introverted functions weren't subjective, nor did I state that that INFPs are the only subjective type. Trust me I understand, and have written much on it, that Si/Ti/Fi/Ni are all subjective in their own right but the topic at hand is about INFPs specifically, so I wanted to keep my part in the discussion on INFPs specifically.

Also just because introverted functions may be more likely to find universal truths does not mean that they are the only ones who can do it, nor does it mean that it is impossible for them to be wrong. There are many INFPs who disagree with each other on the case of morals, so whose to say one infp is more right than another? Just your thought process of thinking everyone is wrong but you may speak much more volumes in favor of my first post than I think you are aware of.

 

I love INFPs. My best friend is one. Perhaps other types are just jealous that your type is more likely to do the right thing no matter what... Perhaps

 

@The Incandescent Abyss please refer to my post and try to understand that what -seems- subjective to you is not what a subjective function means.

 

I presented definitions to exempt myself from holding an opinion on what is subjective or not. These arent my beliefs, they are definitions that Im using to explain the differences between objectivity and subjectivity. It really doesnt matter how I feel or what opinion I hold on the definitions, all that matters is that these are the definitions and what falls under them are essentially subsets of them. Im also pretty sure I never brought up anything about subjective functions, I as of now have only responded to you about the subjectivity of all introverted functions, but other than that I have not once talked about subjective functions, instead my focus was on the subjectivity of morals which I am sure that they arent exclusive INFPs themselves.

 

......

 

I think male INFPs are hated, while female INFPs are welcomed. Vice versa with NTs.

 

Haha maybe she just wants to be challenged and -objectively- argue the matter and yes in her mind -educate- or give perspective to others, why are you bothered she is stating opinions and discussing it with others? Her morals to be honest are not to limit freedom of others but remove privileges although it could be discussed. Why do you prefer them to be silenced? She is not the one that pushes changes, your constitution and laws are doing this, maybe even whoever has power and money and influence while you are so alarmed because of an opinionated person on facebook lol. That does sound like an INFP, I will give you that, although my INTJ friends are much more hardcore about this and I did think one of them could be INFP before I learnt she is INTJ. Anyhow yes I am opinionated too and people hate that, people love me a lot more when I post funny or mainstream stuff yet something about social media has allure to state opinions, it just makes it so easy

 

Why do you think it bothers me? I dont think I ever stated that her behaviours and actions bothered me, I was asked to provide an example and thats what I did. I didnt know that by providing an example would mean I was bothered by the example that I presented. To be frank, I have no emotional disposition towards how she conducts herself, I was only presenting an anecdotal example that was the first to come to my mind, maybe because she is the most prevalent on my facebook doing what it is that I was asked to provide an example for. Youve done this a few times so far in this discussion, where you assume that I hold some emotional disposition towards something I said, like how you stated that I want to change how INFPs are which that couldnt be further from truth. I have opinions but my opinions are strictly that, just an opinion based off of personal experiences, this does not mean that I have emotional relationship with my opinions or the examples I provide when Im asked to provide them

 

" aspects of reality that are not subject to change based on the feelings and opinions of people, and when I speak of subjectivity I am speaking of those aspects if reality that are subject to change or based upon the feelings and opinions of others."

This is more of a Te vs. Ti matter, we -are- actually objective logic preferers as opposed to a tertiary Ti - subjective- logic user. We are able to separate reality from fiction, we may still chose the way we feel how things should be.

Take your example, compensation for black is not objectively wrong considering that many countries including USA has profited off slave labor when its foundations were implemented and these people were not given rights or properties, after on, lived in segregation so an average citizen to have financial security enough to get the education they want etc. is far less possible with no wealthy gained from his extended / earlier family. So although both are given equal opportunities today, there is injustice and there will ever be. Taking this and putting on spotlight while there are white families in the same condition though is far less than ideal or compassionate of course and if she has written -white men -are- evil- precisely (although I doubt anyone would), yea well she is wrong lol but maybe she was referring to majority of politicians and %1 holders or in a historical perspective rather than me, you or her bf or neighbors.

To be honest I don't know who is more offended in this case. You feeling this way and threatened by her because she is opinionated or her by being expected to keep all her opinions to herself. Like I said, focus should be on Tes in offices discussing rather the matters ;D


edit: alright alright, I use -we- to loosely refer to you and your environment that is under her behavior, okay? No need to get stuck on that. By stating what you think of the matter though, you are not absolutely abstracting yourself from the picture like this ". Also from what I have seen it is usually the INFPs eho go around painting everyone as good or evil, and this is obviously going to make people not want to be around people like you if youre going around judging them based off of your subjective morals which differ amongst INFPs themselves. If INFPs would learn to live with their morals without imposing onto the livlihood of others then those people who dislike INFPs may change their outlook on them."

You think this is the reason and you justify it by your -subjective morality- definition, so it still hints a personal opinion and I understand you just wanted to share what you observe through your lens rather than making it a you vs. me case

 

" aspects of reality that are not subject to change based on the feelings and opinions of people, and when I speak of subjectivity I am speaking of those aspects if reality that are subject to change or based upon the feelings and opinions of others."

This is more of a Te vs. Ti matter, we -are- actually objective logic preferers as opposed to a tertiary Ti - subjective- logic user. We are able to separate reality from fiction, we may still chose the way we feel how things should be.

Take your example, compensation for black is not objectively wrong considering that many countries including USA has profited off slave labor when its foundations were implemented and these people were not given rights or properties, after on, lived in segregation so an average citizen to have financial security enough to get the education they want etc. is far less possible with no wealthy gained from his extended / earlier family. So although both are given equal opportunities today, there is injustice and there will ever be. Taking this and putting on spotlight while there are white families in the same condition though is far less than ideal or compassionate of course and she has written -white men -are- evil- precisely, yea well she is wrong lol but maybe she was referring to majority of politicians and %1 holders or in a historical perspective

To be honest I don't know who is more offended in this case. You feeling this way and threatened by her because she is opinionated or her by being expected to keep all her opinions to herself. Like I said, focus should be on Tes in offices discussing rather the matters ;D

Once again I ask, how am I offended and/or threatened by her? Im positive that I never gave my opinion on whether what she is doing is right or wrong, I simply used her as an example because she was the first person to come to mind. Personally I dont care what she does as long as she doesnt impose onto others her morals in a way that could harm the well being of another. As long as she is not harming others, then it is of no concern to me.

As to which white men she thinks are evil, well im positive that she doesnt think her present boyfriend along with her recent ex are evil, so I agree that she doesnt honestly believe that all white men are evil, but she has called many white men evil who didnt agree with her worldview or opinions, and these men werent politicians or part of the 1%. I dont doubt that white male politicians and the white males part of the 1% are considered evil by her also, especially since she has stated such more than enough times.

As to the definitions being more Te vs Ti oriented, I dont agree. The focus is on morals, not functions, being subject to change based on feelings and opinions of others, and this is what makes morals malleable and not a universal truth prevalent among all humans at all times.

 

@Tetsuo Shima

Words are not the only means with which we transfer information In fact: some painters told us more than many a scientist without writing down a single word.

@nichya Measuring intelligence is certainly difficult. I honestly don't know why we even attempt to do so. According to tests my IQ is in the 140s. Ehmm. So? Why is this useful info? (Before someone asks 'why did you take the test then? Answer: therapy). And. Why did I fail the theoretical part of my driving exam the first time and why did Pete with an IQ of a 100 nailed it?

SO yeah, you are correct with that. IQ test => man made. Everything that is man made => biased/colored/subjective to a degree.

 

@Tetsuo Shima

Words are not the only means with which we transfer information In fact: some painters told us more than many a scientist without writing down a single word.

I'm not good at drawing.