INTP/INFJ derailment discussion

slant said:
I'm still not sure I understand what you're distinguishing.

(Warning, graphic)
I once read about HiFi murders that happened here in Utah... They made the hostages drink bleach and described the blood and blisters that happen when you do that. They shot then, too. But this one guy just wouldn't die. So to kill him, they took a ballpoint pin and smashed it into his ear canal by stomping on his head until it came out of his cheek. I guess it was the straw that broke the camel's back. I was fine until I read the ballpoint pen thing; to this day, if I think about it, I feel upset. That guy was the only guy who survived the incident and he watched a 16 year old get raped in front of him and his son tortured to death.

So you're saying the difference between feelers and thinkers is that a feelers will feel negative imagining these things, and a thinker can imagine these things happening but feel fine emotionally?

Isn't that like... disassociation?
Click to expand...

I don't know a lot about disassociation, but I'll try to explain differently.
Let's say there are 2 employees working in your brain. Let's call them Bill and Chester.
Bill's job is take the incoming information and carry it to the conscious mind.
Chester's job is to read the information, determine which emotion is associated with it, and go to the emotion control center and pull the right levers to reproduce that emotion in yourself.

When I read what you wrote, about that incident, Bill takes it to my conscious mind, where I process it and understand why it's bad. I also can imagine feeling those kind of very physical pains, and it's unpleasant, but I don't think that's on the level of emotions, that's more in the realm of physical sensations. But Chester did nothing with that information, so I don't feel upset in a "if I put my hand on the guy who did this I'll fuck him up" way. I don't know if that's what you meant by "upset", or if you meant being upset because of the physical pains this incident implies.

Now, had I been in that store, Chester would have probably been very busy.

slant said:
When I was disassociated I never felt anything. I probably could have even hurt people and felt nothing. I'm just very confused as to how this is different than disassociation.
Click to expand...

So you had no Chester at all? I don't think I ever felt like this, I can't get rid of emotions like that, they still control what I can and cannot do, even if I had a rational intention to do it.

Am I making sense to anyone in this thread? :laughing:
 
java said:
I don't know a lot about disassociation, but I'll try to explain differently.
Let's say there are 2 employees working in your brain. Let's call them Bill and Chester.
Bill's job is take the incoming information and carry it to the conscious mind.
Chester's job is to read the information, determine which emotion is associated with it, and go to the emotion control center and pull the right levers to reproduce that emotion in yourself.

When I read what you wrote, about that incident, Bill takes it to my conscious mind, where I process it and understand why it's bad. I also can imagine feeling those kind of very physical pains, and it's unpleasant, but I don't think that's on the level of emotions, that's more in the realm of physical sensations. But Chester did nothing with that information, so I don't feel upset in a "if I put my hand on the guy who did this I'll fuck him up" way. I don't know if that's what you meant by "upset", or if you meant being upset because of the physical pains this incident implies.

Now, had I been in that store, Chester would have probably been very busy too.



So you had no Chester at all? I don't think I ever felt like this, I can't get rid of emotions like that, they still control what I can and cannot do, even if I had a rational intention to do it.

Am I making sense to anyone in this thread? :laughing:
Click to expand...
The situation didn't make me angry, just upset. And not for a long time just sort of thinking about it but I was able to move on to other things. Just if it gets brought up it's upsetting.

I wouldn't say I didn't have a Chester; I did, deep deep deep down and I was aware of that, but I made the decision to distance myself and completely ignore it. Eventually I got very good at it so that Chester was buried so deeply I couldn't describe or understand my own feelings. I could maybe feel the sensation in my body but I had no idea what it was. The only emotion I experienced was anger but to me that was just feeling "normal" I didn't place it as anger. I only realize now that I've recovered and in retrospect.
 
Redundant information: Average, well-adjusted humans all think and all have feelings.
We're discussing level of sensitivity.

INTJs often insist they do not have feelings. They do.
 
slant said:
Wish I understood what the difference between F and T is supposed to be lol
Click to expand...
Asa said:
Redundant information: Average, well-adjusted humans all think and all have feelings.
We're discussing level of sensitivity.
Click to expand...

Indeed, type aspects are not black and white. The model merely demonstrates preferences.
F types prefer/default to feelings in their given slot(dom/aux/tert etc.), as T types do in theirs.
This is generally at a subconscious level.
 
Last edited:
slant said:
Same way. I thought "oh that's horrible" but was totally fine until the pen thing and I just had this intense reaction. And i guess it's not that I imagined it happening to me, but I could see the picture in my head. So I think pretty much same reaction as you. Wish I understood what the difference between F and T is supposed to be lol
Click to expand...

From my perspective, the story resonated cold in me, with a simple fascinated "That's gross".. up until I read that he had his son tortured to death in front of him.

I can hear about these things, but until I see the faces of the people I don't feel them. For the father/son bit I can relate as my kids mean everything to me.

For typing purposes: I also hover on the line for T vs J. Although, since joining this forum I've been more accepting of my Fe use.
 
java said:
I think it's definitely a real thing.

Personally, there are things feelers easily care about that have no grasp on me. I notice this the most in world problems, like hunger and poverty. If I see a poor person in the street, I might feel bad and sympathize with that person (and that's no guarantee, if I'm too distracted it probably won't shock me). But when I read about people struggling in poor countries, I have no emotional response. I only relate to it in a rational way, almost as if it was fiction. The problem is probably too abstract or too distant for me to respond emotionally, even if I see images or footage of it.

However, yes, there are probably traumatized people who self-report as thinkers, but have the emotional "potential" or "awareness" to be feelers. Are these people automatically good thinkers, though?

Now, regarding low emotional intelligence, can someone self-restrict the development of their own emotional intelligence, or does it happen as a side effect of using and developing other aspects of their personalities?
Click to expand...

T vs F is very real
 
ClevelandINTP said:
Does it matter
Click to expand...
Yes. If you're being humorous than it's a joke- you don't mean it seriously.

If you mean it seriously you are belligerent and confrontational and as such I'm going to respond different.

If you made a joke for example, i might go,

"Ha ha! Oooh, you!"

But if you are trying to aggravate me I might go,

"Kiss my ass, man."

See the subtle difference in response style there?
 
slant said:
Yes. If you're being humorous than it's a joke- you don't mean it seriously.

If you mean it seriously you are belligerent and confrontational and as such I'm going to respond different.

If you made a joke for example, i might go,

"Ha ha! Oooh, you!"

But if you are trying to aggravate me I might go,

"Kiss my ass, man."

See the subtle difference in response style there?
Click to expand...

Isn’t it more fun to leave it ambiguous and assume the benefit of the doubt? If it was hostile I would have said knock it off or something
 
slant said:
If you made a joke for example, i might go, "Ha ha! Oooh, you!"
But if you are trying to aggravate me I might go, "Kiss my ass, man."
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
For example, I can assume good and change my mind etc without being judgemental or confrontational at first. And friendly. And once there is conflict view it as okay and work through it.

I think it’s better to have no expectations instead of assuming nothing. Perhaps a feeler vs thinker thing but who knows
 
Your view also tends to build in expectations. Which leads to more let downs in my opinion. As soon as you clarify, now you think you have something concrete when that usually isn’t true other than an illusion of control. Sounds J-ish too
 
Actually, now that I think about it, all my INFJ romantic interests had the same mentality you do. If you think it works, that’s cool, but be aware how others might perceive “incremental certainty.” Nothing really works like that so why set yourself up for it. Life is a dance, it’s not walking up a staircase. Very J-ish
 
ClevelandINTP said:
Actually, now that I think about it, all my INFJ romantic interests had the same mentality you do. If you think it works, that’s cool, but be aware how others might perceive “incremental certainty.” Nothing really works like that so why set yourself up for it. Life is a dance, it’s not walking up a staircase. Very J-ish
Click to expand...
I love a good monologue.
Sounds like you're working some shit out there. Just need to push that barrier ... you're almost there.

popcorn anyone?
 
slant said:
I don't like to assume anything; that's why I clarify.
Click to expand...


Re-read his first post here. Look at the title and your intention, then look at the title of the thread you sliced this off of...

Someone was just playing at being a smart ass. Don't think he was being evil, just playing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top