Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 190

Thread: Understanding Fi of EIIs-INFjs and the origins of their empathy

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    North
    Posts
    567
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Understanding Fi of EIIs-INFjs and the origins of their empathy

    Over time here, I've had quite a few requests from curious people of other types how INFj empathy works. "How do you do it?" Quite frankly, this often makes me feel guilty, and quite possibly mistyped: I'm not conscious of any empathy with others. I don't know what you think or feel. I have no idea what is in your head. Does that sound strange? It is. Untill just a little bit earlier today, I was unaware of any empathy going on beyond the "big emotions": Tantrums, crying, laughing etc. Then, while reading a book, I came across a line that, though totally unrelated in every way to the subject, sparked a line of thought that lead to me taking a good, close look at what goes on in my head. There, I found it: The empathy.
    And now I understand why I'm not conscious of it: It is embedded deeply, so deeply that it is an integral part of me, and I can quite simply not possibly imagine life without it. That would be like imagining going through life without being able to count in the slightest bit, or like living without the sense of hearing at all. It can quite simply not be done. I always thought that everybody had this sense of empathy, of being able to read what went on in other people's emotions without any problem. It was so ordinary. So easy. How could anybody miss it? I never even contemplated the idea.
    How do I know what people feel? I have no idea. I am as conscious of my empathy as I am of my bowels. Yes, I can feel something is going on, and I know the results perfectly well, thank you very much, but I have no idea what is going on. I don't think about it. I react to emotions reflexively, like most people react to having a ball thrown at you: Pick it up or shy away. Thinking about it, I can be aware of your emotions. They are in my head like a second set of feelings, not as strong as mine but there. Kinda like the Warder bond is explained in the Wheel of Time. I don't think about it. Whenever my empathy is in use, I have better things to take care of. Like the conversation that is probably going on, verbal or not. I can no more turn off my empathy than I can turn off my sense of hearing.
    Mayhap you can imagine what kind of a hassle that can be . I think it may also be a contributing factor to my reservedness and asocial behaviour: Being close to people is quite simply like having completely random tunes of music played simultaneously at low burn. Still, since some people are apparently envious of this, I'll not complain. It makes up for the annoyances it can lead to.

    I will try to observe my mental processes when I am around people a bit more, and report back when (Or, indeed, if) I find something more.

    If any other INFjs have more information on this subject, please share it.

    Now, for the other types (Or at least those this applies to), I'd like to reverse the question: How is it not being aware of others people's emotions (Or at least not to this degree)?

    PS: One tidbit of strange information: I empathize with animals, as well. Although, due to the inherent nature of communication, in this case, the subjects are unable to verify the accuracy of my information :wink: .
    Beware! Nerd genes on the prowl.

    INFj - The Holy CPU Saint
    Dishonorary INFp
    Baah

    (Very good place for emoticons. Right-click on the one you want and select "properties" for direct link)

  2. #2
    Topaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,340
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Darklord this is really good and is what Ive been reaching for. I identify with what you said about picking up others feelings like that but I think mine is more concious because its my creative function. With people I use it like a shovel, digging for more inherent possibilties The closer I am with someone the more I unconsciously track their feelings. Sometimes someone could walk in a room and I know what state theyr'e in before I even see their face. Its like I hear the pace of their movements, the way they breath... I dont know ... just something. Often I wished I could turn this off because it IS a heavy burden. Sometime I want to slam someone for being a jerk but then I see all the underlying stuff thats making them act that way and I just dont have it in me to kick em in the head. Not to mention I think 'well I have my own imprefections too'
    I dont know. Maybe I shouldnt tell all this

    Topaz
    The artifact which is the source of my power will not be kept on the Mountain of Despair beyond the River of Fire guarded by the Dragons of Eternity. It will be in my safe-deposit box. The same applies to the object which is my one weakness.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    near the beach
    Posts
    184
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Digging Into INFj Empathy

    Quote Originally Posted by Darklord
    Now, for the other types (Or at least those this applies to), I'd like to reverse the question: How is it not being aware of others people's emotions (Or at least not to this degree)?
    It can be turned off, but it’s a horrible feeling – it’s like you’re loosing a part from you. When this happened to me it felt like there is a wall made of glass between me and the other people. I was talking to them, but it didn’t seem that they have emotions at all. I was loosing the bond with them, the emotional connection that I need.
    me

  4. #4
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,819
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I can't imagine not knowing what people are feeling. It's like they let it off as a scent - you can feel it as soon as they're in the vicinity.

    I have no idea how to turn it off or if it can be.
    It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
    -Mark Twain


    You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

  5. #5
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Digging Into INFj Empathy

    Quote Originally Posted by Darklord
    Now, for the other types (Or at least those this applies to), I'd like to reverse the question: How is it not being aware of others people's emotions (Or at least not to this degree)?
    .
    For me it's not so much a question of not being aware of other people's emotions, it's more about being unconfident about them. My stronger functions are T and N, so I'm more inclined to go "what's s/he thinking" than "what's s/he feeling". However, where emotions are crucial in a situation, I do feel little confident and usually ask for help, if only to double-check.

    I must say, though - - I have, or had, close contact with ISFjs and INFjs. Very often they are not really aware of other people's emotions - not really. They project into other people the emotions they, themselves, are feeling, or those they hope/fear/want/etc the other people to be feeling. They filter other people's emotions through their own, even if they don't realize it.

    The people I know who are best at accurately reading other people's emotions are ENFjs.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  6. #6
    Topaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,340
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Digging Into INFj Empathy

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Quote Originally Posted by Darklord
    Now, for the other types (Or at least those this applies to), I'd like to reverse the question: How is it not being aware of others people's emotions (Or at least not to this degree)?
    .
    For me it's not so much a question of not being aware of other people's emotions, it's more about being unconfident about them. My stronger functions are T and N, so I'm more inclined to go "what's s/he thinking" than "what's s/he feeling". However, where emotions are crucial in a situation, I do feel little confident and usually ask for help, if only to double-check.

    I must say, though - - I have, or had, close contact with ISFjs and INFjs. Very often they are not really aware of other people's emotions - not really. They project into other people the emotions they, themselves, are feeling, or those they hope/fear/want/etc the other people to be feeling. They filter other people's emotions through their own, even if they don't realize it.

    The people I know who are best at accurately reading other people's emotions are ENFjs.
    Enfjs can be good at reading emotions but sometimes they concoct elaborate reasons and schemes around why the person is having those emotions which may not be accurate.
    Sometimes they will read into a certain passing emotion and think its far more significant than it really is. I know this from experience. They are best at understanding other rationals. IMO of course.

    Topaz
    The artifact which is the source of my power will not be kept on the Mountain of Despair beyond the River of Fire guarded by the Dragons of Eternity. It will be in my safe-deposit box. The same applies to the object which is my one weakness.

  7. #7
    schrödinger's cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,186
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Darklord, thanks for telling all that. It was very interesting.

    Topaz, what does this sentence mean:

    Quote Originally Posted by Topaz
    With people I use it like a shovel, digging for more inherent possibilties.
    ? It sounds interesting, but I can't really understand it.

  8. #8
    Topaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,340
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schrödinger's cat NLI
    Darklord, thanks for telling all that. It was very interesting.

    Topaz, what does this sentence mean:

    Quote Originally Posted by Topaz
    With people I use it like a shovel, digging for more inherent possibilties.
    ? It sounds interesting, but I can't really understand it.
    Oh you know how we IEE do. We ask questions and poke around people, careful not to step on the sore spots, getting them to open up and tell us more about who they are what they like and dont like. They say something that suggest they are inclined a certain way. You follow the thread and watch their eyes. Ah there lies a passion back there, a fire! So you nonchallantly ignore the subject just a little to see how eager they are to keep the thread going. Now you have them! and you real them in! Theyre excited and youre excited cause theyre coming to your house next week to show you how to build an deck or bake a chicken or play the guitar ..... :wink:
    Do you see?

    Topaz
    The artifact which is the source of my power will not be kept on the Mountain of Despair beyond the River of Fire guarded by the Dragons of Eternity. It will be in my safe-deposit box. The same applies to the object which is my one weakness.

  9. #9
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Digging Into INFj Empathy

    Quote Originally Posted by Topaz
    Enfjs can be good at reading emotions but sometimes they concoct elaborate reasons and schemes around why the person is having those emotions which may not be accurate.
    Sometimes they will read into a certain passing emotion and think its far more significant than it really is. I know this from experience. They are best at understanding other rationals. IMO of course.
    That was a very interesting point, it does fit with my observations of ENFjs. The one I know best totally misread an ISFp and was baffled by an ENTp. I do see it. Thanks for the insight!
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  10. #10
    schrödinger's cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,186
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Topaz
    Oh you know how we IEE do. We ask questions and poke around people, careful not to step on the sore spots, getting them to open up and tell us more about who they are what they like and dont like. They say something that suggest they are inclined a certain way. You follow the thread and watch their eyes. Ah there lies a passion back there, a fire! So you nonchallantly ignore the subject just a little to see how eager they are to keep the thread going. Now you have them! and you real them in! Theyre excited and youre excited cause theyre coming to your house next week to show you how to build an deck or bake a chicken or play the guitar ..... :wink:
    Do you see?
    Yyyyeess... I think I do. I often try to get people to talk about things they feel strongly about. That way they get to talk about something they like talking about, and I get to listen to something that's authentic and real. Sometimes that used to backfire, because guys occasionally misread it as "impressionable female eager to listen to my bragging". Urk.

  11. #11
    Topaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,340
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schrödinger's cat
    Yyyyeess... I think I do. I often try to get people to talk about things they feel strongly about. That way they get to talk about something they like talking about, and I get to listen to something that's authentic and real. Sometimes that used to backfire, because guys occasionally misread it as "impressionable female eager to listen to my bragging". Urk.
    HA! thats funny. Ive created a few monsters in my past but yes basically its fun to get people to talk about what they like. Just their very enthusiasm is inspirational. I try to use more discernment now than I did in the past. Not everyone is worth listening to.

    Topaz
    The artifact which is the source of my power will not be kept on the Mountain of Despair beyond the River of Fire guarded by the Dragons of Eternity. It will be in my safe-deposit box. The same applies to the object which is my one weakness.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    North
    Posts
    567
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Digging Into INFj Empathy

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Quote Originally Posted by Darklord
    Now, for the other types (Or at least those this applies to), I'd like to reverse the question: How is it not being aware of others people's emotions (Or at least not to this degree)?
    I must say, though - - I have, or had, close contact with ISFjs and INFjs. Very often they are not really aware of other people's emotions - not really. They project into other people the emotions they, themselves, are feeling, or those they hope/fear/want/etc the other people to be feeling. They filter other people's emotions through their own, even if they don't realize it.
    Might well be. As I said, I really don't know exactly what is going on in my head when it comes to this. There is empathy in there, deeply ingrained, but is it a separate system? Is it very good at all? Or is it just this tiny little thing that influences my own emotions?
    It could quite possibly really be introjection, i.e. putting myself in their shoes and simulating their circumstances in order to come to a certain reaction. Like I said, I'm not conscious about this.
    However, I have become aware that, in many cases, I can read faces more than some others. For instance, I read this book on the brain, and if the writers/whoever could read faces at all, their example pictures of the 6 basicemotions wouldn't be in there. The guy was damn near laughing at all of them .
    Beware! Nerd genes on the prowl.

    INFj - The Holy CPU Saint
    Dishonorary INFp
    Baah

    (Very good place for emoticons. Right-click on the one you want and select "properties" for direct link)

  13. #13
    schrödinger's cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,186
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Could it be both? Like this: we perceive something, perhaps slight changes in someone's facial expression, perhaps the way someone fidgets, whatever, in any case it's very subtle, blink and you'll miss it. This gives us information on the other person's state of mind. But we can only decode this information into the framework of our own emotions. And that's were the errors come in.

    Couldn't it be a bit like the way we perceive information through our senses? That is highly influenced by the categories we've formed in our mind (regardless of type). We never perceive everything. What we generally do is this, we perceive certain key stimuli, and these trigger the categorization of the entire object. So if you see a dog, for example, your brain doesn't process the entire wealth of information your senses send it. It has a holistic and "archetypal" image of a dog, and if there are enough bits of information to trigger this image, then that's it, task done, next one please. If you ever wondered why toddlers spend HOURS staring at a doggie (at everything really), that's why. They haven't really got very well-defined categories, and that is why they need to examine everything over and over and over again. And of course that cookie cutter way of perceiving reality explains why we so often get it wrong... for example, why we can mistake a coat and a pair of boots for a man standing in a dark corner.

    Ach, this has nothing whatever to do with the subject of this thread. I was trying to see parallels to the way we "perceive emotions"... but perhaps there are none. Anyway, it was something I feel strongly about, so that should satisfy those of us who've got strong

  14. #14
    Creepy-Paul

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schrödinger's cat
    Could it be both? Like this: we perceive something, perhaps slight changes in someone's facial expression, perhaps the way someone fidgets, whatever, in any case it's very subtle, blink and you'll miss it. This gives us information on the other person's state of mind. But we can only decode this information into the framework of our own emotions. And that's were the errors come in.
    I largely agree with this. Though, trying to predict another’s behavior based upon ones own emotions does not seem like a very efficient or effective way of predicting the future behavior of others.

    To me, INFps seem to be the best at, at least in my case, getting into other peoples heads. They leave less of a footprint when they try to read someone. INFjs are very loud and obvious, at least to me, when they try to read some one. ENFps can also to some degree read people, but then they make stuff up (that is mostly favorable to the person they are reading) and add it to their reads.

    The NT approach also suffers problems when it comes to reading people because NTs are so reliant on the causal chain. Maybe there are exceptions to the causal chain. Maybe consciousness is an aberration of the causal chain. Perhaps, Schrödinger's cat can be both alive and dead until one actually opens the box.

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    852
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I do not know how INFjs do it, emotionally or otherwise, but they are usually extremely accurate when reading people and by far the best of any type I have seen. ENFps are quite good too but they do lean towards the positive too much. It is not logical, logic has it's strenghts but I see that emotion & ethics does too. INfjs are very subtle people in every way and not loud or obvious about anything at all Paul, I think quite the opposite.
    I am not a total INFj defender, but I just had to say this because of my recent experiences.

  16. #16
    schrödinger's cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,186
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul
    I largely agree with this. Though, trying to predict another’s behavior based upon ones own emotions does not seem like a very efficient or effective way of predicting the future behavior of others.
    The framework of one's own experiences includes things you've read or seen or heard about, and even things no one talks about but everybody knows. That means we interpret another's behaviour based on our general knowledge of the world. That includes our knowledge of ourselves, but it also includes our knowledge of other people and of the world in general.

    And I can't say anything about trying to predict the future. I was talking about the way we perceive the present. Predicting somebody's future behaviour is IMO often a by-product of perceiving the present correctly. I say "often" because what we believe here largely depends on our worldview. We might believe that our minds are separate entities, and that contact is only possible via the five senses. Or we might believe that our minds can sort of overlap at the edges, and that communication can therefore occur directly.

    My own opinion is that we generally see (or hear, smell, feel...) small clues other people miss, and this helps us "see" others' emotions, and that in turn helps us predict their likely future behaviour. (This process is subconscious and automatic.) Occasionally, however, we can sort of touch another's soul directly and perceive things without the help of our senses. But that's rare.

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,246
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    All you infj's: I can't relate. At all. It's very cool that you are able to pick up on so well. I just can't do it, I am not sure it can be taught either. The best I can do with this functio is to follow simple rules and hope for the best.

    I spose your is like entp ; around estp's you'd likely feel as lost as I feel around infj's.
    Entp
    ILE

  18. #18
    Creepy-Paul

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schrödinger's cat
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul
    I largely agree with this. Though, trying to predict another’s behavior based upon ones own emotions does not seem like a very efficient or effective way of predicting the future behavior of others.
    The framework of one's own experiences includes things you've read or seen or heard about, and even things no one talks about but everybody knows. That means we interpret another's behaviour based on our general knowledge of the world. That includes our knowledge of ourselves, but it also includes our knowledge of other people and of the world in general.

    And I can't say anything about trying to predict the future. I was talking about the way we perceive the present. Predicting somebody's future behaviour is IMO often a by-product of perceiving the present correctly. I say "often" because what we believe here largely depends on our worldview. We might believe that our minds are separate entities, and that contact is only possible via the five senses. Or we might believe that our minds can sort of overlap at the edges, and that communication can therefore occur directly.

    My own opinion is that we generally see (or hear, smell, feel...) small clues other people miss, and this helps us "see" others' emotions, and that in turn helps us predict their likely future behaviour. (This process is subconscious and automatic.) Occasionally, however, we can sort of touch another's soul directly and perceive things without the help of our senses. But that's rare.
    I may have to reread this a few more times to be sure, but first impressions, I think I largely agree with this.

    I also want to add NeFi=ENFp. For whatever reasons, ENFps tend to be considered, even here, to be dumb bubbly odd people. That is a very bizarre generalization. You are a great example against that generalization.

    I am not sure why that stereotype exists. Maybe ENFps tend to try too hard to fit into a world largely dominated by Ss. Since Ss dominate, Ns are considered odd. ENTjs don’t really have that problem though. Maybe it’s because ENTjs tend to dominate socially and so therefore their N differences are perceived as genius by the Ss.

  19. #19
    Creepy-Paul

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schrödinger's cat
    We might believe that our minds are separate entities, and that contact is only possible via the five senses. Or we might believe that our minds can sort of overlap at the edges, and that communication can therefore occur directly.
    On reread, I may have issues with the above. My full argument against this one though would require me to figure out consciousness though. Ugghhh, consciousness, why does the universe deem it necessary????

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    852
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    No type is dumb; No type is intelligent. People are dumb; people are intelligent.

    ENFps are not dumb. Maybe some try a little too hard for acceptance and are a little too positive about people, which can be an even greater flaw than thinking too negatively about people.

    ENTjs do not always fit in. Unless they manage to seize power and hold on to it, they have the same fitting-in issues as other N types and even worst.

    Solution: We need to form a big army of N types perhaps with some of our SP sympathizers and crush the SJs who are our main oppressers.

  21. #21
    Creepy-Paul

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul
    I also want to add NeFi=ENFp. For whatever reasons, ENFps tend to be considered, even here, to be dumb bubbly odd people. That is a very bizarre generalization. You are a great example against that generalization.

    I am not sure why that stereotype exists. Maybe ENFps tend to try too hard to fit into a world largely dominated by Ss. Since Ss dominate, Ns are considered odd. ENTjs don’t really have that problem though. Maybe it’s because ENTjs tend to dominate socially and so therefore their N differences are perceived as genius by the Ss.
    Sweet and nice=dumb. Happy=shallow. Simple enough.
    ENFps share their happiness, but not their sadness. Most people assume that in order to be deep, you have to be a) sad and/or negative or b) cynical or c) emotionally detached.

    Do I sound bitter?
    Another alternative, come up with a login like schrödinger's cat. NTs will think you are another NT. First impressions for whatever reasons matter. NTs have a hard time thinking of another NT as dumb. I don’t think I have ever met a dumb NT. OK, ENTjs can be amazingly reckless, but not in a totally dumb sort of way.

  22. #22
    Let's go to fairyland Minde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amongst the stars
    TIM
    EII/INFj E9w1sp
    Posts
    4,053
    Mentioned
    86 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hmm... I feel very exposed reading this thread. For some reason, especially when Topaz talks, though I'm sure I'm not ENFp.

    It was when I was about 12 that I first noticed being able to "read" people, their emotions and motives. It kinda overwhelmed me, so I hid. Perhaps if I'd been less afraid, I could have developed more in that area.

    As it is, I can generally figure out the moods, interactions, and such of the people around me without trying too hard. In fact, if I try, sometimes that makes it harder, because I end up reading myself into the situation. Also, reading the motives for certain behavior is often just as easy as reading the emotions.

    It's hard to explain, because it's such a non-verbal, non-linear process. If you pin it down, you lose something.

    Darklord, I empathize with animals, too. Out of all of my family members, I am the quickest to discern our animals' comfort and health. I knew when our rabbit was dying (everyone else said he was fine) and I know when our aging dog needs her pain medication. Animals usually respond well to me, too.

    I must mention, that all of this can only happen when I notice what's going on around me. Picking up emotions and such is automatic, like hearing or seeing. The problem is, I don't always put 2 and 2 together. I'm not very good at noticing and remembering details like schedules and numbers (unless I try), and sometimes it's the same way with emotions. It's there, but I can overlook it.

    And, of course, the better I know someone, the easier it is to empathize.

  23. #23
    schrödinger's cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,186
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by schrödinger's cat
    We might believe that our minds are separate entities, and that contact is only possible via the five senses. Or we might believe that our minds can sort of overlap at the edges, and that communication can therefore occur directly.
    On reread, I may have issues with the above. My full argument against this one though would require me to figure out consciousness though. Ugghhh, consciousness, why does the universe deem it necessary????
    Seems I've expressed myself awkwardly. Sorry. I meant to say this:

    We know about others' emotions. How do we do that? Two theories are possible:
    (1) We perceive them indirectly. We perceive small signs (like dilated pupils, slight changes of posture etc.) and they are like a code we can crack.
    (2) We perceive them directly. Soul touches soul.

    Now, what do we believe is true? Theory (1) or (2), or both? We could discuss this endlessly. Our opinions will probably depend on this: What is the soul, and how does it communicate? Let's say there are 4 possible theories on this:

    (A) Human beings don't have souls. Our consciousness is a product of bodily processes. There is nothing else. Empathy works by reading someone else's body language and smelling his sweat, whatever. There is no other way. Everything else is delusion and/or mere chance.

    (B) Human beings have souls, but they are tied to their bodies and cannot communicate directly. Empathy works by reading someone's body language etc.

    (C) Same as (B), but with the belief that souls can sometimes communicate directly. Empathy works generally by reading someone's body language, but it can occasionally work by perceiving the emotion directly. Thus, you might "know" out of the blue that someone close to you (who is far away) is in danger or has died. You might walk into a room and "perceive" a certain powerful emotion (like strong suffering), and later on hear that this room was the scene of a crime.

    (D) Human beings have souls. We are all of us connected to all living things, and therefore we can communicate directly, without the help of sight, sound, taste, smell or touch. Empathy usually works by perceiving emotions, not by perceiving body language caused by emotions. Some of us who are good at perceiving this interconnectedness and this enables them to read other people's emotions. Others aren't aware of it and therefore they lack empathy.

    If we talk about how empathy works, it'll probably help if we're aware of those four basic assumptions. Otherwise someone who believes in (A) and someone who leans more to (D) might get into terrible quarrels without ever knowing what the problem was.

    I'm probably making this unnecessarily complicated. But at least I've now expressed it all clearly... I hope.

  24. #24

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    westfield, nj usa
    Posts
    529
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Digging Into INFj Empathy

    If any other INFjs have more information on this subject, please share it.

    Now, for the other types (Or at least those this applies to), I'd like to reverse the question: How is it not being aware of others people's emotions (Or at least not to this degree)?

    PS: One tidbit of strange information: I empathize with animals, as well. Although, due to the inherent nature of communication, in this case, the subjects are unable to verify the accuracy of my information :wink: .
    if i meet someone new, i can feel what they feel about something. i know if they say "good morning", that they mean it, or if they are simply saying it because it's what they are "supposed" to say. i can tell if someone is depressed, because i can feel it. i havn't quite pinpointed where i feel it though, as there is certain level i feel the pain. a sort of pressure around my heart, if it's below the heart, then it's my feeling. if it's above, it's usually someone elses.

    after i get used to the person, i don't seem to be able to sense it as well as i did - or perhaps i'm manipulating them in some way, not sure yet.

    i can usually sense when something bad is going to happen to me (a personal thing), or something different will happen. if i get a sudden, and sometimes painful stomach ache, for no reason (like fighting butterflies) - then i should look out for something bad within the next 30 min. it seems to have a several mile span. if i feel that the air is different, like if i'm in a place that i'm comfortable in, and it suddenly feels different; like it's the first time i've been there feeling - then something might happen (still working with that one.)

    i can easily emphathize with animals - they really don't have hidden agenda's. i know what my bird wants, you learn things and behaviors to look for. i say high to squirrels. offer my hand to a strange dog. animals seem to like me, they can read fear.

    however on the other hand, i'm not sure if i'm actually feeling some magical force - or if i'm simple super observant when it comes to reading a person in general. i have to hear, see, and study that person. i can see the cues that my subconscience see's, and formulate from that. as often it's difficult to judge if someone is depressed, sleepy, or ill - they all look the same, and can feel the same.

  25. #25

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    852
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It is potentially very insulting and wrong to be certain and conclude based on feelings or whatever that we really know and understand another person without actually spending the time to get to really know them. I doubt truly getting to understand another person has any short cuts.

  26. #26

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    North
    Posts
    567
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quite true.
    Actually, I doubt really getting to know anybody is possible. The best that can be done is to try.
    Beware! Nerd genes on the prowl.

    INFj - The Holy CPU Saint
    Dishonorary INFp
    Baah

    (Very good place for emoticons. Right-click on the one you want and select "properties" for direct link)

  27. #27
    schrödinger's cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,186
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Megan
    It is potentially very insulting and wrong to be certain and conclude based on feelings or whatever that we really know and understand another person without actually spending the time to get to really know them. I doubt truly getting to understand another person has any short cuts.
    No short cuts, but quick access to data you'd otherwise miss. Empathy is a valid source of information. The best strategy is to listen to your gut feelings and then to see if you can verify what they say.

  28. #28

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    852
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schrödinger's cat NLI
    No short cuts, but quick access to data you'd otherwise miss. Empathy is a valid source of information. The best strategy is to listen to your gut feelings and then to see if you can verify what they say.
    I do not believe that empathy is always a valid source of information, though it might have the potential to be. Empathy is founded on the subjective and the value assessment of the empathizer.

    My observations is that some sensors seem to have skills that make them equal or more effective in really understanding people and getting accurate information about them. I was about to launch into a lot of bullcrap but I will just say that the type that seems to me to be able to best read people (myself included) seem to be ESTps. ESTps and INFjs might actually have the best overall bullshit detection system. However, I think that of the INFj's can often be a bit more nebulous. Personal experience.

  29. #29

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    852
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @ fever, I sent you a response.

    Quote Originally Posted by ishysquishy
    Quote Originally Posted by Megan
    ESTps and INFjs might actually have the best overall bullshit detection system.
    That would be because ESTps know exactly how it's done...

    And they can be so cute when they don't know what they're talking about!
    @ishysquishy- You (their dual) said it and not me :wink: .

    But seriously, aren't ESTps cute all the time?

  30. #30
    Topaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,340
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    To each his/her own I suppose I will admit that there are some ESTPs that are quite stylish. Not over the top but just right IMO. I can think of a guy and a girl, both ESTP who always look inspiring.
    Perhaps thats how they get over on people and rob them blind I find them difficult to trust because I dont understand ( or maybe I do all to well ) their MO. It seem to me they can turn on a dime and sell you out as my brother has done many times

    Topaz
    The artifact which is the source of my power will not be kept on the Mountain of Despair beyond the River of Fire guarded by the Dragons of Eternity. It will be in my safe-deposit box. The same applies to the object which is my one weakness.

  31. #31

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    852
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Topaz
    Perhaps thats how they get over on people and rob them blind I find them difficult to trust because I dont understand ( or maybe I do all to well ) their MO. It seem to me they can turn on a dime and sell you out as my brother has done many times

    I do admire their (ESTp) people reading skills. No type or person always gets people reading right I guess.

    ESTps? robbing people blind?

  32. #32
    Topaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,340
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Megan
    Quote Originally Posted by Topaz
    Perhaps thats how they get over on people and rob them blind I find them difficult to trust because I dont understand ( or maybe I do all to well ) their MO. It seem to me they can turn on a dime and sell you out as my brother has done many times

    I do admire their (ESTp) people reading skills. No type or person always gets people reading right I guess.

    ESTps? robbing people blind?
    HHECK Yeah! If you are going to get hustled 70% of the time its ESTP ( the other 30% are ENTPs ). Ive seen em run in packs with all kinds of multilevel marketing scemes, false promises, borrowing from Peter to pay Paul. Ive seen ESTPs have parents, girlfriends, grandparents, buddies, bail them out of all kinds of crap, only to borrow money and take off without so much as a thank you. Then somehow, through all that disappointment and shameful conduct will somehow get people to feel sorry for them (the old repentent sinner routine), charm their way back into peoples hearts so they can repeat the process. I know it sounds very critical but I would say it if I hadnt seen it over and over and over...
    On the other hand I do know some straight ESTPs. The bad ones are out there though and they play by their own rules so WATCH OUT! Dont be a bleeding heart or they will WORK you, ya hear! (ooooh they are so good at lying )

    Topaz
    The artifact which is the source of my power will not be kept on the Mountain of Despair beyond the River of Fire guarded by the Dragons of Eternity. It will be in my safe-deposit box. The same applies to the object which is my one weakness.

  33. #33
    schrödinger's cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,186
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Megan
    Quote Originally Posted by schrödinger's cat NLI
    No short cuts, but quick access to data you'd otherwise miss. Empathy is a valid source of information. The best strategy is to listen to your gut feelings and then to see if you can verify what they say.
    I do not believe that empathy is always a valid source of information, though it might have the potential to be.
    Agree. I think the difference is (in part) that Intuitive Feelers get plenty of "training" in using their Sensing and Thinking functions, because
    (1) you usually grow up surrounded by Sensors,
    (2) at school, the skills that you are supposed to develop are mainly Sensing and Thinking skills,
    (3) even subjects where Intuitive Feelers can usually shine (e.g. languages) are often taught in a way that's geared more towards Sensors and Thinkers (long lists of vocabulary you're supposed to learn by tomorrow; learning grammar rules by heart...), and
    (4) Sensing and Thinking skills are usually seen as essential for success and survival. So there's some sort of pressure on you to learn them.

    That means that Intuitives have plenty of opportunity to develop their Sensing. Sensors don't have this kind of opportunity. Their own (and our) Sensing skills are usually highly developed (or at least average), and that's the yardstick people use. Intuition as we see it in ourselves and/or the people around us just isn't as highly developed. Even if every Intuitive were a master at using his Ne or Ni, then the fact remains that Intuitives are usually a minority. So when people compare Sensing with Ituitition, they compare a highly evolved set of skills with another that's not as highly developed. No wonder Sensing seems to be the more valid source of information.

    If I could express my theories in a short and clear and interesting way, I'd be so, so glad. Sorry.

  34. #34
    Creepy-

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schrödinger's cat
    If I could express my theories in a short and clear and interesting way, I'd be so, so glad. Sorry.
    I always find your post interesting. No need to be sorry.
    Anyway, its true that we do get a lot of sensing and thinking pressure, esp. us guys so its very easy to have doubts and question the validity of what your own intuition is telling you. To everyone else it just doesnt seem to make any sense. Intuition is usually based on something, but that something may be vauge and unmeasurable at the time you 'see' it. I get so mad when I ignore my intuition in favor of someone elses judgment and then end up wrong. Once it cost me a good deal of money in a business deal.

  35. #35
    Topaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,340
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    oops forgot to long on ^^ that was me.

    Topaz
    The artifact which is the source of my power will not be kept on the Mountain of Despair beyond the River of Fire guarded by the Dragons of Eternity. It will be in my safe-deposit box. The same applies to the object which is my one weakness.

  36. #36

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    852
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schrödinger's cat

    then the fact remains that Intuitives are usually a minority. So when people compare Sensing with Ituitition, they compare a highly evolved set of skills with another that's not as highly developed. No wonder Sensing seems to be the more valid source of information.
    I think sensing and intuition are both vaild sources for information gathering. However, It is my opinion that both are deficient for gaining full understanding on their own. What I resent deep down is this almost god-like skill some NF types believe they have in figuring people out because of their feeling and intuition, and you have now added learnt sensing and thinking to this mix. Despite years of schooling in certain limited sensing type skills, I really do not believe that intuitives can ever gain anything like the capacity some sensors have to see, particularly more detailed physical things in their environment which are huge sources of data. Also, I think the formal education system is not that great a place for sensors to use their natural skills and intellect. This is particularly so at higher levels of education where intuitive skills seem to be assumed and expected. We are only engaging in speculation, but as I see it, some sensors have equal or greater capacity to figure people out than intuitives.

  37. #37
    schrödinger's cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,186
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Topaz: thanks.

  38. #38
    schrödinger's cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,186
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Megan
    I think sensing and intuition are both vaild sources for information gathering. However, It is my opinion that both are deficient for gaining full understanding on their own.
    Yes, I agree. It's best to use the two of them together. Is that what you meant?

    Quote Originally Posted by Megan
    What I resent deep down is this almost god-like skill some NF types believe they have in figuring people out because of their feeling and intuition...
    Sounds annoying, I agree. It's OK to be proud of one's skill, but what you mean is (I think) when people are so sure of themselves that they stop listening to others. "Make way, ye lesser mortals, here comes the master." That sort of thing, right?

    Quote Originally Posted by Megan
    We are only engaging in speculation, but as I see it, some sensors have equal or greater capacity to figure people out than intuitives.
    Sure. I think what people meant in this thread wasn't that intuitive empathy is better than other kinds. It's weirder (does this word exist? "weirder" sounds odd, but "more weird" sounds even odder... now I'm worrying whether "odder" exists... ah, I've just remembered, it does. Good.). Err... where were we? Ah yes: intuitive empathy isn't better than other kinds, just stranger. As for me, I'm so wired to thinking that other sources of information are better than my intuitive feeling ones, and now that I do listen to my gut feelings I'm often like "ohmygosh, it WORKS!!" Others seem to feel the same. Perhaps that came across as if we think our empathy is the best?

    Quote Originally Posted by Megan
    Despite years of schooling in certain limited sensing type skills, I really do not believe that intuitives can ever gain anything like the capacity some sensors have to see, particularly more detailed physical things in their environment which are huge sources of data.
    That is true. You could call it NeFi slapstick. What I meant was more what happens when you compare the skill level an Intuitive's Sensing and a Sensor's Intuition.

    Quote Originally Posted by Megan
    Also, I think the formal education system is not that great a place for sensors to use their natural skills and intellect.
    Kiersey has some interesting thoughts on this. He says education is full of SJs, and that they gear the system towards SJs. From what I remember he says it's particularly bad for SPs. Don't know if that's true, but it sounds plausible. Some SPs I know just couldn't see the point in studying and didn't fulfill their potential.

  39. #39
    Creepy-Paul

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anonymous
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by schrödinger's cat
    We might believe that our minds are separate entities, and that contact is only possible via the five senses. Or we might believe that our minds can sort of overlap at the edges, and that communication can therefore occur directly.
    On reread, I may have issues with the above. My full argument against this one though would require me to figure out consciousness though. Ugghhh, consciousness, why does the universe deem it necessary????
    Seems I've expressed myself awkwardly. Sorry. I meant to say this:

    We know about others' emotions. How do we do that? Two theories are possible:
    (1) We perceive them indirectly. We perceive small signs (like dilated pupils, slight changes of posture etc.) and they are like a code we can crack.
    (2) We perceive them directly. Soul touches soul.

    Now, what do we believe is true? Theory (1) or (2), or both? We could discuss this endlessly. Our opinions will probably depend on this: What is the soul, and how does it communicate? Let's say there are 4 possible theories on this:

    (A) Human beings don't have souls. Our consciousness is a product of bodily processes. There is nothing else. Empathy works by reading someone else's body language and smelling his sweat, whatever. There is no other way. Everything else is delusion and/or mere chance.

    (B) Human beings have souls, but they are tied to their bodies and cannot communicate directly. Empathy works by reading someone's body language etc.

    (C) Same as (B), but with the belief that souls can sometimes communicate directly. Empathy works generally by reading someone's body language, but it can occasionally work by perceiving the emotion directly. Thus, you might "know" out of the blue that someone close to you (who is far away) is in danger or has died. You might walk into a room and "perceive" a certain powerful emotion (like strong suffering), and later on hear that this room was the scene of a crime.

    (D) Human beings have souls. We are all of us connected to all living things, and therefore we can communicate directly, without the help of sight, sound, taste, smell or touch. Empathy usually works by perceiving emotions, not by perceiving body language caused by emotions. Some of us who are good at perceiving this interconnectedness and this enables them to read other people's emotions. Others aren't aware of it and therefore they lack empathy.

    If we talk about how empathy works, it'll probably help if we're aware of those four basic assumptions. Otherwise someone who believes in (A) and someone who leans more to (D) might get into terrible quarrels without ever knowing what the problem was.

    I'm probably making this unnecessarily complicated. But at least I've now expressed it all clearly... I hope.
    Oh, wow, that is good. Sorry for the delay in responding.

    A) I have problems with that one. What is the point of consciousness if that one where true.
    B) OK, I am having less problems with this one.
    C) Umm, now this is getting harder. I am stuck on consciousness. Until I get past the whole understanding the point of consciousness, I decline to comment.
    D) Out on a limb.

    Quote Originally Posted by schrödinger's cat
    If we talk about how empathy works, it'll probably help if we're aware of those four basic assumptions. Otherwise someone who believes in (A) and someone who leans more to (D) might get into terrible quarrels without ever knowing what the problem was.

    I'm probably making this unnecessarily complicated. But at least I've now expressed it all clearly... I hope.
    Completely agree on paragraph one. Paragraph two, reality is complicated. You didn’t make it unnecessarily such, that is just the way it is.

    PS

    Descartes rocks, even if he punted, and the last part of meditations is stupid.

  40. #40
    Creepy-Paul

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schrödinger's cat
    Quote Originally Posted by Megan
    Quote Originally Posted by schrödinger's cat NLI
    No short cuts, but quick access to data you'd otherwise miss. Empathy is a valid source of information. The best strategy is to listen to your gut feelings and then to see if you can verify what they say.
    I do not believe that empathy is always a valid source of information, though it might have the potential to be.
    Agree. I think the difference is (in part) that Intuitive Feelers get plenty of "training" in using their Sensing and Thinking functions, because
    (1) you usually grow up surrounded by Sensors,
    (2) at school, the skills that you are supposed to develop are mainly Sensing and Thinking skills,
    (3) even subjects where Intuitive Feelers can usually shine (e.g. languages) are often taught in a way that's geared more towards Sensors and Thinkers (long lists of vocabulary you're supposed to learn by tomorrow; learning grammar rules by heart...), and

    (4) Sensing and Thinking skills are usually seen as essential for success and survival. So there's some sort of pressure on you to learn them.

    That means that Intuitives have plenty of opportunity to develop their Sensing. Sensors don't have this kind of opportunity. Their own (and our) Sensing skills are usually highly developed (or at least average), and that's the yardstick people use. Intuition as we see it in ourselves and/or the people around us just isn't as highly developed. Even if every Intuitive were a master at using his Ne or Ni, then the fact remains that Intuitives are usually a minority. So when people compare Sensing with Ituitition, they compare a highly evolved set of skills with another that's not as highly developed. No wonder Sensing seems to be the more valid source of information.

    If I could express my theories in a short and clear and interesting way, I'd be so, so glad. Sorry.
    Agree. Would add that NTs are generally worse than NFs at empathy because NFs care more about others feelings. NTs dismiss others feelings as an annoying weakness and don’t really think about others feelings, unlike NFs. Well, unless money or something else is involved, then NTs can pay attention to feelings.

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •