Hidden Agenda of IEIs-INFps: introverted logic Ti

[Scrummy]

Oh, you don't want to fulfill it. The Hidden Agenda is like what makes us tick. Without it... we've pretty much got nothing to live for. Just let your INFps keep groping out into the void that is humanity itself and occasionally your breasts (I didn't just say that to a 15-year-old girl).

EDIT: Now that I think about it, you can help them by making sure the following things are always nearby: a computer with fast internet access, lots of books with a library and big book store nearby, a park, a television, and lots of conversation pieces.

[ScarlettLux]

This hidden agenda thing REALLY manifests itself in me.

I always want to understand everything, and I'm quite a pseudo-intellectual, I must admit.

[CuriousSoul]

I think you should not confuse intellectual curiousity with the hidden agenda. The former concerns almost all semi-intelligent people, the latter is a certain peculiarity of ISFPs and INFPs. Ti as the hidden agenda of ISFPs and INFPs seems to be more about willingness to listen and be persuaded by almost any kinds of semi-logical arguments regardless of their truthfulness, at least as long as they are presented with a passion and personal conviction, probably partly as a result of Te as PoLR, which again occasionally manifests itself as flat out denial of reality.

Anyway the hidden agenda is a controversial idea that makes more sense in some cases than in others. In a sense it is what limits you the most. For ISFPs and INFPs it should mean that they never know if they understand things and therefore like others explaining things to them. Well, I am not sure if this actually makes sense, but the reason I am writing is that I believe it is very attractive to think that you have Ti, to understand as Sergei Ganin sums it up, as your hidden agenda, and indeed I used to think so too, but it is more complicated...

Think rather in terms of:
Judging/rationality = object of thought defines me = The truth is out there, regardless of what I happen to think of it.
Perceiving/Irrationality = I define the object of thought = The truth is whatever I or someone else decides it is.

[kopernikus]

Yeah, well at least for me I sometimes lay out a whole argument and then end it with saying that I really have no idea what I'm talking about, and then I'm not entirely sure that I've made any sense until the other person recapitulates what they think I've said. I'm sure it's annoying for people sometimes but it's hard not to do it... This is what ESTPs do well I think; they give you a "felt sense" of the in a situation even when they're not adding anything you didn't know.

[dreamer]

I think my hidden agenda is...trying to find someone who cares about me more than I care about myself (yes, roll eyes) and when they show imperfection and worst, some sort of betrayal, i get very very enraged and defensive. Hmm. That makes no sense.

[maze]

=)

[Fermi]

That's hidden agenda, isn't it?

[dreamer]

It's very important to me if it makes sense. I only trust what other people are saying IF they make sense. And I keep wanting to make sense of everything.

[Fermi]

If everything make sense, you should be fine with everything?

[Fermi]

That need of yours, is that the essence that make infp gullable?

Could be

[Joy]

I'm not an INFp, but I have the same hidden agenda. Yes, things need to make sense. Particularly movies. If life doesn't make sense, I see it as irony or randomness or something like that. If entertainment doesn't make sense... if there are loose ends in the plot or a lot of things that aren't explained or inconsistencies or illogical cause and effect relationships... then I cannot respect the movie. Peter says "Okay, so I don't know why that *insert nonsensical item here*, but it was still a good movie." And I'm like, "NOOOO!!! It didn't make sense!!!"

[Creepy-aurora_faerie]

I'm not an INFp, but I have the same hidden agenda. Yes, things need to make sense. Particularly movies. If life doesn't make sense, I see it as irony or randomness or something like that. If entertainment doesn't make sense... if there are loose ends in the plot or a lot of things that aren't explained or inconsistencies or illogical cause and effect relationships... then I cannot respect the movie. Peter says "Okay, so I don't know why that *insert nonsensical item here*, but it was still a good movie." And I'm like, "NOOOO!!! It didn't make sense!!!"

When he'd say that sort of thing, I would be like, "Yeah it was still a good movie *goes on to talk about how that one part didn't make sense and tries to make sense of it*" Then Peter is like, " *doesn't listen*" hahahha

[Joy]

I'm not at all gullible... because I never *know* anything. Everything I know is held in a malliable state, because I never have ALL of the information. I am willing to change what I *know* whenever it seems fittingmakes sense to do so.

When he'd say that sort of thing, I would be like, "Yeah it was still a good movie *goes on to talk about how that one part didn't make sense and tries to make sense of it*" Then Peter is like, " *doesn't listen*" hahahha

lol in my conversations it usually plays out more like

Peter: oh come on, it was a pretty good movie
me: I dunno... I mean, yeah... but... what about *blah blah blah*

Both of us continue to try to make sense of it, as well as analyze foreshadowing that could have been done better. If we can figure out all of the parts that weren't really explained, I may drop it and say, "yeah, it was allright" but if not I say "eh, I'm disappointed with the movie. That part could have been done a lot better" or "the ending could have been a lot stronger"

not that I dislike every movie I see. I like a lot of movies. I just don't like the ones that aren't thought out enough and leave unanswered questions, other than the type that play into the overall plot (like when they PURPOSELY don't give the ending, like that story The Lady and the Tiger or whatever it's called).

[Creepy-pokeball]

It makes sense to me. Have you ever MET the people that make and indulge in that horse shit lol? I think you have to look further out to see why it makes sense.

[Mariano Rajoy]

i love infp's. you guys should post more.

[glam]

I'm interested in learning more about this idea. niffweed told me a little about it in regards to hitta, whom he believes is an IEI who is (unhealthily) overfocused on his HA, and I'd like to know what others think about it, whether they agree with this idea or not (not necessarily whether hitta is "Ti-IEI" or not, but just the idea in general.) the idea is apparently controversial so I want to spark some discussions here, and get a feel of what you guys think of it.

there's a lot of talk about this here on the wiki regarding hitta, with a few who argue he's an IEI with this HA overfocus.

so, does this idea make sense to you? couldn't this phenomenon happen among other types as well? (Si-LII/Se-LIE/Te-IEE/etc.) and not even that, what do you guys think of the idea that any type could get overfocused on any function/s (perhaps from being raised a certain way or with certain conflicting types, etc.)

sorry if this is not anything all that new, or if a thread already exists on this subject (I couldn't find one)

I personally think this idea of superid focus (or any non-ego focus in general) is pretty damn believable, but for the record I'm having an extremely extremely difficult time seeing hitta as an example of it.

[Expat]

I made a case for that here:

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ad.php?t=14990

In the case of hidden agenda:

unshakeable and stubborn defense of ideas and beliefs against all opposition, with unwillingness to even discuss the possibility of their not being correct

[BLauritson]

I've been wondering lately how accurate the whole over-focusing on the HA is based on people like Hitta for example, but then again I have no evidence to the contrary, so.. *shrugs*

[implied]

I don't have a strong opinion on Hitta's type other than Ti/Fe valuing. Though if he can be a "Ti-IEI," why can't he be an "Fe-LII"?

very good point. why isn't he a Fe-LII?

[Expat]

very good point. why isn't he a Fe-LII?

*shrug* you ask "why not", I ask, why not ask "why".

I think that "IEI overfocusing on Ti HA" is more likely than "LII overfocusing on Fe" because:

1) I think that to focus too much on your HA is more likely than on your dual-seeking - unless, perhaps, you're already convinced that your HA is satisfied, so you get into a super-id "trip" (but that's another story)
2) in hitta's particular case, Fe seems to me to be more of a "taken for granted" thing for him, Ti more of something he puts a particular effort on
3) in videos, he seems more IP than IJ to me.
4) finally, to me he just seems to devalue Te far more than he does Se.

That's my present opinion, not the "truth".

[implied]

*shrug* you ask "why not", I ask, why not ask "why".

I think that "IEI overfocusing on Ti HA" is more likely than "LII overfocusing on Fe" because:

1) I think that to focus too much on your HA is more likely than on your dual-seeking - unless, perhaps, you're already convinced that your HA is satisfied, so you get into a super-id "trip" (but that's another story)
2) in hitta's particular case, Fe seems to me to be more of a "taken for granted" thing for him, Ti more of something he puts a particular effort on
3) in videos, he seems more IP than IJ to me.
4) finally, to me he just seems to devalue Te far more than he does Se.

That's my present opinion, not the "truth".

possibly. i think carla, for instance, has a pretty high Fe-focus. i think even once salawa suggested Fe-ego for her? (don't quote me, could be wrong.)

he does seem IP-ishly relaxed, i agree. but i think pedro the lion can give a similar impression in his old videos. i don't know about Se-valuing, though.

[Phaedrus]

I'm interested in learning more about this idea. niffweed told me a little about it in regards to hitta, whom he believes is an IEI who is (unhealthily) overfocused on his HA, and I'd like to know what others think about it, whether they agree with this idea or not (not necessarily whether hitta is "Ti-IEI" or not, but just the idea in general.) the idea is apparently controversial so I want to spark some discussions here, and get a feel of what you guys think of it.

there's a lot of talk about this here on the wiki regarding hitta, with a few who argue he's an IEI with this HA overfocus.

so, does this idea make sense to you?

The idea is totally wrong, and it has no support in the Socionics theory. Hitta is not an IEI, that's for sure. The idea looks rather insane if you take a closer look at it. Do that, please.

It is an example of this forum going astray, inventing its own version of Socionics, and you will probably not find a serious socionist outside of this forum that is willing to support it.

[XoX]

In the case of hidden agenda:

unshakeable and stubborn defense of ideas and beliefs against all opposition, with unwillingness to even discuss the possibility of their not being correct

That might be a description of how Ti hidden agenda manifests but not all people who behave like that have Ti hidden agenda. As a behavioral pattern that is rather common actually. It depends more on what are the motivations behind the behavior.

[Phaedrus]

That might be a description of how Ti hidden agenda manifests but not all people who behave like that have Ti hidden agenda. As a behavioral pattern that is rather common actually. It depends more on what are the motivations behind the behavior.

Correct and good point. The mistake people make here over and over again is to think that they can interpret the motivations behind the behaviour they have observed (and interpreted) with total accuracy, and also that there can be only one possible explanation for that kind of behaviour. They are actually very naive in that respect.

[mm]

Correct and good point. The mistake people make here over and over again is to think that they can interpret the motivations behind the behaviour they have observed (and interpreted) with total accuracy, and also that there can be only one possible explanation for that kind of behaviour. They are actually very naive in that respect.

If you ask me, by stating it that way, you just made the mistake yourself But I understand what you're getting at. It doesn't mean people should stop looking for explanations and stop sharing their thoughts though.

[aestrivex]

I don't have a strong opinion on Hitta's type other than Ti/Fe valuing. Though if he can be a "Ti-IEI," why can't he be an "Fe-LII"?

because of where we are. this is the internet.

i'll respond more thoroughly later, but this is something i've talked about rather extensively with regards to hitta.

[aestrivex]

ok; essentially, you have a situation in this particular community that is more closely related to logic and intuition than to Fe. rick calls the integral type of socionics ILE. i think that this has a great deal to do with the idea that a number of IEIs who are very particularly Ti (and i don't necessarily think such IEIs are "unhealthy" per se), which might be a relatively rare phenomenon IRL, might be attracted here. these are not limited to idiots like hitta/phaedrus/jarno, but are also extended to IEIs like snegledmaca and kioshi (if those people are IEIs) that seem very superficially logical and intellectual.


basically the way i see it, hitta's videos, which are extremely informative about him as a person, display a very different persona than the Ti-blatherer that wanders around here. i think that this would apply to many of the Ti-ish IEIs that go here; they are able to hide under the facade of Ti-systematization and braindeadness over the internet, but they are very different people IRL.

[Phaedrus]

basically the way i see it, hitta's videos, which are extremely informative about him as a person, display a very different persona than the Ti-blatherer that wanders around here. i think that this would apply to many of the Ti-ish IEIs that go here; they are able to hide under the facade of Ti-systematization and braindeadness over the internet, but they are very different people IRL.

Basically, the "Ti-blatherer" wandering around in the heads and coming out of the mouths of idiots like Phaedrus and Hitta are impossible to find in IEIs. Only logical types can think and behave like those two jerks do. That's an empirical fact.

IEIs are much more sophisticated and polite. They would never come up with such ideas, and even less would they try to "force" their ideas onto others, totally disregarding oppositions and rejections of others. Wake up, folks! You must learn the basic differences between logical and ethical types, not insist on confusing them.

[Gilly]

The idea looks rather insane if you take a closer look at it.

Care to explain how it's so "insane?"

[Gilly]

Basically, the "Ti-blatherer" wandering around in the heads and coming out of the mouths of idiots like Phaedrus and Hitta are impossible to find in IEIs. Only logical types can think and behave like those two jerks do. That's an empirical fact.

IEIs are much more sophisticated and polite. They would never come up with such ideas, and even less would they try to "force" their ideas onto others, totally disregarding oppositions and rejections of others. Wake up, folks! You must learn the basic differences between logical and ethical types, not insist on confusing them.

Wow, you called yourself an idiot. Like, explicitly. Either you REALLY spaced out or you're posting here under another name.

[Expat]

If only logical types are keen on "forcing" their ideas onto others, and if Phaedrus likes Lytov's typings so much, perhaps he could explain why Lytov (and others, I believe) typed such people (correctly or incorrectly) as ethical types:

Che Guevara, Adolf ******, Gaddafi (he has his own political views as per his "green book"), Jesus, Mohammed, bin Laden, Leon Trotsky - all typed as ENFj.

Are all those typings wrong? Or perhaps those people weren't having ideas and "forcing" them on others? Yes Phaedrus referred to IEIs, and these are EIEs; but he was referring to ethical vs logical generally.

[marooned]

4shame.

[Expat]

I think you summed it up very well.

[Steve]

I agree that you can definitely find certain INFps with a big Ti emphasis, but Hitta is not one of them. There is NO Ni in hitta lol.

And he's static, and looks it - ever watch his videos? Ti INTj forral.

[aestrivex]

I agree that you can definitely find certain INFps with a big Ti emphasis, but Hitta is not one of them. There is NO Ni in hitta lol.

And he's static, and looks it - ever watch his videos? Ti INTj forral.

thank you for this wonderful display of unadulterated ignorance.

[Steve]

.

In essence, I don't understand why Hitta posts his +/- systems seemingly the same way every time, and then when met with criticism or confusion about it, just reiterates what he said before in somewhat different words. I don't understand why it never seems to change... why it is so strictly adhered to. I don't get it. He doesn't try to make it make sense. He doesn't try to make others see how it might be real and not some systemized-arbitrary-irrelevant-to-reality idea in his mind.

It's like...

Hitta: All corvettes are red and all camaros are blue.
Someone else: But, I've seen a red camaro before.
Hitta: Then it was a corvette. All comaros are blue. All corvettes are red.
Someone else: Sometimes cars are purple, any car can be purple, even camaros and corvettes.
Hitta: All corvettes are red and all comaros are blue. Neither of them are purple.
Someone else: Look, a purple corvette!
Hitta: No, purple corvettes don't exist. Either that's not a corvette, or it's not purple. All corvettes are red.
Someone else: Your theory about corvettes and comaros is full of crap!
Hitta: People here don't like my ideas because they're opposed to innovative new ideas and hate me.

That's what I feel happens. I just don't get it.

lol nice description. Yes unfortunately this is what happens :\.

[Ms. Kensington]

i think i have only seen IEIs go mad with their Ti HA in the case when they are in charge of something and need to Te. Or else, they might over focus on it when dealing with an Fe interest of theirs. For example. I know one who would explain minutae of linguistic syntax for no apparent reason, with no apparent reason in sight.

[Elro]

i think this iis the most wonderful example of Ti vs Te ever.

No it's not (as Herzy pointed out) - it is, however, a good example of the no true Scotsman fallacy.

[misutii]

I've discussed this issue extensively at wikisocion and don't really know what I can add of value here, I'd recommend people go there and read the debate in more depth: http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?t...sus_List/hitta

but basically I disagree with this Ni-Ti IEI thing. I've tried real hard to make sense of it and it just makes my brain hurt.

IEIs that Niffweed mentioned, kioshi & snegledmaca (I've even been mentioned in relation), are socionically different than any of the Ti-IEIs that this little hypothesis shines light on: Phaedrus, hitta etc.

One of the tell-tale signs of IEI is a lack of commitment, whether to these forums or something else, but notice that kioshi, snegledmaca and even I have relatively low post counts, and tend to appear and disappear from the forums for extended periods of time - this is Ni manifesting itself. IEIs that confuse themselves to be ILIs, at first, do not do this due to using Ti, but Ni. Ni is a primarily intellectual function, consider ENTjs, ENFjs, INTps, INFps, all these types have a strong potentical for intellectual activity. It makes sense, in a way, that an IEI would confuse themself for an ILI, simply because both of these are Ni-dominant types. ENTps and ENFps tend to make a similar mistake, in their case due to shared Ne function.

I haven't seen any proper explanation from Niffweed or Expat on Ni (in hitta) yet and in time I'm confident that this whole Ti-IEI will be discarded as its proponents gain a better understanding of IEIs and other types. owww my brain

[misutii]

4) finally, to me he just seems to devalue Te far more than he does Se.

i actually see this as evidence against IEI. the PoLR function is not something that a person is necessarily able to devalue, but rather they purposefully avoid as it can be a source of pain and misunderstanding. when someone is "PoLR"d they tend to overreact and even claim malicious intent against them - this reaction isn't controlled and the individual tends to rely on their strong functions to "strike" back. In the case of IEI, and I would know because I've done this, the reaction often has a Fe sharpened point, hence the reoccurring theme on the forums that IEIs can be emotionally manipulative. Hitta doesn't have the capability to manipulate emotion on that level because he does not have Fe in his ego block.