A very simple quotation.Quote:
ISFj's can be like total pushovers at times. Definitely moreso than the INFj.
I'm not going to get into explaining this, just tell what you think about the quote.
Printable View
A very simple quotation.Quote:
ISFj's can be like total pushovers at times. Definitely moreso than the INFj.
I'm not going to get into explaining this, just tell what you think about the quote.
no..
UDP, please stop! I don't know what it is. Maybe the avatar. It all just seems ridiculous.
Ummmm....about the quote.
I don't think either INFJs/ISFJs are push-overs. These are types who basically do everything according to their "system." They're not exactly "go with the flow" people. If you're talking about more physically assertive situations, maybe INFJs seem more weak. If you're talking about shooting around ideas in a meeting, maybe ISFJs seem more weak. I don't really see "pushover" though.
Maybe what UDP is referring to is the fact that an EII, with Se PoLR won't always realise when they're fighting a 'losing battle' and will persist, whilst the ESI will revise their position and back-down 'strategically' in line with assessing the 'conditions of battle' via their Se-creative. I do think sometimes EIIs persist where ESIs desist, but I don't think that should necessary be taken as the ESI being 'more of a pushover'.
I think you mean, "Maybe what whoever wrote that quote is referring to..."? I don't think it's been made clear yet who wrote that, and I'm thinking the anonymity is intentional so as to focus on the content.
Anyway, generally speaking, I wouldn't say that an ISFj is going to be more of a pushover than an INFj, though I think it would probably depend on the circumstances.
I fight losing battles all the time (and choose to) if I feel there's good reason behind it, but hell if I'm not trying to win 'em all. Most of the time there's not really much cause, so why would I bother putting energy struggling over something that doesn't matter to me?
As far as the original question: don't care.
Expat will always be LSE Delta to me though. But I get the concept.
I don't think either type is necessarily a pushover. But I think it's safe to say that both of those types have a sort of nervous energy to them, that can be perceived as a weakness. Also whether a person is strong or weak or not varies so much in human relationships that I generally view the meaning obsolete. Especially because I've so easily been both the top dog and bottom of the barrel in social situations myself... for some pretty weird reasons.
I used to be a little bit of a push over when I was younger but that is a change I have noticed greatly in myself.
As for which type might be more of a pushover... I would say ISFjs. I think an INFj might be less likely to give in to something they don't want to do whereas an ISFj might do it but not without some inward hostility. I would watch out, though, because after a while an ISFj might push back.
Still, I think circumstances and other non-type related factors would better predict a person to be a pushover than type.
Neither type is by definition a pushover. ISFjs would be less likely to be pushovers because they have Se in the ego block and therefore are better at handling confrontation when it comes up.
.
Congrats, Diana!!!! :D
.
regarding the ESIs and EIIs I know, the EIIs are more likely to give in, without *visible* retaliation. but do not underestimate the other forms of retaliation that exist such as, my favorite, *the silent treatment*. ESIs are more likely to be confrontational about it, yes. but INFjs have their own ways of getting their way.
Actually, what this thread was about is that someone who, imo, doesn't understand socionics properly, said the quote in the original post. I was going to use this thread as a means to show various opinions on the matter.
I wasn't implying anything myself about the original quote, what it meant, or whether it was true or false.
From my experience, INFjs and ISFps are the pushovers, not ISFjs.
lolQuote:
Originally Posted by B&D
I don't think either type is necessarily a pushover either -- meaning that it's function-related (cmon lol). I haven't met many ISFjs, but the ones I did were by no means pushovers. I have met a fair number of INFj pushovers, but most of these people were enneagram 9's, which influences it much more than having "weak Se" lol.Quote:
I don't think either type is necessarily a pushover. But I think it's safe to say that both of those types have a sort of nervous energy to them, that can be perceived as a weakness. Also whether a person is strong or weak or not varies so much in human relationships that I generally view the meaning obsolete. Especially because I've so easily been both the top dog and bottom of the barrel in social situations myself... for some pretty weird reasons.
I'm not a pushover. I like to do what I can to help people and all that, but I have lines and limits and I always stand firm.
...that are not always immediately apparent to the manipulating party. Sometimes as people withdraw in attempt to avoid conflict, as in the case with 9s, or in seeking the solace of their inner world, like 4s, they can draw people into those things without knowing it.
I don't mean to suggest that this kinda thing is necessarily rampant among or limited to withdrawn types, but it is certainly visible in them.
I think the 9's manipulation is more activity-based, attempting to re-balance things. The 4's manipulation is more emotional, driven by a desire for attention. And I'd say people know what they're doing most of the time -- whether they'll admit it to themselves or not.
How would it apply to 5's? They're the last people to care about attention or harmony. I suppose they could do it in some attempt to prove their "expertise" or generate some feeling of control over the external world.Quote:
I don't mean to suggest that this kinda thing is necessarily rampant among or limited to withdrawn types, but it is certainly visible in them.
Well, yeah. I would say that people know what they're doing, but may not see (or admit to themselves) that it is manipulative.
Well, the whole approach of 5s offering their thoughts or "expertise" to the world is, in essence, manipulative. And I guess it's kinda like you suggested. But the kinda manipulativeness I was talking about before really tends to occur in the context of closer relationships, and I haven't had a lot of experience being close to 5s. So I dunno.Quote:
How would it apply to 5's? They're the last people to care about attention or harmony. I suppose they could do it in some attempt to prove their "expertise" or generate some feeling of control over the external world.
From a purely "socionical" point of view - so, I'm not going to mix my personal observations with it - it's not an easy comparison: while lacking in Se might result in less of a tendency to steamroll over situations, INFjs are positivists and ISFjs are negativist IJ's, thus the latter is more likely to consider the negative consequences of straying from one's duty, whereas the former might be less inclined to do so.