Discussion of INFj description from socionics.com

[Joy]

Is this a good one?

INFjs are generally very modest, which is also noticeable in their choice of clothes. However from time to time they may wear something very flashy according to the latest fashion especially is noticeable in males. INFjs prefer to observe people for sometime before making contact in order to identify social hierarchy in a group. Normally INFjs do not show initiative when making contact for the first time.

INFjs can be very touchy and this may strain the easy atmosphere of a conversation. Sometimes they adopt a monotone speech pattern that can snuff out all playfulness in others. INFjs have a special ability to listen to people and as a result they are often asked for advice or sympathy. They never push people away and are always prepared to listen for as long as it takes to make others feel better, even if they theoretically have better things to do. INFjs are always ready to help friends in difficult life situations. They care not with words but with real actions.

INFjs do not really make good cheats or frauds. This however, does not stop them from trying sometimes. And even if they do, they are likely to feel pretty bad about themselves afterwards. This gives INFjs a reputation as naive and impractical people. INFjs are very conscientious in their work . They do everything carefully, paying great attention to the quality of their labour. INFjs demand cleanliness and order. At home they tend to keep everything tidy, carefully storing their belonging, especially females INFjs. They like a calm and measured style of life and therefore try to prepare and anticipate everything beforehand, often making them quite reliable.

INFjs know how to establish peace between conflicting sides. They take a neutral position in the conflict, often being fired upon from both sides. They rarely push, shout or show aggressiveness. Instead they punish offenders by completely ignoring them until they realise their mistakes and apologise. INFjs do not like to project themselves: when everybody works, they work too, when everybody rests, they rest too. INFjs often cannot stand violence, conflict and graphic depiction of injuries.

[April]

It’s okay. I can only tell you how well I think it describes me, though…

Me
Kind of me
Not me

INFjs are generally very modest, which is also noticeable in their choice of clothes. However from time to time they may wear something very flashy according to the latest fashion especially is noticeable in males. (I don’t know the latest fashions, but I think that I dress pretty well. Probably my favorite fabric to wear is black lace. Black lace doesn’t really scream “INFj”, huh?) INFjs prefer to observe people for sometime before making contact in order to identify social hierarchy in a group. Normally INFjs do not show initiative when making contact for the first time.

INFjs can be very touchy and this may strain the easy atmosphere of a conversation. (Unfortunately, yeah. I notice people watching what they say in front of me sometimes. It’s usually just Alphas and Betas.) Sometimes they adopt a monotone speech pattern that can snuff out all playfulness in others. INFjs have a special ability to listen to people and as a result they are often asked for advice or sympathy. They never push people away and are always prepared to listen for as long as it takes to make others feel better, even if they theoretically have better things to do. INFjs are always ready to help friends in difficult life situations. They care not with words but with real actions. (I have a hard time understanding this, because a lot of the time, you can only care with words. My boyfriend’s ESFj mom shows her care by baking cookies, but never says a nice word about anybody, which is just whack to me.)

INFjs do not really make good cheats or frauds. This however, does not stop them from trying sometimes. (Hah, no, I’d say it does stop me.) And even if they do, they are likely to feel pretty bad about themselves afterwards. This gives INFjs a reputation as naive and impractical people. (I think that the causal relationship described here doesn’t make sense. We can’t be frauds, so we’re seen as naïve and impractical? What? I guess I can be naïve when it comes to people sometimes, because I sometimes expect too much (although nothing more than what I expect of myself). Then I end up being let down.) INFjs are very conscientious in their work . They do everything carefully, paying great attention to the quality of their labour. INFjs demand cleanliness and order. At home they tend to keep everything tidy, carefully storing their belonging, especially females INFjs. (I wish!) They like a calm and measured style of life and therefore try to prepare and anticipate everything beforehand, often making them quite reliable.

INFjs know how to establish peace between conflicting sides. They take a neutral position in the conflict, often being fired upon from both sides. They rarely push, shout or show aggressiveness. Instead they punish offenders by completely ignoring them until they realise their mistakes and apologise. (No, if somebody really upsets me, I tell them. I don't like it eating away at me.) INFjs do not like to project themselves: when everybody works, they work too, when everybody rests, they rest too. INFjs often cannot stand violence, conflict and graphic depiction of injuries.

[eunice]

I think most of what Joy has written is generally applicable to IXFx.

[Megan]

I think most of what Joy has written is generally applicable to IXFx.

Eunice what Joy posted is from here:
http://socionics.com/prof/infj.htm

Also, I do not think most of it is applicable generally to IXFx.

[eunice]

edited

[Joy]

I'm trying to figure out how fitting these descriptions are. For example, I relate as well to most of the ISTp description as I do to the ENTj description. There's a thread in What's My Type right now about a Delta introvert whose wife says is described equally well by the INFj description and the ISTp description. It seems pretty clear to me though that he has a Fe PoLR.

I'm beginning to think that it would be better for me to focus on functional analysis, quadra values, and dichotomies and just ignore the descriptions. I thought for a while that the ones on socionics.com (exept for the VI notes that SG added). The best ones that I've read have been the Stratiyevskaya descriptions... which are WAY too long to read and remember what's said for each type, much less have others read. The ones written by forum members on socion.info are praised by many, but I personally don't really like them. The ones beneath them with the functional breakdown are good, but too abstract to have others read. Other type descriptions are often poorly translated and too vague.

[April]

I'm beginning to think that it would be better for me to focus on functional analysis, quadra values, and dichotomies and just ignore the descriptions.

I agree. Some websites (try to) do the functional analysis and quadra values, but I think that the dichotomies are neglected. Is there a website that lists that stuff? Whenever I want to read about dichotomies, I have to search the board.

[Joy]

not that I know of

[Minde]

April, have you read through any of Smilex's Socionics 101? It's a little long, but I've found it very helpful.




edit: changed the url

[vigilante]

I have terrible times with EII...
They never get the point of explorational discussions (takes information inappropriately e.g. cannot hold contradictory perspectives in mind at the same time; cannot reserve judgment; apparently they see only one truth)... and most conversations end up with me walking off after they deliver their (uninsightful) final moral judgments ...

[That Guy]

I have terrible times with EII...
They never get the point of explorational discussions (takes IN information inappropriately e.g. cannot hold contradictory perspectives in mind at the same time; cannot reserve judgment; apparently they see only one truth)... and most conversations end up with me walking off after they deliver their (uninsightful) final moral judgments ...

I wouldn't use that to describe me at all. I will generally always see things from a different perspective.

[vigilante]

I have terrible times with EII...
They never get the point of explorational discussions (takes IN information inappropriately e.g. cannot hold contradictory perspectives in mind at the same time; cannot reserve judgment; apparently they see only one truth)... and most conversations end up with me walking off after they deliver their (uninsightful) final moral judgments ...

EIIs do hold contradictory perspectives in mind due to in the conscious block. sometimes though, EIIs may appear otherwise as they may not think about actively stating the fact that they r tossing around so many contradictory perspectives.

I must have mistyped the person.

But on a related discussion -- I thought that is supposed to be more involved in assigning a potential (and self-improvement) as opposed to understanding the state?

[mikemex]

My boyfriend’s ESFj mom shows her care by baking cookies, but never says a nice word about anybody, which is just whack to me.

Perhaps you typed her wrong, because she seems more ISFj to me than ESFj.

[vigilante]

But on a related discussion -- I thought that is supposed to be more involved in assigning a potential (and self-improvement) as opposed to understanding the state?

well, first it tries to understand the state or perspective and then will spawn new ideas or present possible solutions.

I have previously understood as being more prejudiced on individual ideas than ,that is, would (almost subconsciously) make assumptions about what is more important than other things (i.e. "what are the 'central ideas'?"). is probably also unconcerned about total consistency (i.e. having a 'hacky' short term solution is acceptable until it breaks again). wants a solution for the present situation.

That being said, wouldn't this make EII's relatively aggressive in their pursuit of moral justice?

[vigilante]

I have previously understood as being more prejudiced on individual ideas than ,that is, would (almost subconsciously) make assumptions about what is more important than other things (i.e. "what are the 'central ideas'?").

neither nor r prejudiced as they r perceiving functions. blame prejudice on these guys... (the judging functions).

Right, I probably didn't really mean "more prejudiced"... maybe "better prioritized" would have been a better word.

is probably also unconcerned about total consistency (i.e. having a 'hacky' short term solution is acceptable until it breaks again). wants a solution for the present situation.

out of control Ne makes trying to make a point, pointless! it's anything but consistent! with Ne ideas r chaotic and random whereas with Ni ideas tend to flow in some ultimate direction.

For the most part, I'd actually either disagree, or at the very least argue that the chaotic/direction description is too subjective. If anything, , being the antithesis of , has the least will in any of the functions. encodes at least a little bit more information about goals and probably better answers questions like "Is this better?" Leading accepts the explicit refusal to answer such question unless the question was sufficiently well qualified with specific details. Even then, such answers are still given a dubious-ness measure of some kind.

That being said, wouldn't this make EII's relatively aggressive in their pursuit of moral justice?

i don't think "aggressive in their pursuit of moral justice" is accurate for EIIs. when u say that, it makes me think of ExFjs or maybe even ISFjs( as their 2nd/creative function).

Finally, back to the main point
Anyone can be aggressive in some perspective. is concerned with the physical perception, willpower and goals -- the kind of aggression associated with it is more easily observed, but I think every element has its form of aggression. For example, I could easily see myself being capable of using combinations of and to make an opponent feel like they are a worthless piece of mistake if some hypothetical conflict occasion really arises.

More specifically, aggression might correspond to "cold wars" or moral-based attacks or perhaps making someone feel like they are evil and repent their identity.

[vigilante]

More specifically, aggression might correspond to "cold wars" or moral-based attacks or perhaps making someone feel like they are evil and repent their identity.

On a personal (ILI) note, having a hidden agenda, and PoLR, I handle aggression much much better than aggression. When faced with aggression, I feel like I have an active interest in resolving the situation. Although it is a weak function, I find myself interested and engaged in resolving the "cold war" or whatever. And any progress that I make in defusing the situation (or alleviating it) makes me feel like I have done something meaningful. Thoughts like "I am so happy that we repaired the relationship" will pop up quite often.

On the other hand, with aggression... my first thoughts in mind are generally bunches of swear words with the attitude that "oh my god, I can't believe that I have to be bothered with this trivial drama." I snap easily under pressure.