Self-deprecating humor is common among INFPs, is it not?
INFps and self-deprecating humor
Self-deprecating humor is common among INFPs, is it not?
At least in my case, yes. :wink:
What is it about INFPs that causes this? My reasoned hypothesis is that it stems from the INFP's inherent dislike for formality...as do many other peculiarities of the INFP.
Sure they do ... but I would not say that it is demeaning to them or anyone. They like to do curious imaginative things like this ...
No, they are just being goofy ... no science involved there.Originally Posted by Anonymous
You don't consider socionics to be a science? Oh, well, that's not really relevant to our discussion, is it? I think that a large portion of INFP behaviors are motivated by a sense of irony rather than intrinsic goofiness. I wish there was an INFP around right now to corroborate my statements.
Yes, I would agree with this "sense of irony" with the INFP- most if not all of the humor of an INFP girl i know comes from saying everyday phrases in an ironic tone. Last night for example we were at a movie with loud patrons seated next to us and she told me afterwards, "I did not have a pleasant moviegoing experience!" to be taken in jest of course.
edited
If you're an INFP, then you are a SERIOUS ISTP wannabe and do your best to convince people of that.
Black Molly,
Reasons to believe you are ISTP:
- None of the INFPs here thought you sounded INFP
- Your description of yourself did not sound at all INFP (I immediately thought ISTP and Monica immediately thought ISTx as well)
- You thought the ISTP descriptions came out and slapped you in the face
- You say you worry a lot about correcting/editing your writing
- You say you are more ST than NF in body movements
- You said you wanted to become an assassin
Reasons to believe you are INFP:
- Cone said so (and he lives with you so maybe you are just diffrent from how you come off/describe yourself)
- Your husband's ESTP and we all know that ISTPs and ESTPs can't get along just like me an Herzblut.
Rocky there has been some debate over what type you are, and you yourself did not know at first (and as far as we know that conclusion is quite wrong).
Therefore typing others seems a task better left to the ones who are 100 percent sure.
You must also consider the fact that she seems quite religious. That is more NF than ST, definitely.
{♠x<º))))><¸.·´¯`·.¸IcEPiCk¸.·´¯`·.¸><((((º>x♠ }
ISTjs can be pretty damn religious, but since no one's attempting to push the notion that she is indeed ISTj herself, I suppose my comment is irrelevant.
"To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"
"Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."
Me being unsure of my type has nothing to do with my knowledge of socionics. The problem lies with trying to look at yourself and see yourself the way you can see other people. Your own self-perception plays a role in this. Every time I try to look at my own type now ISTP just seems to make the most sense, I'm just trying to get other peoples views of it. If you haven't noticed, I enjoy going to the "What's My Type" thread and helping other people out finding their type. As for Black Molly, fighting over a religous argument has little to do with her being NF. A lot of diffrent people posed their opinions on it. If you read over her description of herself you would notice that she does NOT sound INFP. Also, like I said above, none of the INFPs here thought she sounded INFP or related to her.Rocky there has been some debate over what type you are, and you yourself did not know at first (and as far as we know that conclusion is quite wrong).
Therefore typing others seems a task better left to the ones who are 100 percent sure.
You must also consider the fact that she seems quite religious. That is more NF than ST, definitely.
I didnt say it does.Me being unsure of my type has nothing to do with my knowledge of socionics.
However, there is a difference between being a master of socionics (understanding all the functions) and being able to type someone. You can be very good at understanding the THEORY behind socionics, and still be not the greatest at typing someone. Inversely, you can be very good at typing someone by knowing the profiles and different interactions of different types, without being a master behind the THEORY behind it all.
and ST vs NF has a lot to do with religion I would argue, not whether or not they are religious, but the amounts how devotely they follow their religion and what parts of it they accept/embrace more than others.
__________________________-
I am arguing that ISTPs dont need confirmation of other's oppinions, especially when it comes to their socionics type. I noticed you enjoy the What's My Type thread, and in it I noticed 2 things which make me doubt the ISTP in you.Every time I try to look at my own type now ISTP just seems to make the most sense, I'm just trying to get other peoples views of it. If you haven't noticed, I enjoy going to the "What's My Type" thread and helping other people out finding their type.
1st....
you saidAn ISTP is very confused with what other's are feeling. We truly dont get people.I'm not confused or anything when it comes to dealing with others
and
2nd....
How the hell is DiNiero ISTP?!
I checked your pic (finally found it on the forum again)... You appear very ENTP... You even seem to have the elongated arms and legs.
{♠x<º))))><¸.·´¯`·.¸IcEPiCk¸.·´¯`·.¸><((((º>x♠ }
Actually, profiles have little to do with typing people. And if you don't think I'm good at typing people then that is an entirly diffrent argument that I'm not going to discuss here but whole heartly disagree with.Inversely, you can be very good at typing someone by knowing the profiles and different interactions of different types, without being a master behind the THEORY behind it all.
http://the16types.info/forums/viewtopic.php?t=867
Maybe you can look at Black Molly's thread and actually give some reasons why you think she is INFP. What are you basing that on? Religon? In that case you have a very superficial view of what the types really are.
For once I agree with Cone. Anyone can just read a simple profile and think it sounds like them.You mean, "all the ISTps I know who don't know Socionics at all..." Note that many people on this forum doubt their types because they know Socionics enough to build up a resistance against the Barnum effect. Then they stop reading personality descriptions at face value and start really looking at themselves from a more objective standpoint. Studying Socionics makes you so much more self-aware.
Just because I have not posted on all of her threads that request her to be typed by others doesnt mean shit. It is not merely based on relgion.Maybe you can look at Black Molly's thread and actually give some reasons why you think she is INFP. What are you basing that on? Religon? In that case you have a very superficial view of what the types really are.
ISTPs do not need praise.I find any defiance from Cone and his sister as utter disrespect. This enrages me and the screaming starts which is just another attempt at manipulation. I want acknowledgement for all the hard work I put into constant housework. I often dream of living in a museum with everything sterile and in its place! Oh, God, Yes!
No ISTP would post their love on a forum for everyone to see, its just exposing your heart too much. We have an inner need to be macho, male or femaleForgive me, Cone. You will never know the depth of my love. I only hope it doesn’t destroy you.
I would argue that a 'socionic virgin' would be able to be typed easier. Once you have read up on all the functions and theory behind it you can become a lot more biased. This is a case of the less you know, the more objective you tend to be in typing yourself. The ones who have the hardest time typing themselves are the ENTPs, which I think you are.For once I agree with Cone. Anyone can just read a simple profile and think it sounds like them.
I would argue that a 'socionic virgin' would be able to be typed easier. Once you have read up on all the functions and theory behind it you can become a lot more biased. This is a case of the less you know, the more objective you tend to be in typing yourself. The ones who have the hardest time typing themselves are the ENTPs, which I think you are.[/b]For once I agree with Cone. Anyone can just read a simple profile and think it sounds like them.
{♠x<º))))><¸.·´¯`·.¸IcEPiCk¸.·´¯`·.¸><((((º>x♠ }
I am always worried about whether or not people actually like me and I always have this feeling like I don't really "know". However, I don't have a problem talking with people *if* I want to.An ISTP is very confused with what other's are feeling. We truly dont get people.
2nd....
How the hell is DiNiero ISTP?!
Well, Dmytri Lytov also typed him as an ISTP. What type do you think he is? I think that has something to do with the subtypes. DiNiero comes off a lot like a logical subtype, and I mentioned in my thread that this is the type that I think I am.
I think you're basing that on yourself because you "knew" right away that you were ISTP. There are some people in every type that seem to be sure of their type right away while their are people in every type who are unsure. There have been a couple other ISTPs on here like that. And you mentioned ENTP.org before, I don't think that everyone on there is actually ENTP themselves.I am arguing that ISTPs dont need confirmation of other's oppinions, especially when it comes to their socionics type.
This is very ENTPish behaviour. ISTPs truly do not care what other's think except for a few people very close to them. ENTPs: As their hidden agenda is to be loved, they sometimes will always hope for people to like them. They wont truly know since they also lack in the ability to know what other's are feeling.I am always worried about whether or not people actually like me and I always have this feeling like I don't really "know". However, I don't have a problem talking with people *if* I want to.
Im gonna drop the DiNiero thing, Beta aint my home turf anyways...
{♠x<º))))><¸.·´¯`·.¸IcEPiCk¸.·´¯`·.¸><((((º>x♠ }
I have said the same thing many times before.I would still argue its pretty damn good as long as you have a good memory recall and have met other's of that type. It improves with practice and interaction knowing those other people's types.
Question about ENTP.org; why does everyone there sound like an Introvert? I doubt even most of them are ENTP. I think MBTI people seem to flock towars ENTP because their decription of it sounds so good.
In the beginning I was able to type people accurately based only on the 16 profiles I've read.Actually, profiles have little to do with typing people.
http://forum.socionix.com
I don't see what's so important about the possibility of extraterrestrial life. It's just more people to declare war on.
EVERYONE PLZ CONTINUE TO UPLOAD INFINITE AMOUNT OF PICS OF "CUTE" CATS AND PUPPIES. YOU KNOW WE GIVE A SHIT!!
That is weird, I get along just fine with Herzblut ... of course, we are look-a-likes ...- Your husband's ESTP and we all know that ISTPs and ESTPs can't get along just like me an Herzblut.
I have dicovered that ENTps and ISTps do not ever seem to get along well, either. Even though they often try.
For some reason I have a hard time trying to understand what the profiles at socionics.com are trying to convey. I think they were by an INTj, because it seems to me like the authour was trying to pack hugh amounts of information into as little space as he possibly could when writting those descriptions. I have problems understanding subjects that are conveyed in an over-simplified manner, anyhow.
Profiles have a lot to do with typing people, especially since the socionics.com profiles include physical descriptions. I am merely arguing you cannot type someone if you arent one hundred percent about what type you are... An ISTP with over developed Ne? WTF is that? As you develop intuition sensory is taken away, it is a give and take, you cant have your cake and eat it to.Actually, profiles have little to do with typing people. And if you don't think I'm good at typing people then that is an entirly diffrent argument that I'm not going to discuss here but whole heartly disagree with.
You can type person on:
Their relationship with another person
Their behavioural tendencies (slowly figuring out F vs T, S vs N, J vs P, etc
Their visual appearance (physical features, sometimes clothing)
Their speech, wording, and choice of vocabulary (arguably hardest way)
and of course testing.
Now, the socionics.com profile contains visual appearance, it also contains some behaviour tendencies, and some vague references to speech.
To discount the profiles is not efficient. You can use the profiles and build upon them further observations you have made as a better tool for typing others.
rMcNew, is correct. I guess it depends on what type you are to start with? I find the profiles help a ton with typing, along with behavioural tendencies.For some reason I have a hard time trying to understand what the profiles at socionics.com are trying to convey. I think they were by an INTj, because it seems to me like the authour was trying to pack hugh amounts of information into as little space as he possibly could when writting those descriptions. I have problems understanding subjects that are conveyed in an over-simplified manner, anyhow.
as for the ESTP <-> ISTP relationship, I get along fine with ESTPs, but it is on for a while than off for a while. Its more better in a 1 on 1 situation with them.
ENTPs description is far from the ideal one. At least on socionics.com's website. If you read up on ENTP.org the ones that constantly are contributing instead of trolling are definitely ENTPs... They love conversation. I found it funny, they had a poll and overwhelmingly admitted to being narcisists, who admits that!?
{♠x<º))))><¸.·´¯`·.¸IcEPiCk¸.·´¯`·.¸><((((º>x♠ }
That is not what I was saying ... ENTps have the opposite problem of over-complicating simple matters, and INTjs have the opposite problem of the over-simplification of complex matters [or maybe that is just a problem with introverts and extroverts in general?]. I have absolutly no clue how to type correctly from the socionics.com description, because I have problems understanding what the author was attempting to convey with his oversimplified writting style.rMcNew, s correct. I guess it depends on what type you are to start with? I find the profiles help a ton with typing, along with behavioural tendencies.For some reason I have a hard time trying to understand what the profiles at socionics.com are trying to convey. I think they were by an INTj, because it seems to me like the authour was trying to pack hugh amounts of information into as little space as he possibly could when writting those descriptions. I have problems understanding subjects that are conveyed in an over-simplified manner, anyhow.
as for the ESTP <-> ISTP relationship, I get along fine with ESTPs, but it is on for a while than off for a while. Its more better in a 1 on 1 situation with them.
ENTPs description is far from the ideal one. At least on socionics.com's website. If you read up on ENTP.org the ones that constantly are contributing instead of trolling are definitely ENTPs... They love conversation. I found it funny, they had a poll and overwhelmingly admitted to being narcisists, who admits that!?
So, I can not say that the descriptions are ones by which just anyone can use to type people. It is impossible ...
I don't agree with the part about "losing" your sensing. A lot of people believe that you can develop your weaker functions without losing control of your stronger ones (there was a thread a while back on how the develop and work together). As for the Ne, it's called dual-seeking. You can explore new possibilites while still having Si as your dominant function.An ISTP with over developed Ne? WTF is that? As you develop intuition sensory is taken away, it is a give and take, you cant have your cake and eat it to.
I do!
an ISTP wouldnt want to do the warm fuzzy thing... Sex than a cigarette...
OK so what my religious statement was justified...
Still INFP.
HOOOOOOOAH
{♠x<º))))><¸.·´¯`·.¸IcEPiCk¸.·´¯`·.¸><((((º>x♠ }
Wow, so you probably ARE INFP. It sounds like you try to come off as ISTP as possible, and you show way more S and T tendencies than the other INFPs, but mentioning this before could've helped. Tisk tisk tisk, so absent-minded. Cone was right (oh, God... his ego
.
Loves black, wanted to be an assassin, talks about facts and science, tries to bring people down to the "real world"... oddest INFP I've ever heard of.
I don't know whether to be embarrassed or happy.I guess I'm just want you pretend to be, HA!
ENTP!Tisk tisk tisk, so absent-minded.
{♠x<º))))><¸.·´¯`·.¸IcEPiCk¸.·´¯`·.¸><((((º>x♠ }
I think that illustrates how it's easy to get sidetracked by hobbies and interests and little things that people say.Loves black, wanted to be an assassin, talks about facts and science, tries to bring people down to the "real world"... oddest INFP I've ever heard of.
I'm not denying that certain types flock towards certain interests. And that can be helpful. However, I bet one could find representatives of each type interested in one thing, but why they like it and how that interest manifests itself would be different for each one.
TiNe, LII, INTj, etc.
"I feel like I should be making a sarcastic comment right now, but you're just so cute!" - Shego, Kim Possible
If you have what seems to be such a wonderful family... You must be married to your dual, which would only make sense that he is ESTP and you INFP.
Duality is the ultimate (some argue only) type of love!
{♠x<º))))><¸.·´¯`·.¸IcEPiCk¸.·´¯`·.¸><((((º>x♠ }
Hmm brainwashable you say?
I heard next to INFJs they are the most likely to have psychic experiences...
Strong NFs usually do it seems.
{♠x<º))))><¸.·´¯`·.¸IcEPiCk¸.·´¯`·.¸><((((º>x♠ }
IcEPiCK, I think you are always putting too much stock in the THEORY of duality. Duality has nothing to do with love.
Socionics itself is a theory, you obviously believe in most aspects of it as you invest a decent proportion of your time on this forum (and ENTP.org).IcEPiCK, I think you are always putting too much stock in the THEORY of duality. Duality has nothing to do with love.
Duality has a lot to do with love, you obviously have never experienced it to know how significant it truly is.
Nothing is more real...
Black Molly, what I do?
{♠x<º))))><¸.·´¯`·.¸IcEPiCk¸.·´¯`·.¸><((((º>x♠ }
Ok, I DO believe in a lot of the socionics theory, but I think you tend to talk about this duality thing too much. Whenever you talk about duality you seem to be talking about love, which is diffrent from duality. You can fall in love with someone of any type. Transigent wrote a little thread about duality, and he pretty much hits on the nose. I know you've said you've experienced love in duality, but maybe when you feel the same thing OUTSIDE of duality you will see what I mean. "Love" is a complicated thing and I don't want to bother even trying to explain what I think it is (nor should other people try and explain it). There is another socionics theory called "Erotic Attitudes". I think it would also be very good to have a relationship within one of these groups; for one thing they seem to communicate on a physicla/sexual level better than duals. Why do you think that so may INTJs and ENFPs seem to want each other? Why is it that I've heard a lot of people say that they wouldn't think to be attracted to their dual? For ISTPs, thier Erotic Attitude includes ISFPs, ESFJs, ISTPs and ESTJs (and don't be fooled, some ESTJs are actually HOT!).Socionics itself is a theory, you obviously believe in most aspects of it as you invest a decent proportion of your time on this forum (and ENTP.org).
P.S. Weren't you banned twice from ENTP.org?
There you go with your assumptions again.maybe when you feel the same thing OUTSIDE of duality you will see what I mean.
I have experienced both, duality is so @#$#ING different. The reason they think they are not attracted to their dual at first is because DUALITY takes time. Unlike the other idealistic bullshit, where its love at first sight. It doesnt work that way. Its takes a long time of seperation or some other pattern of interaction involving time for both to realize they miss each other so much. I find all types to be attractive, just ENFPs to be the most attractive to me.
and I love how you threw in that ENTP.org comment at the end as if I am insulting your delicate layer of existence. I merely used it as proof of your belief in the socionics theory as a whole. Yet you discount duality as a mere interaction which it is not. Your dual completes your energy and makes you a system of one. Thats why its so addictive, you work better in the presence of your dual. I could ramble on about the energy one feels when touching their dual, but I won't, you cannot comprehend it unless you have experienced it FIRST HAND. Even Slava wrote it was something he couldnt completely explain, something that made socionics beautiful. For duality work, you need more than just being a dual withsome... Other factors apply. However, when it clicks, it isnt a just a click...
I get along great with ISFPs... Now if you think an ISTP could get along with an ESTJ in an intimate relationship, you really need to study YOUR type more.
You are hardcore ENTP the more I talk to you. You do not appear ISTP to many other people here either. There is even a thread, Rocky an ESFP?...
(An ISTP would write that first thing and at least attempt to appear some what macho instead of the P.S.-B.S.)
Apparently other types are not welcome, so you should fit right in, being an ENTP on ENTP.org. You are the farthest thing from an ISTP, even in your subtle tactics. I went on that forum to stir shit up, I admit I loved doing it to. They are self admitted narcissists, they can handle it.
I truly feel sorry for you if you have yet to experience the beauty that is duality.
hooooah
{♠x<º))))><¸.·´¯`·.¸IcEPiCk¸.·´¯`·.¸><((((º>x♠ }
*sigh*
Don't bother posting here anymore!
I just asked Cone and he said . . .
ISTP.
*sigh
{♠x<º))))><¸.·´¯`·.¸IcEPiCk¸.·´¯`·.¸><((((º>x♠ }
The only other possibility is that I would say that Rocky could be an ESTj ... but, I can not say with assurity.
That is taking that he is not really ISTp ...
Hes not aggressive enough to be ESTJ, he is almost passive agressive...
an ESTJ would say some very harsh comments, hes been much more subtle.
{♠x<º))))><¸.·´¯`·.¸IcEPiCk¸.·´¯`·.¸><((((º>x♠ }
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote