Another INFJ post - I am too curious for your feedback (intuitive communication)

[orange_coat]

NF who is once again curious for your NT perspective. Here is a post which I copy-pasted from the INFJ comm:

Comments

[athaira9]

It depends. I don't expect people to read my mind - I expect them not to try and take what I say as if I actually meant it. Somehow, that doesn't seem to work very often, though...it's no just intuitives, though. Sensors may tap into the 'if you say X it means y' scripted data that I don't know about.

[orange_coat]

"Sensors may tap into the 'if you say X it means y' scripted data that I don't know about."

I have to agree with this. I probably have a tendency to overlook y when someone says x.

[risenphoenixkai]

Very little of what's written in that post is applicable in any way to INTJs. Especially not this INTJ.

This, specifically, is the most inapplicable part of the post:

A specific example regarding myself, I used to be always paranoid about what others thought of me as a person. I would try to influence what others thought of me or compulsively figure it out, which I soon learned was really codependency. I learned to be myself, and realize it doesn't matter what anyone thinks of me.

I begin with the attitude this poster had to learn: I don't give a crap about people's opinions of me. The idea of actively trying to influence other people's feelings toward me is repugnant, and "compulsively trying to figure it out" isn't something I'd waste even an erg of energy on.

I've learned to make sure I am aware of my motives, and I've learned to make sure that my motives are well-conveyed.Again, not something I had to learn. It's innate, or near enough that I've never given it a second thought

weird...

[tricstmr]

.. I don't think miscommunication usually breaks down because of N:N differences or problems.. and I do find your examples rather strange

Re: weird...

[janne]

most strange was the part about "motives".. when I try to communicate with someone, my "motive" is--95% of the time--to either gain or impart information..

That was pretty much my main reaction to that post as well. There seemed to be an underlaying assumption that the motive for communication (also for INTJs) is to be likeable. I consider the main purpose and motivation for communication to be transmitting information at the best possible signal/noise ration. Which is why communicating with other INTJ's is such a blessed relief, they don't bother with the superfluous details, social posturing, and attempts to read between the lines. At least not the ones I've interacted with IRL.

[night_princess]

> Why would we assume that we are more likeable if the loved ones around us had to telepathically figure us out?

I don't. I thought that was just a bad stereotype.

> I have no idea what the psychology behind that is

My first reaction was that silly little girls watched too much Disney and didn't realize it was fantasy.

OK, just for fun, if I wanted to randomly speculate... There might arguably be support for this in terms of evolution: babies can't talk, so if the mother can figure out what the baby needs without being explicitly told, then the baby is more likely to be survive. Mothers are supposed to be hormonally wired to love their babies, but hormones are messy and not very precise. So, sometimes the signals get crossed, and they think that all "true love" requires psychic insight into the loved one's needs.

> (humans are more quick to want to be understood.. rather than be the one who is understanding).No, I prefer to understand than be understood. My underlying instincts give me positive feedback when I understand,

[night_princess]

> I've learned to make sure I am aware of my motives
> Why would we assume that we are more likeable if the loved ones around us had to telepathically figure us out?

That juxtaposition is interesting. This is something I suspect of an INFP I know: You didn't fully understand your motives, so you needed your loved ones to help you find them. If they couldn't do that, you don't feel loved because they couldn't give you what you needed. Once you figured out what your motives were, you freed yourself from the need for your loved ones to be telepathic.

[jeroentiggelman]

Possibly. I read it more simply as: I do not claim for myself what I want, but I expect you to give it to me anyway. That seems a clear cut case where transmitting more intention would probably lead to better results.