Don't you mean sensing instead of sensual?
My apologies. As an English grad student, and a nerd, I have a special affection for the history of words, for their etymology. Thus, I sometimes use words as they originally were used, or with the meanings that their roots imply. "Sensual," at least when it was first used, carried with it the idea of "having to do with the five physical senses." But to be truthful, I think such an understanding of the word's origin can be helpful (and if you're a nerd like me, fun).
An INFP, with their extroverted intuition, understands the world around them in an intuitive way, letting all their sensory input blend into one melodic impression. From what I can tell about myself and about others, the following analogy might be helpful. Think of our five physical senses as various colors of paint--red, blue, green, so on. A sensing person absorbs the distinct sensory impression of each color individually; an intuitive person lets the colors swim together into a rainbow of paint on the white canvas of our consciousness. (I welcome
respectful, considerate of my feelings responses to this metaphor by sensing and intuitive folk alike.)
So simply put (but still using the metaphor), sensors appreciate separately each brush stroke of the painting of their understanding. Intuitives can see a painting even where one is not, such as if a person dropped a bunch of paint cans on a floor, letting spill forth an accidental rainbow onto the tiles.
I have have an ISFP sister, and she has no signs of intuition and is pretty cruel to the pets while not even noticing that they are distressed.
It pains me to hear this. Do you know why she is this way? I would be loath to attribute this simply to her being an S and not an N.
You raise an interesting point, though. It is one that I have thought much about. Does the ISFP, The Artist,
have difficulty empathizing with other beings? The reason I have wondered this will be made known immediately. Before we get there, let me issue the following caveat: the following will be a generalization. It is not meant to hurt or offend anyone; it is used simply to gain understanding.
Many of the artists I have met in my admittedly short life have come across to me as superficial. Regardless of their artistic talent, many of them have shown a desire to create beauty through the use of such physical media as paint, clay, fabric, etc. However, I have been amazed to discover just how "unfeeling" many of my artists friends have been capable of being.
Again, this is not said to offend anyone. I am no saint myself; I'm not saying these things to judge. Anyway, back to the discussion.
What I'm getting at is this. I have a tendency to romanticize beauty and its creation. I have a tendency to idealize (predictably enough, given that I'm an INFP) art and artists. It is my instinct to believe that all artists are good, caring people, that anyone who dedicates his or her life to the creation of art (beauty) is a deeply feeling person. I have been proven wrong on more than one occasion.
The question remains--why? Why isn't a person who dedicates him or herself to beauty not by definition a good person, one who cares about the feelings and well being of this planet and her life? If artists are not worthwhile people, then who is? Of course, maybe the answer is no one. *shudder*
Bookmarks