# Theory about why NFs have higher rates of people with mental disorders



## infphile (Nov 20, 2013)

This especially applies in the case of the INFP, which I read people often get mistyped as due to a mental illness which makes them more likely to answer the way an INFP. I shouldn't find that amusing but as an INFP I do. Anyway, I thought maybe part of it is that we feel isolated and different from other people, especially as a young teen and especially if we don't find the right people or spend too long around one type of people, and especially if we spend a long time alone. Thus, we latch onto to simple explanations, especially if we haven't yet found Myers-Briggs. Perhaps I am projecting personal experience too much. Thoughts?


----------



## Xenograft (Jul 1, 2013)

We are the most subjective temperament and we have the capability to inflict our idealised realities onto the physical world (within the confines of our perception, of course), thus we can delude ourselves into believing our own insanities.


----------



## chimeric (Oct 15, 2011)

“It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.”

Just sayin'.


----------



## Belzy (Aug 12, 2013)

Normal people are dumb people.


----------



## infphile (Nov 20, 2013)

chimeric said:


> “It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.”
> 
> Just sayin'.


Agreed. Nice quote.


----------



## lightsandloudnoises (Mar 16, 2014)

chimeric said:


> “It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.”
> 
> Just sayin'.





infphile said:


> Agreed. Nice quote.


Blaming anxiety on external things, like society and other people, doesn't help though. It's all part of that way of thinking.


----------



## C3bBb (Oct 22, 2013)

chimeric said:


> “It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.”
> 
> Just sayin'.


Begging the question, how DID society get so sick in the first place?


----------



## infphile (Nov 20, 2013)

lightsandloudnoises said:


> Blaming anxiety on external things, like society and other people, doesn't help though. It's all part of that way of thinking.


I don't know. When I have severe anxiety I focus on that anxiety and not its rational causes. Lately I had anxiety and assigned it to events coming up in my life, which helped me to deal. Showing myself that there are smaller causes helps to cope, so yes, I suppose pinning it to something that feels as out of your control as society wouldn't help. Though when looking at objectively you may.


----------



## infphile (Nov 20, 2013)

Senshu_Ben_Gone said:


> Begging the question, how DID society get so sick in the first place?


When it started being run by rich men who had their own interests at heart?


----------



## infphile (Nov 20, 2013)

Senshu_Ben_Gone said:


> Begging the question, how DID society get so sick in the first place?


When it started being run by rich men who had their own interests at heart?


----------



## Antipode (Jul 8, 2012)

Humans all revolve around relationships.

+

NF indulge in relationships.

=

Higher chance for something to go wrong and screw their brains up.


----------



## C3bBb (Oct 22, 2013)

infphile said:


> When it started being run by rich men who had their own interests at heart?


Can you solely blame it on a changing economic climate, or was there a sociological shift as well?


----------



## chimeric (Oct 15, 2011)

'Far as I can tell, society's always been effed up.

Also, it pretty much is _always_ run by rich men with their own interests at heart; that's hardly a new development. If anything, a notable recent change is the increasing number of selfish wealthy women with power. Yay?

Poor people are effed up too, of course. Cheers.


----------



## 54-46 ThatsMyNumber (Mar 26, 2011)

I've always been crazy but it's kept me from going insane
Nobody knows if something to bless or to blame
So far I ain't found a rhyme or reason to change
I've always been crazy but it's kept me from going insane

The late great Waylon Jennings


----------



## aHumanRenaisance (Nov 20, 2013)

Ehh, it's all relative. What's brown to you, may be clear to them but brown to me.

When you think differently then most, but feel deeply about things... your bound to experience some hardships. But lucky for us, it's all mental. We don't go out into the world for the most part and beat our physical bodies all up. We rather beat our minds up.

My advice, once you diagnose your mental illness. Provide your own antidote. You know better then anyone, what your cure is :wink:


----------



## infphile (Nov 20, 2013)

chimeric said:


> 'Far as I can tell, society's always been effed up.
> 
> Also, it pretty much is _always_ run by rich men with their own interests at heart; that's hardly a new development. If anything, a notable recent change is the increasing number of selfish wealthy women with power. Yay?
> 
> Poor people are effed up too, of course. Cheers.


Hmm. Not everywhere, but that was kind of my point. 

Selfish wealthy women with power? Who exactly are you referring to? 

Maybe if governments had the needs of the entire population at heart it would be different. I'm not saying all rich people are evil. I'm saying that the system is unjustly in their favour.


----------



## infphile (Nov 20, 2013)

Senshu_Ben_Gone said:


> Can you solely blame it on a changing economic climate, or was there a sociological shift as well?


The economic climate influences the sociological one. Capitalism has enabled great things to be produced and great technological advancements to be made but now we have these advancements it is time to move into the next stage. With capitalism people are valued for the amount of money they make and the things they own and are taught to be selfish. It is a difficult environment for sensitive people.


----------



## Euclid (Mar 20, 2014)

infphile said:


> The economic climate influences the sociological one. Capitalism has enabled great things to be produced and great technological advancements to be made but now we have these advancements it is time to move into the next stage. With capitalism people are valued for the amount of money they make and the things they own and are taught to be selfish. It is a difficult environment for sensitive people.


People who are selfish are going to be selfish either way. Only under capitalism, the selfish are of most benefit to society, in that they best accomplish their goals in a way that best satisfies the needs of society.


----------



## chimeric (Oct 15, 2011)

infphile said:


> Selfish wealthy women with power? Who exactly are you referring to?


Women are far from being the sex that's in power, but it's pretty indisputable that women have more power now than they ever have had in recorded history, at least in the West.



infphile said:


> I'm not saying all rich people are evil. I'm saying that the system is unjustly in their favour.


Oh, I know, and I'm certainly not arguing that. I'm just saying that evil is a thing humans do, separate from all questions of money. In poor neighborhoods, you'll still see plenty of violence and abuse. While some of that violence is undoubtedly exacerbated by being victimized by an unjust system, I don't think it's fair to blame capitalism for everything crappy that humans do to each other. Ultimately, humans just do crappy things, and they would under any system.




Euclid said:


> People who are selfish are going to be selfish either way. Only under capitalism, the selfish are of most benefit to society, in that they best accomplish their goals in a way that best satisfies the needs of society.


And that statement is more black & white and naive than the one you were responding to. There is no ideal way to structure society, and ideologies are silly. If you seriously think the richest people in the world are the ones who benefit society the most, I don't know what to say...


----------



## Euclid (Mar 20, 2014)

chimeric said:


> And that statement is more black & white and naive than the one you were responding to. There is no ideal way to structure society, and ideologies are silly. If you seriously think the richest people in the world are the ones who benefit society the most, I don't know what to say...


Not what I said though.


----------



## chimeric (Oct 15, 2011)

Euclid said:


> Not what I said though.


Fair enough. But...do selfish people truly benefit others under capitalism? Debatable. When I think of the paragon of selfish and capitalistic, I think Wall Street, and, well.


----------



## Euclid (Mar 20, 2014)

chimeric said:


> Fair enough. But...do selfish people truly benefit others under capitalism? Debatable. When I think of the paragon of selfish and capitalistic, I think Wall Street, and, well.


Not necessarily, but if you want to make as much money as possible, then you'd better provide goods and services that are worth it to others, as opposed to just taking it whether they like it or not. Now, much wealth has concentrated into the hands of very few not because of capitalism, since that's not what you have, but through corporatism. Most politicians will sell their soul for a dollar, and buying politicians to do your will through force is much more profitable than through voluntary cooperation. But this is not capitalism, but corporatism.


----------



## xraydav (Jan 3, 2013)

infphile said:


> This especially applies in the case of the INFP, which I read people often get mistyped as due to a mental illness which makes them more likely to answer the way an INFP. I shouldn't find that amusing but as an INFP I do. Anyway, I thought maybe part of it is that we feel isolated and different from other people, especially as a young teen and especially if we don't find the right people or spend too long around one type of people, and especially if we spend a long time alone. Thus, we latch onto to simple explanations, especially if we haven't yet found Myers-Briggs. Perhaps I am projecting personal experience too much. Thoughts?


When I first saw your post, I thought there _may_ be a correlation. 

NFs tend to focus on values. Generally when you have a value there is either an empathetic component or a tendency to feel strongly about something in some way. 

A lot of mental disorders are treated on the basis that one can become more objective in their life, consider the facts rather than the feelings or anxiety that one is having. I think disorders like schizophrenia are also similar to this, I mean, if the person could realize what the objective truths of his disorder were, or what the facts of reality were in his situation, I think they would have less issues with delusions. 

Then again, you can't say NFs are more prone , without *considering who they are "more prone" against *- in this case, it would be NTs, STs, SFs, etc. '

*SFs also* have an emphasis on their own feelings, which can lead to mental disorders.

*NTs* and *STs* are more likely to have less emphasis on their own feelings and personal development, and this can lead to mental illness as well. 

Considerably, how the N function (as an abstract function), relates to the dominant F function in NF types, and that can get an individual to become detached from reality. As I said before, objective truths and facts are more likely to treat mental illnesses, and this tendency toward 'abstract reality and feelings' is more likely to cause a person to not follow objective truths and facts, and to have mental illnesses. I can't see how NTs can't have this, as they can also pay less attention to their feelings, and pay too much attention to unrealistic things, and become more prone to mental illness. 

So then again, NFs are equally as prone to mental illness as NTs are, and are more prone to mental illness than STs and SFs are. 

Then again, since the labels rarely do justice to the unique individual, there is no real way to measure any of these "more prone" claims with reasonable evidence. Rendering them all devoid of validity and truth.


----------



## Indiana Dan (Jun 11, 2013)

Senshu_Ben_Gone said:


> Begging the question, how DID society get so sick in the first place?


 Substance use. All mood altering substances.


----------



## xraydav (Jan 3, 2013)

Antipode said:


> Humans all revolve around relationships.
> 
> +
> 
> ...


Then again, within this reasoning;

Humans all revolve around relationships.

+

NT doesn't indulge in relationships.

=

Higher chance for something to go wrong and screw their brains up.

:tongue:


----------



## C3bBb (Oct 22, 2013)

Sunshine Boy said:


> Substance use. All mood altering substances.


But the effects of substances are only temporary (unless the user is an abuser)


----------



## Indiana Dan (Jun 11, 2013)

Senshu_Ben_Gone said:


> But the effects of substances are only temporary (unless the user is an abuser)


There is a profound long term effect of even a seldom use. You can whore your body out to a great, great extent before something actually physically fails. It is undescribable without writing a book.. That's why I choose to hold onto my original statement


----------



## SweetPickles (Mar 19, 2012)

If I'm feeling depressed I do all the things one shouldn't do. I completely isolate myself because I don't want to burden anyone with my problems. Depression is paralyzing, and if we feel flawed, different, ashamed we tend to just wallow in our own misery. Always good to have a gentle friend to help you through this time. Good support networks are necessary and we are bad at sustaining these relationships.


----------



## C3bBb (Oct 22, 2013)

Sunshine Boy said:


> There is a profound long term effect of even a seldom use. You can whore your body out to a great, great extent before something actually physically fails. It is undescribable without writing a book.. That's why I choose to hold onto my original statement


Hmm..let's take the case of marijuana. Light users ( once a week, let's say ) I don't think will have profound effects, and with respect to pulmonary function, studies have already been released that show that it doesn't appear to have adverse long-term effects. Perhaps you have empirical evidence suggesting otherwise?


----------



## Antipode (Jul 8, 2012)

AverOblivious said:


> Then again, within this reasoning;
> 
> Humans all revolve around relationships.
> 
> ...


To sum up:

We are all screwed. xD


----------



## Indiana Dan (Jun 11, 2013)

Senshu_Ben_Gone said:


> Hmm..let's take the case of marijuana. Light users ( once a week, let's say ) I don't think will have profound effects, and with respect to pulmonary function, studies have already been released that show that it doesn't appear to have adverse long-term effects. Perhaps you have empirical evidence suggesting otherwise?


I said mood altering substances, not perception altering.


----------



## C3bBb (Oct 22, 2013)

Sunshine Boy said:


> I said mood altering substances, not perception altering.


..Hallucinogens are still classified as "mood-altering" drugs. Perhaps you'd like to be more specific?

Use, Abuse, and Addiction to Mood Altering Drugs


----------



## Indiana Dan (Jun 11, 2013)

Senshu_Ben_Gone said:


> ..Hallucinogens are still classified as "mood-altering" drugs. Perhaps you'd like to be more specific?
> 
> Use, Abuse, and Addiction to Mood Altering Drugs


Perhaps I'd like to go to bed. Goodnight. Congrats on 1000.


----------



## xraydav (Jan 3, 2013)

Antipode said:


> To sum up:
> 
> We are all screwed. xD


Pretty much :happy:


----------



## Jwing24 (Aug 2, 2010)

Xenograft​;4772813 said:


> We are the most subjective temperament and we have the capability to inflict our idealised realities onto the physical world (within the confines of our perception, of course), thus we can delude ourselves into believing our own insanities.


Yes exactly. Once I fall into a hole it takes me a long time to get out because I don't tell anyone, meaning I have to dig myself out of the hole.

Sometimes as an INFJ I feel insane.


----------



## Superfluous (Jan 28, 2014)

I think when you're an an NF, you have massive knowledge and understanding of the workings of the universe... to even sociology. The most intelligent people go crazy, dont they?

"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new dark age."


----------



## infphile (Nov 20, 2013)

AverOblivious said:


> When I first saw your post, I thought there _may_ be a correlation.
> 
> NFs tend to focus on values. Generally when you have a value there is either an empathetic component or a tendency to feel strongly about something in some way.
> 
> ...


Thank you for your detailed and thoughtful response. I feel like you must enjoy writing essays. I wasn't being scientific, more just asking if people thought there could be a link through their own experience and thinking.

EDIT: Just read my title and realised it does sound quite scientific. I'd read that INFPs have the highest rate of people with depression and perhaps over mental disorders though I can't remember. Apparently it is debated whether this is because people with an emotional disorder are more likely to answer as an INFP would. I suppose the emphasis on personal feelings, general fear of the outside, and longing for an idyllic world may be some INFP characteristic exaggerated with an emotional disorder. Oh, and aren't we're extremely emotionally turbulent since we're so sensitive. Like, we seem manic depressive but there's actually a cause. Someone has messed with our principles or not everything is balanced so we suddenly act out. When everything is back in balance we are very elated. I don't know. I'm no expert. Anyway, I asked this question in the NF section because I thought results may be skewed if only people with mood disorders answered.


----------



## infphile (Nov 20, 2013)

AverOblivious said:


> Then again, within this reasoning;
> 
> Humans all revolve around relationships.
> 
> ...


I feel INTJs sometimes indulge.


----------



## infphile (Nov 20, 2013)

Euclid said:


> People who are selfish are going to be selfish either way. Only under capitalism, the selfish are of most benefit to society, in that they best accomplish their goals in a way that best satisfies the needs of society.


They wouldn't be able to act on it in the same. Also, that is debatable. We are products of our genes, yes, but also our environment. Their goals do not always benefit society. That is a theory only true if you believe that Capitalism is virtuous, but that point has already been argued. It is natural for people to place the needs of themselves and their families first, society second. I personally believe communism best balances all of these needs.


----------



## infphile (Nov 20, 2013)

chimeric said:


> Women are far from being the sex that's in power, but it's pretty indisputable that women have more power now than they ever have had in recorded history, at least in the West.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sorry, I misinterpreted that statement. 

Not everything, no, but a lot of it. Capitalism is another thing that humans do and it influences each and every one of us. 

Excuse me, my statement was not naive.


----------



## Belzy (Aug 12, 2013)

We so called dreamers are often a problem to their created society where you have to learn learn learn and pay attention. They have already decided what we all should learn in life, but we want to think for ourselves too (and boy, how dumb I would feel if I didn't...).

You can't pay attention? There's something _wrong_ with you! 

They diagnosed me with mental disorders, but sometimes I wonder if it's not the other way around.


----------



## Nothing1 (Jan 22, 2014)

I identify with none of this. This topic was derailed on the first page (ADD anyone), and you question your mental health diagnosis :dry:


----------



## Belzy (Aug 12, 2013)

weirdleftovers said:


> I identify with none of this. This topic was derailed on the first page (ADD anyone), and you question your mental health diagnosis :dry:


I am mentally very healthy, thank you very much.


----------



## petite libellule (Jul 4, 2012)

Nu uh! Those NT's are freaking wacko! :tongue:


----------

