# Are INTJs sensitive or insenstive?



## Bastard (Feb 4, 2018)

Blue Ribbon said:


> Lol, I think Fi types in general approach ethics like some kind of game. As someone with inferior Fi, I enjoy the Fi "game." I assume that Ti ego types would have a hard time playing the game because Ti is too rigid internally to play.


I think this is true of Fi auxiliary types. Remember that the auxiliary isn't always _on_. Auxiliary is like a switch, you flick it on when the dominant needs backup, otherwise its on standby. 

Fi/Ti dominants are often more J than Si/Ni doms. Part of the reason I'm averse to linking cognitive functions with four-letter MBTI: J/P for introverts doesn't usually match cognitive functions.



Blue Ribbon said:


> Contrary to popular belief, Fe is the function of social freedom, not of social rules. Fe/Ti is internal rules, social freedom and Te/Fi is the opposite. I find it so ridiculous when people just ignorantly assume the opposite.


Fe is best thought of as social atmospheres, rather than "social feeling." Strong Fe is very in tune with emotional atmospheres and Fe dominants are great at controlling that atmosphere, whether that involves creating a positive or negative atmosphere depends on the individual. I've met more than a few ENFJs that are stereotypical "drama queens." 

xxTPs like emotionally free atmospheres where we can express ourselves without being judged too harshly by strong Fi types. Notice how half the time we offend people, it's usually Fi doms. 



Blue Ribbon said:


> If you are a person at a party, looking grumpy, an ENTJ is more likely to care than an ESFJ. "They ruined the mood for everyone" is more likely to come from an ENTJ than an ESFJ.


People really underestimate how good Fi is at creating bonds between people. It's part of why ExFPs are so charming. They're extraverts that can flick that Fi switch to really connect with people, then when those people are gone the switch is flicked and they're onto the next thing. I don't mean this in the negative, either. Very few of these types are predatory about it.


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

Bastard said:


> I think this is true of Fi auxiliary types. Remember that the auxiliary isn't always _on_. Auxiliary is like a switch, you flick it on when the dominant needs backup, otherwise its on standby.
> 
> Fi/Ti dominants are often more J than Si/Ni doms. Part of the reason I'm averse to linking cognitive functions with four-letter MBTI: J/P for introverts doesn't usually match cognitive functions.
> 
> ...


I'm more into socionics because I think it's a more coherent system, and it is not nearly as biased against types. I hang around Socionics communities a lot and don't see much vitriol there. 

Yeah, I don't really understand Fe all that much. Typically, in a social situation, I'm just trying to follow the established rules. This is why Fe types seem that much more "unrestrained" to me, I think. It's the merry/serious dichotomy. A lot of people seem to think social rules = Fe, when I see Fe as the opposite. Fe types seem to have an intuitive understanding of how to behave. For them, it's a kind of expression. For me, it's a set of rules. "Smile politely, say thank you, don't use bad language" that kind of thing. 

And yes to Fi and relationships. The very nature of Fi is relating. Fi is constantly forming relationships between the user and other people, between the user and objects/ideas and among different people. Since I have weak Fi, I suck at forming these relationships. This is why I love Fi types. They can close psychological gaps between people so easy. I can't do that. I sort of just take whatever my ISFP likes, and make it my own. Strong Fi types can be very very stubborn, and I can understand why they can clash with Ti. Fi is, to reduce down, "what I like" and these categories for liking may even seem arbitrary but if you look at it closely, there is consistency to it. People associate finding meaning to intuition but I think it's pretty clearly Fi. 

ENFJs are maybe drama queens, but I think they are really misconstrued. Same for ESFJs. They can be petty, viscous and manipulative, but they can also be loving, warm and generous. And I have met INTJs who are petty, viscous and manipulative lol. 

Oh and have you seen the other posts by the OP, bashing all feelers? How much do you want to bet the OP is a feeling type? xD


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Neither sensitive nor insensitive. 

I am not _insensitive _towards people to gain resources and maintain the functionality of things. In that case, I value manners, etiquette, politeness, professionalism (e.g., tact), degrees of empathy or appeasement to be expressed when needed. A general submission to rules (of any kind - even social in nature), that I haven't any _issue_ with. Being respected socially (e.g., first-impressions, etc.), (_respect_) in general is high on my list.

In personal situations, whether I am "sweet/nice" with friends/people I like is pretty situational. I do not necessarily soften up just because they are a friend or something. I do not change, I am still the same as I have always been. If anything, I get more crude, less tactful, a little playfully mean - or less concerned about this sort of thing if we are pretty close - assuming we can trash-talk/express ourselves however without taking things so heavily - which is the kind of associates I seek anyhow. Think the words are less closed-off, not particularly "more sensitive" ... which is perhaps why associates/people close to me often have to call attention to when I have hurt their feelings or said something off. 

I am not_ sensitive_ to people, either. In a sense I haven't any real interest in understanding their feelings on personal levels unless it is necessary. My aim for ex; would not be understanding Sarah as a person nor her likes and dislikes, but will attempt to keep her comfortable as a general human being by addressing any problems with (X) she may have.

I can also handle highly emotive people, and absorb the emotion(s) of others without being affected to either re-stabilize or maintain a calm, collected environment/situation. Not a sense that I put myself in their shoes, but instead that I do not crack under pressure and can continue to perform efficiently.


----------



## Mizmar (Aug 12, 2009)

Blue Ribbon said:


> Yeah, I don't really understand Fe all that much. Typically, in a social situation, I'm just trying to follow the established rules. This is why Fe types seem that much more "unrestrained" to me, I think. *It's the merry/serious dichotomy.* A lot of people seem to think social rules = Fe, when I see Fe as the opposite. Fe types seem to have an intuitive understanding of how to behave. For them, it's a kind of expression. For me, it's a set of rules. "Smile politely, say thank you, don't use bad language" that kind of thing.


Well, I'm basically a Merry type according to this comparison: Socionics Dichotomies: R3t1
But I'm more like you in that I don't have an intuitive understanding of how to behave (at least not in new groups) and tend to fall back on formalities and rules (saying "please" and "thank you", ect.) I certainly don't feel smooth or emotionally unrestrained in most social settings. I do tend to notice the emotional background, though, and see people's names, birthdays, ect., as peripheral hence why don't identify with the 'serious' description.


----------

