# Introverts are Stubborn it seems "Dmitry Golihov"



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

It turnouts out introverts are very difficult to persuade when they believe the framework they've made is right. Resistance if futile since you find yourself going against what intimately makes sense to them. Due to tendency for bias towards their framework persuasion is difficult even when the alternative presented is superior; so long as their perspective rationalizes their bias even the most cogent argument has a high probability of being being distorted through their lens thus appearing inferior. 

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/193-Aspects-in-the-Valued-Functions-Dmitry-Golihov



Ti - Subjective Logic said:


> Ti as leading function in LSI (ISTj; Maxim Gorky) and LII (INTj; Robespierre) - very attached to his understanding of something, his thinking, his logic and concepts, confident and conservative in these. It is impossible to convince him otherwise, as he "lives" by this, but does not necessarily share his understanding with others. If his understanding does not converge with facts, then at times he will judge the facts to be of lower value. Any attempts at criticizing his understanding make him feel irritated. He knows how reason logically, but does not like to defend his vision of the situation: "Those who understood - understood, the rest don't have it in them". Thus he often surrounds himself with those who accept his logical judgments and who do not make attempts to dispute them. Changes his thinking with great difficultly and needs a lot of time to reflect on mistakes. Likes it when everything converges with the way he understands it. If this cannot be achieved - experiences irritation. Therefore, one can only persuade him using solid arguments. He is often skeptical of new information, if he is unsure in something: everything must be carefully weighed before saying "yes." His thinking is like a foundament - it is solid, something that can be "leaned on" in any situation, thus in this matter there cannot be any risks. It is difficult to require from them to immediately approve someone else's views. In general, he tries to understand everything first, and only then accept it for himself. If it is something he cannot understand, then mastering new information progresses slowly, since it is difficult to accept it for himself. Thus he can spend very long time learning something before utilizing it, even if the question is very simple.





Fi - Subjective Ethics said:


> Fi as leading function of ESI (ISFj; Dreiser) and EII (INFj; Dostoevsky) - this person is very tenacious in his attachments and conservative in his feelings and attitudes towards another, keeps true to the feelings he develops. If someone does not agree with his valuation, it irritates him immensely. Someone who has deceived him once he will consider a liar forever, even if the person changes. Due to this, from aside he is often seen as a moralist, as these feelings and evaluations are the main part of his life. The product of leading function is often not shown to the outside world but instead is kept inside. Thus this happens most often when something annoys him in terms of its values. The negative is often seen more clearly than the positive. Thus he may hold onto such false impressions. Attempting to challenge their assessment is useless, for them something is just "good" and something is just "bad" and they will not be able to communicate clearly why this is so, except for making some general statements. Tries to keep himself near those with whom positive relationship was once established. Their division of people into "good" and "bad" is very clear-cut. The "good" people are liked and the "bad" people are despised; often this is hidden but if the person evoke a strongly negative response they may express it openly. If there are not enough people around him whom he values, this may inspire in him aggression, because this means that he doesn't exist. He is very sensitive to such concepts as duty, honor, dignity, morality, that is - to his own perception of these concepts. For him his own feelings, emotions, attitudes are important, not external, public ones, which may not be given any importance. He rarely changes his attitude towards anyone, especially from low evaluation to a higher one. He has a large supply of different emotions and their various nuances. He is very sensitive to other people deviating from his own moral code - it is as if he is constantly controlling them in this respect and taking care of them. His positive feelings are something that should be confirmed by behavior that coincides with his expectations of what is "good" and "bad". In society, they are sometimes misunderstood since their ethics are personal, subjective, and therefore may deviate significantly from what is accepted as a norm. But he is deeply entrenched into this subjective perception, thus his only resort is to find those who agree with him and accept him for it.





Si - Subjective Sensing said:


> Si as leading function of SLI (ISTp; Jean Gabin) and SEI (ISFp; Dumas) - these people live with sensory pleasures of life and look for them everywhere: great food, a comfortable chair, a variety of good, stable physiological sensations. Often consider themselves to be experts in their physical tastes: "If I love warmth, then everyone who likes cold is a walrus". Very self-confident in matters of health, can put their views about health "above" the opinions of the doctors or even to treat their advice as irrelevant. Almost always have good health, but excessive enthusiasm for sensory pleasures of life can sabotage them. Smoking, alcohol, gluttony - it is very difficult to just give it up. At the same time on these issues they have very conservative tastes. If he is involved in the kitchen, such skills come to him easily if he is predisposed to such activity. But can be very critical of cooking of others, especially high-risk atypical dishes. Often carry all that is necessary for comfort with them. Freely talk about intimate matters, don't consider it necessary to hide any of this from strangers, like to talk about their illnesses and inner workings of their bodies. Conservative in his sensory experiences, so in these matters, he is very attentive. Confident in his invulnerability and reliability. If he senses or feels something, then he won't listen to anyone and will do everything "in his own way." He likes reliable things that can be used to "bend a horseshoe", and indeed such an idea may come to his mind easily. Has good control of his body and its plasticity. Have a need to always feel something physically, to confirm own presence in the world, and will surround themselves with such things: warm carpet, woolen socks, soft kitten, baoding balls for spinning in hands. Fuss a lot over issues of convenience, but does not worry, this fussing is a way to maintain a conversation.
> [translator's note: Many of the descriptions of Si in socionics seem to overlap with descriptions of the self-preservation (sp) instinct (link). Personally, I have seen Si-devaluing and Si-polr types engage in "sensory over-indulgences" and find the validity of these descriptions of Si quite questionable. There is a better discussion of Si in this thread.]





Ni - Subjective Intuition said:


> Ni as leading function in IEI (INFp; Esenin) and ILI (INTp; Balzac) - this person considers himself to be very ideological, consistent, principled, and is very conservative in this. Becomes irritated by those who criticize his ideas. He lives by the "wholeness" of the internal situation. Often able to see "through" things, to the inner essence of something or someone. Romantic and idealist. Lives by his internal harmony, tranquility, serenity, is able to draw inspiration within himself, and gets annoyed by those who try to disturb it. Generally does not like when people try to look inside of him, gets frustrated and angry when this happens. Strives to be inwardly calm in all situations and internally consistent. "Fluid like a river": involuntarily adjusts himself to the interlocutor in conversation by taking form of consciousness that is best fitted for the situation. By this he isn't playing a role, his consciousness is simply multifaceted and he is directed by his inner "wholeness". That is, he simply presents a version of himself. Communicating with you, he always feels your moods as if he is living through them together with you, adjusts himself to this. Loves to introspect and to meditate. In case of failure, can make a qualitative self-analysis. Being present in some place he as if tunes himself out, tries to become invisible like a chameleon, especially if he perceives it as a threat to his inner tranquility: for example, in the workplace so that no one bothers him. Can even hide it in some clever way: arrange a barricade of folders so that behind them he is not visible. Does not like restless, internally discordant individuals, as their state can get transmitted to him, will try to escape from their company at any price. This is especially funny in a situation where a male representative of this type flees from ladies, and they pursue him like prey, because they feel that he has something that they so desperately need: inner peace. But for him this inner "wholeness" is not the product but material for inner consumption, so he can only share this with a small number of people, but sometimes someone might snatch a piece - this makes him very angry. Often, especially in circle of family, he becomes a critic, since deviation in behavior away from his principles turns him aggressive. If in another situation he will somehow restrain himself, at home he may allow himself to explode with anger.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Reading the Fi description just makes me keep facepalming and I don't even consider myself an Fi subtype. Once I've made up my mind about what I think about something or a person it's very hard for me to change this perception, especially if it's more in the latter of dislike than like. It's easier for a person to go from my like scale to dislike scale than the other way around, and once they're on my dislike scale, they tend to stay there forever and ever. 

It's even worse when I have immediate snap judgements of people before I even know them as it always makes me very suspicious and I have to constantly remind myself that I may be wrong. Yet my initial impression tends to color the way I see this person so much that it's hard for me to think otherwise unless there is very strong evidence to prove that I'm wrong.

It's also very true that I'm more aware of what I dislike than what I like somehow T_T Essentially I guess I just like most things that I don't dislike... or whatever. What I like I tend to have very strong feelings towards though.


----------



## Zero11 (Feb 7, 2010)

The "Ni" description is a whole joke, it is more of a IEI description :dry: where is the ILI in this text?


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

Boolean11 said:


> It turnouts out introverts are very difficult to persuade when they believe the framework they've made is right. Resistance if futile since you find yourself going against what intimately makes sense to them. Due to tendency for bias towards their framework persuasion is difficult even when the alternative presented is superior; so long as their perspective rationalizes their bias even the most cogent argument has a high probability of being being distorted through their lens thus appearing inferior.


Extraverts are stubborn, too. Have you ever met ExTjs type 1 or 8? They are very insistent on their views. That article by Golihov even mentions this in leading Te description.

This topic should be examined by looking at functions rather than types. Each type has several functions that due to the position they occupy in Model A can be called "conservative" and "stubborn". Therefore each type has areas where it is difficult to change it's opinions, and other areas where the type is flexible and easily persuaded. From what I have studied of Model A, the best candidates for "stubborn" functions are the ones that are called Inert:

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/6-Translation-Model-A
*Inert (reference) functions* - These functions are rather rigid in their functioning; they are almost immune to internal changes. They require an external impulse of sufficient strength so that something in them changes. They are characterized by fairly long response, and often a fixate on the state to which the external impact has led. Thus they tend towards relative permanence.
*Contact functions* - These functions are very mobile and able to manage their state well. It is through these functions that a primary reaction to an outside impact is developed. They produce an initial processing of information received, they also generate final decisions. Thus, their activity is determined by what's transpiring around or current tasks, among which they can easily switch.

These are functions numbered 1, 4, 6, and 7 - Leading, Ignoring, Mobilizing, Vulnerable. Types are stubborn in any information that pertains to these functions. The parts of the article you quoted all address the Leading function. Being inert, it's no wonder that the author describes it having a measure of stubbornness. But so are the leading Te or Fe in Exxj types. Have you ever had an ESFj insist that you should behave in a certain way, be more welcoming, receptive, open, and no matter how many times you tell them that you just can't they don't listen to you and insist on the very same things the next time? The fact that extroverts have extroverted functions in inert position doesn't make them any less stubborn. They are just going to insist on something superficial.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Agreed with this. Nothing more hilarious on the Intertardz than an argument between introverts which never ends.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

LeaT said:


> Reading the Fi description just makes me keep facepalming and I don't even consider myself an Fi subtype. Once I've made up my mind about what I think about something or a person it's very hard for me to change this perception, especially if it's more in the latter of dislike than like. It's easier for a person to go from my like scale to dislike scale than the other way around, and once they're on my dislike scale, they tend to stay there forever and ever.
> 
> It's even worse when I have immediate snap judgements of people before I even know them as it always makes me very suspicious and I have to constantly remind myself that I may be wrong. Yet my initial impression tends to color the way I see this person so much that it's hard for me to think otherwise unless there is very strong evidence to prove that I'm wrong.
> 
> It's also very true that I'm more aware of what I dislike than what I like somehow T_T Essentially I guess I just like most things that I don't dislike... or whatever. What I like I tend to have very strong feelings towards though.


Me too. I also relate to the Socionics Si though. 



> Often consider themselves to be experts in their physical tastes: "If I love warmth, then everyone who likes cold is a walrus". Very self-confident in matters of health, can put their views about health "above" the opinions of the doctors or even to treat their advice as irrelevant. Almost always have good health, but excessive enthusiasm for sensory pleasures of life can sabotage them. Smoking, alcohol, gluttony - it is very difficult to just give it up. At the same time on these issues they have very conservative tastes. If he is involved in the kitchen, such skills come to him easily if he is predisposed to such activity. But can be very critical of cooking of others, especially high-risk atypical dishes. Often carry all that is necessary for comfort with them. *Freely talk about intimate matters, don't consider it necessary to hide any of this from strangers*, like to talk about their illnesses and inner workings of their bodies.




Socionics Si seems more like Se, except that it's described later as "conservative." 

In fact, the more I read it, I think of this ISTJ I know. But he's a perfect Socionics ISFj, and that's an Fi dom in Socionics.

I think Fi is probably the most me:



> Tries to keep himself near those with whom positive relationship was once established. Their division of people into "good" and "bad" is very clear-cut. The "good" people are liked and the "bad" people are despised; often this is hidden but if the person evoke a strongly negative response they may express it openly. If there are not enough people around him whom he values, this may inspire in him aggression, because this means that he doesn't exist. He is very sensitive to such concepts as duty, honor, dignity, morality, that is - to his own perception of these concepts. For him his own feelings, emotions, attitudes are important, not external, public ones, which may not be given any importance. He rarely changes his attitude towards anyone, especially from low evaluation to a higher one. He has a large supply of different emotions and their various nuances. He is very sensitive to other people deviating from his own moral code - it is as if he is constantly controlling them in this respect and taking care of them. His positive feelings are something that should be confirmed by behavior that coincides with his expectations of what is "good" and "bad". In society, they are sometimes misunderstood since their ethics are personal, subjective, and therefore may deviate significantly from what is accepted as a norm. *But he is deeply entrenched into this subjective perception, thus his only resort is to find those who agree with him and accept him for it.*


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

cyamitide said:


> Extraverts are stubborn, too. Have you ever met ExTjs type 1 or 8? They are very insistent on their views. That article by Golihov even mentions this in leading Te description.
> 
> This topic should be examined by looking at functions rather than types. Each type has several functions that due to the position they occupy in Model A can be called "conservative" and "stubborn". Therefore each type has areas where it is difficult to change it's opinions, and other areas where the type is flexible and easily persuaded. From what I have studied of Model A, the best candidates for "stubborn" functions are the ones that are called Inert:
> 
> ...


Now on a separate topic I've been wondering about the flaws Ti ignoring types like EXTjs would have by devaluing internal logical consistency. I understand for certain that IXTjs' Te ignoring flaw is being reluctant paying attention to new facts, updating their frameworks, which seems to be a considerable flaw. However what is the flaw for Ti ignoring types? The same conundrum applies for Lead Ni and Ne types where equivalently Ni's weariness towards new abstract data makes it conservative.


----------



## QwertyCTRL (Dec 31, 2020)

well, we only do that when we are sure that we're right. if you prove us wrong, we're usually open minded. but until you prove us wrong, we're annoyingly stubborn. at least, that's how it is with me.


----------

