# Ni and negative impressions of people



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

I've noticed a tendency in Ni-doms to express a lot of suspicion regarding people. There seems to be a sureness in their initial readings of people, and those readings often seem to be negative, even when quite unfounded in fact. I've seen a lot of comments, particularly from INFJs, indicating they know what people think/feel and that they are often right, so they don't bother to verify it with the person. Both types seem to almost have a paranoia at times regarding other people & even how events will play out. Being a "benefit of the doubt" kind of person, I find this foreign.

I also realize there is some extroverted judging flavoring this, but it seems a trend in both INTJs & INFJs more so than ENxJs.

Is this accurate, or am I off the mark? 
If I'm wrong, then what is the true nature of such impressions (if you can relate to them)?
If you don't relate to this, then why?
How would you, Ni-doms, describe how you form impressions of people? 
How wholly do you trust these? 
What does it take to budge a negative first impression or alter a positive one?
How often are you surprised by people?


----------



## UncertainSomething (Feb 17, 2010)

Most INxJs make judgments at the extremes of their perception it seems, we have a way of deciphering what motivations and directions that someone is taking and how we fit into it, hard to explain. I must admit INFJs and INTJs do make mistakes at times and miss out on having good people in their lives, resulting feelings of regret can cause sadness and insecurity. However the damage a single person can do to our integrity of thoughts/feelings is quite big so the choice is to obviously be very cautious, INxJs have a very unusual, it seems, way of seeing humanity. We start to trust people when the deciphering of someone is complete and proved to be a workable interaction whereby the INxJ feels mutuality is easy. INxJs decisions cannot be based on benefit of the doubt, its foreign to us to trust something that has only 50/50 chance of working out especially when it easy to test it. To answer your questions: 
_
Is this accurate, or am I off the mark?_ Mostly accurate, Ni dom is very different than Ni aux I've noticed
_If I'm wrong, then what is the true nature of such impressions (if you can relate to them)?_ see above
_If you don't relate to this, then why?_ see above
_How would you, Ni-doms, describe how you form impressions of people?_ infjs by integrity and consistency by most counts
_How wholly do you trust these?_ totally, its very easy to do, but does sometimes get it wrong (mostly because of insecurity issues I find, occasionally out of ignorance ) 
_What does it take to budge a negative first impression or alter a positive one?_ something that matches what is being perceived or the INxJ continually being proven wrong(very rare but based on insecurity).
_How often are you surprised by people?_ hardly ever, feels quite depressing too but when it does happen its very exciting[/QUOTE]

Hope that made sense, its not easy to explain and I've probably left out something somewhere.


----------



## NeedsNewNameNow (Dec 1, 2009)

I know an INFJ who told me she thinks everyone has an agenda and is not very trusting of people. For some reason I passed this filter. I have no clue how it works, I have seen her turn out to be right though.


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

I notice this much more with INFJs. Usually their negative impressions are actually _about _the person. INTJs just seem to dislike humanity - their negative impressions seem to be far more general and abstract. Certainly for myself it is - I have little faith in humanity, but don't tend to apply that to an individual I meet _until_ they start being stupid. Although I can be very aware of stupid things and not gloss over them. I find INFJs a lot more pessimistic than INTJs in some ways.

It usually takes a while to form full impressions of people. What happens quickly is deciding whether I want to bother or not. Some people I can tell early on it will be a lot of work - more like an awareness of red flags than forming a picture of a person. I cannot make a _decision _about a person based on the benefit of the doubt - but I can hold off on a decision and collect information, albeit only for so long. If I want to, I can spend a lot of time brainstorming ways a person _may _have meant well until I find something that makes sense. Malice doesn't make a lot of sense really, or other negative emotional reasons, so I tend to exclude them from calculations - sometimes to my own detriment. INFJs seem more comfortable assuming malice - INTJs prefer assuming ignorance or incompetence. Really, though, I don't invest a lot into thinking about people really until they become important. Ideas - then my first impressions come thick and fast.

Changing impressions...it's like the data never leaves, but can be overwhelmed with more data. So it will be entirely dependent upon how strong the first impression was and how much it was based on - as well as how much info contradicts it. A single action, however good, won't do much - I cannot base an impression on statistical outliers.

I think if I were more suspicious, I would understand why I appear hostile to people. Really, I'm kind of oblivious.


----------



## CounterPoint (Oct 13, 2010)

Ni by its very nature seeks out disharmony and deviations in patterns so it has an innate preference for finding "negatives" or anything different from past patterns. This is the main reason for an INTJs search for "efficiency" in systems. 

Whether the impressions are accurate is mostly a factor of the individual and their life experiences. Of course, someone with more experience will have more patterns to draw from and thus have a more accurate read. What is certain though is that these impressions are never concrete and can change with new data.


----------



## Introspiritual (Mar 12, 2010)

OrangeAppled said:


> I also realize there is some extroverted judging flavoring this, but it seems a trend in both INTJs & INFJs more so than ENxJs.


Ni-dom, gotta love it. :happy: I've also read that ENxJs can get confused by Ni as a secondary and discount it more than lead INxJs will.



OrangeAppled said:


> Is this accurate, or am I off the mark?
> If I'm wrong, then what is the true nature of such impressions (if you can relate to them)?
> If you don't relate to this, then why?
> How would you, Ni-doms, describe how you form impressions of people?
> ...


- It's accurate for me. I gauge trust/don't trust in an average of 10-15 seconds in-person. "Why" can take longer.
- Initial impression is like listening to the beginning of a song I haven't heard before. If I don't like it, I don't keep listening.
- I trust my impressions far more than I don't trust them.
- To budge the true (not perceived) initial impression takes a lot, and rarely happens.
- Rarely am I truly surprised by people (read: the initial impression was completely wrong).


----------



## vel (May 17, 2010)

OrangeAppled said:


> Is this accurate, or am I off the mark?
> If I'm wrong, then what is the true nature of such impressions (if you can relate to them)?
> If you don't relate to this, then why?
> How would you, Ni-doms, describe how you form impressions of people?
> ...


- Not sure, I don't feel like on INFJ or INTJ forums that we always form negative impression of people but being Ni-dominant myself my impression of it might be biased.
- Perhaps it is because Ni subtracts meaning from environment, sees what could not be, and so with people it might pay attention to things that those people cannot do, areas they are lacking in. Ne adds meaning to environment, see what could be, and so with people perhaps it might pay attention to what they can do, what areas they are strong in.
- I get vibes about people. These vibes are for the most part "just is" perceiving kind. They are not strongly negative or positive, as Ni is a perceiving function that internalized things just as they are but doesn't strive to make a judgement about it. These intuitions either pull me towards the person or away from the person. Like with my current ENFP housemate, when I was looking for a new place to move in and just met her we talked for about 20 minutes after which I had an overall positive vibe about her so I decided I'm moving into this place.
- If I have very little time to think about it, then I have to trust my intuitions completely. If I have more time I will attempt to 'lodgik' them out, deconstruct and analyze with Ti.
- Depends on how much time has passed. My mind seems to add people's behavior over time (Ni is a probabilistic function). So if a lot of time has passed and same patterns of behaviors are occurring, I would very strongly expect the person to fall into same patterns in the future (the probability of them doing it would be very high). In this case it would be difficult to change my mind about that person.
- Little day-to-day things surprise me all the time. I get fascinated by people, especially by people's creativity and ingenuity. Knowing person for a while I tend to build like a model of the core traits. Those core traits do not change, at least I haven't seen a single case of it yet, so in this manner I am never surprised.

Also remember that INTJs and INFJs as internal perceivers and extraverted judgers, meaning that they will internally play with possibilities, but put out a judgment when interacting with environment. Sometimes I see perceivers not taking to this well, thinking that by judging we aren't giving the situation any benefit of doubt or are not considering all the possibilities. This is just a difference in how perceivers and judgers interact with the outside environment.



lirulin said:


> I notice this much more with INFJs. Usually their negative impressions are actually _about _the person. INTJs just seem to dislike humanity - their negative impressions seem to be far more general and abstract.


Hmm I actually had the opposite impression. My sense was that INTJs due to their introverted feeling function feel more like being individuals, feel separate from other people, and same perception they have of others, that they are separate indviduals. But INFJs to the contrary feel like being part of the group during to extraverted feeling seeking to develop strong bonds between us and a bunch of people around us. On INFJ forums several times I have seen people post something along the lines "my friends have treated me badly, I am losing my faith in humanity now" but I have not encountered same kinds of posts on INTJ forums.


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

vel said:


> Hmm I actually had the opposite impression. My sense was that INTJs due to their introverted feeling function feel more like being individuals, feel separate from other people, and same perception they have of other people. But INFJs to the contrary feel like being part of the group during to extraverted feeling seeking to develop strong bonds between us and a bunch of people around us. On INFJ forums several times I have seen people post something along the lines "my friends have treated me badly, I am losing my faith in humanity now" but I have not encountered same kinds of posts on INTJ forums.


I wouldn't expect posts like that, no. But posts insulting all humankind because they are annoying, tiresome, slow, stupid, noisy...those are _everywhere_. A lot of INTJs are good at hating in the abstract - hating groups, generalisations, but not mentally relating it to the individuals as easily. Because, as you say, there is less a feeling of a group, there seems to be less projection of assumptions about the group onto individuals. So as much as negativity re humans exists, it won't be as much a part of our ideas on specific individuals, initially, as if there was less a sense of separation/individuality. I would also say INFJs have far more of a databank on human behaviour that they can relate to their negative impressions, making some connection to the individual person they are judging, making it more about the person. Without that information to inform a specific connection to the person, INTJs have to wait for more specific irritations with the person in particular, rather than the detailed web of associations INFJs can have. That's what I meant to say, which seems to go with your impression. Obviously this is is very much a generalisation.

EDIT: That, and when INTJs are stubborn in their interpretations, it is usually not because they trust their impressions. We know we suck with humans. Usually it is because whatever system we chose to use is the only thing we have to hold onto, so it _can't _be wrong - for then there is nothing.


----------



## penchant (Sep 20, 2010)

Doesn't Si work more or less the same with regard to suspition, cautious negativity and quick jugdment?


----------



## vel (May 17, 2010)

penchant said:


> Doesn't Si work more or less the same with regard to suspition, cautious negativity and quick jugdment?


I was thinking about it too (does this also translate to sensor types?), so I'll throw in a bit socionics in here (again, hehe). According to Reining dichotomies types can be separated into positivists and negativists though this is not really accepted - Positivist and negativist - Wikisocion. Positivists are more complementing and negativists are more reprimanding. The difference between them lies in actually combination of dominant and auxiliary. I haven't investigated this yet but my intuition tells me that there is more than one function involved in determining how generous a personality type would be with compliments or criticisms.


----------



## penchant (Sep 20, 2010)

vel said:


> I was thinking about it too (does this also translate to sensor types?), so I'll throw in a bit socionics in here (again, hehe). According to Reining dichotomies types can be separated into positivists and negativists though this is not really accepted - Positivist and negativist - Wikisocion. Positivists are more complementing and negativists are more reprimanding. The difference between them lies in actually combination of dominant and auxiliary. I haven't investigated this yet but my intuition tells me that there is more than one function involved in determining how generous a personality type would be with compliments or criticisms.


hmm... i'm not sure i would want to see that as function-related at all... that seems so much more a values thing...


----------



## Zygomorphic (Nov 19, 2009)

I typically assume from the beginning the individual has good intentions and thus some inherent good nature. I am always first observant since I act according to the individual - and with new acquaintances, I still haven't wholly gathered my thoughts on the individual, and thus cannot yet methodically act. Therefore I am quick to note behavioral characteristics and patterns in the way people act, and I will speculate their motives and methodologies. At most I will judge a person's actions, but never will I _assume_ - only speculate - a person's inner character, as I am aware of how complex people can be and of the fact that _I am no one but myself, and thus I cannot truly and always 'know' another person._

I let time reveal the person; I have many ideas of who the person may be and always check to see if my predictions were right, but I will not allow myself to ever make any conclusions without genuinely 'experiencing' the individual. I expect everything and nothing, and thus orient myself in a position to typically not be surprised by anyone. This is my choice of mindset.

I am well aware of how paranoid I _could_ be if I allowed certain thoughts to become lucid; envisioning entire conspiracies of people toying around with me for no other reason than perverse pleasure. Such cynicism no longer binds me, however.


----------



## SarahWilliams (May 5, 2010)

OrangeAppled said:


> I've noticed a tendency in Ni-doms to express a lot of suspicion regarding people. There seems to be a sureness in their initial readings of people, and those readings often seem to be negative, even when quite unfounded in fact. I've seen a lot of comments, particularly from INFJs, indicating they know what people think/feel and that they are often right, so they don't bother to verify it with the person. Both types seem to almost have a paranoia at times regarding other people & even how events will play out. Being a "benefit of the doubt" kind of person, I find this foreign.
> 
> I also realize there is some extroverted judging flavoring this, but it seems a trend in both INTJs & INFJs more so than ENxJs.
> 
> ...


Overall, I would agree with your assessment of Ni-doms. Although, I would also add that if someone is completely using Ni, that person is going to appear to be disconnected and serious. Just this morning, I was staring off into space, frowning, and thinking... and I got a 'hey, what's wrong?' comment. Nothing's 'wrong' I'm just processing a lot of information quietly. 

I would agree with your assessment that Ni-Js can be cynical about people. Although, I don't think I'm pessimistic about society in general... but I intentionally keep people at arm's length until I can figure out their motivations. 

I form impressions within the first few minutes of meeting someone. It's usually a snap 'good' or 'bad.' It may also take weeks to understand why I thought the way I did. And I promise, almost always, I am spot on correct. Yes, I trust my impressions of people. 

So, let's be honest, most people fall into the chasm of 'not super good, not super bad.' So my impressions are only slightly bumped one way or the other by addition of new information. The people I admire the most in my life have started at 'good' and then slowly work their way into a 'super good' level. 

I'm not typically surprised by people. Alot of my time is spent (whether I want it to be or not) analyzing patterns of human behavior. The more times you do this - the better at it you get. Hence, my impressions are usually correct. 

Two things I want to add: 

1) Regardless of first impressions of people, people are much more dynamic than we give them credit for. Just because someone has a tendency towards an action - does not mean they will choose it. People have layers, and depth that add to their person. Someone's life story can go a long way towards helping you understand them, but even then, we are all capable of change. 

2) It is something truly beautiful when people surprise you. Awe-inspiring even. As much as I trust my impressions of people... I also seek someone to rise above the baseline. Each day I wake up hoping, trusting, that someone will surprise me. And that's what motivates me to keep going.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

Interesting comments, thanks everyone



Zygomorphic said:


> I typically assume from the beginning the individual has good intentions and thus some inherent good nature. I am always first observant since I act according to the individual - and with new acquaintances, I still haven't wholly gathered my thoughts on the individual, and thus cannot yet methodically act. Therefore I am quick to note behavioral characteristics and patterns in the way people act, and I will speculate their motives and methodologies. At most I will judge a person's actions, but never will I _assume_ - only speculate - a person's inner character, as I am aware of how complex people can be and of the fact that _I am no one but myself, and thus I cannot truly and always 'know' another person._
> 
> I let time reveal the person; I have many ideas of who the person may be and always check to see if my predictions were right, but I will not allow myself to ever make any conclusions without genuinely 'experiencing' the individual. I expect everything and nothing, and thus orient myself in a position to typically not be surprised by anyone. This is my choice of mindset.
> 
> I am well aware of how paranoid I _could_ be if I allowed certain thoughts to become lucid; envisioning entire conspiracies of people toying around with me for no other reason than perverse pleasure. Such cynicism no longer binds me, however.


This sounds similar to my own mindset. Have you always thought this way? I get the impression you once did not...

When I was a child, I made quick, knee-jerk judgments about people (often negative), but I did not necessarily find myself always right. I think that led me to develop two qualities I'd call good: giving the benefit of the doubt & being curious about people. There are downfalls to this attitude also (slight naivete maybe), but overall it makes me more open in a good way. Although, I'd say I orient myself to expect to be surprised :tongue:.

Another question for the Ni-doms:
Do you find yourself not very curious about people then? If you quickly sum them up, is there little drive to dig into who they are in a more interactive manner?


----------



## vel (May 17, 2010)

OrangeAppled said:


> Another question for the Ni-doms:
> Do you find yourself not very curious about people then? If you quickly sum them up, is there little drive to dig into who they are in a more interactive manner?


There is a drive to take shortcuts and make quick conclusions due to how Ni learns new things. I've explained this in this thread: http://personalitycafe.com/infj-forum-protectors/36911-i-dont-seem-like-infjs.html


----------



## penchant (Sep 20, 2010)

OrangeAppled said:


> Another question for the Ni-doms:
> Do you find yourself not very curious about people then? If you quickly sum them up, is there little drive to dig into who they are in a more interactive manner?


For me it makes all the difference if what I see matches my judgment about people. As soon as I see something I can't make fit my understanding of a person, I will need to rethink my image of them. But when I believe I have a good understanding of how a person functions, I'm probably more likely to want to go out and understand the world together with them, than sit down and analyse them...

That said, unless people actually work hard to give off a consistent impression, I'd think there would always be more things that need to be analysed. But, you're right in that I am not very often going to be intentionally investigative with people that I already think I've figured out.


----------



## Aelthwyn (Oct 27, 2010)

lirulin said:


> Certainly for myself it is - I have little faith in humanity, but don't tend to apply that to an individual I meet _until_ they start being stupid.
> 
> ....But posts insulting all humankind because they are annoying, tiresome, slow, stupid, noisy...those are _everywhere_. A lot of INTJs are good at hating in the abstract - hating groups, generalisations, but not mentally relating it to the individuals as easily.


This sounds a lot like me, although I always have a strange war going on in my head about whether I want to cuddle the whole of humanity, or if I want to crush them under a brick for the swarm of ants that they are. :tongue:

I have this idealistic side which believes that inside everyone (sometimes burried very very deep inside) there is a person who means well and just needs to be loved. While on the otherhand when I look at the masses of people all around me in school, on the street, in coffee shops and theme parks they all seem so alien, so shallow, so boring, so stupid, so petty, so obnoxious......I feel that it would be impossible to have anything in common with them and summarily dismiss them all as uninteresting and having nothing to do with myself - so I ignore them all. HOWEVER, I don't apply this to individual people I meet. 

Each new individual begins as a blank slate which is very quickly sketched out with my intuition. Then I continue to make observations - which usually line up with my initial predictions, though I may make some minor adjustments. I feel like I take lots of notes on people, and pick up lots of vibes from them, but don't necessarily form an overall evaluation of them as a whole from these traits. I don't think I usually think of people in terms of good or bad, but in terms of "this kind of person" or "that kind of person" in various contexts according to all the many traits and trends I see in them. I feel like I try to take people as they are, both appreciating good points and recognizing bad points. I don't feel like I am very often surprised by people both because my intuition and observations usually add up, but also because I'm always still in the information gathering stage, I just take them as they come. However, based on my initial impressions I may endeavor to know them more, or to keep my distance. I seem to give individuals the benefit of the doubt all the time, but when it comes to "abstract, generalisations" I'm a lot more cynical.


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

^ yeah, I've always figured it was more Fe doing the projecting onto people part for INFJs, especially comparing how much ENFJs do it, and how little INTJs do. Ni paired with Te would be more inclined to think they know "reality" not other humans. I have found Ne to do a lot of projecting also, but Dom-Fi can keep it in line. Also, with INFPs I may have to defend against a particular interpretation/assumption usually based on their own ideas - with Fe-users I tend to have to keep telling them that what they are talking about is about a different person, or different people.

I do get the sense that hating abstractions and being ok with individuals is associated with Fi. I think we do it, though, in ways that are hard for each other to understand - INFPs always seem to think I'm making negative judgments about people, when as far as I'm concerned it's neither negative nor about people - while I find a lot of threads on the INFP boards astoundingly, unfairly judgmental...but this doesn't seem to come out in individual interactions unless they are _extremely_ upset so these judgments are separate, somehow - sometimes passive-aggressive too, but I do now get the sense there is more going on there when originally it just all seemed passive-aggressive and mean. We both generalise and hate the generalisations, and try not to judge individuals - but we consider different ways of generalising valid.


----------



## Aelthwyn (Oct 27, 2010)

lirulin said:


> ^ yeah, I've always figured it was more Fe doing the projecting onto people part for INFJs, especially comparing how much ENFJs do it, and how little INTJs do. Ni paired with Te would be more inclined to think they know "reality" not other humans. I have found Ne to do a lot of projecting also, but Dom-Fi can keep it in line. Also, with INFPs I may have to defend against a particular interpretation/assumption usually based on their own ideas - with Fe-users I tend to have to keep telling them that what they are talking about is about a different person, or different people.


yes I think this makes sense.



> I do get the sense that hating abstractions and being ok with individuals is associated with Fi. I think we do it, though, in ways that are hard for each other to understand - INFPs always seem to think I'm making negative judgments about people, when as far as I'm concerned it's neither negative nor about people


Yes, I've gotten this impression in rare moments where I feel I am glimpsing one of my NT friend's perspectives. It seems perhaps NFs are quicker to associate oppinions and emotions with straightforward observations about things, when that is not what someone else is doing. I think we also have a way of assuming one unfavorable comment reflects someone's oppinion of the entire person - something which strangely enough we do not do in spite of assuming it in others. Which leads to....



> while I find a lot of threads on the INFP boards astoundingly, unfairly judgmental...but this doesn't seem to come out in individual interactions unless they are _extremely_ upset so these judgments are separate, somehow - sometimes passive-aggressive too, but I do now get the sense there is more going on there when originally it just all seemed passive-aggressive and mean. We both generalise and hate the generalisations, and try not to judge individuals - but we consider different ways of generalising valid.


Also good observations.

A key point to understanding myself, and I think other INFPs, is that while we tend to have a more ballanced, well rounded perspective on many things, we don't always talk about both sides of something in the same conversation. It's almost like we leave it as assumed that we can also see the other side, but that's not what we're talking about right now*. Which can lead to us appearing to have much more extreem views, or even to looking like we contradict ourselves. 

Something interesting I've noticed between myself and some INFP friends - I have no idea if others do this or not, perhaps so - but we seem to need little venting sessions about all the things we dislike about people we know as well as people in general. We only do this around people we percieve as being very kind-hearted, however, and not with people who we think would either misconstrue or spread what we have said. We also don't generally do this in a group, just with one person in a confidential sort of manner - unless it is a group of INFPs/people we see as kindhearted and discrete.

This ties in with the key point above: when doing this we have a mutual understanding that in spite of all we are saying, we care about the person, like many things about them, and do not mean them ill -well at least in most cases. We can sound very harsh, but at the same time we know that we have more of a spirit of "hating the crime but loving the person". That is often left as understood, not specifically stated when we are making our little rants (*cause that's not what we're talking about). Thus I have a feeling that it would be easy for others, if they have a chance to listen in on one of these conversations, to believe we are very criticle, not to mention hypocriticle in our smiles and acts of care. As we value kindness and social tact, we certainly can display those without feeling them, but I think more often than not we genuinely feel caring and accepting, yet because we are constantly overlooking shortcomings, sometimes the annoyances that we don't think worth confronting others about (esp. natural differences which are not actually bad behaviour) build up. We often have a constant stream of analysis in our heads telling us, "yes that's frustrating but you have to take into account they are having a bad day, they probably aren't aware of it, it's perfectly understandible, etc." So sometimes we just need to say the opposite - and often it can come out rather strong. Yet once we've had a chance to tell someone that this other person really irritates us in some way, we are able to let it go and not feel like we are putting on fake smiles around that person.

This plays a part in how we deal with problems in a non-confrontational way. At least among my own friends I have found that if we complain about eachother to a mutual friend, but don't confront eachother directly, the mutual friend then finds subtle ways to direct the other person's perception so that they can see the other person's side of an issue, or so that they can discover their fault for themselves. If I begin a rant about someone who has already talked with this friend about their side of the issue, then they will listen and empathize with me and then offer some 'possible' motivations, reasons, perspectives of the other person for me to consider (which unbeknownst to me the other person has told them). So in a way it gives us a chance to talk things out without actually facing the awkward face-to-face confrontation. It seems we are more open to hearing the other person's arguments from a third party's mouth and don't get on the defensive so easily. This way we also don't say things we don't exactly mean to the person bothering us. The third party we do voice those moments of passion to takes it all in with a benevolent attitude toward us both, but doesn't pass along the extreem passion/conviction which we may have expressed to them. Also it seems understood that passionate expression isn't always as strong and all encompassing as it may sound. (Sometimes I can rail about something one moment, then just because I've said it, suddenly feel better about the whole thing and proceed the next moment as if nothing is wrong, because I really am feeling fine now. It's out, it's done with, now I'm good). 

This reminds me of something I found very interesting in an anthropology class about some culture where the acceptible form of dealing with conflict was "through the grape-vine" so to speak. I can't remember where this culture was, but I remember the description that the protocol was to mention some problem to someone like, say, the local grocer. The gorcer would mention it to the person's uncle, and the uncle would bring it up with the person. Apparently confronting someone directly was considered unacceptible, but in essence, gossiping and getting the message to them third-hand was seen as appropriate. Seems like something I could work with 

Sorry I'm getting a little off the topic of INFJs and negativity now.....but perhaps INFJs do this too?


----------



## penchant (Sep 20, 2010)

Aelthwyn said:


> Sorry I'm getting a little off the topic of INFJs and negativity now.....but perhaps INFJs do this too?


I wouldn't say I relate to it personally... But both this and lirulin's post are brilliant, so don't worry about being OT. It's very educational and so many aha moments.


----------



## midnightblonde (Aug 12, 2010)

OrangeAppled said:


> I've noticed a tendency in Ni-doms to express a lot of suspicion regarding people. There seems to be a sureness in their initial readings of people, and those readings often seem to be negative, even when quite unfounded in fact. I've seen a lot of comments, particularly from INFJs, indicating they know what people think/feel and that they are often right, so they don't bother to verify it with the person. Both types seem to almost have a paranoia at times regarding other people & even how events will play out. Being a "benefit of the doubt" kind of person, I find this foreign.
> 
> Is this accurate, or am I off the mark?


Very much accurate. 



> How would you, Ni-doms, describe how you form impressions of people?


It's an automatic and unconscious process. I pick up their vibes. Not only IRL, I do it quite successfully also online on a community that I help to manage.



> How wholly do you trust these?


I've learned to trust them from experience.



> What does it take to budge a negative first impression or alter a positive one?


It won't change much in either case.



> How often are you surprised by people?


Almost never.


----------



## Ray Mabry (Jun 6, 2010)

I find all of this rather interesting because I am the opposite of that and I guess it has to do with Ne. Even if I hate someone or have a bad first impression, I usually will give them the benefit of the doubt until I know enough for sure to be able to write them off...of course by then things get rather complicated because people generally end up liking me a lot and then I have to figure out a way to distance myself without being a complete jerk. 

The funny thing too is that I always have hope for people (even if at times I pessimistically will say I hate people and think they are stupid) ...like I always fall into the trap of thinking that people can or will change and am generally surprised when they don't. I feel as though I am always trying to change and better myself and I feel like other people should be and are doing that too. 

My first impressions usually end up being less important to me. When I look back some of my best friends I didn't necessarily like in the beginning...others i've disliked from the beginning and i've been right (although I usually ignore my negative impressions like I said before)...and others have changed drastically and I never saw it coming. All in all though I think ENTP's compensate for our open mindedness about people by never letting people get too close but creating the illusion with them that they are close. I guess Ni's are the opposite and will only let someone get close if there are no red flags.

...it's so funny, the opposing attitudes.


----------



## dude10000 (Jan 24, 2010)

I flat out assume all people are stupid, shallow, self-centered, though I know this isn't universally true. Events are far easier to predict with this assumption, and others will never disappoint us with a pessimistic outlook. It also makes surprising people who don't fit the mold that much more enjoyable.


----------



## CounterPoint (Oct 13, 2010)

To clarify, are we talking about general attitude towards people, or are we talking about data-derived impressions of people? I’ll admit that I tend to spot disparity in what people expressively state and what they unintentionally show, but never without some kind of data (perceived impressions or otherwise). 

Rarely do I walk around with an elitist aura claiming that my sht don’t stink  Ni dominants are usually neutral and detached until proven otherwise, and even when proven otherwise, I’m always open for a counter point. To paint a fixed pessimistic view of people seems overly defensive to me whether it’s coming from an intuitive or not.


----------



## dude10000 (Jan 24, 2010)

> To paint a fixed pessimistic view of people seems overly defensive to me whether it’s coming from an intuitive or not.


I don't. If we're going to be active participants in the commerce of life, we need to recognize that human beings are part of the animal kingdom, with all of the devouring desires that go with it. Think of Freud's view of mankind.


----------



## SarahWilliams (May 5, 2010)

hmmm what are the differences between NFs and NTs? It's so close, I feel like I can almost put my finger on it.... :tongue:


----------



## Ray Mabry (Jun 6, 2010)

SarahWilliams said:


> hmmm what are the differences between NFs and NTs? It's so close, I feel like I can almost put my finger on it.... :tongue:


I can't speak for every NT but I would think the difference between myself and other feeling types is that while I recognize that we're all human I still feel I can classify and define everything...that everything has a reason and can be analyzed and measured if need be. I also tend to become very disconnected at times and I start to see the world in a cold almost computer-like sort of way forgetting the "human element". It's hard to really I guess clearly express the way I think however so I dunno if i've even been much help hahaha.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

CounterPoint said:


> To clarify, are we talking about general attitude towards people, or are we talking about data-derived impressions of people? I’ll admit that I tend to spot disparity in what people expressively state and what they unintentionally show, but never without some kind of data (perceived impressions or otherwise).


We're talking about specific impressions of individual people, but less "data-derived" than intuitive perceptions.

That suggests another question though; do you (Ni-doms) use Fe/Te to "justify" an impression? How quickly do you go from an impression to a judgment?


----------



## CounterPoint (Oct 13, 2010)

OrangeAppled said:


> do you (Ni-doms) use Fe/Te to "justify" an impression? How quickly do you go from an impression to a judgment?


It is my understanding that Ni impressions (being perceiving functions) are pretty adaptable until Te/Fe finds something to contradict or support them. I thought it was dom. and aux. Fi/Ti users who are harder to convince once they form an impression. Not sure...


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

CounterPoint said:


> It is my understanding that Ni impressions (being perceiving functions) are pretty adaptable until Te/Fe finds something to contradict or support them. I thought it was dom. and aux. Fi/Ti users who are harder to convince once they form an impression. Not sure...


It's harder to change a Ji type's judgment once it's been made, but it tends to be formed from a series of impressions, meaning the impressions are also quite flexible. I'm getting a sense of one major impression being the basis for the Fe/Te judgment, possibly because Ni may have a deeper view where Ne has a broader one (and therefore needs to cover more ground & holds off on the conclusion).


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

That's interesting since I've obviously no Intuition where this type of thing is concerned from my endless list of misjudgements but I assumed it was Fi that was to blame for this since I'd make such quick judgements only to realize I was dead wrong. I am not uneasily convinced I was wrong though, in fact quite the opposite. Damn this thread is making me feel more like an optimist despite my attitude, my expectations of people are way too positive which is why I feel so let down when I'm wrong I guess.


----------



## ItsAlwaysSunny (Dec 17, 2010)

UncertainSomething said:


> Most INxJs make judgments at the extremes of their perception it seems, we have a way of deciphering what motivations and directions that someone is taking and how we fit into it, hard to explain. I must admit INFJs and INTJs do make mistakes at times and miss out on having good people in their lives, resulting feelings of regret can cause sadness and insecurity. However the damage a single person can do to our integrity of thoughts/feelings is quite big so the choice is to obviously be very cautious, INxJs have a very unusual, it seems, way of seeing humanity. We start to trust people when the deciphering of someone is complete and proved to be a workable interaction whereby the INxJ feels mutuality is easy. INxJs decisions cannot be based on benefit of the doubt, its foreign to us to trust something that has only 50/50 chance of working out especially when it easy to test it. To answer your questions:
> _
> *Is this accurate, or am I off the mark?*_* Mostly accurate, Ni dom is very different than Ni aux I've noticed
> If I'm wrong, then what is the true nature of such impressions (if you can relate to them)? see above
> ...


*


*


ditto to this


----------



## yesiknowbut (Oct 25, 2009)

ENFJs certainly do this too. Frustrating, as it's actually quite difficult to tell an xNxJ they are wrong. No matter how much they say that is because they are rarely surprised or rarely shown to be wrong, I beg to differ: they rarely accept that they might be wrong. Perceptually the same to them, but different from the outside. As a Ne-Ti married to an ENFJ who has a strong N preference I see this happen a fair bit. I can see that there is another angle to view the person from, other things to take into account, and he....has made up his mind, and that is that. I think if an impression has been intuitively gained, is something you "just know", it can be hard to shift with reason, as the intuitive in question doesn't always know what reasoning led them to their conclusion.


----------



## Random Ness (Oct 13, 2010)

I guess I'll bring a new perspective to the table.

*Is this accurate, or am I off the mark? *

Hmm...I don't know. I'd be more likely to label this as an enneagram 6 thing if I didn't know it was about Ni.

*If I'm wrong, then what is the true nature of such impressions (if you can relate to them)?*

Making sure I don't get screwed over and not being disappointed when I am, I guess.

*How would you, Ni-doms, describe how you form impressions of people?*

I monitor their every move and word to try to form my opinion on them. I take a behavior, justify why they did it, and consider them nice or a jerk based on that. This isn't always the best way of forming an impression, though, because there's no way I can know what they're thinking. Why I think they're doing something and why they actually are can be very off.

*How wholly do you trust these? *

Hmm...well, I usually believe them unless I get more information that changes my perspective entirely. When I have my impression of someone, although I seem like I stick to it, I'm actually cosntantly doubting it, since new info can change that impression so drastically.

*What does it take to budge a negative first impression or alter a positive one?*

Either they do something I don't expect them to do (something I like or something that hurts me), or I get some explanation about why they act the way they do (for instance, they've gone through something that explains their hurtful behavior).

*How often are you surprised by people?*

All the time. When someone does something unexpected, I get all confused and have to spend hours/days/weeks "perceiving" it in my mind with my Ni to come up with some kind of conclusion about how they are/what I should do.


----------



## Flamethrower (Aug 3, 2009)

OrangeAppled said:


> I've noticed a tendency in Ni-doms to express a lot of suspicion regarding people. Both types seem to almost have a paranoia at times regarding other people & even how events will play out.


I think this is possibly true. In the book Type Talk they cite INTJs as being the most paranoid of all the types since our imaginations can get away on us. There's a great thread on this in the Cognitive Functions sticky section where the following is written:

"Ni leads you to try and see "through the smoke and mirrors" to what is REALLY going on below the surface, that other people are not perceptive enough to pick up on...so in its unhealthy form, it turns into conspiracy theories"

I think Ni is always looking for the meaning behind the meaning behind the meaning of things and this can lead to suspicion and paranoia about people sometimes. When I was a child I was really suspicious of the motives of adults for instance. Particularly the teachers at school. I felt that since it seemed the teachers could not answer complex questions about the universe and didn't encourage speculation about it either (but rather expected us to learn basic answers by rote off the board without explanation) and had the power to order children to do whatever they wanted (regardless of whether it benefitted them or not) then the teachers must have some secret agenda other than teaching! It wasn't until I got older I realised that the questions I wanted answered were really theoretical and not all that practical to answer in front of a class, that adults do not know everything and that the teachers were catering for a whole group of kids, that my suspicion was not justified at all!

I've caught myself being unreasonably suspicious recently too. For example, my friend sent an email to a group of people including me. The next day I got an email from someone on that group I didn't know and in a totally paranoid moment I shot an email back to my own friend asking "who the hell is this person and why are they emailing me?!" She replied, "They aren't, they were replying to me and hit the 'Reply to all' button by mistake". It seemed so obvious when she explained this and I still have no idea what made me so suspicious. The same friend (who is ESTJ) tells me I am often suspicious like this even though I don't notice it myself. 

I also had a totally "suspicious" moment recently where I was waiting outside in my car for someone. A motorcyclist came past a few times which seemed odd since you don't expect to see the same person riding up and down the road. He seemed to be "casing the joint". He then awkwardly parked at a weird angle in a car park and then fumbled around with his helmet nervously for a long time before getting up and going to look in all the car windows parked up the street several times. So by now I had concocted a completely ridiculous story for what he was doing. He was 'obviously' up to no good - either looking to steal the cars or maybe worse... he had parked outside a hotel and looked nervous so of course he MUST be planning to set off a bomb or something... I actually got worried about this to the point of almost calling the police to investigate. But then I noticed that he had a Learner plate on his bike. Realistically a far better explanation would be that he was a beginner and hadn't parked a bike very often so was riding up and down looking for somewhere easy to park - hence the awkward parking job and appearing nervous. And he was probably looking in the cars to find out what sort of payment system was in the area. In the end he walked of and nothing bad happened.

I think those are both good examples of how Ni imagination can get the better of you if you don't watch it!



vel said:


> My sense was that INTJs due to their introverted feeling function feel more like being individuals, feel separate from other people, and same perception they have of others, that they are separate indviduals. But INFJs to the contrary feel like being part of the group during to extraverted feeling seeking to develop strong bonds between us and a bunch of people around us. On INFJ forums several times I have seen people post something along the lines "my friends have treated me badly, I am losing my faith in humanity now" but I have not encountered same kinds of posts on INTJ forums.


Yes, I think this is true. INTJs are more individualistic. I feel like a separate person to others and when I am getting to know someone else I like to know what their individual view of the world is. I don't merge with other people around me as if I am part of them like it seems INFJs can. If my friends treated me badly I would view that as my friends treating me badly - not necessarily as the whole of humanity being bad.


----------

