# Fi > Ne communication and being subtle



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Marlowe said:


> Last I was aware, this thread conversation was regarding physical, face-to-face communication. Internet is an entirely different medium with a different set of social protocols.
> 
> So are you still able to skip the small talk in face-to-face with strangers?


But why is it different? I think it just shows how phony we are in society and how little small talk actually interests us or matters. I mean you and I couldn't just spontaneously have this conversation in real life. There would have to be formalities first. But they don't really accomplish anything in my view..


----------



## FallingSlowly (Jul 1, 2013)

Marlowe said:


> There are a lot of mistypes. Which potentially opens up the question that if all the poorly communicating INFPs aren't really INFPs, then what types are they?


One of the other 15, but with a socially awkward slant


----------



## Dragheart Luard (May 13, 2013)

I'm still derpy on those kind of circumstances, but at least I try to be polite with strangers. I'm not a fan of small talk, but I know that it can be useful for getting a rough idea about the other person, so I can see which topics I could bring later. Besides I have zero problems for having a more lightweight conversation, specially if there's something about series, books or music that I could like. 
So, maybe younger introverts could have issues with such talk, but I don't think that it is something that couldn't be mastered somehow. Heck, maybe you can meet someone interesting by pure chance.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

FearAndTrembling said:


> But why is it different? I think it just shows how phony we are in society and how little small talk actually interests us or matters. I mean you and I couldn't just spontaneously have this conversation in real life. There would have to be formalities first. But they don't really accomplish anything in my view..


There is a lack of anonymity IRL. A stranger is a much more real threat face to face than on the internet. That's not phoniness, that's just being sensible.


----------



## FallingSlowly (Jul 1, 2013)

monemi said:


> It's hard to guess if people are mistyped on an online forum. We just get a snapshot. Plus, are there an insane number of INxx's because they are drawn to this or are there people in dire need of finding a reason for being outcasts? Either is just as likely to be true in my estimation.


Probably a bit of both. I think the latter is especially true for very young and/or very unbalanced people though...


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

monemi said:


> There is a lack of anonymity IRL. A stranger is much more real threat face to face than on the internet. That's phoniness, that's just being sensible.


I understand that, but the point is that I don't really care about that stuff anyway, and I doubt you do either. I don't want to have to ask you how your kids are doing, or whatever. Or what you did at work. I am glad I don't have to talk to you about that stuff. The internet frees us from those chains, and allows us to have actual interesting conversation.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

FearAndTrembling said:


> I understand that, but the point is that I don't really care about that stuff anyway, and I doubt you do either. I don't want to have to ask you how your kids are doing, or whatever. Or what you did at work. I am glad I don't have to talk to you about that stuff. The internet frees us from those chains, and allows us to have actual interesting conversation.


That's nice for the internet but doesn't change the importance or value of small talk IRL. I'm not interested in the conversations required for small talk. However, I do place value on it because it's not about the words.


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

FearAndTrembling said:


> But why is it different? I think it just shows how phony we are in society and how little small talk actually interests us or matters. I mean you and I couldn't just spontaneously have this conversation in real life. There would have to be formalities first. But they don't really accomplish anything in my view..


They don't accomplish anything because you don't know how to utilize it properly. Like any tool, you have to know how to use it for it to be helpful. 

I think it's absurd to suggest that communicating differently through different mediums is a sign of fakeness/phoniness. That's like suggesting a phone conversation is "cheapened" because somebody has to ask "who is it?" first.


EDIT: also, still waiting on an answer for my question. please oblige.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

monemi said:


> That's nice for the internet but doesn't change the importance or value of small talk IRL. I'm not interested in the conversations required for small talk. However, I do place value on it because it's not about the words.


But that is why we have to agree to disagree. Because I don't believe I am capable of picking up the cues you are. I can't get the benefit out of the situation that you can. And now that I know that people like you really are trying to probe me that way, my paranoia is no longer unfounded, and it's only gonna make me more defensive. I already thought it was a test. But I don't believe it is an accurate test, or one with much value. And I don't like to be judged by systems I don't agree with. I just don't think you can learn anything substantial from small talk. It has practical value as a bridge, but itself, not really.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

FearAndTrembling said:


> But that is why we have to agree to disagree. Because I don't believe I am capable of picking up the cues you are. I can't get the benefit out of the situation that you can. And now that I know that people like you really are trying to probe me that way, my paranoia is no longer unfounded, and it's only gonna make me more defensive. I already thought it was a test. But I don't believe it is an accurate test, or one with much value. And I don't like to be judged by systems I don't agree with. I just don't think you can learn anything substantial from small talk. It has practical value as a bridge, but itself, not really.


It tests whether I think you're a psycho/threat of some type. If in conversation we talk about the traffic on the way to work, am I willing to be vulnerable enough to mention which roads I took to get to work? Because that could be used to triangulate where I live exactly. If in conversation we talk about kids, can I talk about something valuable without you taking the piss out of me later to a coworker when my back is turned? Not a big deal on the internet, damaging and threatening to my career IRL though. We're talking about very, very basic trust. If you give me nothing to work with day in and day out, you're telling me that you're an outsider and therefore, untrustworthy. I can only draw conclusions IRL based on the information available. 

These are the building blocks of any type of relationship. You might find the rare few that will overlook closed off behaviour. But this goes against instinct. The purpose is not to test people. The objective is to get to know them. Nothing too invasive. I'm not going to do the social equivalent of asking for a pelvic exam. Just the very, very basics. Do you have any manners? Do you use basic hygiene? Can you make polite conversation? Do you break into gossip about the girl in accounting that gets dropped off in a different car every week by a different man? Are you too aggressive? Do you ask questions that are too personal? The expectations for small talk are extremely low. It's hard to screw it up. And yet a minority of people do manage to screw it up. Such as when they don't engage in it.


----------



## braided pain (Jul 6, 2012)

monemi said:


> During small talk, I am giving a person an opportunity to tell me about themselves. Skipping over that stage when meeting someone is like stripping at the restaurant on a first date. It's presumptuous and socially awkward. You really don't think these details matter? They do matter.


And here I was all set to make this comparison after the first two pages. Hah.

I just don't get this. I get not _liking_ small talk--it consumes energy for an introvert, and no, it's not always fun, but this attitude-- 

OMG I CAN'T DO THIS SMALL TALK AAAAGH I WANT TO SKIP TO THE MINDPROBING

--is just weird. Yes, you have to make people comfortable first. You should also bathe regularly before going out in public. Because if you don't, you will chase people away. You're not entitled to dig into everyone's psyche without preliminaries. You don't have to be some kind of social genius to get this. 



FearAndTrembling said:


> Because I don't believe I am capable of picking up the cues you are. I can't get the benefit out of the situation that you can.


Why? I managed to. It's a skill like any other. Most people will never become concert pianists, but "Mary had a little lamb" is within reach.

Is it possible you're just worried about failing and being embarrassed?


----------



## Wellsy (Oct 24, 2011)

I don't do subtle well, I certainly note body language and stuff but more on an unconscious level. In conversation I feel like i'm moving back and forth between the external world and my thoughts, the more I have to think about my response the less I look at the person. It's too much to be try and analyse a person while giving full attention to a topic. 
As for small talk being used as a toe dipped in water I don't think I consider its importance to much, not to say I don't partake in it but it's hard to waste energy on things I couldn't care about when I am somewhat selective about who I direct my energy to.
There isn't much concern for social pleasantries, social etiquette annoys me. It sometimes feels like it detracts from people saying what they really want to say and that to me seems a waste of time and effort.
I'd appreciate a person saying I don't feel like talking to you more so than social nicety of body language.

I don't think there's too much concern of me actually intruding on a person and being unwanted company because I don't feel much motivation to initiate conversation with many people. Very few people get me excited enough to make explode with enthusiasm socially. What this does is makes me a good listener, I respond and let people take the floor and help keep the flow of the conversation going. Also I think my pessimistic view of myself in any given situation lends itself to minimizing the chances of realizing positive feedback as i'm significantly more likely to believe that I am unwanted than not.
I'm genuinely surprised at how well I am received by people and that they enjoy my company where I feel like i'm dull and boring to them, as if i'm supposed to be charismatic constantly.

Generally though i'm not very engaging and will be seen as quiet and reserved. The worst case scenario is more me speaking my mind and it being seen as odd making me shut down more, so I often avoid this unpleasant feeling as I feel what I find interesting is not often interesting to others. Not always true but is how it feels at times.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Wellsy said:


> I don't do subtle well, I certainly note body language and stuff but more on an unconscious level. In conversation I feel like i'm moving back and forth between the external world and my thoughts, the more I have to think about my response the less I look at the person. It's too much to be try and analyse a person while giving full attention to a topic.
> As for small talk being used as a toe dipped in water I don't think I consider its importance to much, not to say I don't partake in it but it's hard to waste energy on things I couldn't care about when I am somewhat selective about who I direct my energy to.
> There isn't much concern for social pleasantries, social etiquette annoys me. It sometimes feels like it detracts from people saying what they really want to say and that to me seems a waste of time and effort.
> I'd appreciate a person saying I don't feel like talking to you more so than social nicety of body language.


Part of dipping toes in the water is figuring out if it's best to keep up social pleasantries or if we can fast forward to something more entertaining. How else are we supposed to know who actually wants talk about how many bloody parsnips they can fit in their oven or gossip about the angry mob that kicked the shit out of those two guys at Brazilian Championship football match? Small talk offers context.


----------



## Dreamer777 (Jan 15, 2011)

monemi said:


> Some recent conversations has me thinking. Posters talking about struggling with small talk and making deeper connections with people and dating etc... Sorry, this is long.
> 
> Are they just missing the sign posts in communications? Is it like navigating the outside world without knowing what the colours on the traffic lights represent and misunderstanding the Stop, Give Way/Yield and going the wrong way up one way streets? Because some people really don't seem to know what signals they're putting out. I'm going to try to breakdown exactly what preliminary signals I am used to. It's difficult, because a lot of this is just instinctual I think. But I suspect some aren't aware of this stuff. Let's see if posters agree or disagree with my assessment.
> 
> ...


well, before i read on to replies, i wanted to just answer you straight off without any influences from any replies you got. i'm an INFP. yes, we come across as socially dumb when a Sensor is hitting on us. Probably we're more intune if it's an Intuitive, but even then maybe not, but Sensors use different ways, like ur signals, and referencing them to stop, go, etc. we INFP's are not going to fit into those ways and cues. sometimes we're oblivious to what's unfolding, as we have to process our thoughts, we're not quick witted, it can take hours or days to process what took place in an encounter/inerraction. 

and we read between lines and expect others to read between our lines, so the cues we might give are different to yours and neither party is understanding and reading the other party right.

so yeah, welcome to the INFP psyche, it can make you real confused! cause a Fi dom, especially worse a Intuitive Fi dom, cannot explain their feelings. 

they are so bad at explaining their feelings that they could be married for 50 years and still never been able to fully explain their feelings to their partner. we show alot of love and care in our actions and touch. good luck trying to figure out how an INFP feels! LOL


----------



## Wellsy (Oct 24, 2011)

monemi said:


> Part of dipping toes in the water is figuring out if it's best to keep up social pleasantries or if we can fast forward to something more entertaining. How else are we supposed to know who actually wants talk about how many bloody parsnips they can fit in their oven or gossip about the angry mob that kicked the shit out of those two guys at Brazilian Championship football match? Small talk offers context.


You're right, i'm just inhibited in a lot of social interaction. I do sometimes initiate conversations and make small talk when i've mustered up the energy I just don't think i'm acutely aware of the things going on during it as you seem to be.
I don't think I analyse my interactions that much, more i just experience them and let things flow. Probably doesn't make for a very interesting interaction and I suppose this is how I can surprise people when I do talk about things I want to.
I'm impressed by my friends abilities to make jokes so smoothly so quickly. 
I suppose it has been the initial moments I have figured out whether someone is worth my time, some chemistry is made apparent and I feel more compelled to talk.


I feel weird talking about myself, I always feel there's some chance that I have an imperfect view of how i behave and it'd be better if I had someone who had observed me give their opinion in my place.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Dreamer777 said:


> well, before i read on to replies, i wanted to just answer you straight off without any influences from any replies you got. i'm an INFP. yes, we come across as socially dumb when a Sensor is hitting on us. Probably we're more intune if it's an Intuitive, but even then maybe not, but Sensors use different ways, like ur signals, and referencing them to stop, go, etc. we INFP's are not going to fit into those ways and cues. sometimes we're oblivious to what's unfolding, as we have to process our thoughts, we're not quick witted, it can take hours or days to process what took place in an encounter/inerraction.
> 
> and we read between lines and expect others to read between our lines, so the cues we might give are different to yours and neither party is understanding and reading the other party right.
> 
> ...


It's not a real problem for me if intuitive Fi-dom's aren't picking up on subtle social cues. I'm not the one being rejected. I was just thinking that, much like I learned to lip read as a deaf person, maybe it would be wise for intuitive Fi-dom's to learn more subtle social cues to avoid rejection?


----------



## Dreamer777 (Jan 15, 2011)

monemi said:


> It's not a real problem for me if intuitive Fi-dom's aren't picking up on subtle social cues. I'm not the one being rejected. I was just thinking that, much like I learned to lip read as a deaf person, maybe it would be wise for intuitive Fi-dom's to learn more subtle social cues to avoid rejection?


well, learning is always a good thing, it never hurts to try to learn more and more and become wiser and wiser for sure! but you have to realize there is a S and N clash taking place, you look for concrete signs, cues, etc, an N may be giving you 6th sense abstract words as their signs/cues, but you're not understanding that and they aren't understanding your concrete 5 sense cues.

and i think INFP has the biggest struggle of all types because we're a Fi dom and an Intuitive abstract Fi dom at that. you have to take time to get to know an INFP. and they respond more to a gentle interraction than a forceful or loud extroverted interraction. what makes us tick and open up? gentleness, not forcefulness.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

Well, my view is that Fi is thinking is better at noting what's going on WITHIN people better than what's going on BETWEEN people. Whereas Fe seems opposite.

The stuff I pick up on people is not how they want to interact in that moment, but often
-how they want to be seen in general
-certain emotions & feelings they have that they may not be aware are coming through (or even have)
-when they are adhering to propriety or an image and not expressing their actual feeling
- etc, similar stuff to the above
But this I did not even really pay attention to until more recent years.

Growing up, I was just largely oblivious, probably due to disinterest. This made me vulnerable. I tended to act with honesty and assumed the same of others, so I was dealt some blows when I realized others were playing by script. It's not about what signals mean, but whether or not they are genuine, or what actual weight they carry. Now I note discrepancy with signal and intent better, but I don't really label it - I just note it. Over time I get a pattern and see how seriously I can take such signals from an individual. 

Other times, I am oblivious because I am just distracted by my own thoughts. So while I may interact okay with someone directly, I do stuff like walk past them and seem to ignore them because I don't "see" them. These little gaffes add up and can make people judge you negatively, which hinders communication even when I am aware and not doing anything "wrong". Sometimes I'm quiet even if I know someone wants to chat because I just don't feel like it and it becomes a matter of maintaining sanity. Again, these things add up...what I find is *others do not read me well*. I am rarely read correctly and have a lot of crap projected onto me. This may be because instead of operating in a mode to send signals, I operate with my internal state. So the meaning is only apparent to me. I find this rather common to introverts, being that we "devalue" the object, so we don't tend to define our behaviors in relation to it (whereas extroverts overvalue it and can over adjust to objective standards & contexts).

I think due to inferior Te - INFPs do not assign functioning categories to people well, or we resist it. In other words, we don't sum up a role/label for someone and then treat them as such, which is what the OP sounds like (and from an INFP perspective, it can looks like using people as tools of sorts to reach an end goal). There can be a tendency to doubt our judgements here - _did that REALLY fall under X behavior or am I being too sensitive or too harsh (etc)?_ So often, I give the benefit of the doubt, and I act with doubt, which may mean not acting at all or being quite vague (which people will project a lot onto). I can also come up with many reasons someone may do/say something, so I don't see everything as having one clear meaning. At times, this gives me insight where others have misunderstandings. 

But doubt becomes even worse when trying to gauge how people feel about ME. Because then I have a hyper-awareness of my hyper-awareness and how it clouds my perceptions & hinders judgement. I can't feel the correct weight (which is of extreme importance to an F-dom, but with different focuses whether I/E). I pick up on dynamics between people I am not involved with much better, but I have a disinterest in it (notice it more now, realizing I can learn for myself if I observe more). Meaning can be regained with intimacy, where I have that pattern to refer to built up and surer foundations for how that person feels towards me. 

However, I do tend to pick up on the sort of "essential nature" of someone, and I may see what that person is lacking (as in, what they need & also their flaws) and what potential they have. Since this is hidden and perhaps even unconscious to them, it doesn't do much for casual interaction. It can even tick people off to act with this - perhaps it does not play to the ego well enough. Or it's like the elephant in the room - impossible to call out. They will deny it or downplay it anyway. Sometimes I do "let's get real" talk and it works though. This tends to make me good at giving advice to people for relationships or emotional problems, without any first hand experience in whatever it is they have an issue. So I understand people very well in that way, but not in everyday interactions so much.

Between my own insecurities, my multiple interpretations, and the focus on less obvious info, it's easy for me not to catch what's obvious to others. But the other stuff I notice is not exactly useless, just less immediately so, and less "practical".

For more intense, deeper moments, it can make people feel like you're profoundly insightful and somehow know how to articulate things they feel that they couldn't quite identity. I think people can feel exposed in a way that is not comfortable for chit-chat.

More and more, I am aware of people's egos and can see how to play to them, but I find it manipulative or am just disinterested in that game. I see Fe types doing this a lot, and some ExFPs.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Dreamer777 said:


> well, learning is always a good thing, it never hurts to try to learn more and more and become wiser and wiser for sure! but you have to realize there is a S and N clash taking place, you look for concrete signs, cues, etc, an N may be giving you 6th sense abstract words as their signs/cues, but you're not understanding that and they aren't understanding your concrete 5 sense cues.
> 
> and i think INFP has the biggest struggle of all types because we're a Fi dom and an Intuitive abstract Fi dom at that. you have to take time to get to know an INFP. and they respond more to a gentle interraction than a forceful or loud extroverted interraction. what makes us tick and open up? gentleness, not forcefulness.


Signals aren't all deliberate concrete communication. Many of them are only projected for milliseconds. I've noticed I pick up on stuff other people miss. I don't know if that's just Se or deafness. Deaf Sign Language Users Pick Up Faster on Body Language - College of Letters & Science We recognize non-language gestures/expressions 100 milliseconds faster than hearing people. Not everything is intentionally put out. Often you do NEED to read between the lines. It's just, you don't have time to analyze it. You have to react on instinct. It's not forceful or loud extroverted interaction at all. Hence it's called subtle. It's fast and most often subliminal. 

It doesn't really matter if I'm missing intuitive communication. Much like it doesn't matter if hearing people are missing deaf sign language. When the majority were communicating clearly and effectively without me, it was my responsibility to adapt to them as best I could. INFP communication abilities aren't a disability. Much like I was required to work on my ability to work through abstract and theoretical principals in school and continue to do so on PerC, it would be wise for Fi-dom intuitives to work on their ability to detect subtle communication. If you're already decent at small talk and body language, then obviously, that's unnecessary. Obviously, any type could have these problems. But it seems nonsensical to put the onus on the majority for the minority.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

I think I am like this because of Ni. I like the "sensors sacrifice imagination for observation" and "intuitives sacrifice observation for imagination". I am lead around by inspiration, not by information. When I am talking to a girl I like for example, I am not looking for visual cues. I am imagining all the possibilities.. I am always chasing an inner thought, not outer sensory information. 

I am constantly in a dream world, and small talk interrupts that. I said I hate when people talk to me in general. It is because I am already having a conversation with myself, and they are interrupting it. With Ni, all the action is inside my head. Not outside in the sensory world. That is boring. Those details are boring. My inner world is much more interesting.


----------



## Wellsy (Oct 24, 2011)

Stelliferous said:


> I think it has been rather obvious that she has something against INFPs, because we have vastly different values when it comes to people and communicating with them. Values versus values is what has been demonstrated here in this thread and dare I say "she started it".


I'm indifferent to it all hahaha
I think she wishes to understand why some people devalue the importance of small talk and used INFPs as an example.
I assume she considers it immature for people to expect insight into the more indepth and personal aspects of people without first getting to know them through light hearted banter and small insignificant details.
That the social culture isn't going to stop 'small talk' because people don't like it and that perhaps it'd be to their advantage to take on a perspective that is adaptive for themselves socially.

I think the counter to that is perhaps one of energy and belief of how small talk comes off in some scenarios.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

Marlowe said:


> No. My laser retina scanner downloaded a color scan of your cat avatar and cross referenced it with my backlog of types most likely to have something so stupidly cute as their picture. "Wildly Emotional INFP" came up top with "Bitchy but Fun ISFP" second. Seems "Wildly Emotional" is part of the INFP package. No assumptions needed.


Well not all of us are impulsive. The F stands for feelings, not emotions. They are different. Being bitchy is triggered by emotion, being argumentive is triggered by feelings. Feelings are much less intense and controlling than emotions.


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

Wellsy said:


> I'm indifferent to it all hahaha
> *I think* she wishes to understand why some people devalue the importance of small talk and used INFPs as an example.
> *I assume* she considers it immature for people to expect insight into the more indepth and personal aspects of people without first getting to know them through light hearted banter and small insignificant details.
> That the social culture isn't going to stop 'small talk' because people don't like it and that perhaps it'd be to their advantage to take on a perspective that is adaptive for themselves socially.
> ...


Rather than creating your own interpretive spin on what's been written, why don't you just re-read the original post? Or better yet, ask the OP?


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

Wellsy said:


> I'm indifferent to it all hahaha
> I think she wishes to understand why some people devalue the importance of small talk and used INFPs as an example.
> I assume she considers it immature for people to expect insight into the more indepth and personal aspects of people without first getting to know them through light hearted banter and small insignificant details.
> That the social culture isn't going to stop 'small talk' because people don't like it and that perhaps it'd be to their advantage to take on a perspective that is adaptive for themselves socially.
> ...


I wonder though why they value small talk so much. Sociopaths happen to be experts at it and seem to be great people. Why bother using a radar that can't efficiently detect incoming missiles? Small talk is a system that can be learned and abused by the very people it's supposed to protect you from. It has lost its usefulness to me. Instead I talk to others about ideas and such, or I listen. No small talk needed. At least to the people I converse with. If they are dangerous well I don't think I would have figured it out from small talk.


----------



## Wellsy (Oct 24, 2011)

Marlowe said:


> Rather than creating your own interpretive spin on what's been written, why don't you just re-read the original post? Or better yet, ask the OP?


Is why I added those words you bolded, it's what I've taken from the OP but I do think you're right I should ask for clarification with her.
@monemi am I getting anywhere near to what you're expressing?


Wellsy said:


> I think she wishes to understand why some people devalue the importance of small talk and used INFPs as an example. I assume she considers it immature for people to expect insight into the more indepth and personal aspects of people without first getting to know them through light hearted banter and small insignificant details.
> That the social culture isn't going to stop 'small talk' because people don't like it and that perhaps it'd be to their advantage to take on a perspective that is adaptive for themselves socially.


----------



## braided pain (Jul 6, 2012)

OrangeAppled said:


> They don't know you do it. You don't actually talk about it with them. While they are busy trying to make me know something about them, I am perceiving the stuff they may not be directly communicating. IDK if it's rude, it's just how I "see". It's how my brain automatically focuses when dealing with stuff outside my head.


See, I get this. This is pretty much what I do.



OrangeAppled said:


> Based off of cherry-picked information that says nothing about who we really are? So the foundation of the relationship is some ego illusion? It is perhaps even based on lies, if a person is deceptive in how the present themselves....


Here's where I get lost. You should be able to tell from the accidental non-verbal cues that they're being deceptive, right? Does it matter whether they're doing it on purpose or not? Plenty of people do so to protect themselves from hurt, embarrassment, or just because they truly see themselves as something they are not.




OrangeAppled said:


> As far as general, previous comments about making effort to hone social skills - of course I do that. I'm all about self-improvement, but I keep my priorities straight and values refined. I'm not going to "sell out".





Cantarella said:


> I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say "communication skills" is more of a T concept.
> ...
> Communicating isn't a "skill." It's a choice. If we fail to communicate effectively, it may annoy us, but we don't chalk it up to "poor communication skills." We're more likely to blame our feelings or other factors that affected how we decided to communicate.


Okay, I'm linking these two quotes for a reason.
@OrangeAppled, I get the impression that for you this is not a skill but a defining part of your self-image. Small talk is shallow and phony and you would consider yourself inauthentic for engaging in it, yes? Because I think we've blown right past MBTI and are into Enneagram issues now. (And as a 6w5 using small talk to make allies while keeping my distance, I've got no room to judge you.)
@Cantarella, I use the phrase "communication skills" because it's not an essential part of me anymore than cooking skills or carpentry skills. It's something I _do_, not who I am.


Is this the core of the problem? Do the rest of you see this as an honesty issue? Because I still find it every bit as creepy as expecting someone to get naked on the first meeting. If you find someone who shares your views, fine, but expecting everybody to adopt your standard just comes across as entitled to something the majority of people don't want to give. If you're okay with that, fine, but if not, i want to know how I, as a very private individual (with trust issues), can deal with you without compromising my privacy.




And WTF with the sensor/intuitive wars?! If you all confuse me as to which side I am supposed to be on I am going to find a way to send cow patties right through the internets. Swearsies.


----------



## Cantarella (Sep 3, 2010)

braided pain said:


> See, I get this. This is pretty much what I do.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What you responded to my quote with makes perfect sense, thanks.  That is sort of the impression I get, especially with my NT friends. I don't think it's a BAD thing either. Actually, I find myself wanting to protect them. I was just trying to make the point that the way NTs/STs and NFs/SFs approach communication is different, and for good reason.


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

braided pain said:


> I am going to find a way to send cow patties right through the internets. Swearsies.


Well that's definitely a threat I haven't seen before.


----------



## Wellsy (Oct 24, 2011)

Stelliferous said:


> I wonder though why they value small talk so much. Sociopaths happen to be experts at it and seem to be great people. Why bother using a radar that can't efficiently detect incoming missiles? Small talk is a system that can be learned and abused by the very people it's supposed to protect you from. It has lost its usefulness to me. Instead I talk to others about ideas and such, or I listen. No small talk needed. At least to the people I converse with. If they are dangerous well I don't think I would have figured it out from small talk.


I don't think sociopaths are relevant hahaha
Lots of things can be abused but that doesn't make them useless or to be discarded though. 
It's uses explained in the OP. If that's working for you that's great 

It's certainly pleasant when people can enjoy discussing certain concepts with you rather than disdain and that lights me up and for the rest of the time I mostly listen or make a few jokes depending on the culture of the social group. 
But I do think it's difficult to start an interpersonal relationship with someone early on without small talk, most people aren't too happy with probing questions from acquaintances or strangers. That's when i'm most willing to make small talk, though I don't think i'I've reflected as much on my own behavior after doing it as much as monemi. 
She seems well aware of how much unconsciously goes into conversation between people, especially when someone is relatively unknown.


----------



## Sporadic Aura (Sep 13, 2009)

Interesting, I think the main difference between how we communicate is to the vast majority of people I'm just neutral towards during our first conversation, I normally don't decide I like someone based off of just one interaction they would have to be incredibly annoying for me to completely just write them off.


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

Sporadic Aura said:


> Interesting, I think the main difference between how we communicate is to the vast majority of people I'm just neutral towards during our first conversation, I normally don't decide I like someone based off of just one interaction they would have to be incredibly annoying for me to completely just write them off.


That's probably more a J/P difference. 

But I think your method is probably a good rule of thumb.


----------



## Sporadic Aura (Sep 13, 2009)

Marlowe said:


> That's probably more a J/P difference.
> 
> But I think your method is probably a good rule of thumb.


Hmm, isn't the OP an ESTP though?


----------



## Khiro (Nov 28, 2012)

FearAndTrembling said:


> I think I am like this because of Ni. I like the "sensors sacrifice imagination for observation" and "intuitives sacrifice observation for imagination". I am lead around by inspiration, not by information. When I am talking to a girl I like for example, I am not looking for visual cues. I am imagining all the possibilities.. I am always chasing an inner thought, not outer sensory information.
> 
> I am constantly in a dream world, and small talk interrupts that. I said I hate when people talk to me in general. It is because I am already having a conversation with myself, and they are interrupting it. With Ni, all the action is inside my head. Not outside in the sensory world. That is boring. Those details are boring. My inner world is much more interesting.


Fun as it can be to embrace your inner stereotype, as an INFJ it's very, very likely that you actually pay a lot more attention to that sort of thing than you realise. Our inferior function is one we doubt, but it's still one we value. You may not sit there going "Oh, she's moving her hand. That means she's a fan of Michael Jackson," but, chances are, you know when to lean in, when to make or break eye contact, what tactility signals and also what those things mean when someone else does them.


----------



## FallingSlowly (Jul 1, 2013)

Khiro said:


> Fun as it can be to embrace your inner stereotype, as an INFJ it's very, very likely that you actually pay a lot more attention to that sort of thing than you realise. Our inferior function is one we doubt, but it's still one we value. You may not sit there going "Oh, she's moving her hand. That means she's a fan of Michael Jackson," but, chances are, you know when to lean in, when to make or break eye contact, what tactility signals and also what those things mean when someone else does them.


^^ Exactly. 

If you're Ni dom, your perception will still oscillate between Ni and Se. They're inextricably linked, but they don't happen at the same time. Se might be inferior, and you tend to use it less and not as reliably, but you _do_ use it. And _value_ it. If you don't, I'd consider you might actually be Si/Ne of sorts (and Si and Ni are easy to mix up if your understanding of functions is superficial).

IMHO, it's both a question of age and whether you're generally a type who rather develops already existing strengths or glaring weaknesses. If you're not keen on the latter, that's totally okay, but then don't moan if it causes you problems in everyday life. 

I guess this was the whole intention of the thread, if I understood @_monemi_ correctly. It's not a problem if you're genuinely happy with the way you connect with people, and say: "I don't need small talk, I get along fine without it." 

There are so many people on here who bemoan their difficulties with communication though. And if that's the case, it is for them to do something about it - not for all the world to adjust to them. Whether the observation that this is more common in certain types than others is right or not is just an interesting idea to ponder (as I said in an earlier post, I personally think that life experience and self-awareness play a much bigger part in it than functions, but that's just me)...


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

FearAndTrembling said:


> I don't think it is a false dichotomy. There is a pattern. Look up famous sensors vs intuitives. There are barely any great philosophers, scientists or artists in the sensor category, and they make up the majority of the population. Intuition is the root of all creative genius imo, Jung thought so too. Sensors excel at their own things. They are usually businessmen or politicians or something.


Barely great artists in the Sensor category? That doesn't sound very likely to me. You are not making this up, are you? :laughing:

Do great philosophers and scientists make up for the majority of iNtuitives, or is it a relatively small extraordinary category you are attributing? Like iNtuition is also linked to Low Latent Inhibition, which indeed is linked to creative genius, but also to phantasy proneness, psychotic and anti-social behavior. The link between LLI with IQ is actually up for debate. Lower IQ with LLI is said to increase the likeliness of psychopathology. 



Introverted Intuition said:


> According to Jung, the introverted intuition type can be either an artist, seer or crank. Such a person has a visionary ideal that reveals strange, mysterious things. These are enigmatic, 'unearthly' people who stand aloof from ordinary society. They have little interest in explaining or rationalizing their personal vision, but are content merely to proclaim it. Partly as a result of this, they are often misunderstood. Although the vision of the artist among this type generally remains on the purely perceptual level, mystical dreamers or cranks may become caught up in theirs. The person's life then becomes symbolic, taking on the nature of a Great Work, mission or spiritual-moral quest. If neurotic, repressed sensation may express itself in primitive, instinctual ways and, like their extraverted counterparts, introverted intuitives often suffer from hypochondria and compulsions.
> Jungian Psychological Types


If you prefer to be caught up in your imagination, fine, that is your own choice. I don't see anything wrong in the topic that OP started. It's something I have improved myself in over the years, and I think it has served me well. So, I don't think it's impossible, and just like I was able to learn from Sensors, for whom it comes more naturally (often by just observing them -e.g. how to break the ice at a business meeting) I think one could also see this thread as an opportunity rather than feeling invalidated or attacked. Although ultimately, I would do it in my own (Fi-Ne) way. I don't pretend I will ever become as skilled in it like a Sensor (dom). But it is a skill, not something you effortlessly accomplish by virtue of 4 preferences. 

There have indeed been complaints about smalltalk on the INFP board, so I can understand why this is directed at INFP.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Khiro said:


> Fun as it can be to embrace your inner stereotype, as an INFJ it's very, very likely that you actually pay a lot more attention to that sort of thing than you realise. Our inferior function is one we doubt, but it's still one we value. You may not sit there going "Oh, she's moving her hand. That means she's a fan of Michael Jackson," but, chances are, you know when to lean in, when to make or break eye contact, what tactility signals and also what those things mean when someone else does them.


Yes, and I can also move my legs and think at the same time. That doesn't mean I am focusing on walking. I can sit here and type this and sip water, without even thinking about the water. It's like magic. What you are describing is basically unconscious reflex, really not much different than muscle memory.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Sporadic Aura said:


> Interesting, I think the main difference between how we communicate is to the vast majority of people I'm just neutral towards during our first conversation, I normally don't decide I like someone based off of just one interaction they would have to be incredibly annoying for me to completely just write them off.





Sporadic Aura said:


> Hmm, isn't the OP an ESTP though?


The question isn't whether I've made a judgement call within 7 seconds about someone new. The question is whether the person I'm introducing myself to is making a judgement call about me within 7 seconds. And therein lies the challenge for me. What am I communicating to this person on first impression? I'm well aware that first impressions are unreliable beyond the very basics. I can usually tell their race, age and gender. I can look at what they are wearing and do some guesswork as to their socioeconomic status, although it's possible that I'm wrong. Much like an intuitive reads between the lines, they may be wrong at times also. It's best guess. 

It goes against my values to write someone off within seconds of meeting them, unless I perceive that they are a risk. Such as when they are closed off. They don't want me to read them. Fine, I won't pry. But I'm not going to give them any basic trust.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

FallingSlowly said:


> ^^ Exactly.
> 
> If you're Ni dom, your perception will still oscillate between Ni and Se. They're inextricably linked, but they don't happen at the same time. Se might be inferior, and you tend to use it less and not as reliably, but you _do_ use it. And _value_ it. If you don't, I'd consider you might actually be Si/Ne of sorts (and Si and Ni are easy to mix up if your understanding of functions is superficial).
> 
> ...


This is EXACTLY what I'm saying. Thank you. 

I make an effort to take a step back and look at the big picture. I make an effort to read between the lines. I don't trust my skills in these areas. But this is something I work towards. I don't go on the ESTP board and complain about people things directly related to intuition and how I'm rejected because of it. I do something about it. It appeared to me, that some posters are struggling with something and not recognizing the connection between the two. I opined that the two issues are connected. If posters that complain were more aware of the connection and saw the value in it, maybe it wouldn't continue to be an issue for them anymore.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Yes, and I can also move my legs and think at the same time. That doesn't mean I am focusing on walking. I can sit here and type this and sip water, without even thinking about the water. It's like magic. What you are describing is basically unconscious reflex, really not much different than muscle memory.


Well done! 
For you!









Now, take those motor skills and put them to one side for just a minute. Your water will wait, I promise. Now work on your observation skills and put them towards other people and not just inside your own head space. 

Communication comes from latin and means to share. Conveying an exchange of information, thoughts, ideas and feelings though speech, visual signals, behaviour and writing. Communication is sharing. Meeting people halfway. You don't have to personally relate to the person. You don't have to like the person. But they are consciously or subconsciously sharing information. 55% of this communication is through non-verbal facial expressions. 30-40% is body language and gestures. They're SHARING with you and you are suggesting you are oblivious to most of what they are saying because they didn't use words. That's not very intuitive to ignore most of the message. They're telling you everything you need to know and you're brushing them off because the words aren't valuable to you. 

Where are your instincts? 

I'm sorry if I'm coming off as aggressive at times. These are all words. I communicate heavily with body language, gestures, intonation and facial expressions. Typing is annoying. I'm trying to stuff my communication into ever inadequate words. Meanwhile, you're saying you don't even pay attention to the parts of communication that I rely most heavily on. I'm extremely expressive and you're saying, you don't listen to people like me. How can posters insist on being good communicators when they dismiss the value of visual communication? A large segment on the population are expressing themselves to you this way more than with their words.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

monemi said:


> Well done!
> For you!
> 
> 
> ...


The problem is that the outside world can only hold my interest for so long. Of course I am aware of my surroundings, to a degree...

Like this weekend. I was having a couple drinks and playing trivia at the bar. I'm pretty good at trivia and was in first, these other people playing weren't bad though. So this competition piqued my interest, and I am ready to win. I am in total pay attention mode, hand on the buzzer, eye on the screen. Then I get lost in a thought...next thing I know, when I "wake up", 3 or 4 questions have passed, and I am totally out of the running. The inner world just totally takes over and sucks me in.


----------



## Sporadic Aura (Sep 13, 2009)

I understand the INFP's dilemma with small talk because I have a similar one. It's not that they _can't_ do small talk, it's mostly that they just won't be arsed to do it. Someone earlier described it as 'interrupting the conversation I'm having with myself' and I completely relate to that. Small talk, by definition is trivial conversation, trivial conversation that has a purpose but still trivial conversation. I always have a constant dialogue going with Ne/Ti and small talk will draw me out of my internal world and almost never be as interesting as it. That being said, I have Fe and they have Fi, I am more apt to do small talk even if I don't want to because it might make a mutual connection between the two of us, which is something I value. What I'm mainly looking for in conversations though is _fuel_ for my ideas or _fuel_ that will keep me engaged and interested, which is why small talk isn't very appealing.

Though if they did want to learn how to be effective at small talk I think they're already well adapt for it. Small talk is being _aware_ of the person and reacting to it in real time. I think the INFP tendency sometimes it to be _aware_ of the other person but then get lost in thought/speculation about the other person instead of reacting to it in real time. INFP's are great at reading people, I think they'd be very effective at small talk if they used their perceptions about people and then got outside of their head for a bit and applied them to the conversation at hand.


----------



## Sporadic Aura (Sep 13, 2009)

monemi said:


> Is it gender or size that makes women more cautious in risk assessment? Not sure. But I'm well aware that guys I know who are significantly bigger than me aren't as cautious.


Hmm, not sure. I actually have noticed that small guys might tend to be a little more cautious as well. For me there really isn't very many people who I find physically threatening so that might play a part in me not being very cautious. Might be interested in hearing other peoples perspectives on this.


----------



## Cantarella (Sep 3, 2010)

@Marlowe I don't have a problem with small talk, but I think the only advice I can really give people is to just go for it and not be so focused on being authentic all the time. Few people are--it's all about participating, which is easy. Adjusting to others gets easier and learning about them can be rewarding. As for reading social cues, I can't imagine most INFPs having a real problem with this. I think that many just resist trying because it feels like a tedious thing to do to fit in when fitting in isn't their main concern. However, if you're inexperienced at something, the only way to get better is to practice.


----------



## Kabosu (Mar 31, 2012)

I relate with some of them not enjoying it as well. Sometimes I've been in areas where so much talk went on and in moments when I wanted to say a lot and not just a little and in this instance to not just jump around in communication.
Speech wise, people usually find me nervous the first couple to few times. With some people, I'm immediately comfortable but despite that first dichotomy, there is shyness and anxiety in me. For this, I kind of relate with those people's base issue.

Some small talk is okay and especially in an introductory way.

Maybe what these people are doing is like when people rant of their problems on a place like Facebook, only sometimes they do it on a forum instead.


----------



## Sporadic Aura (Sep 13, 2009)

Doge said:


> Maybe what these people are doing is like when people rant of their problems on a place like Facebook, only sometimes they do it on a forum instead.


I agree with this. I doubt it's really some massive roadblock but more of a mild annoyance and this is a place for them to rant.


----------



## FallingSlowly (Jul 1, 2013)

Marlowe said:


> Getting back to the original discussion, @_monemi_ @_FallingSlowly_ @_Cantarella_ what are some steps an INFPs might be able to take to improve their ability to read small cues/do small talk, if they want to? It's not exactly a solution to say "just notice these things and you'll be pat."
> 
> Also mentioning @_Blue Flare_ and @_braided pain_ @_Wellsy_


I guess most has already been said.



Awareness is obviously the first step.
Consider it's not necessarily only the others who don't get you (essentially: Don't feel entitled). It might actually also be you who is not getting them. Communication is not a one way street. Both have a responsibility, no one is superior. It's work.
Stop focusing on yourself, tune into the other person and give them your undivided attention (if that gets too hard at some point, that's okay, just do as much as you can. It gets easier with time).
Related to that: Be in the moment. Don't switch off, think too much about past experiences or future scenarios.
Seek out situations like these, even if they're out of your comfort zone. You actually need to do it to improve on it.
Surround yourself with people who are good at small talk/reading body signals, and learn from them.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

FallingSlowly said:


> You are aware though that it is a million times easier to lie with words than with tone of voice and body language?
> 
> If you train yourself to pick up upon non-verbal cues (if you don't naturally possess that ability, which I find very strange in someone with Ni/Fe if I'm honest), you often learn a lot more about people than only going by what they say...


Or maybe I realized it is bunk. You seriously believe in body language experts, and that garbage? Really? It's like a modern version of phrenology. Where did you guys get your training? Who certified you? 

Polygraph machines are not even reliable indicators of human truths, and they measure objective physiological signs. But reading body language is? Come on.. That Ni stuff about psychics is nonsense too.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

braided pain said:


> Here's where I get lost. You should be able to tell from the accidental non-verbal cues that they're being deceptive, right? Does it matter whether they're doing it on purpose or not? Plenty of people do so to protect themselves from hurt, embarrassment, or just because they truly see themselves as something they are not.


I don't really focus on whether or not people are deceptive. As I said, I don't bother to categorize actions or people in any immediate way. I am a Ne type - I get a sense of where something could go and it's either interesting or desirable or not.
The latter is sort of a Fi filter for what I will be open to exploring, but not any kind of decision that prompts specific action.

What I note is a discrepancy between what is displayed and what vibe is being given off indicating a different internal state (whether conscious or not). I don't consider this a deception or phony, etc. But it can be confusing as to where I stand with someone - they give off all the social "friendly" signals, but their vibe says they don't particularly like me. But then I also know I am sensitive and so maybe I am assuming they dislike me and it's something else that is giving off that vibe. I see so many interpretations for these discrepancies that I don't really know what is my actual standing with someone. This paralyzes action or response.

Anyhow, I feel that the OP is working off a premise about INFPs that is incorrect - some idea that a distaste for small talk means we don't function in practical areas or that alternate ways of approaching such things cannot lead to good results. The main points I was making is we may not be gabby with small talk, but we still manage in life. It's not as essential as it seems, or you CAN deviate from the script. And it's not that it's 100% avoided, but that's not where many of us are going to shine. I don't have an interest in becoming someone who puts on a show within 5 minutes of meeting people. Just as others don't want to get very personal right away (another false dichotomy - it's not small talk vs. personal talk), I don't have the energy to be outgoing by default. I get more silly and will make playful commentary more readily when I know someone and feel comfortable with them. I don't have the energy to put that out all the time. My friends get that side of me. 




> Okay, I'm linking these two quotes for a reason.
> @_OrangeAppled_, I get the impression that for you this is not a skill but a defining part of your self-image. Small talk is shallow and phony and you would consider yourself inauthentic for engaging in it, yes? Because I think we've blown right past MBTI and are into Enneagram issues now. (And as a 6w5 using small talk to make allies while keeping my distance, I've got no room to judge you.)


No, I don't apply judgement to these things. I don't really use "phony" or "shallow" as any kind of scale. That sounds like a 6 impression of a 4 (6s seem more concerned with what can be trusted & hidden motives, etc). I just don't find certain things interesting. There are many "shallow" things I find interesting. I like fashion and makeup, for example. I frequently use this with other women, since I often don't know what else to say (I can compliment their outfit and ask something about it).

I frankly cannot even identify a topic sometimes though. If people actually chatted about something with a content, then I could listen, follow it and perhaps add something. But in much of small talk, it just sounds like NOISE. I don't even know what the topic is. I don't participate at times mainly because I draw a total blank. I have absolutely nothing to say and struggle to come up with anything. I end up just staring back at someone awkwardly. I'm not saying this happens all the time. I've gotten better at this stuff with age, but the pay-off is not what people make it out to be. 

I'm starting to think others do some stream of consciousness, and because they are extroverts, this commentary is a shared experience and thus interesting to other extroverts. Whereas my stream of consciousness has an inward focus and that can seem like shifting others' attentions to YOU, even if it's not about you. I think this is why some introverts get pegged as self-absorbed, when extroverts strike me as just as "into themselves". Because I am highly aware of the focus on my thoughts (inward) I tend to avoid leading in conversations and will throw the focus back to the other person. This makes it difficult for others to get a sense of me. I'm just a quiet person who listens and asks questions. And the thing is, that IS me. That's the real me when I first meet people. 




> Is this the core of the problem? Do the rest of you see this as an honesty issue? Because I still find it every bit as creepy as expecting someone to get naked on the first meeting. If you find someone who shares your views, fine, but expecting everybody to adopt your standard just comes across as entitled to something the majority of people don't want to give. If you're okay with that, fine, but if not, i want to know how I, as a very private individual (with trust issues), can deal with you without compromising my privacy.


It's the false dichotomy of "small talk" vs "personal confiding" again. Why can't people talk about music, books, interesting THINGS too? Like I said, most of the time, I can't even identify a topic. And I get that no one launches into discussion of things immediately, but people can keep a whole dinner conversation to small talk. I don't even mean the weather - at least I see a topic there.


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Or maybe I realized it is bunk. You seriously believe in body language experts, and that garbage? Really? It's like a modern version of phrenology. Where did you guys get your training? Who certified you?
> 
> Polygraph machines are not even reliable indicators of human truths, and they measure objective physiological signs. But reading body language is? Come on.. That Ni stuff about psychics is nonsense too.


You're absolutely right. I mean, what's the point of having vision anyways? Certainly don't need it now that you've put things in perspective.

If you'll excuse me, I'm going to go pry out my eyes.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

Marlowe said:


> Getting back to the original discussion, @_monemi_ @_FallingSlowly_ @_Cantarella_ what are some steps an INFPs might be able to take to improve their ability to read small cues/do small talk, if they want to? It's not exactly a solution to say "just notice these things and you'll be pat."
> 
> 
> Also mentioning @_Blue Flare_ and @_braided pain_ @_Wellsy_



Most of these people are not INFP and have shown they don't even grasp the basic reasons why INFPs may struggle with small talk or social cues in casual interactions (if they do at all). I gave a thought-out response as to what's going inside & where the blind spots actually are (posts thanked by actual INFPs), and this was brushed off with no effort to grasp it (as well as several posts by other INFPs, like our glasses wearing kitty friend, whose name escapes me). As such, any advice which ignores the actual experience & viewpoint of INFPs is useless as it will miss the heart of the matter. I see most posts from non-INFPs operating off of assumptions and glib, overly simplistic explanations in-line with their existing ideas, most of which are inaccurate stereotypes.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

I really relate to what OrangeApplied is saying. 

INFJ like using analogy. This is like city driving vs highway driving. I can talk a person's ear off, but the conversation must have a flow. It must have a steady direction. It's not constantly stop and go, changing streets, small trips...it is a long drive. I am comfortable there. Highway driving also requires less attention to detail, another reason why I like it. I mentioned before that small talk is not a place I shine, and I want to come up to somebody and knock them out, throw a haymaker, not clumsily jab them. That is how I generally approach problems. Give them by best from the start, and get them done as quickly and efficiently as possibly. I don't do warm ups. Small talk is warming up.


----------



## Kabosu (Mar 31, 2012)

Nonverbal communication says more about a person's demeanor than verbal communication. Companies are observing that when interviewing people to hire.


----------



## FallingSlowly (Jul 1, 2013)

OrangeAppled said:


> Most of these people are not INFP and have shown they don't even grasp the basic reasons why INFPs may struggle with small talk or social cues in casual interactions (if they do at all). I gave a thought-out response as to what's going inside & where the blind spots actually are (posts thanked by actual INFPs), and this was brushed off with no effort to grasp it (as well as several posts by other INFPs, like our glasses wearing kitty friend, whose name escapes me). As such, any advice which ignores the actual experience & viewpoint of INFPs is useless as it will miss the heart of the matter. I see most posts from non-INFPs operating off of assumptions and glib, overly simplistic explanations in-line with their existing ideas, most of which are inaccurate stereotypes.


I guess the problem is that the whole thread should be rather about people who generally struggle with conversation, small talk or reading cues, than making it about specific types. It's possible that some types struggle more with it than others, but as I said in an earlier post: I think it's more down to experience and self-awareness. I know Fi doms who have no problems whatsoever (but also ones who do, or those who can be rather abrasive), Ti doms who have struggled badly but improved, and Ni doms like myself who don't really have problems reading people, but who used to have real problems with small talk because it's just not their thing. Btw, definitions of small talk seem to vary greatly. 

If someone doesn't have a problem and is happy with the way things are going, then there's no need to change. No one has to change who they are (I haven't either). If you're unhappy or uncomfortable though, you need to make adjustments, and there are tons of threads on here (some of them very recent) with people lamenting these very things. I just think that if _most_ people are _consistently_ bored, creeped out or offended by the way I communicate, it should make me think...

And of course you know your own type-specific problems best, but sometimes, it's not a bad idea to get the input from other types, specifically because they're different and don't wear the same blinkers. Their opinion is neither necessarily shallow, nor insincere. 
When I had problems, I almost always found it more helpful to get input from people who are _not_ like me. I am aware this is a personal preference, but I also think it's worth considering. You know what's going on inside you, but other people can tell you how you come across. Both views are obviously biased, but if communication on these subjects is open, it can only help.

As an aside: I personally don't care what people's types are, it just boils down to one common denominator:

You can't really change other people. If you want them to react differently, or would like to connect in different ways because you're not happy with the way things are going, you need to change your own approach. Otherwise, things will stay as they are. The choice is up to the individual.


----------



## braided pain (Jul 6, 2012)

@OrangeAppled

Will respond in depth later, but point out now that makeup, music etc are small talk just like sports. How much talking past each other are we doing?


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

FallingSlowly said:


> I guess the problem is that the whole thread should be rather about people who generally struggle with conversation, small talk or reading cues, than making it about specific types. It's possible that some types struggle more with it than others, but as I said in an earlier post: I think it's more down to experience and self-awareness. I know Fi doms who have no problems whatsoever (but also ones who do, or those who can be rather abrasive), Ti doms who have struggled badly but improved, and Ni doms like myself who don't really have problems reading people, but who used to have real problems with small talk because it's just not their thing. Btw, definitions of small talk seem to vary greatly.


If general advice is being given, then yes. If you are aiming to grasp and advise a more specific group, then you should actually try and grasp the group to begin with.



> If you're unhappy or uncomfortable though, you need to make adjustments, and there are tons of threads on here (some of them very recent) with people lamenting these very things. I just think that if _most_ people are _consistently_ bored, creeped out or offended by the way I communicate, it should make me think...


I see several insinuations in here that such people, particularly ones who are INFP, are not making adjustments or doing self-examination. Yet, nearly every INFP who has posted in here has noted that is not the case; they all note they make efforts towards self-improvement & give thoughtful consideration to such matters. Nor do I see a general attitude among INFPs to not be highly introspective and focused on refining themselves. It's actually quite at odds with general Fi mentality to deflect blame, as it turns evaluation inward, often seeing yourself as at fault in most situations. I see types who are poor at introspection and identifying their own blind spots projecting this onto ones whose strength is that very area.

And when people address you with those assumptions, then it is condescending to say the least. Then, when you explain what's really the case, to have it dismissed is further insulting. At this point, people have just disqualified themselves as someone who knows what they're talking about.



> And of course you know your own type-specific problems best, but sometimes, it's not a bad idea to get the input from other types, specifically because they're different and don't wear the same blinkers. Their opinion is neither necessarily shallow, nor insincere.
> When I had problems, I almost always found it more helpful to get input from people who are _not_ like me. I am aware this is a personal preference, but I also think it's worth considering. You know what's going on inside you, but other people can tell you how you come across. Both views are obviously biased, but if communication on these subjects is open, it can only help.


It's rude to give advice when not asked for; it's not a matter of sincerity or shallowness. This thread reads like, "You know what I think INFPs' problems are? Here's why they have that problem & what I think they need to do". It's obnoxious, especially when people have informed you what their REAL struggle is and the EFFECTIVE strategies they have devised to combat it. 

There has not been much commentary on how INFPs come across. It's mostly been telling us how we should think, based on assumptions of how we currently think. I'm not sure I'd trust that commentary from these sources. It's better to talk to people who actually know you in person and see your attempts/failures at small talk in action.



> You can't really change other people. If you want them to react differently, or would like to connect in different ways because you're not happy with the way things are going, you need to change your own approach. Otherwise, things will stay as they are. The choice is up to the individual.


And the same is applied to people who wonder why their unsolicited advice and opinions are not well-received.


* *




"No - YOU!"


----------



## Kabosu (Mar 31, 2012)

OrangeAppled said:


> Most of these people are not INFP and have shown they don't even grasp the basic reasons why INFPs may struggle with small talk or social cues in casual interactions (if they do at all).


The OP was mainly addressing people who posted in the subforum who complained about failed interactions and rejections. Maybe pointing out it was from the forum of people in that type was somewhat of a problem. The problem isn't being addressed for people who know what they want and are making their decisions based off of it and the OP pointed that out in her later posts.




> The main points I was making is we may not be gabby with small talk, but we still manage in life. It's not as essential as it seems, or you CAN deviate from the script.


Maybe she thought people were talking about a problem they wanted to solve. I actually find this statement to be a relief, as so many higher-level Fe females in my life seem to think I'm weird just because I don't connect deeply with everyone.



> Why can't people talk about music, books, interesting THINGS too?


Some don't but they probably aren't people I relate with much and small talk would be the primary. I used to not talk about the former when I was shyer about expressing my hobbies, but since about 10 years ago I made an about face on that. Everybody who gets in contact with my irl will have at least one discussion about music. That is a part of some people and it's in our lives, so I fail to see why they wouldn't.


----------



## Kabosu (Mar 31, 2012)

Marlowe said:


> You're absolutely right. I mean, what's the point of having vision anyways? Certainly don't need it now that you've put things in perspective.
> 
> If you'll excuse me, I'm going to go pry out my eyes.


:laughing: !!

Then again, despite my eye vision, I'm a sensing inferior. So sometimes that eyesight isn't so useless when I ignore so many things that I don't think I have to pay attention to.
There's people who when I ride the bus downtown, they think I just think a certain bus is going to come at a certain time because that's the trend, but I just know from the small message & number which bus it is supposed to be.


----------



## Old Intern (Nov 20, 2012)

Op sounds very Se. Just putting in my two cents. If I deliberately choose to be in a social situation for social reasons it is almost like I flip on a mental switch. Other times I could be in a grocery store or whatever and I might as well be on another planet. I could look through someone and be oblivious, to someone I know even, unless they grab my arm or jump up and down? And I'm not a big fan of small talk, but I understand the place for it. I preffer "meaning of life" or "did you read about world changing geeky thing" conversations but I don't expect to jump into it, or try that direction with everybody.

My social skills are fine when I'm "on" but I don't live in a state of on? I could be thinking about something I read in one of these posts . . . .or something I'm working on . . . . or visualizing something I need to find some gizmo for, imaginig how parts of something would fit. So I could see where someone would approach me, think I was unfriendly (if they were looking for friendly signals) and then be surprised when I made deliberate effort to ask questions, be nice, or draw them out at another time. Though I don't know that it has ever been a problem.

My brother on the other hand, I believe is INFP, and he is difficult, even if someone were to flag him down. He lives in a constant state of worry or brooding? Or that is how he seems, and you have to make quite an effort to bring him out of whatever land he is in (everybody does, not just me). In fact don't start talking untill you have waited for eye contact from him and it might be a while. Start with asking him how he's doing, and at first he wont be with you, even if he is talking. It's just how he is. He takes a bit of warm up time, like my flat iron.


----------



## idoh (Oct 24, 2013)

monemi said:


> But are you really as oblivious to visual cues as you purport? People point out how quiet and how little I talk in real life. I'm communicating all the time. Just I don't use words as much as other people. I've been assured I sound fine and I talk when necessary. But I'd rather not. Words never express what I'm trying to convey as effectively as I can express myself.
> 
> I've seen for myself that there are some people that really are oblivious of body language. But they're few and far between and usually autistic. Is it possible that you're taking in this information on a subconscious level? Emotional Intelligence Quiz | Greater Good How do you do reading facial expressions? I have a hard time believing that someone that says they're an INFJ, nature's counselor, can't follow body language and facial expressions. These are key elements of communication. People think they're good at covering contempt, lies, fear etc... but they are broadcasting all the time.
> 
> ...


ouo
Your Score: 17/20Nice work. You seem naturally well-attuned to others' emotions--a vital skill for forming compassionate connections. You scored well above average but still have room for growth; research suggests that people can improve their emotion recognition skills with practice. So keep an eye out for our forthcoming empathy training tool, designed to boost your emotional intelligence. Sign up for our e-newsletter for updates on it.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

Old Intern said:


> Op sounds very Se. Just putting in my two cents. If I deliberately choose to be in a social situation for social reasons it is almost like I flip on a mental switch. Other times I could be in a grocery store or whatever and I might as well be on another planet. I could look through someone and be oblivious, to someone I know even, unless they grab my arm or jump up and down? And I'm not a big fan of small talk, but I understand the place for it. I preffer "meaning of life" or "did you read about world changing geeky thing" conversations but I don't expect to jump into it, or try that direction with everybody.
> 
> My social skills are fine when I'm "on" but I don't live in a state of on? I could be thinking about something I read in one of these posts . . . .or something I'm working on . . . . or visualizing something I need to find some gizmo for, imaginig how parts of something would fit. So I could see where someone would approach me, think I was unfriendly (if they were looking for friendly signals) and then be surprised when I made deliberate effort to ask questions, be nice, or draw them out at another time. Though I don't know that it has ever been a problem.
> 
> My brother on the other hand, I believe is INFP, and he is difficult, even if someone were to flag him down. He lives in a constant state of worry or brooding? Or that is how he seems, and you have to make quite an effort to bring him out of whatever land he is in (everybody does, not just me). In fact don't start talking untill you have waited for eye contact from him and it might be a while. Start with asking him how he's doing, and at first he wont be with you, even if he is talking. It's just how he is. He takes a bit of warm up time, like my flat iron.


I would very much be like your brother if I wasn't a 1w9 in my tritype. It makes me value greatly being "good", as in not evil (which is based on my personal judgments), by giving others attention. It's tiring but I'll make precious INFP me-time later when I am alone.


----------



## braided pain (Jul 6, 2012)

Marlowe said:


> I think you're overestimating what a "thank" means.


How can I _not_ thank this post?


----------



## Sporadic Aura (Sep 13, 2009)

Marlowe said:


> I think you're overestimating what a "thank" means.


I think it's just a sign of agreement. It seems to me there are kinda two groups that mostly agree with each other.


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

Sporadic Aura said:


> I think it's just a sign of agreement. It seems to me there are kinda two groups that mostly agree with each other.


Sure. But I don't think it's a fair step to use that as an assumption that "two sides [are] trying to win an argument to validate themselves more than actually trying to understand the others perspective."

That's conjecture.


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

braided pain said:


> How can I _not_ thank this post?


Well thank you kindly for kindly thanking my post!


----------



## braided pain (Jul 6, 2012)

Sporadic Aura said:


> It's funny if you follow the 'thanks' of this thread, there are definitely two distinct camps here...
> 
> It looks like two sides trying to win an argument to validate themselves more than actually trying to understand the others perspective.


I would love to understand, but @FearAndTrembling is thoroughly inconsistent in his reasoning and is trying to say that a Ni dom can't read body language which I know to be BS, and @OrangeAppled and I are talking past each other. Most of the other posts are helpful, but are focused on what I know first-hand-- it's tough and not fun.

gah.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Sporadic Aura said:


> I think it's just a sign of agreement. It seems to me there are kinda two groups that mostly agree with each other.


Depends. I don't always agree with opinions I thank. I'm thanking them for sharing their opinion as I found it food for thought and appreciated a different perspective. Thank can mean many things.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

braided pain said:


> I would love to understand, but @_FearAndTrembling_ is thoroughly inconsistent in his reasoning and is trying to say that a Ni dom can't read body language which I know to be BS, and @_OrangeAppled_ and I are talking past each other. Most of the other posts are helpful, but are focused on what I know first-hand-- it's tough and not fun.
> 
> gah.


I think you throw around the word "know" a little too casually. 

Nobody can read body language. It's a parlor trick. How many times do I have to say that?


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

braided pain said:


> I would love to understand, but @FearAndTrembling is thoroughly inconsistent in his reasoning and is trying to say that a Ni dom can't read body language which I know to be BS, and @OrangeAppled and I are talking past each other. Most of the other posts are helpful, but are focused on what I know first-hand-- it's tough and not fun.
> 
> gah.


You know you love it.


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

FearAndTrembling said:


> I think you throw around the word "know" a little too casually.
> 
> Nobody can read body language. It's a parlor trick. How many times do I have to say that?


And I think you throw around absolutes a little too casually. It's a big step to assume "nobody" can do something.


----------



## Kabosu (Mar 31, 2012)

Some of the most transparent people just wish they weren't.


----------



## Kabosu (Mar 31, 2012)

monemi said:


> Depends. I don't always agree with opinions I thank. I'm thanking them for sharing their opinion as I found it food for thought and appreciated a different perspective. Thank can mean many things.


I thanked this. Being a Ne dom, its reasoning is open-ended.


----------



## braided pain (Jul 6, 2012)

FearAndTrembling said:


> I think you throw around the word "know" a little too casually.
> 
> Nobody can read body language. It's a parlor trick. How many times do I have to say that?


Dude?

*Babies* can do it. Cats and dogs can do it. Fucking _livestock_ can do it.

You don't have to be some sort of trained pro to know that tense muscles are a sign of negativity, someone scowling and glaring is pissed, and a relaxed body and smile that reaches the eyes is at the least calm, if not genuinely happy.

No tricks involved, it's common sense.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

FearAndTrembling said:


> I think you throw around the word "know" a little too casually.
> 
> Nobody can read body language. It's a parlor trick. How many times do I have to say that?











So, these aren't expressions or visual communication. If you read emotions from this, it's a bullshit parlour trick. These are just a bunch of facial expressions men pull during a blow job. *queue slut jokes*








More parlour tricks that don't mean anything. 









You might think that you can read this body language as angry or aggressive or threatening. But body language is a parlour trick. The truth is, Leo here, wants to snog Joey.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

Sporadic Aura said:


> I think it's just a sign of agreement. It seems to me there are kinda two groups that mostly agree with each other.


And there's nothing wrong with that. It seems we just can't communicate effectively with each other, probably because it's over the Internet where no body language is seen. And it's not because INFPs are "bad" at communicating. It's that people like them and people like us naturally don't get along. When I say people like them or us I don't mean MBTI type. It's more of an aggression versus softness thing. When details and aggression is combined and targeted at me, or INFPs, I grow sort of a hatred or contempt. They were showing lack of perception to what I say and redirected everything to their wants which are details and at the same time insulting us for engaging our Ne and going slightly off topic but still related. Those insults and redirection show disrespect to me and my words, which happen to have some answers in them. Its about how they talk to us, not about what they say. They are rude and aggressive and it makes me sick enough to grow that hatred. And guess what, I'm Fi dom so that feeling of hatred isn't going anywhere. And they say they know how to communicate, they can't even be respectful to people who are different to them. They were complaining about INFPs without even understanding them. Just look at the title, it's not about people with problems with small talk, it's about INFPs supposed problem with small talk. I have no problem communicating with small talk, nor do other INFPs I know. We just prefer to not engage in it. The INFPs she saw complaining about small talk on this thread is probably because this site attracts a larger number of INFPs, therefore there will be more threads about the problem, which encompasses every type, than other types. Like you said there was a thread about how Entps don't do small talk well. It's not an INFP problem like the title suggests.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Stelliferous said:


> And there's nothing wrong with that. It seems we just can't communicate effectively with each other, probably because it's over the Internet where no body language is seen. And it's not because INFPs are "bad" at communicating. It's that people like them and people like us naturally don't get along. When I say people like them or us I don't mean MBTI type. It's more of an aggression versus softness thing. When details and aggression is combined and targeted at me, or INFPs, I grow sort of a hatred or contempt. They were showing lack of perception to what I say and redirected everything to their wants which are details and at the same time insulting us for engaging our Ne and going slightly off topic but still related.


We don't want anything from you. :dry: Which further displays your lack of insight into this thread. What difference does it make to any of these posters if you suck at small talk or subtle visual communication? None. None whatsoever.


----------



## Dragheart Luard (May 13, 2013)

I should be sleeping at this hour, but this discussion is so interesting that I should bring some popcorn for reading it. In fact this confirms why I tend to piss off my mom when I talk to her about difficult issues, she's so sensitive that I seem like an angry barbarian compared to her LOL


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

monemi said:


> We don't want anything from you. :dry: Which further displays your lack of insight into this thread. What difference does it make to any of these posters if you suck at small talk or subtle visual communication? None. None whatsoever.


I think it's obvious you didn't want anything from me. Why do you think I am against you?


----------



## Sporadic Aura (Sep 13, 2009)

@Stelliferous I agree that there is unfounded aggression in this thread, and although I don't understand your hate I can definitely understand your frustration. 

@monemi What was the purpose of this thread? I'm not complaining it's an interesting read, I think the _purpose_ went over my head too though.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

braided pain said:


> Dude?
> 
> *Babies* can do it. Cats and dogs can do it. Fucking _livestock_ can do it.
> 
> ...


Not in the way that was being spoken. Like you could tell a lot about a person by visual cues in small talk. Obviously I know what a frown means. That isn't what is being discussed. We are talking about much more nuanced observations, like the ones body language "experts" pick up on.


----------



## Alaya (Nov 11, 2009)

Body language and subtle facial cues are huge when it comes to communicating for me. As an Ni-dom, however, I may read upon these physical expressions too deeply and sometimes end up inaccurately assessing the situation. 

Small-talk, on the other hand, even though it's boring I find it very rich in information about the person I'm talking with.. It allows me to understand which venues to spark a meaningful communication at, and which I should avoid. Knowing about their children, what school they go to and their names are important details to take note of since it's knowledge you can use to relate to the person you are with. If you manage to include this information someplace in the conversation, you're more likely to attract their attention.

Even though I hate details, I make a conscious effort to remember all the small-talk facts since it makes the deep and meaningful conversation more personal later on. If I can mention the name of the kid that this person has at some point in the conversation, it will mean a lot since it shows that I'm interested in them. For example, saying, "Say hi to [insert son's name here] and tell him to keep being a great kid!" means so much to that father or mother knowing that I have acknowledged their children. The same goes for other things that are part of the dreaded small talk ritual. Use this information to your advantage, is what I'm getting at.


----------



## braided pain (Jul 6, 2012)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Not in the way that was being spoken. Like you could tell a lot about a person by visual cues in small talk. Obviously I know what a frown means. That isn't what is being discussed. We are talking about much more nuanced observations, like the ones body language "experts" pick up on.


Even the subtler signs can still be picked up on.

Just because you're bad at it doesn't make it a parlor trick. It just means you're bad at it. Have you ever actually *watched* people? We're all so repetitive, same behaviors over and over.


----------



## Sporadic Aura (Sep 13, 2009)

Blue Flare said:


> I should be sleeping at this hour, but this discussion is so interesting that I should bring some popcorn for reading it. In fact this confirms why I tend to piss off my mom when I talk to her about difficult issues, she's so sensitive that I seem like an angry barbarian compared to her LOL


I too find this thread far more interesting than I probably should.

I kinda feel ENTP's, or at least me, are in between the 'so sensitive' and the 'angry barbarian'. I relate and can be both. It's weird actually.


----------



## Dragheart Luard (May 13, 2013)

braided pain said:


> Even the subtler signs can still be picked up on.
> 
> Just because you're bad at it doesn't make it a parlor trick. It just means you're bad at it. Have you ever actually *watched* people? We're all so repetitive, same behaviors over and over.


Exactly, and Ni is good for extrapolating patterns, so you could even try to predict how people would react on a certain circumstance if you have gotten enough data beforehand.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Stelliferous said:


> And there's nothing wrong with that. It seems we just can't communicate effectively with each other, probably because it's over the Internet where no body language is seen. And it's not because INFPs are "bad" at communicating. It's that *people like them* and people like us naturally don't get along. When I say people like them or us I don't mean MBTI type. It's more of an *aggression versus softness* thing. When *details and aggression* is combined and targeted at me, or INFPs, I grow sort of a hatred or contempt. *They were showing lack of perception* to what I say and redirected everything to their wants which are details and at the *same time insulting us* for engaging our Ne and going slightly off topic but still related. Those insults and redirection show disrespect to me and my words, which happen to have some answers in them. Its about how they talk to us, not about what they say. They are rude and aggressive and it makes me sick enough to grow that hatred. And guess what, I'm Fi dom so that feeling of hatred isn't going anywhere. And they say they know how to communicate, they can't even be respectful to people who are different to them. They were complaining about INFPs without even understanding them. Just look at the title, it's not about people with problems with small talk, it's about INFPs supposed problem with small talk. I have no problem communicating with small talk, nor do other INFPs I know. We just prefer to not engage in it. The INFPs she saw complaining about small talk on this thread is probably because this site attracts a larger number of INFPs, therefore there will be more threads about the problem, which encompasses every type, than other types. Like you said there was a thread about how Entps don't do small talk well. It's not an INFP problem like the title suggests.





Stelliferous said:


> I think it's obvious you didn't want anything from me. Why do you think I am against you?


I'm not going to go highlight all of this. The OP, is the longest OP I have ever written. I went to great lengths to be sensitive. My following comments were as considerate and thoughtful as I can manage. I put in a lot of effort. And then some posters came in, obviously didn't understand my perspective, I doubt they actually finished reading what I wrote or they didn't understand my perspective at all, read between the lines for things I didn't say or imply and used insulting language toward me. Yes, after a few posts, I responded in kind. 

I put in effort and I don't see effort coming from some of the INFP's reading my post. They've jumped to conclusions and misinterpreted me so much that I don't believe for a minute they are listening to anything beyond a kneejerk reaction.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

braided pain said:


> Even the subtler signs can still be picked up on.
> 
> Just because you're bad at it doesn't make it a parlor trick. It just means you're bad at it. Have you ever actually *watched* people? We're all so repetitive, same behaviors over and over.


It's called being a conman. The tricks work with the majority but there are people out there who can use body language to mask and mislead. I think he's saying that he is unpredictable because he controls his body language. Something I'm familiar with. I've masked my body language for years. Why? Because I have something to hide. And I know I'm successful at masking and misleading because I can read how others react to me. So in a sense I see myself through others.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Sporadic Aura said:


> @_monemi_ What was the purpose of this thread? I'm not complaining it's an interesting read, I think the _purpose_ went over my head too though.


Read my OP again if you want. I noticed the same types were complaining about the same problems. Rejection by society and struggling with small talk. Most of society are sensors and the people complaining about is the most are not. I also noticed INFP's complain the most about these issues. It seemed a reasonable hypothesis, that they are missing subtle cues that are leading to rejection. Not all, but the ones that are complaining about these two issues. I then asked, if I was way off base or not. 

It's sad to read about people feeling rejected. If there is a connection, maybe they could avoid this pain in the first place. 

Then I got some insulting and defensive responses from people who claim they communicate well and don't have feel rejected. I've gone back and looked and as far as I can see, I was respectful. Many of their responses weren't.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Not in the way that was being spoken. Like you could tell a lot about a person by visual cues in small talk. Obviously I know what a frown means. That isn't what is being discussed. We are talking about much more nuanced observations, like the ones body language "experts" pick up on.


Where did anyone suggest that you need to become an expert?


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

Well look at that, an INFP and ESTP HAVE been getting along this entire time. Who'da thought?


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

monemi said:


> I'm not going to go highlight all of this. The OP, is the longest OP I have ever written. I went to great lengths to be sensitive. My following comments were as considerate and thoughtful as I can manage. I put in a lot of effort. And then some posters came in, obviously didn't understand my perspective, I doubt they actually finished reading what I wrote or they didn't understand my perspective at all, read between the lines for things I didn't say or imply and used insulting language toward me. Yes, after a few posts, I responded in kind.
> 
> I put in effort and I don't see effort coming from some of the INFP's reading my post. They've jumped to conclusions and misinterpreted me so much that I don't believe for a minute they are listening to anything beyond a kneejerk reaction.


So tell me, why make the title like that and why make this thread in the first place? Where did you see this thread going? You want to help INFPs? That's what it sounds like to me and it's narcissistic sounding. Sounds to me like you tried to make something narcissistic into something that seems sensitive, which is where the effort comes in.


----------



## braided pain (Jul 6, 2012)

Stelliferous said:


> It's called being a conman. The tricks work with the majority but there are people out there who can use body language to mask and mislead. I think he's saying that he is unpredictable because he controls his body language. Something I'm familiar with. I've masked my body language for years. Why? Because I have something to hide. And I know I'm successful at masking and misleading because I can read how others react to me. So in a sense I see myself through others.


But 1) that's a mere handful of people, 2) I do it too, and newsflash: we're not always as good as we think we are, 3) part of the reason behind small talk is to test the mask, and 4) It's SMALL talk, first impressions, initial conversations we're talking about here. You're not handing out your wallet (I hope).

I'm not sure why this is such a risk. ?



/and just this weekend I thought I was way too suspicious. I'm feeling like an open book now LOL.


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

Stelliferous said:


> So tell me, why make the title like that and why make this thread in the first place? Where did you see this thread going? You want to help INFPs? That's what it sounds like to me and it's narcissistic sounding. Sounds to me like you tried to make something narcissistic into something that seems sensitive, which is where the effort comes in.


At this point I'm struggling to see the "softness" you were so quick to claim for yourself...


----------



## Kabosu (Mar 31, 2012)

braided pain said:


> But 1) that's a mere handful of people, 2) I do it too, and newsflash: we're not always as good as we think we are, 3) part of the reason behind small talk is to test the mask, and 4) It's SMALL talk, first impressions, initial conversations we're talking about here. You're not handing out your wallet (I hope).
> 
> I'm not sure why this is such a risk. ?
> 
> ...


Maybe the people dismissing body language are also avoiding small talk because if they'd pay attention to it, they'd realize people can see through them.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Stelliferous said:


> So tell me, why make the title like that and why make this thread in the first place? Where did you see this thread going? You want to help INFPs? That's what it sounds like to me and it's narcissistic sounding. Sounds to me like you tried to make something narcissistic into something that seems sensitive, which is where the effort comes in.


INFP's were the best example I could think of because I've seen posts about this so many times. I haven't seen posts addressing this topic but it seems like the elephant in the room to me. Not sure why no one points out that these issues keep coming up and I don't see any signs that anyone at that posts these complaints ever considers the possibility that maybe they could consider possibility of trying to fit in. Why not? 

Like I've said before, if you're not one of the people complaining about these things, then the idea isn't relevant to you personally. I don't see a need to get upset by the idea that maybe people experiencing these issues, could adapt to their surroundings.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

braided pain said:


> But 1) that's a mere handful of people, 2) I do it too, and newsflash: we're not always as good as we think we are, 3) part of the reason behind small talk is to test the mask, and 4) It's SMALL talk, first impressions, initial conversations we're talking about here. You're not handing out your wallet (I hope).
> 
> I'm not sure why this is such a risk. ?
> 
> ...


Well when you mask yourself every encounter body language loses its meaning to you and you don't really believe it for the most part in others. I'm not suspicious, I just don't see the body language as authentic. (I have trust issues).


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

monemi said:


> INFP's were the best example I could think of because I've seen posts about this so many times. I haven't seen posts addressing this topic but it seems like the elephant in the room to me. Not sure why no one points out that these issues keep coming up and I don't see any signs that anyone at that posts these complaints ever considers the possibility that maybe they could consider possibility of trying to fit in. Why not?
> 
> Like I've said before, if you're not one of the people complaining about these things, then the idea isn't relevant to you personally. I don't see a need to get upset by the idea that maybe people experiencing these issues, could adapt to their surroundings.


I don't know if it's so much an issue about fitting in...although that seems to be how many INFPs on here are interpreting the whole thing. It just seemed to me like you were addressing a problem people had and suggesting what they might do to change their problems.

And then it turned into a steaming mess about how INFPs simply don't like small talk and body language therefore they don't need your advice thank you very much GOODBYE.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Stelliferous said:


> It's called being a conman. The tricks work with the majority but there are people out there who can use body language to mask and mislead. I think he's saying that he is unpredictable because he controls his body language. Something I'm familiar with. I've masked my body language for years. Why? Because I have something to hide. And I know I'm successful at masking and misleading because I can read how others react to me. So in a sense I see myself through others.


Wow, with intuitive superpowers, it's a wonder that sensors actually survive. I mean, we don't mysteriously see through people. We just have our five senses right? How did sensors survive all these generations if visual communication is so useless? We must be walking victims. It's funny, ESTP's usually get branded as the conartists, but I'll happily hand that over to INFP's if they want it.


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

Stelliferous said:


> Well when you mask yourself every encounter body language loses its meaning to you and you don't really believe it for the most part in others. I'm not suspicious, I just don't see the body language as authentic. (I have trust issues).


oh, so you're a politician. 


that makes so much more sense.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Marlowe said:


> I don't know if it's so much an issue about fitting in...although that seems to be how many INFPs on here are interpreting the whole thing. It just seemed to me like you were addressing a problem people had and suggesting what they might do to change their problems.
> 
> And then it turned into a steaming mess about how INFPs simply don't like small talk and body language therefore they don't need your advice thank you very much GOODBYE.


You're right, fitting in isn't what I was going for. Just, being able to recognize cues from other people. Knowing when they're interested or not. Most of the time, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck. Most people aren't trying to cover up basic communication and get creepy vibes from people who are covering. It doesn't make sense to me to avoid visual communication. It's like deciding to cut out your vocal cords because sometimes people aren't authentic.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

Marlowe said:


> At this point I'm struggling to see the "softness" you were so quick to claim for yourself...


I'm like a fluffy cat, soft at first but when threatened can become fierce. Cats and dogs don't get along too often. Why? Because the dog chases the cat.


----------



## braided pain (Jul 6, 2012)

Doge said:


> Maybe the people dismissing body language are also avoiding small talk because if they'd pay attention to it, they'd realize people can see through them.


QFT, and I wish I could thank this more.



Stelliferous said:


> Well when you mask yourself every encounter body language loses its meaning to you and you don't really believe it for the most part in others. I'm not suspicious, I just don't see the body language as authentic. (I have trust issues).


Okay. This I get.

So it's not that you can't read body language, it's that you don't believe it.

So how do you carry on *any* conversation? What makes anything anybody says believable?

Or do you avoid all of it?


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

TreasureTower said:


> But that poster is typed as an INFP.


And? People's labels don't always correlate with their actual cognition for various reasons.


----------



## Chesire Tower (Jan 19, 2013)

ephemereality said:


> And? People's labels don't always correlate with their actual cognition for various reasons.


So, are you suggesting that they are having a Fe/Fi conflict except that @Stelliferous is the Fe and @monemi, the Fi?

Because I know that you consider me to have Fe and I don't find anything problematic with the OP. I rarely take offense where none was intended and I would have objected strenuously, had I been under that impression.


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

ephemereality said:


> Fe types fake laugh because the social situation requires it.


I do this and I'm Fi. 

Pretty sure it's not Fe/Fi correlated.


----------



## FallingSlowly (Jul 1, 2013)

ephemereality said:


> Is there a reason you type as ESTP over ESFP since this is a very obvious cue that you don't value Fway of conversation? *Fe types fake laugh because the social situation requires it*. This is as true for ESTPs.


I get what you're hinting at, but it's an overly simplified view of how Fe would work in a situation like that.

We might adjust our behaviour according to the environment, but that doesn't mean we don't distinguish between situations, even if standards are externally derived. Faking a laugh at a bad joke might be "required" in a very particular situation, but certainly not in all. We are well capable to react in different ways, like every Fi user.

So is laughing at bad jokes a Fe/Fi thing? I don't think so. A Fi user might well laugh at someone's bad joke because they, in that moment, feel sorry/empathy for that person. The underlying reasons might be different, but the reaction can be the same.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

ephemereality said:


> Is there a reason you type as ESTP over ESFP since this is a very obvious cue that you don't value Fway of conversation? Fe types fake laugh because the social situation requires it. This is as true for ESTPs.


Not fake laughing isn't socially awkward if you move the conversation along quickly. Giving people the false impression that you find them funny, in my experience, leads them to believe you enjoy their humour. The most subtle way, to dispel that impression without calling too much attention to it, is to redirect with a smile. The social situation doesn't require false laughter.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

OrangeAppled said:


> I made no claims to being a good communicator or good at understanding you (or whoever "us" is referring to). On the contrary, you are the ones making those claims. Projection much?
> 
> You continue to call me names. There is no conceit in my posts simply because I don't say "Oh yeah, I'm a loser, please teach me to be a winner like you!". I examined in detail my own shortcomings and what issues I have/have had in these areas, and I explained ways I effectively deal with it. But then this ruins the theory that INFPs just like to whine, right?
> 
> ...


Other's disagreed with me without being nasty. I accepted their assessments. You managed to be insulting. In general, most of your posts on PerC are insulting and I'm difficult to insult.


----------



## Chesire Tower (Jan 19, 2013)

Marlowe said:


> Are we talking house cat threatening? Cause I have yet to meet an indoor feline that put the fear of God in me.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

TreasureTower said:


> So, are you suggesting that they are having a Fe/Fi conflict except that @_Stelliferous_ is the Fe and @_monemi_, the Fi?
> 
> Because I know that you consider me to have Fe and I don't find anything problematic with the OP. I rarely take offense where none was intended and I would have objected strenuously, had I been under that impression.


There are natural cognitions then there are learned cognitions. When I communicate with others I am always fake. I use Ti and recently learned Fe to communicate. And it's unnatural to me so it actually takes quite a bit of work. THe brain is a muscle that can be worked.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

monemi said:


> Not fake laughing isn't socially awkward if you move the conversation along quickly. Giving people the false impression that you find them funny, in my experience, leads them to believe you enjoy their humour. The most subtle way, to dispel that impression without calling too much attention to it, is to redirect with a smile. The social situation doesn't require false laughter.


Yes, but why do you reason this way? Why do you find it important to think that one should follow this specific ideal you are presenting here over for example making sure the other person is emotionally comfortable with you? What if that person just pulled an awkward joke without realizing it was awkward after it was pulled and now feel incredibly out of place? In the role of Ti-Fe dual communication, it is very important the Fe type always takes care of the Ti type in this manner precisely because the Ti type often seeks this emotional inclusion but when they attempt to seek it out they often fall very flat. Fake laughing makes them feel comfortable and included, that it was actually not such a bad joke after all. 

You are focusing on your own emotional states in relation to this person. You are self-focused. This is extremely uncharacteristic of Ti-Fe, since Fe creates an awareness of the emotional situation even if it is of inferior quality i.e. tertiary or inferior.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

ephemereality said:


> Yes, but why do you reason this way? Why do you find it important to think that one should follow this specific ideal you are presenting here over for example making sure the other person is emotionally comfortable with you? What if that person just pulled an awkward joke without realizing it was awkward after it was pulled and now feel incredibly out of place? In the role of Ti-Fe dual communication, it is very important the Fe type always takes care of the Ti type in this manner precisely because the Ti type often seeks this emotional inclusion but when they attempt to seek it out they often fall very flat. Fake laughing makes them feel comfortable and included, that it was actually not such a bad joke after all.
> 
> You are focusing on your own emotional states in relation to this person. You are self-focused. This is extremely uncharacteristic of Ti-Fe, since Fe creates an awareness of the emotional situation even if it is of inferior quality i.e. tertiary or inferior.


It's not that complicated. If you don't let them know you don't like their joke, they'll keep making jokes and then you'll have to keep fake laughing at shitty jokes. It's illogical to laugh at jokes you don't find funny when people will take that as a signal to keep telling their jokes.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

monemi said:


> It's not that complicated. If you don't let them know you don't like their joke, they'll keep making jokes and then you'll have to keep fake laughing at shitty jokes. It's illogical to laugh at jokes you don't find funny when people will take that as a signal to keep telling their jokes.


And why is that a bad thing? I am not saying it's complicated. I am however trying to make you reason why you derive these particular values by showing you that there are people who do not value or reason around this particular social behavior in this way. To an Fe type the content of the joke is irrelevant. What is relevant is how their fake laughing makes the other person feel. You are still not focusing on the feelings of the other person, you are focusing on your own personal feelings and how this person makes you feel. It's different and hence, it seems Fi over Fe since, if we are going to be extremely simplified here:

Introversion - focus on self
Extroversion - focus on the other


----------



## Chesire Tower (Jan 19, 2013)

Stelliferous said:


> There are natural cognitions then there are learned cognitions. When I communicate with others I am always fake. I use Ti and recently learned Fe to communicate. And it's unnatural to me so it actually takes quite a bit of work. THe brain is a muscle that can be worked.


I wouldn't read too much into what Ephemerality is saying anyway; he is convinced that I am an ESFJ; perhaps it has something to with the way I crinkle my nose like _Bewitched_'s Samantha Stevens?


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

ephemereality said:


> And why is that a bad thing? I am not saying it's complicated. I am however trying to make you reason why you derive these particular values by showing you that there are people who do not value or reason around this particular social behavior in this way. To an Fe type the content of the joke is irrelevant. What is relevant is how their fake laughing makes the other person feel. You are still not focusing on the feelings of the other person, you are focusing on your own personal feelings and how this person makes you feel. It's different and hence, it seems Fi over Fe since, if we are going to be extremely simplified here:
> 
> Introversion - focus on self
> Extroversion - focus on the other


Fe does not equal moron. I'm not going to hurt their feelings. I make them feel good by smiling in response and then redirect quickly. Most people aren't so emotionally stunted that I have to exaggerate any more than that. Fe is a tertiary function for me. Low on my totem pole. I care, but I'm not going to set myself up to listen to a string of knock knock jokes.


----------



## Old Intern (Nov 20, 2012)

monemi said:


> I was trying to narrow down what the issue is given that it comes up frequently. Fi > Ne was my best example because I've seen it most frequently with them. Especially the assumption that those of us engaging in small talk enjoy small talk. Very few people are actually interested/enjoy small talk. We engage in it because it has value. We see it as socially necessary.
> 
> *Where did you get your information on how extroverts process communication compared to introverts?*


Maybe you don't see how much of your own Se is particular to how you are?

Simmilarly I'm baffled when people don't see a million ways a specific situation can be put on course (how do other people not see an obvious re-rout? - sometimes this is my Ne kicking in, but it seems like common sense to me). What is normal for me isn't normal for everyone. Your default setting is to be in tune with signals in your environment; In fact it scratches an itch for you. 

Simmilarly an Fe dom friend can't understand that if I don't feel well, having people around is not helpful. This doesn't make me somehow broken or mistrustfull of people. Fe "connecting" scratches an itch for her, for me - not so much.

It always takes more energy for someone to opperate from something not high in their own function stack.

Some people may lack certain social awareness, but also some people just don't care that much about what might be viewed as socially necessary. It isn't necessary for them. Some people have a small circle of people who understand them and anything beyond that is a burden - until or unless proven otherwise.

Not intending to sound critical here, just find this interesting.


----------



## braided pain (Jul 6, 2012)

OrangeAppled said:


> No, I don't see why you think that, unless you scan paragraphs and pick out words without reading them in context of the whole post & the post(s) they are responding to. You 100% missed the point there. I am criticizing a way of reasoning, one which is not my own.


No, I responded to the context based on my subjective understanding of it. And for all you are telling me I'm missing the point, you're not telling me what the point is very clearly.



> And please, DON'T take so much at face value. This thread is like talking to people who've never read a book in their life, unless it was a technical manual.


Oy. You just pointed out my understanding of a 4 seemed to be colored by a 6 search for a hidden agenda, so I tried to stick to face value. Now you want me to stop that and go back to reading between the lines? Okey-dokey.



> small talk stuff


I appreciate you clarifying. 



> I'm not touchy about that; I am touchy about having my perspective & experiences invalidated, especially when it's highly relevant to the topic at hand. I am touchy when I can tell someone didn't bother to really read a post and dismisses it with name-calling.
> 
> Let's redirect that touchy comment to where it belongs though - the T types in this thread who'd rather be right than have any understanding of a different perspective & how it might NOT be a hindrance to functioning in life.


Who's being dismissive now?

You know, I woke up thinking maybe I had been too brusque, and wanting to know what you meant when you said you sometimes couldn't find a thread of conversation, but you flinging typist shit like this around tells me you're uninterested in different perspectives yourself. 

Maybe somebody less self-righteous will explain.


----------



## braided pain (Jul 6, 2012)

You know the sensor bashing is getting out of hand when even Ni doms are supposedly unable to look past the surface.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Old Intern said:


> Maybe you don't see how much of your own Se is particular to how you are?
> 
> Simmilarly I'm baffled when people don't see a million ways a specific situation can be put on course (how do other people not see an obvious re-rout? - sometimes this is my Ne kicking in, but it seems like common sense to me). What is normal for me isn't normal for everyone. Your default setting is to be in tune with signals in your environment; In fact it scratches an itch for you.
> 
> ...


The world would be a boring place if we operated the same way. I didn't address situations where people don't care about how they are viewed socially. Still, some of them give the impression that they don't care how they are socially perceived but struggle to make connections with people. Isn't the first step in making connections being aware of how you are perceived socially? At the very least, things are going to be more difficult for someone that isn't social to meet people if they fumble through the introductory process. 

I try to improve in areas that I'm weak, with a mixture of results.  Suggesting people practice something that is not a strength doesn't mean they need to do this around the clock. I experiment with things I'm weak at and then practice the approach that seems most like to bring results. It's not hopeless.


----------



## idoh (Oct 24, 2013)

awww @monemi i am sorry for what happened to your thread. :sad: You just wanted to discuss how the cognitive functions operate and then by the middle it got so side tracked... But you had so much patience too... i would have told them to leave and be happy with their boring life


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

ephemereality said:


> And why is that a bad thing? I am not saying it's complicated. I am however trying to make you reason why you derive these particular values by showing you that there are people who do not value or reason around this particular social behavior in this way. *To an Fe type the content of the joke is irrelevant. What is relevant is how their fake laughing makes the other person feel.* You are still not focusing on the feelings of the other person, you are focusing on your own personal feelings and how this person makes you feel. It's different and hence, it seems Fi over Fe since, if we are going to be extremely simplified here:
> 
> Introversion - focus on self
> Extroversion - focus on the other


Again, I do the bolded. I'm not sitting around trying to put a dent in your reasoning, but most of what I'm seeing you write on this just isn't adding up. :/


----------



## shakti (Oct 10, 2012)

Being an ENFJ, communication and small talk are high among my priorities and I'm very good at them. For me, this is something that happens unconsciously...somehow all the right words just pour out of me and I have a lot of fun subtly discovering things about the other person, it's like a game or a theatre show 

I think I have also experienced something similar to what you describe in your OP in real life. I had many friends who seemed to expect everything to somehow just happen to them, without engaging in any communication rituals to stimulate it themselves. For example, I had some friends in uni (INxxs) who were dismayed that no professors ever took notice of their views or formed a high opinion of them...yet they never offered their opinions in class, asked questions, engaged in banter with the professor after class...anything. I felt sorry for them and tried to help them to be more active, but it was as if they thought social courtesy means "selling out", as their genius should be readily apparent without such "marketing".

Hopefully such things come to people with time, experience and maturity  Good communication is very important for all aspects of one's life, unless you live on a desert island, I suppose


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

shakti said:


> Being an ENFJ, communication and small talk are high among my priorities and I'm very good at them. For me, this is something that happens unconsciously...somehow all the right words just pour out of me and I have a lot of fun subtly discovering things about the other person, it's like a game or a theatre show
> 
> I think I have also experienced something similar to what you describe in your OP in real life. I had many friends who seemed to expect everything to somehow just happen to them, without engaging in any communication rituals to stimulate it themselves. For example, I had some friends in uni (INxxs) who were dismayed that no professors ever took notice of their views or formed a high opinion of them...yet they never offered their opinions in class, asked questions, engaged in banter with the professor after class...anything. I felt sorry for them and tried to help them to be more active, but it was as if they thought social courtesy means "selling out", as their genius should be readily apparent without such "marketing".
> 
> Hopefully such things come to people with time, experience and maturity  Good communication is very important for all aspects of one's life, unless you live on a desert island, I suppose


I suggested living in a hill. In good company with Bilbo Baggins. Safe, quiet, undisturbed, free to eat and read.


----------



## Old Intern (Nov 20, 2012)

monemi said:


> The world would be a boring place if we operated the same way. I didn't address situations where people don't care about how they are viewed socially. Still, some of them give the impression that they don't care how they are socially perceived but struggle to make connections with people. Isn't the first step in making connections being aware of how you are perceived socially? At the very least, things are going to be more difficult for someone that isn't social to meet people if they *fumble through the introductory process*.
> 
> I try to improve in areas that I'm weak, with a mixture of results.  Suggesting people practice something that is not a strength doesn't mean they need to do this around the clock. I experiment with things I'm weak at and then practice the approach that seems most like to bring results. It's not hopeless.


*You make some constructive points in OP*. At this point in my life though, I see benefits to putting a limit on self improvement too. I'm thinking in particular of someone I've worked with, this person has been in deep shit with people who have justified anger at him, and he often seems like a social retard, but the people he's close with, quirky as they may be - they all have a really good time together.

I contrast that with having had an SO situation that went on too long. It wasn't untill after distancing myself that I realized there were people in "our circle" I'd worked too hard at being nice to. They didn't take advantage of me, they just had no idea they were not blessing me with their chit chat. I'm not bitter or anything, just saying -life is short.

And there may be less people on the planet that an Fi-Ne will truely hit it off with. At some point we have to give ourselves credit. It's good to know how we can adjust to other people. We can go too far with calling these adjustments - working on a weakness.


----------



## SuperSoaker (Aug 19, 2013)

I don't think you will meet the right people if you need to fake building rapport with them. 

I know some extraverts doesn't like me because I won't play their game with building rapport; smiling and so on. It's not that I have a complete stoneface, but my Fe is weak with strangers.


Thats my first impression with them and some won't change their idea about me. Their loss.

The truth is that I don't need people as much and some times I prefer to keep them away.

Those that need a constant stream of smiles and asskissing will probably not be my best friend or whatever match ☺


----------



## mirrorghost (Sep 18, 2012)

wow, i can't believe i read through this whole thread.

i am an INFP, hate small talk, find it boring, etc. i have been told that i am aloof, and when i was younger, it bothered me, i didn't always intend to project aloofness, but instead it was my mind going blank in a small-talk conversation. (however projecting aloofness is really valuable at times!)

i understand INFPs feeling rejected too though. our whole way of being and our values are often the actual antithesis to society in many ways. it can be alienating. you're criticized, then internalize that, which makes you feel worse. you want to connect with (some) others, but it's difficult for various reasons. my boyfriend (a reserved ISFP) said "i didn't think you could talk when i met you." but he bothered to try, and that's all i can be thankful for when it comes to my close friends or significant others. i am not for most people, and most people aren't for me. i think this is mostly an intuitive/introvert thing, if i had to guess.

still, i would expect maybe it's younger INFPs posting these rants about this stuff? i felt more that way when i was younger, but i learned how to do small talk (kind of), didn't take it all so seriously and sure, people reject me, but oh well. it's usually not people who i care much about. with rejection, i was able to step back and objectively look at the other person and the situation, and i realized these people rejecting me weren't even compelling anyway, it was just that gut feeling of rejection that hurt, but when i stepped back and observed, it was like why in hell did i let _that_ person bother me? they were all just heathers up in my veronica.

my mom is an INTJ and she hates small talk too and is not very good at it, we often talk about this. she's good at reading people though, and trusts that intuition more than i am able to.


----------

