Role Modeling
Do you have a comment about this page?
posted by Vicky Jo at 3:01 AM
Thursday, June 15, 2006
About Me
- Name: Vicky Jo
- Location: Los Angeles, California, United States
I coach people to identify and develop their natural personality strengths in order to maximize their potential.
Please contact me to arrange a free strategy session -- I would be delighted to speak with you.
Previous Posts
- Orientation
- The Stonehenge Test
- Questioning & Wondering
- Don't Worry Be Happy
- Tertiary Talk
- Psychic?
- Two Kinds of Bosses and Jerks
- The Time Machine
- Cognitive Dynamics
- The Self-Disclosure Facet
10 Comments:
Vicky Jo-
Question:
Does this difference in Fi/Fe have any parallel in the two T function attitudes?
The reason for my asking is that this article brought up an interesting phenomenon I saw happen on another (non-Jungian type) personality discussion board, where a certain set of people sharing a similarity in type habitually got really upset and riled up over mistypings of others.
They were fixated on it, and very adamant, just as you describe the Fe's getting. However, this personality set were not at all Feeling dominant types, nor even Fs at all (nowhere near Auxiliary position, even, either). All were definite Thinkers. [I wonder if it is just Te or Ti?]
When the reasons for their anger were articulated, what came out was very like what you stated: "...people who are mis-typed ...are (unintentionally or otherwise) modeling behavior for their [professed group's] members."
And that other, genuine members of this type group "...naturally look to them as a model for what [they] should be like. And if [they are] not that Type, it may be very distressful and create dissonance for some of the members...."
Although they did not say that way - in Feeling terms. They articulated it as more of a matter of "purity control." -This is why I think this is a parallel, but in Thinkers' language: It could confuse newbies trying to learn about the system and dillute the (in their mind) solid purity of the ideas of each type.
:) It was ironic that for Thinkers, they unconsciously got VERY emotionally heated up, over this. It was like a very personal matter to them. An affront!
(The Shadow of an Inferior Feeling function emerging under pressure, no doubt.)
What was different from your context though were that these people were not even tolerant of people's mis-typings on an All/mixed-type board.
On a dedicated type email list, I can see what you're saying though, much easier.
I guess I figure (as a P) that even newbies just learning a system are going to have to sort out the good from the bad, the gold from the dross, on their way through the process of assimilating a new typology. There is no way to protect them by "purity control."
Maybe neither should we ought to.
(Hmmm? :) )
It is a lesson. And teaches them to think critically, and hard. Forces development of discernment, and exercises and trains their mind to make fine disctinctions, in the chosen field.
Besides that, I guess I just believe in the human freedom to learn on one's own, independently, and by making mistakes- trial, and error. The joy in discovery for one's self, in perfect, risky freedom.
I'd love to offer a little course correction here, and note that I don't believe in "Thinkers" and "Feelers." There are people who PREFER Thinking and people who PREFER Feeling. The model of type is all about PREFERENCES. (And this is one of the reasons why it's actually about the *worst* way to figure out your type pattern, because we all of us can and DO use all eight of the processes.)
SO, having said that, I invite you to visit the page on this site that describes "Tandem Processes." In there you will find that each of the Feeling processes does in fact operate in tandem with a Thinking process. I don't know whether it maps to your observation or not -- not that I put much weight in such things anyway. Whatever you represent has been filtered through you so I have no idea of how closely your example approximates reality. (Things like this can turn into a massive game of "he said / she said" and I have little energy for that. :-/) So I tend to steer away from speculating about what "They" do and instead focus on the person I'm interacting with. I prefer the more immediate interaction (Se? Fe?).
Okay. This is starting to sound like a campaign, and I really don't mean it to. I'm over here debating even whether to be authentic and share what I've noticed, because I don't want to be accused. (Big coaching truth moment here. =8-O)
So here goes. You write:
What was different from your context though were that these people were not even tolerant of people's mis-typings on an All/mixed-type board.
On a dedicated type email list, I can see what you're saying though, much easier.
I guess I figure (as a P) that even newbies just learning a system are going to have to sort out the good from the bad, the gold from the dross, on their way through the process of assimilating a new typology. There is no way to protect them by "purity control."
Maybe neither should we ought to.
(Hmmm? :) )
It is a lesson. And teaches them to think critically, and hard. Forces development of discernment, and exercises and trains their mind to make fine disctinctions, in the chosen field.
Besides that, I guess I just believe in the human freedom to learn on one's own, independently, and by making mistakes- trial, and error. The joy in discovery for one's self, in perfect, risky freedom.
Deep breath -- here we go: I see extraverted Feeling jump out of that excerpt, and it jumped out in a Good Parent archetype.
I'm noticing how you're calibrating to the group as a whole (and doing it very effectively I might add), and then you're noticing where growth and development opportunities are within that context (framework). There's a dose of "tough love" in there, plus the remarkable ability to notice each person as an individual and as a group member simultaneously.
Overall, I notice a great deal of sensitivity to a group process. (Neither did I miss the analysis nor the seeking of universal principles which imply introverted Thinking, but how far do I want to go with this? =8-O)
I wonder how this analysis lands with you? Am I missing the boat somewhere along the way? (I swear I am NOT campaigning!)
Bill...
The emoticon =8-O is my representation of "YIKES!"
And I'm holding my breath to see what Emily says as well.
=8-O
Too funny! :D
Vicky Jo, you ARE hard-core. ;)
You know, what's funny...is that re-reading that post of mine, just at the part that you were waxing all glowing and poetic about ( ;) ), I looked back and heard my language and kind of went, "Ick! I sound like a puffed-up, over-sure, self-important, platitudinous parent!"
I reminded myself of a friend of mine, a gradeschool teacher, when she gets at her most 'annoying' for me: Lecturing. Actually, more like "preaching" -for what looks like the simple enjoyment of hearing the bell-like ring of the sound of her own wise words. >:&
Sorry.
In the re-hash, I can't be as admiring of that Fe, if it was Fe, manifestation that you're seeing.
My own stuff came off to me, now, as phony (sounding) and self-important.
I do believe those things, but it's like another (somehow ego-based or inflating?) spirit takes over, when I feel the need to preach. I prefer to model those beliefs, and shut up about it, rather than flap my jaw or drone in people's ears and make them roll their eyes.
~My Fi recoils~!!! lol
Sorry; I really don't mean to just take a giant pin and poke a big hole in your balloon just now...
But I'm being honest (how I'm feeling).
I just don't mean to kind of insult your auxiliary process (Fe) with my language.
I guess I'm just saying that in my use of it, just there, that is not what I like. I don't value it for That.
I like the way I've used my Fe for other purposes and in other ways quite a bit better.
<:o I think I've been a little TOO open about some of my negative feelings about Fe, here, now. Ducking away...
**no throw stones!**
For what it's worth, Vicky Jo, those *were* nice compliments. I just wish I could feel honest about owning them, when I'm not sure where the motivation for my using that process at the time was arising from.
Hrrmmm...I sense that I'm in the middle of flip-flopping some preference-usage poles in my type, again, lately.
A lot of dancing/acrobatics going on.
To my possible chagrin or dismay (or maybe amusement?), you may have a (TOO) interesting time watching me. hahah... <:)
Let the dust (of flip-flopping usages lately) settle and watch for the broad strokes; that's my advice to you. And I do know myself pretty well, on this.
It can take a very long time to get to know me solidly.
"They"'ve been trying to type my personality on a discussion board I've been poking around on for 3 or 4 years, now...and many still aren't decided.
Telling a secret (an intuition, at that), I think I kind of "hide" when someone who wants to discover something about me starts to look too close.
I can feel the feeling of getting antsy-nervous, like waiting for someone to open the closet in Hide & Seek, when it's just moments away. My 'personality' goes elsewhere, to distract itself from the anxiety or tension of the moment, and that's when I find that I often go "technical" (Te?) or 'expertise' -or, occasionally, like what you described as the Good Parent. I start preaching and Talking and spewing Fact.
It's like a parental, 'competency'-based aspect of my personality takes over.
As an INFP, my two extraverted functions would be...Ne and Te.
If I was an INFJ, as you are feeling ;), they would be Fe and Se.
But let's say the 'proper' order, according to type, of the 8 functions doesn't apply...and just go by my function-test score rankings [listed in the other blog thread: Fi-Ne-Ni-Ti-Fe-Se-Te-Si].
My two supposedly most developed extraverted functions, then, are Ne and Fe.
See? I still can't help exploring all the possibilities, not necessarily following the rules, and 'mixing it up.' >:p
INFP new acronym (out of order):
I Forgo No Possibility
Everyday, New Fantastic Possibilities
...I sure hope you read the "INFP Philosophy" blog page, because I sure don't feel like repeating everything here.
Hi, I`m 15(INFP)from Norway, and there`s a lot about role models in the media, and my mother sometimes ask me who I look up to(actresses,models or singers)
Because some of them are really "off" these days.
I always say: "I don`t need a role model I can think for myself."
She always think it`s strange.
So thanks for clearing it up for me(me not needing a role model)
Aha - role models :) once again you hit the sweet spot.
I've got LOTS of them. Started collecting them while beeing a kid and still do it. After reading a book about indians for example I found myself wondering "what would Winnetou do in this kind of situation" :)) Some models don't last (sadly Winnetou does not inspire me anymore), some stick on for quite a long time.
However all of them are fictional characters and not necessary INFJ. I usually look up to a model for one particular feature - thus now I have got one character with strongly expressed Fe, another one with Ti, third one with Ni and Se combination and so on.
Strangely enough most of my role model characters are female, while I am not :) Now I understand that it's probably influenced by social stereotype, which associates Fe and Se preferences with girls. It's very hard to find a suitable male character with such qualities that would seem attractive to me.
When I was in college I had a teacher I loved. He kept telling me to pick characteristis of people that I could emulate. It was a great learning tool for him and he was always telling me what he liked about other people and what I should learn from them.
Unfortunatly, this totally undermined my confidance in my own intuition, my own prefrences, my own feelings, and eventually my joy in learning the subject at all and I completely dropped out. (This wasn't the only reason, but it added to everything else.)
Now, years later, I'm finally learning that it's okay for an INFP to have only myself as a role model. It was very encouraging to read your article. Thank you.
Besides, it never added to the wonderful possibilities of the world for me to try to be someone I'm not.
Hi, Vicky Jo! The most recent comments on your blog entries seem to be from a few years ago, so I can only hope you're still reading.
I'm still in the process of going through your INFJ or INFP site, but I believe I'm of INFP preferences. It's hard to tell for sure, though, for reasons you have mentioned that apply to INFPs in general :) and also because I'm 25 and probably still developing, personality-wise.
However, this page especially resonated with me: I became vegetarian a few years ago as a result of a conversation with my then-boyfriend. In that conversation I put in words the way I feel (and believed I had always felt) about killing animals for food, and it seemed so clear once I had said it out loud, I couldn't continue eating meat. Only after that did I start reading up on vegetarianism and related ethics, and found - among others - the work of Peter Singer, whom I concluded was worth looking up to. I studied the ethical aspect, but only to the extent that I could logically explain to others why I felt the way I felt. Or that's how I'd describe it now. (I eat fish nowadays, and making that decision was a struggle and a bit of a compromise I made for my non-vegetarian boyfriend - but I digress.)
I've often wondered why I never became a "fangirl" of any sort. I almost envied friends of mine who had these huge idols, but I just never could get interested in celebrities that way, even when I greatly enjoyed their music or books or deeply agreed with their views on this or that matter. In fact I often prefer not to even see photos of an author or a musician so as to not break, stain or change the mental image I have of them - I only want to know their work. Does this make sense? I do admire some people in my life whom I know personally and who have achieved things I'd like to achieve one day, but I actively resist idolization of any kind.
Thank you for keeping up this wonderful website! Looking forward to reading more.
Post a Comment
<< Home