| Socionics Personals |  | Female
Straight
16-25
Oceania
Libra
ENFj |
|  | Male
Straight
16-25
Middle East
Sagittarius
INTj |
|  | Male
Straight
26-35
North America
Pisces
INXj |
| | Join now! |
Who is who?Learn how to convert between different systems
V.I.An introduction into the widely used Socionics Visual Identification technique
TestsA collection of Socionics related tests and quizes
Q & AsAsk a Socionics related question or provide an answer to an existing one
ArticlesVarious articles on the subject of Socionics and Types in general
ForumsWant to discuss Type? Head to Socionics Forums!
|
| Questions & Answers |
| Question #1196113742 | Monday, 26-Nov-2007 |
|
|
| How can I get INTj to express their emotions more? How do I know how they are feeling if they are impassive? -- anonymous |
|
A1 u would have to express ur own emotion,..if they are in agreement with u, they will affirm...or if not, they will shoot u down. from what i understand, there dual   takes this interaction flow well. if u not looking for a 'boy-girl relationship'...u would appreciate these qualities in friendship anyway -- @sirac |
A2   ...correction there -- @sirac |
| A3 My brother is an INTJ, pushing their buttons works great, If they snap at you and then apologize, you know you hit the mark, if they have a complet emotional break down, you have gone way to far. But basically, if you want an INTJ to open up too you, you need to be a true friend, someone they can talk to about anything, once they know you and trust you, they will not be able to hide their feelings (they will not be expressed in terms of "I feel", but they will be expressed in the way they delivers their opinions) Or like my brother who plays the violine, I just listen to the music and I can tell how he is doing. They generally shut down if their confidence of moral is low. Respect is a big thing for them. -- INTP |
|
|
| A4 I believe I am an INTj, and in my experience you'd just have to explicitely ask; if they know you well enough to be comfortable with you, they (or I, at least) will answer honestly. -- Anonymous |
A5 One of my best friends is a cookie-cutter INTj; I have known him since we were in grade school and he *still* doesn't tell me how he feels, even when I ask him. Usually it turns into a theoretical discussion of some logical construct. I would suggest you learn how to read the INTj in question, and play by "Extraverted Feeling rules" ...that's a really vague way to describe it, I know, but to give you an example of what that means: We used to get drunk together a lot, and when I started to fall asleep, he would get hurt that 1) I was ending the night (he would never force me to stay awake) and 2) I wouldn't see him to the door. I could tell he was hurt by the way he evaluated the situation- his voice betrayed him, sometimes a facial expression, and he would systematically list out loud every relevant action that I wasn't going to take that might have been considered socially acceptable or polite. I didn't know why it mattered so much to him, but it's because that's the kind of environment he wants for himself. Very loyal guy, awesome friend- and remember, if you're a Feeling type, you may be over-evaluating the importance of your INTj's emotions. The one I know is flexible, open-minded and extremely logical when it comes to challenges, barriers and difficulties. Not the kind of guy who would get weighed down trying to figure out his purpose or brood over some lost love or something. Just be a friend (or boyfriend or girlfriend or parent or whatever your role is). You'll probably know if something's wrong, and the best thing you can do is help them get through whatever's bothering them by supporting them and helping them deal with it. Hopefully that will help you out  -- INTjs are awesome |
| A6 Trust is the big issue. If an INTj doesn't trust you, no force on earth will get him to show you his true emotions. Building up trust takes time, especially with an INTj. Things that I suspect might help would be: valuing and requesting his input on matters intellectual, and demonstrating to him that you care about his emotional and physical well-being. Do those things for long enough, and a real INTj will probably begin to open up. -- Krig (INTj) |
| A7 INTJs usually express their emotions through music. In fact, I think it's the only way they know how to make their feelings acceptable to other people and to themselves. -- Anonymous |
| A8 A7, that's a great point. Certainly true in the case of this INTj, anyway. -- Krig (INTj) |
A9 A7 is making a good point, I know my ENFp friend's INTj boyfriend once made her listen to a song in the car and said "What he is singing is how I feel about you." It was cute. I belive all feelings are valid whether they are good or bad, but being aware of whether the feeling is good or bad is where morals come into play. There is also the issue about violent and demeaning music too. Research has proved that listening to violent music (lyrics), watching violent movies and playing violent video games, watching porn increases the likelihood of that person being aggressive (by aggression I mean the specific definition of aggression: the intent to harm another living organism which intend to avoid the harm. For example: Shooting a person, calling a person a racial slur, throwing a rock at a dog, etc.). All of the above mentioned exposure desensitize us to (aka dehumanizes) our fellow human beings and makes it more "acceptable" in our minds to commit aggressive violent behaviour when it is by no means acceptable. -- A psych major ENXp  |
| A10 A9 - We're getting a little off-topic, but do violent movies, etc., cause people to become violent, or do violent people watch violent movies, etc.? Correlation does not necessarily imply causation. Watching violence on TV and video games certainly does dull some of the shock response, but I'm skeptical of the idea that it actually causes people to become violent. -- Krig (INTj) |
| A11 A9: Could you provide me with the research that has "proved" this correlation you speak of? I have heard of several longitudinal studies suggesting just the opposite. -- INFp guy |
| A12 To A10 - You are right, correlation does not imply causation. To A11 - Certainly. Numerous experiments which includes randomly selected children and/or adults were divided into two groups, one group were put in a room to watch sports and the others were put in a room to watch violent movies/tv shows. They were then told that they were to participate in a 'learning' activity where they are supposed to ask questions to confederates sitting across from them and for each wrong answer they are to administer a shock to the confederate by pressing a button. They got to choose the level and time-span of the shocks. They could also hear the confederates scream and watch them suffer. 65% of the people that were shown violent movies/tv shows administered high levels of shocks as compared to 20% of the ones that just watched sports. There were similar findings when randomly divided adults were shown soft-core, hard-core and violent pornography as well. Where violent pornography induced the highest level of aggression, and soft and hard-core porn being moderate. Times of war has the similar effect on the people of the country its happening in (Homicide and rape rates increases significantly). There was another experiment done where a confederate driving a pick up truck didn't start driving when a red light turned green. One pick up had a clearly visible rifle on the back of the pick up, one had the rifle and a bumper sticker that said 'Vengeance' and one didnt have either. Roughly 95% of the cars behind the pick up honked which had the rifle and bumper sticker, 75% of the cars behind the only rifle truck honked and 40% of the cars behind the one with nothing honked. Also, another experiment where participants were asked to participate in the 'learning' activity described above were randomly divided up in 2 groups, one where they were doing the activity in the presence of a shotgun (this was in the the 50s and 60s so they used to get away with doing these kind of experiments) and one in the presence of a tennis racket and a ball. And guess what? Considerably more people in the presence of a shotgun delivered high shocks than the ones in the presence of sports equipment. Mere exposure to a violent weapon is likely to increase violent behavior in people. We tend to make the fundamental attribution error when we are not sure why we acted a certain way. Which is most times for everyone. We tend to make justifications for our actions AFTER we do them, and more often than not, we are wrong. I can give examples of those research studies as well. Or if in college, take a social psychology course, most people I've talked to considers it their fav class ever PS: A11, when you are requesting something, you should say "Would you" not "Could you." Ofcourse I could, but the real question is would I? Brush up yo EQ -- A9 |
| A13 @A12: All of those examples you gave are situational, short-term stuff. If I'm still on a high from watching an action movie, of course I'm going to be more willing to inflict pain, just like if I'm still excited from watching a street racing movie, I'm more likely to drive my car fast. What we see affects what we think - if I see a picture of a gun, my thoughts will be more likely to turn to aggressive things. If I see a flower, my thoughts will be more likely to turn to beautiful things. If I see a picture of a scantily-clad person, my thoughts will be more likely to turn to sex. None of that implies any sort of long-term increase in aggressiveness, or any sort of long-term blurring of the lines of when it is and is not acceptable or morally right to use violence. -- Krig (INTj) |
| A14 @ Krig - Hmmm thats a good point. I hadn't thought of that before. But what happens when people are constantly primed from being exposed to violence and aggression inducing agents constantly? I've read that reducing the amount of viewing of violent scenes, porn etc. actually reduces by a relatively significant amount the rate of aggressive crimes like homicides, rapes and assaults. -- Anonymous |
| A15 I haven't read any studies on the subject, but common sense and intuition lead me to suspect that the primary result of prolonged exposure to violent movies and video games, etc., would be a dulling of the emotional shock response to such things. The hundredth time I see a graphic murder on T.V., I'm not going to be as shocked as the first time I see a graphic murder. But I see no reason to believe that would incline someone to be more violent, just somewhat less afraid of violence. Soldiers who have seen and done actual violence and killing are not more likely to commit violence in civilian life, in fact, they're significantly less likely to commit murder, etc., which I suspect is largely due to the discipline and honour codes they're taught in the military. The choice to commit violence is a moral one, and is influenced by your moral education, not how familiar with violence you are. -- Krig (INTj) |
A16 @ A13 you obviously disgree with (Pascal's) theories of long term cognitive priming then?  -- Tricia |
| *Please note that the opinions expressed are not necessarily those of socionics.com* |
|
| Would you like to add anything? |
(When posting, we ask you to make the effort to qualify your opinions.)
|
|
