Debate

Some INFPs enjoy a good debate.  They actually enjoy getting in there and "rearranging people's thinking."

Are you aware that's extraverted Thinking at work?

Extraverted Thinking is about using logic, sequencing, and organizing to meet the needs of the external world (person?).  It is about segmenting, checking for consequences, following guidelines (the guidelines of proper debate technique?), and deciding whether something is working or not.  So it is common to meet INFPs who enjoy hashing out lively differences of opinion.  Some of them did this all through their school years.  Many of them were members of the debate squad in high school or college!

For me, there's nothing like a lively debate to drive me up the wall.  I admire people who can do it successfully, because I just want to duck and run.  It is rare for me to have any faith whatsoever that I can win a fair argument -- it's easier to quit the field.

You may be wondering how can it be that INFPs would display so much extraverted Thinking.... especially when it's their inferior function.

Remember, I subscribe to Dr. Beebe's model, and he explains that "inferior" does not mean "lesser than" -- as in poor/inferior quality.  According to Beebe, the favorite function of all is "superior," and the fourth one is labeled "inferior" in terms of its position in the personality.

Beebe's other word for this process is "aspirational."  In his model, it is the function that tries to be favorite function.  It tries really hard to convince us that it deserves to be number one.  Thus, even though it may not be the process we are most naturally graceful at using, it is the function that repeatedly tries to convince us that it is the function that deserves a shot.  Who knows?  Maybe this time it will prevail!

Whenever someone looks askance at me for suggesting INFPs revel in their use of aspirational Te, I automatically think of Isabel Briggs Myers, who had INFP preferences.  Look at the amazing assessment she created with the MBTI instrument.  And she did all the necessary psychometric calculations by hand, before calculators were created!  For years, she re-calculated the impact of each new question she introduced, and adjusted the instrument to suit.  It was a remarkable achievement, and an INFP did it.  So don't tell me INFPs aren't able to access Te.

I saw an INFP recently take on Annie Murphy Paul in debate over her book, "The Cult of Personality: How Personality Tests Are Leading Us to Miseducate Our Children, Mismanage Our Companies, and Misunderstand Ourselves."  I was impressed by how masterfully he took her on, point by point, never losing a sense of positive regard for her as a person, or even for many of the premises in her book.  I'd have made it a catfight in a second, and heaven knows I wouldn't have been able to maintain positive regard for her or her idealistic attempt to affect positive change via her book.  (I lost my respect for Paul when she said they would have to "agree to disagree," and then abandoned the field.)

I don't believe INFJs are known for debating.  Try imagining Eleanor Roosevelt "debating."  It's hard to picture.

Any time I'm put in the position where I have to try to change somebody's mind, I feel like I lost before I even got started.  Just don't even put me there.  My introverted Thinking is able to spot logical weaknesses rather quickly, but it's very difficult to express them, much less convince somebody diplomatically to align their thinking to mine.

I'm happy to abandon this field to INFPs.  But you might care to notice whether it's something you enjoy or not.

TRADEMARKS