On My Mind

After reading a 2012 blog post on The Secret Life of an INFP - Inside My Mind  I commented on several things I relate to, many of which I could not put in to words as succinctly as its author, aelthwyn, had. Some were as follows:

I enjoy novel experiences. I love people's stories. While I have an aversion to ambiguous feedback and gossip the behaviors interest me. I appreciate  thoughtful conversation, that is to say what folks "think, feel, and theorize about various topics of mutual interest" and their own individual interest. What was shared in the post reminded me of something I reflected on in a blog post of my own as regards "small talk": On Honesty.

I too, like the author, have background noise; what some call thoughts and others voices. The noise is often breached by the grating of intrusive sounds. The sensation is as though a real life conversation had been interrupted; sometimes a symposium, other times it is the dissonant rambling of several voices vying for attention, and at other times a euphonious chant or chorale. In some instances the breach is a welcomed interlude and in others it is entirely inconvenient. My mind frequently repeats familiar songs and composes original melodies, which I routinely hum. Occasionally (be it minutes, hours, or days later) a lyrical element will be realized. I do not know musical notation and I am too shy to perform or to record myself. Admittedly, some part of me longs to sing with others, and envies those who do.

Sometimes, I'll stare blankly in to space; a sudden lapse in consciousness is how I'd best describe it. When asked to recount the experience there isn't much to tell; it is typically brief and I don't seem to be reflecting on anything in particular, as there is nothing for me to convey. When it happens in the presence of others I'm usually met with an, "Albert. Albert? Albert!", "Hellooo?", "Are you alright?", "Are you paying attention?" or "Where were you?" The closest thing I can relate it to are the absence seizures I've read about. However, those occur more often in children. Another person brought up partial seizure, but short of visiting a Neurological specialist I can't know for sure. I prefer to walk barefoot, unless it is unreasonably scalding or cold. While rocks, sticks, and stones are sometimes uncomfortable to walk on or slow my pace I enjoy the sensation of them underfoot and the idea of my flesh touching the Earth's, much like the keen satisfaction I derive from skin-to-skin or eye contact.

I have virtual conversations. Particularly as a reaction to a perceived impending encounter. I like to think of it as preemptive thinking; it is an anticipatory mechanism and variation of my deep or over thinking processes. I'm always considering all the angles. I feel as though my "doing this with past conversations" can be likened to a debriefing of sorts. Perhaps it is a mental inventory of previous experiences and interactions for use in future or present ones. Brooding, on the other hand, is a vexing extremity. The lot of it seems both apprehensive and defensive, however practical it can be made to seem. For instance, if I am a highly sensitive INFJ, it may be rational to think this an act of self-preservation or an attempt to manage one's personal energy & space in relation to both innocuous and unwelcomed external pressures.

Make of it as one will, but in light of the fact that this "type" is merely 1% of the population brings to question whether or not that is few enough to consider it an endangered or critically endangered subset of the human species (within the U.S.). Had such a percentage been applied to animals or plants then a similar sentiment would most certainly be entertained. Perhaps the behavior is an instinctual reaction and expression of insecurity (for people of said "type") triggered by some perceived threat under such conditions, or perhaps we are simply as neurotic as some would have us believe. Studies on Sensory-Processing Sensitivity by Dr. Elaine Aron has further piqued my interest; a topic that she has been researching since 1991. More on that some other time.

I draw fascinating connections between abstract concepts. I am definitely a hypothetical & philosophical thinker. I prefer to communicate metaphorically, appreciate symbolism and parabolic expression. I am fascinated with the way humans behave and interact with one-another and their environments. I prefer to probe people's beliefs & explanations, often inundating them with questions. I like to explore and challenge their personal truths, unveiling the inanity of my own in the process. Such relationships serve as mirrors allowing a person to see themselves more clearly or as doorways to alternative insight.

I have to be mindful of the method of inquiry and allow for their self-paced disclosure lest I elicit their dishonesty, ire, or suspicion of my motives. I've been told that I occasionally make people uncomfortable. There are mixed reviews. Some enjoy it because it compels them to reconcile their cognitive dissonance, illuminating internal conflicts (both theirs and mine), and triggers a psychological remediation of any debilitating and unaddressed self-sabotaging thoughts or behaviors; or its initiation at least. On the other hand, some detest it. They'll specifically say so, change the subject, or suggest it with their body language. Essentially, I am trying to relate what they're divulging to a myriad of other accounts, conversations, observations, and personal considerations while they are speaking, and drawing parallels so to deepen my understanding of any underlying concepts and themes. I find such interactions gratifying. There is satisfaction that is derived from the bond such an experience frequently facilitates. This approach can aggravate and enrich a relationship.

Ultimately, I feel as though the aforementioned is an advantageous precipice off which to dive in to deeper (i.e. thoughtful & specific) matters, after or during which new patterns and possibilities may be explored. In harvesting human thought one may only ever hope to reap an inaccurate retelling of people's experiences, exaggerated, imitated, or rehearsed accounts, imagined narratives, or intentional falsehoods. Even in the instance of a person, trying as they might, to delineate the truth of an experience as it actually occurred they will only ever be relating the event from where they are found during their description, documentation, or retelling of it. What they relate is their reaction to an event in the varying degrees that it is (or was) felt, internalized, and is at the time being disclosed. Essentially, all this from their distinctive perspective. While this does nothing to devalue the event, their experience of it, nor their disclosure, it is important to note that during such encounters all I am ever interacting with are another person's truths, which may or may not coincide with my own, and which may or may not more accurately depict the truth of what is or has been. Notwithstanding the accuracy of the matter and my attempts to challenge people to think differently than they do, I let go of preconception in those moments when I just listen and observe. And, that (if there must be one) is the point of the exercise; to allow an awareness of dissimilarity to guide me beyond the crystallization of any ideas I might arrive at and cling to in the form of "what must be...said, seen, felt, or achieved", as a river might course from one place to another randomly picking up or depositing debris here or there, all the while eroding what is mistaken for permanency en route. Granted, a scientific approach is far more pragmatic in its methods of documenting phenomena, but I prefer the fieldwork of novel human interaction; meeting people where they are at in their personal experience and understanding of life, and exploring our truths together.

I am sometimes misunderstood (or perhaps inadequately expressing myself) as regards my endorsement of alternative viewpoints. I am met with "Things are not so black & white" while I sit there thinking to myself "Precisely!" The statement is often leveraged when I challenge someone's perspective, as if to say that I am closed off to their point-of-view when I simply honor it as the one they are currently entertaining in light of any collaborative or individual speculation that might be otherwise engaged in (e.g. What if... What about...). I present possibilities that do not align with others' truths and try my darndest to remain open to the possibilities they present as well. I have been called by some argumentative, a rabble-rouser, inconsistent or noncommittal, and insecure due to my inquisitive nature. For others, what I express is sometimes perceived as what I am personally consigned to, as some rigid oppositional belief, in its singularity, that I am forcing upon people. And so, I am thought stubborn, recalcitrant, or narrow-minded. Perhaps I am in fact crystallized in belief. After all, my behavior is rooted in my belief in something - specifically, the possibility that what others believe in is inaccurate.

Lastly, I am convinced that animals gravitate towards me. I have had some rather peculiar and profound interactions; several with birds lately. I'll leave it at that.

I hope this shared insight is having a positive impact on someone out there. Or, is at the very least entertaining.

Be Well, Loved Ones...

Albert