User Tag List

First 234

Results 31 to 34 of 34

  1. #31
    Junior Member Thelema's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Forever View Post
    Ehhhhh... this seems like a superficial description, very much removed.

    you're just merely saying in a wordy way, Fe extroverts feeling and Fi introverts feeling.

    This sounds incredibly divisive of the two classes. One will never come to appreciate the other. It just is. Blech.



    And frankly my dear, it has always been about harmony, just in different modes.
    "Dear"? Passive aggressive much?

    Sorry, but typology is divisive in itself. It is categorization. Categorization that seeks to explain differences.

    Oh yeah you can say it is about harmony if you have a different definition for harmony compared to most people.

  2. #32
    In Full Flight Lauren Ashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    EII
    Posts
    3,033

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    But other than that, I do think INF 4s are more alike than not.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeego View Post
    I think people tend to generalize J/P counterpart types as more different from each other than they actually are because "all the functions are different" when in reality their behavior can be quite similar, especially when the Enneagram type is the same.
    Agreed. I've always found INFPs in real life to be more similar to me than most folks, even other Ns, and I don't think I've met any 4s yet (mostly 9s).

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Deadpan View Post
    Sweet baby jeezus, say it again for the people in back. I am so tired of arguing certain aspects of my personality to others simply because I am capable of having a strong presence when I so choose. In reality, I am so introverted that it's painful, I just often appear otherwise because I like stimulation and novelty and attention. I am most certainly not always this way though... I am either "on" or "off." There is no in between really.
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Deadpan View Post
    Still, I can't help but feel that I'm not really like anyone else pattern/behavior wise, which is just an overly individualistic POV that should be discarded. (But really? Who here is THAT much like me? All the NFJs Fe better than I do, and all the NFPs Ne better than I do).
    Tell me more about this...do you have a thread somewhere? In which ways do you think your Fe differs?
    ~Life in a cappella~
    Likes Zeego liked this post

  3. #33
    In Full Flight Lauren Ashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    EII
    Posts
    3,033

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thelema View Post
    Socionics calls Fe "dynamic", and I like to apply this concept to Jungian functions, too. Fe is transitory. Let's say you are pissed off. Very pissed off. You express this dynamic emotional state, which is Fe. But this emotional state doesn't last. It goes away. Fe can be any kind of outer expression. It can create any kind of emotional atmosphere, but it never lasts. Fi is actually more serious, and inner oriented. You can't "see" easily the feelings of a Fi user. They don't experience their feelings in terms of outer emotional expression. Fi users seem to experience more stable feelings, and hence why many of them think the Fe expressions are "fake".
    Sometimes I can be so confused by how Fe/Fi are seen...My feelings are very stable and lasting. Some are expressed, some are not. So what are the feelings I experience inside -- Fi? Then my ISFP ex expresses his emotions outwardly all of the time. So when he is doing this, is this supposed to be Fe? Or something else?

    Are you sure Fi users have more stable feelings? I think I could agree with that in relation to INFPs, but my experience with ISFPs suggests they can cycle through feelings very quickly.
    ~Life in a cappella~
    Likes Video liked this post

  4. #34
    can't handcuff the wind Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    INfJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    3,525

    Default

    One of the notions earlier expressed in this thread that I disagreed with is that Fe expresses emotion and Fi does not. FJs actually have a strong instinct to be very private about their feelings, INFJs (since this thread started explicitly about INFJs) are actually notorious for it. This belief comes from my own personal experience, from the experience of observing the trend with friends, and from the fact that - historically, in this forum - FJs (especially INFJs) have actually taken a great deal of crap for being so private about it.

    But to comment on this "Fi focuses on the space within, Fe focuses on the space between" notion - is this meant to be in general? As if FPs in general focus on the space within (supposedly including the space within others) and FJs in general focus on the space between?

    Exactly how much of a counterbalance do you suppose "Ni focuses on the space within, and Ne focuses on the space between" provides? It's like that element is skipped over.

    It seems to me like it's a no-brainer that saying "Fi focuses on the space within (supposedly including others), and Fe focuses on the space between" is problematic. If FPs were truly better at focusing at the space within others - they wouldn't constantly be the ones to foster such an 'us vs. them' mentality in these discussions in the first place. I always feel like I'm in a herd of people devolving into monkeys when I get hooked by the discussion.

    I feel slightly hooked right now, in spite of myself (because of past Fi/Fe discussions in this forum), but feel compelled to say something because I think it does the forum a disservice to have such self-serving descriptions of Fi posted. A person's ability to effectively see 'within' another person has far, far, far more to do with their self-awareness: their ability to be compassionate/accepting enough towards themselves that they can grant others the space to feel or think whatever they're feeling or thinking without the mind distorting information to compensate for what the ego can not handle listening to; how well they've cultivated an awareness of their own needs so that their unconscious does not inadvertently/manipulatively impose them on anyone else under the radar (again, because the mind distorts information when the ego can not handle the truth); and certainly there are more such factors that I am not aware of. <- Any 'type' definition that suggests one or another type has some kind of golden path somewhat exempting them from those very basic human frailties is doing the forum a disservice.

    While type differences are real, there are definitely trends among certain types for what gets prioritized and what doesn't - and NFs in general do focus on ideals and potentials and whatnot, so their ego is probably more likely attached to this 'authentically sees others' qualifier - it's really annoying when anyone suggests their own type effectively inherently sees 'within' others. It's just as annoying to me when NFJs do it. I think it's safe to say that it's annoying to more people than not.

    [And please notice I didn't say, "Any person who suggests one or another type has some kind of golden path somewhat exempting them from those very basic human frailties is doing the forum a disservice." I said, "Any 'type' description". This isn't about motivations, this is about a directly observable end product. I am criticizing the directly observable end product, and saying that I think it needs refining.]
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari
    Likes Forever_Jung, Video liked this post

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO