Jung's Introverted Feeling Description.

[OrangeAppled]

How many relate to the description, regardless of MBTI type? How many MBTI Fi doms don't relate to it? Any similar descriptions? (I recall at least one other description that portrayed Fi like this, but I can't find it)

I relate heavily to it. This description & Van Der Hoop's (which mostly reiterates Jung) are the descriptions that cemented my type as INFP & not INTP or INFJ.

I too find the MBTI profiles a bit saccharine & "emotional", but I admit they were good enough to catch my attention & consider INFP as the forerunner for my type.

I think that the MBTI profiles seek to appeal to how many INFPs see themselves; they feel far more than they appear to, and that is often true of myself. The problem is, other people expect INFPs to appear that way, and then you have them mistyping people or having a distorted view of what Fi is.

Paging Seymour (next time you login, please find this): did you not once quote a book which had a semi "unflattering" view of Fi, but that would ring as true to most Fi-dom? I want to say it had two authors, if that helps in recalling it....There was a great description of the indirect "influence" a Fi-dom can have over people, which Jung compares to a "spell".

This description is very different from your average MBTI Fi description. It's portrayed as a cold, internally manipulative function rather than a system of values and feelings (or even the values/feelings themselves, as some descriptions allude to).

Although I don't quite see it this way either. It certainly is portrayed as aloof & indifferent on the exterior. I wouldn't use the word "manipulating" either. I think rather, the thought process seeks to remain detached from external influences (which all the introverted processes do), to keep the feeling "pure" in a sense.

I agree it is definitely NOT a system of values....but a Fi-dom may create such a system, as a "byproduct" of its thinking style & focus. I know for me, I don't have any set of clearly defined "values" in the way many think Fi operates though. That's too much like rules; too much like Fe. Having a system of personal values does not mean a person uses Fi thinking; but it's common misconception.

 

[Seymour]

I relate heavily to it. This description & Van Der Hoop's (which mostly reiterates Jung) are the descriptions that cemented my type as INFP & not INTP or INFJ.

I too find the MBTI profiles a bit saccharine & "emotional", but I admit they were good enough to catch my attention & consider INFP as the forerunner for my type.

I think that the MBTI profiles seek to appeal to how many INFPs see themselves; they feel far more than they appear to, and that is often true of myself. The problem is, other people expect INFPs to appear that way, and then you have them mistyping people or having a distorted view of what Fi is.

I agree. Fi is not about fluffy bunnies. It's funny, because in a weird way I think the Fi-dom profiles get nudged towards sounding overly emotionally warm in two ways. First, there's the subjective experience of our emotion, which is often far more intense than how we appear externally. Second, as introverts who don't always emote our internal judgments, we sometimes get projected onto as being "sweet." The truth is more prickly and complicated.

Paging Seymour (next time you login, please find this): did you not once quote a book which had a semi "unflattering" view of Fi, but that would ring as true to most Fi-dom? I want to say it had two authors, if that helps in recalling it....There was a great description of the indirect "influence" a Fi-dom can have over people, which Jung compares to a "spell".

Found it, although it leans too much to the positive (a balance between this and Jung's description would be more neutral, I think):

There's also an indirect effect that Fi-doms tend to have on groups. There's a passage from Jung's Typology, by Marie-Louise von Franz and James Hillman that, despite being far too positive and affirming, does capture a certain dynamic (non Fi-doms feel free to roll your eyes):

They also generally exert a positive secret influence on their surroundings by setting standards. The others observe them, and though they say nothing, for they are too introverted to express themselves much, they set certain standards. Introverted feeling types, for instance, very often form the ethical backbone of a group: without irritating others by preaching moral or ethical precepts, they themselves have such correct standards of ethical values that they secretly emanate a positive influence on those around them.

 

[OrangeAppled]

Found it, although it leans too much to the positive (a balance between this and Jung's description would be more neutral, I think):

I don't know why I remembered it as being more negative than that....maybe I was thinking of something else. But thanks for finding it & re-posting it!

 

[Southern Kross]

I relate heavily to it. This description & Van Der Hoop's (which mostly reiterates Jung) are the descriptions that cemented my type as INFP & not INTP or INFJ.

I too find the MBTI profiles a bit saccharine & "emotional", but I admit they were good enough to catch my attention & consider INFP as the forerunner for my type.

I think that the MBTI profiles seek to appeal to how many INFPs see themselves; they feel far more than they appear to, and that is often true of myself. The problem is, other people expect INFPs to appear that way, and then you have them mistyping people or having a distorted view of what Fi is.

Paging Seymour (next time you login, please find this): did you not once quote a book which had a semi "unflattering" view of Fi, but that would ring as true to most Fi-dom? I want to say it had two authors, if that helps in recalling it....There was a great description of the indirect "influence" a Fi-dom can have over people, which Jung compares to a "spell".

It doesn't bother me either if a description of Fi is mildly critical as long as it rings true. There is a common misconception about INFPs I believe, that we can't bear a less than saintly description of Fi. In fact, I protest a great deal more when I'm attacked for something I'm not. I was falsely accused of being a liar and troublemaker (among other things) the other day and I nearly blew my top - however I restricted myself to strong language.

Anyway I think Jung isn't intending to be negative but very matter-of-fact to remain as unbiased, yet factual as possible. He makes no judgments in his statements, and only explains what it seems like to outsiders.

I agree it is definitely NOT a system of values....but a Fi-dom may create such a system, as a "byproduct" of its thinking style & focus. I know for me, I don't have any set of clearly defined "values" in the way many think Fi operates though. That's too much like rules; too much like Fe. Having a system of personal values does not mean a person uses Fi thinking; but it's common misconception.

This is interesting. I sense a larger theory - please, elaborate. How do you see values fitting into Fi?

 

[INTP]

Though Jung was the one who said Fi types are rational, so it could be perceived as anti-MBTI.

rational function = could be translated to J function in MBTI, but with bit different definition and isnt completely the same thing. function that is used to make decisions.
rational type = type that uses rational function as dominant function

irrational function = function that just perceives things as they seem without judging it, could be translated to MBTI P function, but has bit different definition and isnt completely the same thing
irrational type = type that uses irrational function as dominant function

its just a different way of grouping the types, MBTI makes the group based on whether the J function is E or not. nothing anti-MBTI in it imo, because types are still the same, just grouped differently. only part that jung mentioned judging type(as far as i remember) was when talking about extroverted rational type, so you could see it having a link to Je, i think thats where MBTI picked up the J type definition, but extended it to introverted J types also, while jung only spoke it on extroverted J types.

i think there is positive sides in both ways to group the types. when you look at INTJ for example, they can be really irrational(not just in jungs definition, but in general definition also) at times, much more irrational than for example ISFP would be in same situation. but when you define the J/P based on whether J function is extraverted, the groupings are more similar, like ENTJ is closer to INTJ than INTP, and ENTP is closer to INTP than INTJ when it comes to overall personality because functions used are the same. also one good thing about MBTI way of grouping the types is when the person is close on E-I axis and cant really decide if he is an E or I, but if he is an ENTP for example(and just doesent know it yet), he can still look whether he uses Ne and Ti and identify with NTP, with socionics he could only identify with NT because changing the first letter would also change the last one. and its easier for him to then look at just E-I axis. so its easier for beginners to use this sort of grouping on identifying their type.

 

[Andy]

I agree it is definitely NOT a system of values....but a Fi-dom may create such a system, as a "byproduct" of its thinking style & focus. I know for me, I don't have any set of clearly defined "values" in the way many think Fi operates though. That's too much like rules; too much like Fe. Having a system of personal values does not mean a person uses Fi thinking; but it's common misconception.

Indeed, none of the functions are quite that clearly defined. Fi is more about the importance placed upon ideas about moral, emotional or social worth, regardless of what form those ideas take.

 

[Thalassa]

It doesn't bother me either if a description of Fi is mildly critical as long as it rings true. There is a common misconception about INFPs I believe, that we can't bear a less than saintly description of Fi. In fact, I protest a great deal more when I'm attacked for something I'm not. I was falsely accused of being a liar and troublemaker (among other things) the other day and I nearly blew my top - however I restricted myself to strong language.

Anyway I think Jung isn't intending to be negative but very matter-of-fact to remain as unbiased, yet factual as possible. He makes no judgments in his statements, and only explains what it seems like to outsiders.

I relate to it so much that I actually considered that I could be IxFP instead of ENFP after reading it - and I had completely rejected being INFP before that, on the grounds that the descriptions of INFP generally sound too saccharine, and in Keirsey the IxxP interaction style seems too passive.

I actually had to make a thread about it on another forum, like, "Help I iz confus!!!?"

But they said, no, you're still ENFP.

That's how much I appreciate Jung, though. I think his original theories are best.

 

[erm]

What I have found that seems to fit best (especially in comparison to the other functions), is from Lenore Thomson's definitions.
Fi is about a "personal connection" to an evolving pattern. Personal (F) as opposed to impersonal or technical, basically (T), and an evolving pattern basically being a "variable" (as termed for Ti) that an individual picks up and internalizes, rather than an agreed upon (external) set of personal standards (or what I now term "established").

That is very vague. It describes so much more than Fi.

The greenlight wiki of Lenore Thomson's description is a typical example of the descriptions that contradict Jung's stuff in a lot of ways. Souls, essences, empathy, relationships, harmony and all else that it adds.

Below might be OOT and unsure whether or not I should add it. Here goes.
Just to check something:
Protostar - Fusion ignition - Red Giant/Super giant - Neutron star/Black hole (may become a black hole)
Fi.

Care to explain?

Also, check out this translated version http://forum.socionix.com/topic/2459-jung-fi-translation/page__view__findpost__p__15808

Thanks, that is a better version really. Reads the same, but is easier on the mind.

however from what I can tell some of these xNFPs I mention relate much more to Jung's extroverted feeling description, while relating the most to some general MBTI Fi descriptions.

I personally find this introverted feeling description to fit me and others I know the most, much better than what I've seen from MBTI Fi descriptions.

Yes, that is essentially my point. I am very interested in non-Fi doms (MBTI) who relate to this description. I wonder how many there are?

Although I don't quite see it this way either. It certainly is portrayed as aloof & indifferent on the exterior. I wouldn't use the word "manipulating" either. I think rather, the thought process seeks to remain detached from external influences (which all the introverted processes do), to keep the feeling "pure" in a sense.

I agree it is definitely NOT a system of values....but a Fi-dom may create such a system, as a "byproduct" of its thinking style & focus. I know for me, I don't have any set of clearly defined "values" in the way many think Fi operates though. That's too much like rules; too much like Fe. Having a system of personal values does not mean a person uses Fi thinking; but it's common misconception.

http://personalitycafe.com/nfs-temperament-forum-dreamers/3065-introverted-feeling.html

If that's the other description, I agree it is very similar. I think it is too specific though, and may alienate those unusual Fi doms (who are bound to be quite common) from recognising their Fi use. That last paragraph is pretty bad too, but cutting it out is easy.

As for the disagreement on how Fi is portrayed by Jung, I don't think getting into specific adjectives and such is a good idea. It's already a vague function. I meant by cold, that whilst it has intensive feeling (and thus potential for intensive caring and warmth) a large part of its nature is impassionate and unconcerned, and that it can often be uncaring towards people and relationships. By manipulative, I mean it enacts internal changes in pursuit of the ideal image, and will often do this to cause intense feeling. It doesn't do that externally so much, and so can only be seen indirectly by others. I think those two elements are played down or outright ignored by MBTI descriptions.

As for values. I agree that Fi will generally makes value systems, but so will the other J functions. Fi might focus more intently in that area (though Fe would seem to have equal reason to do so), but it's an essential part to all J functions. I dare say Te would usually make the clearest defined system of values.

 

[Eric B]

That is very vague. It describes so much more than Fi.

The greenlight wiki of Lenore Thomson's description is a typical example of the descriptions that contradict Jung's stuff in a lot of ways. Souls, essences, empathy, relationships, harmony and all else that it adds.

That was based on the book, not the wiki, which is someone's "exegesis" of the book.
This definition to me seems to get right to the essence of what the function is.
The difference between T/F: technical (my term; she calls it "impersonal"), or "personal.
The difference between introverted and extraverted function: internal or external standard. Or emergent variables versus agreed upon rules.

Jung did use a lot of words in his descriptions, and that unfortunately seems to cloud the concepts; hence all the different interpretations.

 

[William K]

Indeed, none of the functions are quite that clearly defined. Fi is more about the importance placed upon ideas about moral, emotional or social worth, regardless of what form those ideas take.

Yeah, my simplistic view on Fi and other J functions is that they are all black boxes that take in lots of inputs (such as values) and decides the 'best' solution based on a weighting system. Fi gives more weight to the things that you've listed more than the logical ones. And the weightage will be a personal and seemingly arbitrary one. The values themselves are mostly separate from Fi the decision-making process and there's nothing at all that forces Fi to only use 'positive' values. We can be as vindictive as any type if we feel we are wronged

Going off on a tangent...
One way of looking at the subjectiveness of Fi is to use the analogy of pain. We all feel pain but we can't know that the level/intensity of pain that one person feels is the same as another person. For example, I find injections a trivial matter but to many it's like facing the Grim Reaper himself. That's one reason I find it hard to explain why/how I'm passionate about something to someone else. Imagine trying to describe what labour pain feels like to a guy...

 

[William K]

As for values. I agree that Fi will generally makes value systems, but so will the other J functions. Fi might focus more intently in that area (though Fe would seem to have equal reason to do so), but it's an essential part to all J functions. I dare say Te would usually make the clearest defined system of values.

I don't know...How do you define 'clearest defined'?
I think the Je functions would be more focused on the external results/effects of the decision while Ji would be content as long as the decision is consistent with the inner 'world'

 

[527468]

Yes, that is essentially my point. I am very interested in non-Fi doms (MBTI) who relate to this description. I wonder how many there are?

That's a good question. Several famous people who seem to have that quality of Introverted Feeling off the top of my head are Oprah Winfrey (Ne/Fi), Carrie Fisher (Ne/Fi), Walt Disney (Ne/Fi), Abraham Lincoln (Fi/Ne), Barrack Obama (Fi/Se), Johnny Knoxville (Se/Fi)...and these people often get typed as non-Fi in MBTI based on a difference of interpretation, one is MBTI and the other is Jung. I'm not familiar with many standard MBTI typings, since I expect them to be based off of Jungian types first and foremost because of its quality and psychological resonance, but those came to mind from some MBTI websites and threads I saw. I have a difficult time recognizing these certain Introverted Feelers as anything else.

I heard Bob Dylan is sometimes referred to as INFJ? But he seems really Fi and Se to me.

On the contrary, I've mentioned celebrities who are typed Fi in MBTI, yet I personally see no resonance to Jungian Introverted Feeling, like Britney Spears (Si/Fe), Audrey Hepburn (Si/Fe), and Robin Williams (Fe/Si) to name a few. I can't be certain to say any of them were accurately typed Fi functionally using MBTI, but at least thought of as Fi in the sense of their more apparent "FP" traits. The Jungian Psychological Types is really great material and I recommend that everyone read about each type if they haven't already. It's as basic as you can get.

 

[Andy]

Yeah, my simplistic view on Fi and other J functions is that they are all black boxes that take in lots of inputs (such as values) and decides the 'best' solution based on a weighting system. Fi gives more weight to the things that you've listed more than the logical ones. And the weightage will be a personal and seemingly arbitrary one. The values themselves are mostly separate from Fi the decision-making process and there's nothing at all that forces Fi to only use 'positive' values. We can be as vindictive as any type if we feel we are wronged

You know, I've read a lot worse descriptions of the functions than that.

 

[Ginkgo]

From his most famous description of the types:

Introverted feeling in general.

Dominant introverted feeling


This description is very different from your average MBTI Fi description. It's portrayed as a cold, internally manipulative function rather than a system of values and feelings (or even the values/feelings themselves, as some descriptions allude to).

How many relate to the description, regardless of MBTI type? How many MBTI Fi doms don't relate to it? Any similar descriptions? (I recall at least one other description that portrayed Fi like this, but I can't find it)

I relate to it a lot. More than any other type description. Yet when it comes to MBTI types, I'll relate to Ts more, precisely because I fit this Fi description pretty well. I don't relate to the T functions themselves, but the behavioural descriptions will put me much closer to MBTI Ts than Fs.

I relate to it save for this part:

Although in the normal type, the tendency, above alluded to, to overpower or coerce the object once openly and visibly with the thing secretly felt, rarely plays a disturbing role, and never leads to a serious attempt in this direction, some trace of it, none the less, leaks through into the personal effect upon the object, in the form of a domineering influence often difficult to define. It is sensed as a sort of stifling or oppressive feeling which holds the immediate circle under a spell. It gives a woman of this type a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious. This power is derived from the deeply felt, unconscious images; consciousness, however, readily refers it to the ego, whereupon the influence becomes debased into personal tyranny. But, wherever the unconscious subject is identified with the ego, the mysterious power of the intensive feeling is also transformed into banal and arrogant ambition, vanity, and [p. 495] petty tyranny. This produces a type of woman most regrettably distinguished by her unscrupulous ambition and mischievous cruelty. But this change in the picture leads also to neurosis.

The danger is in egocentricity.

 

[Ginkgo]

I think you're reading this through your own bias.

Everybody does that. What can be brought against everything doesn't need to be brought against one thing.

 

[Thalassa]

That's a good question. Several famous people who seem to have that quality of Introverted Feeling off the top of my head are Oprah Winfrey (Ne/Fi), Carrie Fisher (Ne/Fi), Walt Disney (Ne/Fi), Abraham Lincoln (Fi/Ne), Barrack Obama (Fi/Se), Johnny Knoxville (Se/Fi)...and these people often get typed as non-Fi in MBTI based on a difference of interpretation, one is MBTI and the other is Jung. I'm not familiar with many standard MBTI typings, since I expect them to be based off of Jungian types first and foremost because of its quality and psychological resonance, but those came to mind from some MBTI websites and threads I saw. I have a difficult time recognizing these certain Introverted Feelers as anything else.

I heard Bob Dylan is sometimes referred to as INFJ? But he seems really Fi and Se to me.

On the contrary, I've mentioned celebrities who are typed Fi in MBTI, yet I personally see no resonance to Jungian Introverted Feeling, like Britney Spears (Si/Fe), Audrey Hepburn (Si/Fe), and Robin Williams (Fe/Si) to name a few. I can't be certain to say any of them were accurately typed Fi functionally using MBTI, but at least thought of as Fi in the sense of their more apparent "FP" traits. The Jungian Psychological Types is really great material and I recommend that everyone read about each type if they haven't already. It's as basic as you can get.

I agree that Audrey Hepburn and Robin Williams are Fe but I don't know about Britney Spears? Pretty sure she's ESFP or ISFP.

I don't know about Johnny Knoxville but I'd probably guess he was actually STP, not SFP. I could be wrong, but STP just seems to make more sense for him.

I entirely agree with you about Bob Dylan. Definitely ISFP. INFJ for him is just silly.

Oprah as ENFP? I don't think so. She's very Je.

 

[Ginkgo]

Jung describes Fi as a function in which one can act "free of conscience". Perhaps to an onlooker, this could be the case, but the root of the issue is that Fi leads the individual by his own virtues. In fact, the other side of the story is that Fi could be the driving force behind a guilty conscience in the mind of someone who is surrounded by people who aren't even bothered by the particular individual's actions.

 

[OrangeAppled]

On the contrary, I've mentioned celebrities who are typed Fi in MBTI, yet I personally see no resonance to Jungian Introverted Feeling, like Britney Spears (Si/Fe), Audrey Hepburn (Si/Fe), and Robin Williams (Fe/Si) to name a few.

I disagree with Hepburn...I think she is prototypical INFP (enneagram 9). I think people are seeing the less fluffy aspects of Fi in the description & going to the other extreme in their impression: not noting the fact that Fi is a mindset still focused on an inner vision of perfection in regards to what is moral, aesthetic, HUMAN. It's not a practical form of Feeling, which is why it's associated with expressions in art, poetry, religion, and "acts of an almost heroic character". Hepburn doesn't strike me as a nurturing, cuddly type, but an idealistic humanitarian leading by example? Yes, and that IS in-line with how Fi thinking manifests.


I broke up & paraphrased Van Der Hoop's Fi description because it's less dense than Jung's, but quite similar. Most of it rings true for me. IMO, it describes a quiet, subtly moody person who has strong, personal ideas about the human condition & what is best in relation to it, in very basic, conceptual terms, but it still amounts to judgments of value. The phrase "the deeper aspects of the human spirit" is a nice one, IMO. These ideals are inspired by the inner world, probably the imagination, in an effort to keep them uncontaminated; this is why they resist being affected by others' emotions & feelings & can seem to "rebuff" them. It produces a person who has a struggle with their critical eye of the world & a desire to love it & the people within it. Their ideas are difficult to articulate, and attempts to do so often come out wrong, even offensive, so feelings tend to be expressed directly only in response to a violation (they come out "negatively"). So instead the person guards them, refines them, and expresses them indirectly, proving an influence on others & leading by example more than actively promoting their ideals. The feelings are sort of hoarded up until their power is called upon .

Tangent: In contrast, a Fe type seeks to affect others & expresses a lot because of it. Affecting other people with feeling creates consensus, a sense of unity, and this has obvious positive results, namely peace, productivity, teamwork towards positive results. However, you can easily see how this can go awry if the Fe person uses their influence for bad. Standards become distorted. The Fi type, meanwhile, has been resisting this influence. This can seem uncooperative, dismissive of other people, suggesting the Fi types has NO feeling at all. However, the purity of this feeling has been kept intact, guarded, stored up, so that if needed, they can resist EVIL. Lenore Thomspon does explain this aspect pretty well by noting that Fi is often portrayed in pop culture in stories where evil runs rampant, where few are NOT corrupt, & so a hero is needed to defend & protect what is good. Because that is how Fi shows it's face - in response to violation, in areas where things have gone very bad, and it's able to recognize these violations because it's resisted their influence. Of course, the negative side of this is what I touched on briefly - it can mean resisting positive influence also, seeming uncooperative & unnecessarily individualistic. Of course, in reality, no one is a pure type, so Pe thinking leaves Fi-dom open to some influence.

Anyhow, I was trying to divide mindset & common visible characteristics, and I got this:

Basic mindset:

- Shapes his own feeling-attitudes in accordance with an inner ideal
- Aims at inner harmony
- Tries to determine what is right in regards to people & relationships, how to make life beautiful & well-balanced
- Absolutely certain as to the soundness of their ideals, accompanied by a helpless feeling that it will never be possible to realize them in this world
- Searching for people & things which embody their ideals
- Not bound by the judgment of others, as is the Fe type
- The standard by which they judge their own behavior is an inner moral law, intuitively felt to be binding
- Even if they are not able to express it clearly in words, they are inwardly quite certain as to what accords with them and what does not.


Characteristic qualities & visible attitudes:
- Feeling is hidden, little to indicate person is a Feeling type
- Vulnerability is marked in this type, due to the gap between ideals & reality
- Conceals sensitivity with a mask that may be child-like, simple, conventional, impersonal, aloof or friendly
- Remarkably individual, which comes to light when either making a real connection with someone or standing up for a threatened ideal
- Contrasted inner security (conviction of feeling) with an outer uncertainty in demeanor, similar to the Ti type
- Strange mixture of inner tenderness and passionate conviction (sensitive, yet emotionally strong) stemming from deep feeling
- Outwardly, feelings are not obvious, but expressed indirectly
- Withdraw into themselves when affected by emotion
- If & when they do express emotions or feeling, it will only be much later, after they have had time to work it out within themselves.
- Obstinate resistance to things which don't accord with feelings
- This resistance can be justified by its fine motive, but its means of expression is often inappropriate
- Nearly always misunderstood, and tend to resign themselves to it
- Strong sense of moral duty (moral duty based on inner convictions, not external mores), and faithful undertaking of this duty
- The strength of their will is less evident than the other rational types (Fe, Te & Ti), because its control is directed inward (ie. self-control), but can unexpectedly come to light, usually in the form of self-imposed moral obligation
- Moody & easily discouraged, having bouts of cynicism, but regard this as a fault in themselves
- In a moment of connecting emotionally with someone, a very profound relationship of mutual understanding may suddenly occur, & all the wisdom of their minds will be unlocked to the confidant
- Sometimes their emotional connections with others will later be broken off just as suddenly and unexpectedly as it was formed, in defense of their own vulnerability
- Where his feelings are aroused, the person who appeared to be so impersonal, distant, and somewhat insignificant, may suddenly burst out with a personal point of view, expressed with such conviction and such force of feeling that it compels respect.
- All forms of expression for the deeper aspects of the human spirit in religion and art find great support from these people.


As Children:
- Gentle & dreamy & mostly reserved
- Occasional violent outbursts of emotion
- Can appear animated & happy in familiar settings/situations and/or with familiar people
- Resent when circumstances don't correspond to feelings
- World seems harsh & indifferent to them
- Show signs of disappointment at a young age, distrusting life
- Inability to express feelings clearly & realize ideals can lead to a sense of inferiority
- See this fault (above) as being in themselves, not in others/circumstances, & may suffer from shame, leading them to fall into a deep depression
- Genuine emotional connection with others can fill them with a quiet, but enormous delight, causing them to see the world anew & embrace nature & humanity like a newfound faith

Into Adulthood:
- Happiness will depend on emotional attachments made with other people
- Less necessary for them than for extroverts to be in regular contact with people
- Expressions of others' feelings & spiritual experiences in music, art, poetry, & stories helps them feel more at home in the world
- Develop an inner life carefully hidden from strangers, expressed in private forms like poetry, religion & art - which are also often kept guarded from others

As Adults:
- All the riches of the mind develop into a passion inwardly directed towards the highest ideals of harmony, in contrast with the Fe type who focuses on creating an atmosphere of harmony around herself
- Emanate calm & security without doing much, expressed in indefinite forms, & having a great but indirect influence on the environment, especially as parents over their children
- A parent of this type can have a greater influence on their child than the devoted & radiant Fe parent, by quietly implanting & fostering their own ideals in them
- Prove a quiet force that keep respect for morals alive in the world
- When form is given to inner feeling, every expression is carefully weighed, but accepted social forms will often be ignored & seen as having no significance - OR - they hide their fine feeling using childlike, conventional forms as a mask
- In spite of ever-repeated collisions with the world and with other people, they can never give up their wish to love them both, as Feeling is directed to making ties & contact with people
- Whether they become artists or scientists, they are primarily attracted to the problems of the emotional life
- Take great care & precision in their work (or "cause"), in these situations showing persistence & devotion associated with & used as evidence of Feeling

Problematic areas:
- Remains aware of conflicts within & outside of themselves concerning things that don't accord with their ideal, whereas Fe types more easily repress these conflicts
- Continual comparison of things with ideal requirements gives them an exaggeratedly critical point of view, undermines their self-confidence & confidence in the world & seriously affects their happiness
- Necessary to recognize that things which are not ideal may still have value & potential
- Clear intention for harmony expressed through uncertain modes cause misunderstanding again & again in their lives
- Motivation & activity suffers from frequent moods of discouragement, losing themselves in pessimistic feelings, giving up their efforts to make themselves understood, or to alter their environment; but they usually recover shortly from these moods as they regard them as a fault in themselves

Other functions:

Sensing - The instinctual life is governed by feeling, viewing tangible things & physical instincts according to their ideals. They put on less pretense than extroverted types, but physical instincts may be too often suppressed for moral reasons. This leaves a feeling that life is passing them by without any true fulfillment & can make them condemn pleasures & joys if they don't have some higher value (ie. music/art/food snobbery and/or asceticism).

- Intuition - subject to the inner feeling, it bears more on the inner aspect of feeling than on its expression in other people, gives form to feeling often in images rather than words (more applicable to ISFPs); developed intuition (INFPs) provides great assistance in finding expression of feelings in everyday life & art, may also provide a link with religious life, seeking an inner unity with God & fellow man

- Thinking - not essential to life for this type, they accept thought-forms as taught & make conscientious use of them, but it's not vital to them. They argue using thinking derived from preconceived attitudes of feeling.