Are you wary of Fe?

[Lightyear]

I'm finding it grating and tiresome as well.

Same here. Let's all go out and bash some Fe together! *yawns*

I actually love my Fe, I just like how it enables me to relate to all kinds of people and just care about them.

 

[Giggly]

I'm with jeno; I'm much more distrustful of Fi.

Me too.

 

[proteanmix]

Same here. Let's all go out and bash some Fe together! *yawns*

I actually love my Fe, I just like how it enables me to relate to all kinds of people and just care about them.

Same here. I love the way the people don't have to be in my "inner circle" or "of special meaning" or have some type of unique connection "just to me" to me in order for me to care about their welfare.

 

[Clonester]

People with Fe do a lot of good and their concern for others is commendable. I would say I'm sometimes wary of it, when those with Fe are trying to get me to do something I'm not interested in doing. I find it controlling/manipulative, and I'm not really one to be controlled against my will. But if they get me on board first for an idea or a task it's a lot better.

 

[Amargith]

Probably the same reason unhealthy Fe shows up in Amar's bs detector - I just don't understand it.

Fixed.

And no actually, I learned how to use Fe myself at home as everyone used it there. It just feels unnatural to me to do so and it costs me a lot of effort. But I also learned to recognize the healthy vs the unhealthy forms as one of the family members was quite adept at it and some of the others weren't and did in fact use it to guilttrip and force their wishes on me and each other. To this day, I'm hypersensitive to that 'trick', and yes, maybe a bit too paranoid of it at times. I do love the healthy variant though, as it can be incredibly comforting and nurturing

 

[jenocyde]

Yes, I get tired of the manipulation as well. But I am not distrustful of it. I get more thrown off when an Fi user changes values with the wind. I know an ENFP that has cheated on all her boyfriends and uses the excuse "it just happened, we just fell in love". Puhleeeze. Now of course, not all Fi users yadda yadda yadda...

I am starting to have an issue with the terms healthy and unhealthy though. Who determines that? And isn't it possible that within the context of the same human being you can find perceived healthy and unhealthy traits? I don't think we always need to add such a disclaimer... I don't believe that people are inherently either good or evil - and healthy or unhealthy.

 

[Amargith]

Agreed, I'm talking about an 'unhealthy' use of Fe, in this case. As with any function, and for that matter, anything in life, it can be used or abused. Fi can be used to make excuses for yourself, and just as with Fe, you can mean it and believe it when you make that excuse. It's not untill later, during self-reflection that you feel the shame when you discover the self-deception.

 

[proteanmix]

The problem is that Fe unhealthiness--as all extroverted functions--is more visible than introverted functions so it's an easy target. And people dump "manipulation" under the category of Fe indiscriminately. Add to the fact that I doubt most people on this forum truly understand the function (most threads about Fe turn into complaining and nothing gets learned) yet think they have a superior working knowledge about it adds to the misinformation.

 

[jenocyde]

what is this "self-reflection" of which you speak? hahahaha...

 

[LadyJaye]

I think Fe rocks in gym socks. People who are squeamish of things that are dissimilar to themselves are just complaining about their own intimidation. Give me a break.

You can't blame a psychology function for your problems with individuals. Learn to tell the difference between the two, people. Quit dumping on Fe.

 

[garbage]

I don't particularly care for the concept of group norms and values, and I hate unexpected and unwarranted expectations being placed upon me. To the extent that one's definition of Fe encompasses those, I'm wary of it.

 

[Fluffywolf]

I am starting to have an issue with the terms healthy and unhealthy though. Who determines that? And isn't it possible that within the context of the same human being you can find perceived healthy and unhealthy traits? I don't think we always need to add such a disclaimer... I don't believe that people are inherently either good or evil - and healthy or unhealthy.

Do people get hurt? Unhealthy. Otherwise healthy. So who determines when it is healthy or unhealthy? Other people and their ability to deal with things!

 

[proteanmix]

I don't particularly care for the concept of group norms and values, and I hate unexpected and unwarranted expectations being placed upon me. To the extent that one's definition of Fe encompasses those, I'm wary of it.

That sounds very pretty. You're a free-thinker when you use such a phrase.

Let's break down this concept of "group norms and values."

Here are some group norms and values I mindlessly adhere to and expect others to as well:

Don't kill
Don't steal
Don't lie to people
Don't cheat
Don't rape people
Don't molest children
Wash your hands after you leave the bathroom
Cover you mouth when you cough
If you're on public transportation and someone in need (handicapped, elderly, pregnant woman) needs a seat, get the hell up and give it to them

And honestly, I really wouldn't even care about someone sleeping with a close relative as long as they're consenting adults. It's disgusting as hell, but I'm OK with that.

Can you please name some group norms and values that are so oppressive that you feel you need to broadly categorize them under the iron fist of Fe?

ETA: The concept of group norms and values occur on both the micro and macro level. What I just listed where norms on the macro level. On the micro level, which is within your immediate and specific group these norms may be different. You immediate culture may be that of people from the Southern United states, North Africa or South Indian or where ever.

If you are talking about group norms and values specific to your immediate culture than fine. I could care less if someone wears white after Labor Day or a fuchsia wedding dress. If you want to rebel against the micro norms and values of your localized culture you do you. But then realize there's probably another culture who values exactly what you're rebelling against so then it's almost to me like you're a rebel without a cause, just going the opposite direction because you feel like it. Which, I just shrug at because non-conformity is the new conformity. If people want to be a chaos-agent for no other reason than to be chaotic, yeah I don't really get that.

 

[LadyJaye]

Here are some group norms and values I mindlessly adhere to and expect others to as well:

Don't kill
Don't steal
Don't lie to people
Don't cheat
Don't rape people
Don't molest children
Wash your hands after you leave the bathroom
Cover you mouth when you cough
If you're on public transportation and someone in need (handicapped, elderly, pregnant woman) needs a seat, get the hell up and give it to them

DICTATOR! Sheesh!

And honestly, I really wouldn't even care about someone sleeping with a close relative as long as they're consenting adults. It's disgusting as hell, but I'm OK with that.

Oh come on! That's how the South populated itself!

Can you please name some group norms and values that are so oppressive that you feel you need to broadly categorize them under the iron fist of Fe?

Seriously. I'd love to know as well.

The Fe bashing is getting whinier by the moment.

 

[poppy]

I feel like there's more complaints on behalf of Fe ("I'm so tired of Fe bashing") than there are complaints against it in this thread. Although people have referenced complaints about it elsewhere on the forum, so I'll assume this is a common thing. I think Greed's comment was a comment on Fe users who push their values on others ("To the extent that one's definition of Fe encompasses those"), not a generalization that Fe always does so.
So what I'm wondering, is where else we can take this conversation? How can non Fe-doms best learn to appreciate Fe in instances where it isn't meant manipulatively, but is genuine?

 

[Eric B]

That sounds very pretty. You're a free-thinker when you use such a phrase.

Let's break down this concept of "group norms and values."

Here are some group norms and values I mindlessly adhere to and expect others to as well:

Don't kill
Don't steal
Don't lie to people
Don't cheat
Don't rape people
Don't molest children
Wash your hands after you leave the bathroom
Cover you mouth when you cough
If you're on public transportation and someone in need (handicapped, elderly, pregnant woman) needs a seat, get the hell up and give it to them

ETA: The concept of group norms and values occur on both the micro and macro level. What I just listed where norms on the macro level. On the micro level, which is within your immediate and specific group these norms may be different. You immediate culture may be that of people from the Southern United states, North Africa or South Indian or where ever.

If you are talking about group norms and values specific to your immediate culture than fine.

Most if not all of those are actually universal values, and thus more covered by Fi. Yes, there may be "micro and "macro", but something all groups would agree on by nature would be universal.

 

[proteanmix]

Most if not all of those are actually universal values, and thus more covered by Fi. Yes, there may be "micro and "macro", but something all groups would agree on by nature would be universal.

Sure, I'll even go with that.

So if that is the case, what exactly are the Fe created values that people find so oppressive? I bet they vary so greatly that you could find to Fe users completely clashing on their value set.

 

[Amargith]

Not so much the values as it is maybe the execution/social norms set by them?

For me, for instance the whole 'you cannot visit someone without bringing like a plant or something thing', or the 'you must send a birthday card to show you care', 'you cannot decline an invitation to visit their new home twice in a row'. Social obligations, basically. Things that are supposed to come from those values, from your heart and are one valid expression of those values, but somehow lose their value because they are enforced that way by society. If you don't follow the prescribed method of society, you often are considered 'rude' or 'inconsiderate'. That's a shame, I feel

 

[Eric B]

Yes, basically things like that that are not universal, but just agreed upon by a group.

Based on Mark Bruzon's concept (Fundamental Nature of the MBTI), Fe is tied to a local area matrix, while Fi is tied to a wide area matrix. So Fe deals more in specifics (like a specific group), while Fi is both universal and personal (as individuals tap into the universal).

 

[garbage]

...

You read way, way too much into my post. You know what I meant, and you know that you knew what I meant. You're being nitpicky for the sake of tearing down 'one of the anti-Extroverted Feeler non-conformist free spirit blind rebels who thinks he's better than everyone else.' That is, you're tearing down some archetype that I'm not a part of.

Did you see where I said "insofar as.."? As in.. "to the degree that which.."? Too much, and it's just smothering. To me. I'm wary of it.

Covering norms at a basic level is fine. It's appreciated. It's necessary. I don't have to elaborate on that, because that much is obvious.


In order to deconstruct a concept or talk about pretty much anything, you've got to get a good, solid, working definition of it.

I got the term "group norms and values" straight out of this Functions of Type book that's sitting right in front of me. To that end, it lists "Judge behaviors according to group values" and "Objectively educate other people about appropriate people" as Extraverted Feeling skills. The "subskills" that fall underneath them just seem irrelevant, unnecessary, and slightly disconcerting to me, so that colored the answer that I just gave.

So, if you want to rally against some crazy non-conformist rebels-without-a-clue, I guess you can start with Jungian authors.