User Tag List

First 25333435363745 Last

Results 341 to 350 of 492

Thread: Pretentious Fi

  1. #341
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    But isn't that how they are defined by other (apparently credible) sources? (Must head to bed so won't cut & paste references ATM; but likely you know what I mean anyway sim.)
    No, this is a problem created by MBTI's transference of cognitive motivations into particular behaviors. This causes a lot of issues because any particular behavior could be motivated by a variety of different functional attitudes.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    Isn't this a cause of significant confusion?
    I'll wait until you wake up and post some of these references before I make a decision about them.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    Why haven't you published your theories on functions too to present this viewpoint and your explanations?
    I don't really feel like writing a book, seeking out a publisher, etc.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  2. #342
    Allergic to Mornings ergophobe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w6
    Socionics
    ENFP
    Posts
    1,210

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    You're still defining functions according to specific tasks when they're really just motivational value systems. Writing elegant code isn't "using Ti"; functions don't equate to singular actions. The act of writing code isn't any particular function at all; it's why you wrote it that determines your functional makeup.
    Exactly - it's not the external manifestation in behavior or action but the internal motivations. Having said that, I would hold with Jungian ordering in that we have a dominant set which provides the default motivations. Kalach ahd a thread some months ago on function mimicking that was very interesting. I buy the mimicking or the idea that several different sets of internal motivations (functional combinations) could lead to the same external behavior.

    Having said that I don't buy that Ti+Fe can mimic Fi+Te. It could lead to similar external behavior but couldn't feel remotely similar on the inside precisely because as you and Tesla are arguing, they are completely different. I've had thinker friends without Fi in the top 4 describe experiencing the use of Fi when it emerges as a weak, alien process that tends to take them by surprise, usually manifesting externally as physical feelings of sickness. Not sure how this could be done and experienced as Ti+Fe. It's one thing for external behavior/decisions to have similarities and another for internal processes to feel similar.

  3. #343
    Vaguely Precise Seymour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/so
    Posts
    1,565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    You're still defining functions according to specific tasks when they're really just motivational value systems. Writing elegant code isn't "using Ti"; functions don't equate to singular actions. The act of writing code isn't any particular function at all; it's why you wrote it that determines your functional makeup.

    Looking around and seeing something is not "using Se." Se is a value system that encourages us to trust our immediate sensory impressions, but the act of taking in sensory information is not in itself associated with any function.

    Organizing and categorizing information is not "using Ti". Ti is a value system that encourages us to organize and categorize information according to internal impersonal logical standards, but the act of organizing it is not in itself associated with any function.

    etc., etc...you may do things in your everyday life that Ti would likely encourage a person to do, but you're not going to get the basis of Jungian functions until you stop describing what and start asking why.
    That's a much more specific and demanding definition of "using" than I was implying. By your definition of "using" I suppose I generally agree with you. It's healthy for the ego to primarily identify with one's dominant and secondary functions. In fact, I've seen authors argue that over-identifying with your inferior function, in particular, is actively dangerous since it's values are diametrically opposed to those of your dominant function.

    So, when type materials say "we all use all 8 of the functions," then that is clearly meaningless to you.

    If you mean "use" only in the sense of "to set the over-arching goals and/or be the primary motivator" then you are correct, I don't use Ti. I do wonder where you got those stringent definitions. I'd argue then when someone intuits something, they are using Ne or Ni, even if their preference is Si or Se. If they intuited via seeing external possibilities it was Ne, if they did it via finding correspondences between contexts or perspective shifting it was Ni. It doesn't mean they suddenly become an intuitive type, with all that that implies. I also don't see how arguing that they were running a simulation of one process using another pair of processes really makes much sense or clarifies much.

    So, according to your definitions of "using a function" I agree with you... but that's not the way I see things defined elsewhere.

  4. #344
    Allergic to Mornings ergophobe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w6
    Socionics
    ENFP
    Posts
    1,210

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    This is likely motivated by Fe. I assume you mean that you get upset and scream and make a scene when your team does badly. This arbitrary emotional response to a sports event that has no real effect on your life is part of blending into your social group's standards--our group supports this team because that's part of the tribal bond that ties us together. This is almost always motivated by Fe, not Fi.


    Same in this example, it's one think to blend with the social group by external articulation, another to feel excited/disappointed by a team's performance - an inherently internal process. Millions of "real" sports fans concur silently

  5. #345
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ergophobe View Post
    Exactly - it's not the external manifestation in behavior or action but the internal motivations. Having said that, I would hold with Jungian ordering in that we have a dominant set which provides the default motivations. Kalach ahd a thread some months ago on function mimicking that was very interesting. I buy the mimicking or the idea that several different sets of internal motivations (functional combinations) could lead to the same external behavior.

    Having said that I don't buy that Ti+Fe can mimic Fi+Te. It could lead to similar external behavior but couldn't feel remotely similar on the inside precisely because as you and Tesla are arguing, they are completely different.
    Right, very good. One person's Ti+Fe can reach the same conclusion as another person's Fi+Te. The two functions have a habit of balancing each other out like that.

    If you think performing actions = "using" particular functions, of course you're going to end up erroneously thinking you use all eight of them.


    Quote Originally Posted by ergophobe View Post
    I've had thinker friends without Fi in the top 4 describe experiencing the use of Fi when it emerges as a weak, alien process that tends to take them by surprise, usually manifesting externally as physical feelings of sickness. Not sure how this could be done and experienced as Ti+Fe. It's one thing for external behavior/decisions to have similarities and another for internal processes to feel similar.
    I don't quite see how this is Fi, though. Physical feelings of sickness could be caused by a lot of different things which may not even be related to cognitive functions. Whatever the Ti+Fe user thinks is Fi is really just another manifestation of Ti and/or Fe combined with misunderstanding about the nature of functions.

    So, for instance, I might believe that theft is wrong because:
    1) Fe says theft is unacceptable in my cultural/social/family group, and
    2) Ti says it's inconsistent for me to criticize others for being thieves if I'm a thief myself.

    And then an Fi/Te user might agree with me that theft is wrong because:
    1) Fi says that theft is unacceptable on a personal moral basis because it hurts others unfairly, and
    2) Te says that society can't function as a cohesive unit if theft is allowed.

    But then you get an Fi user who says, "Well I think theft is wrong, and Jimmy over here agrees with me, so he must also be using Fi." But he might not be--this is based on an erroneous assumption that a particular belief or action always has to be based on the same motivation.

    Holding a particular belief or performing a particular action does not on its own constitute "use" of any particular function...functions describe reasoning, not the act itself.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  6. #346
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    I'd argue then when someone intuits something, they are using Ne or Ni, even if their preference is Si or Se. It doesn't mean they suddenly become an intuitive type, with all that that implies.
    People have them on 1,2 or 3 place. So maybe it will not make to much difference if it's 2 or 3. 1 to 3 other hand should make quite the gap. Or if people are operating atypical, I suppose that could make it even wider.

  7. #347
    Allergic to Mornings ergophobe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w6
    Socionics
    ENFP
    Posts
    1,210

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    If you think performing actions = "using" particular functions, of course you're going to end up erroneously thinking you use all eight of them.
    Right, referring to internal processes...

    I don't quite see how this is Fi, though. Physical feelings of sickness could be caused by a lot of different things which may not even be related to cognitive functions. Whatever the Ti+Fe user thinks is Fi is really just another manifestation of Ti and/or Fe combined with misunderstanding about the nature of functions.

    So, for instance, I might believe that theft is wrong because:
    1) Fe says theft is unacceptable in my cultural/social/family group, and
    2) Ti says it's inconsistent for me to criticize others for being thieves if I'm a thief myself.

    And then an Fi/Te user might agree with me that theft is wrong because:
    1) Fi says that theft is unacceptable on a personal moral basis because it hurts others unfairly, and
    2) Te says that society can't function as a cohesive unit if theft is allowed.

    But then you get an Fi user who says, "Well I think theft is wrong, and Jimmy over here agrees with me, so he must also be using Fi." But he might not be--this is based on an erroneous assumption that a particular belief or action always has to be based on the same motivation.

    Holding a particular belief or performing a particular action its own does not constitute "use" of any particular function...functions describe reasoning, not the act itself.
    Sorry - I'm not explaining this very well.

    Both your examples above are again demonstrating how different functions in this case lead to different external circumstances - I'm with you on that and found the original discussion quite useful in this respect (I'll try and dig up Kalach or Wonka's old thread on the mimicking). I'm referring to the internal experience of using an unfamiliar/weaker value system.

    In the cases described above, the decision to restrain from and discourage theft is an external manifestation (sure several scenarios including Fi/Te and Ti/Fe could lead to the same conclusion). Yet the two processes still feel quite different on the inside, right? What I am referring to is the internal experience of using or being exposed to (due to stress/appropriate circumstance/gut reaction) unfamiliar weaker functions. The physical sickness people have described as being associated with an internal feeling process (some thread on INTPc currently as well on emotions). It seems to highlight well an inexperienced or unpracticed users experience with utilizing an unfamiliar internal process. If the thinkers were experiencing whatever emotion as a result of a value system that was based entirely on Ti+Fe alone -- I doubt they would experience this very Fi internal process. Many similar threads of thinkers expressing what onemoretime described as writing with your left hand, could apply to the use of weak Fi for users where this is not a part of their default 4.

  8. #348
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    If you mean "use" only in the sense of "to set the over-arching goals and/or be the primary motivator" then you are correct, I don't use Ti. I do wonder where you got those stringent definitions.
    Jung defined the functions as underlying psychological drives that (often unconsciously) motivate our behaviors. The whole idea of "I performed x action" = "I used y function" didn't come about until MBTI showed up.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    I'd argue then when someone intuits something, they are using Ne or Ni, even if their preference is Si or Se. If they intuited via seeing external possibilities it was Ne, if they did it via finding correspondences between contexts or perspective shifting it was Ni. It doesn't mean they suddenly become an intuitive type, with all that that implies.
    "Seeing external possibilities" is something that both Ne and Se can motivate someone to do--they just do it in different styles.

    All of these problems stem from the mistake of defining functions as particular actions. Ne is a value system that encourages us to perceive abstract connections between unrelated external systems; Se is a value system that encourages us to perceive concrete relationships and trust our immediate and literal interpretations of them.

    Ne users also have Si, which encourages them to create an internal map of stable and consistent personal meaning.

    Se users also have Ni, which encourages them to consider numerous different interpretations of personal meaning.

    Ne+Si is one method of navigating the process of perception; Se+Ni is another. I didn't say that an N type using an S process requires that person to turn into an S type--I just said that Ne+Si types don't use the Se+Ni method and vice versa. They're just different ways of conceptualizing the same things.


    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    I also don't see how arguing that they were running a simulation of one process using another pair of processes really makes much sense or clarifies much.
    I didn't say that either is simulating the other; I said that most MBTI enthusiasts have far too narrow definitions of functions in the first place, definitions which are not faithful to Jung's intentions.


    Quote Originally Posted by ergophobe View Post
    In the cases described above, the decision to restrain from and discourage theft is an external manifestation (sure several scenarios including Fi/Te and Ti/Fe could lead to the same conclusion). Yet the two processes still feel quite different, right? What I am referring to is the internal experience of using or being exposed to (due to stress/appropriate circumstance/gut reaction) unfamiliar weaker functions. The physical sickness people have described as being associated with an internal feeling process (some thread on INTPc currently as well on emotions). It seems to highlight well an inexperienced or unpracticed users experience with utilizing an unfamiliar internal process. If the thinkers were experiencing whatever emotion as a result of a value system that was based entirely on Ti+Fe alone -- I doubt they would experience this very Fi internal process. Many similar threads of thinkers expressing what onemoretime described as writing with your left hand, could apply to the use of weak Fi for users where this is not a part of their default 4.
    The use of unfamiliar weaker functions comes in the form of the tertiary and inferior. For INTPs, for instance, this would include Fe, not Fi.

    Ti/Fe people are not experiencing an Fi internal process when they feel this sickness that you describe. They are experiencing the effects of the tertiary and inferior functions (for NTPs, that'd be Si and Fe) which are less comfortable and not naturally used.

    Even during moments of use of the weaker and less natural functions, they are still not using Fi because Fi's idea of how one's worldview should be built (i.e., that ethics should be private and internal) wholly contradicts Ti's idea of the same process. Switching from Ti to Fi would require a total collapse and restructuring of the entire psyche. When these Ti-dominant types express Feeling, they are doing it through Fe. This may indeed feel very weird and unnatural, but that doesn't make it Fi.

    The four functions are not just the "default"--the default is usually just the top one or two. The four functions are the entirety of that person's motivational basis. As I said earlier, saying, "I use Fi sometimes and Ti other times" is like saying, "The entire basis upon which my moral and logical system is built completely inverts itself routinely", which seems awfully unlikely.

    Ti and Fe can (and do) coexist and compliment each other in the same person because they deal with different types of cognition (one is introverted judgment and the other is extroverted judgment.) The same goes for Te and Fi--but this supportive relationship breaks down and stops making sense when you start claiming to use both Ti and Fi. Jung was pretty clear about this.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  9. #349
    Allergic to Mornings ergophobe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w6
    Socionics
    ENFP
    Posts
    1,210

    Default

    Si refers to past experience data right and Fe to relating to the group. How would accessing past experience data as relates to the group explain an internally felt emotion that isn't concerned with external manifestation at all or with "fitting in" in any respect. When feeling is experienced in this fashion, they seem to be tapping into Fi. Why should there be a "breakdown" of psyche. What would this breakdown of the psyche look like anyway?

    Perhaps this breakdown is more of a really uncomfortable shift which is what these INTPs/ENTPs are describing.

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    The four functions are not just the "default"--the default is usually just the top one or two. The four functions are the entirety of that person's motivational basis. As I said earlier, saying, "I use Fi sometimes and Ti other times" is like saying, "The entire basis upon which my moral and logical system is built completely inverts itself routinely", which seems awfully unlikely.

    Ti and Fe can (and do) coexist and compliment each other in the same person because they deal with different types of cognition (one is introverted judgment and the other is extroverted judgment.) The same goes for Te and Fi--but this supportive relationship breaks down and stops making sense when you start claiming to use both Ti and Fi. Jung was pretty clear about this.
    Jung lists all eight functions as motivations with the last four being really weak but still part of a person's complete function profile. I'm not suggesting people switch easily between Ti and Fi. That would not make sense and bring down the type system that forms the basis of this conversation in particular

    I'm with you in that we tend to and are skilled in using the first two supported by the 3rd and 4th but the final four don't disappear. I'm questioning the idea of being motivated entirely, always and completely by the first four alone. These do not provide a compelling explanation for the full range of experience - internal and external.

    Finally Fi, as experienced by Fi users do not necessarily base their worldview on internal and private ethics alone. The distinction between moral principles and values is key here. Many of us think principles are better guiding principles. Is this necessarily conflicting with Ti/Fe? Doesn't seem to be.

  10. #350
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ergophobe View Post
    Si refers to past experience data right and Fe to relating to the group.
    Close enough.

    Quote Originally Posted by ergophobe View Post
    How would accessing past experience data as relates to the group explain an internally felt emotion that isn't concerned with external manifestation at all or with "fitting in" in any respect. When feeling is experienced in this fashion, they seem to be tapping into Fi. Why should there be a "breakdown" of psyche. What would this breakdown of the psyche look like anyway?
    I'd argue that Feeling is never experienced by Ti users in a totally internal fashion. Your assertion that it does seems to based entirely on vague descriptions of feeling sick and uncomfortable that you've heard from Ti users. Let's be careful of multiple meanings of the word "feeling" here--the sickness you're describing, let's call it a "sensation."

    So when Ti users start to feel Fe's influence (which says, "Hey, you should be responsive to the emotional states of others and seek to help out those in your group regardless of whether or not it seems logical), if they're not used to that kind of feeling, it's easy to be confused and have some sort of physical reaction. But this physical sickness sensation shouldn't be confused with Fi--Fi is a value system that encourages us to make internal value judgments according to personal feelings, which is something Ti is diametrically opposed to.

    Once the xxTP person grows up and learns to harness all four functions somewhat, Fe will fit naturally into his repertoire because it's used for extroverted judgments. I think you've confused this "wow I've never really thought about being emotionally supportive to others much before" reaction (which is clearly Fe-motivated) with Fi.

    A breakdown of the psyche would be necessary because Ti's entire worldview is predicated on the idea that logic is a subjective and internal process which is unaffected by external conditions. To Ti, the idea that we should make these kinds of internal value judgments according to personal feelings makes no sense whatsoever--Ti and Fi contradict each other because they perform the same cognitive function (introverted judgment) but do it in ways that cannot be reconciled with each other.



    Quote Originally Posted by ergophobe View Post
    Perhaps this breakdown is more of a really uncomfortable shift which is what these INTPs/ENTPs are describing.
    Yes, it's a really uncomfortable shift into realizing that the tertiary and inferior functions are important too. This comes with age and maturity. But again, for NTPs those are Si and Fe--not Fi.


    Quote Originally Posted by ergophobe View Post
    Jung lists all eight functions as motivations with the last four being really weak but still part of a person's complete function profile. I'm not suggesting people switch easily between Ti and Fi. That would not make sense and bring down the type system that forms the basis of this conversation in particular
    I could see a person slowly and gradually changing from a Ti/Fe worldview into an Fi/Te one over a long period of time, but not occasional random flashes between the two. These things are near-permanently ingrained.

    It's almost like a religion--you could grow up Christian and then slowly shift your perspective toward Hinduism over time, but you're not going to randomly swap between Christianity and Hinduism depending on the day.

    Quote Originally Posted by ergophobe View Post
    I'm with you in that we tend to and are skilled in using the first two supported by the 3rd and 4th but the final four don't disappear. I'm questioning the idea of being motivated entirely, always and completely by the first four alone. These do not provide a compelling explanation for the full range of experience - internal and external.
    I think it does. As I said, you may over a long period of time change from a Ti/Fe person into an Fi/Te person, but these two value systems will not ever simultaneously occupy your cognition, and furthermore, such a change would be involuntary and totally dependent upon personal experience and interpretation. You couldn't just decide to tap into Fi instead of Ti one day out of the blue.

    Quote Originally Posted by ergophobe View Post
    Finally Fi, as experienced by Fi users do not necessarily base their worldview on internal and private ethics alone. The distinction between moral principles and values is key here. Many of us think principles are better guiding principles. Is this necessarily conflicting with Ti/Fe? Doesn't seem to be.
    That's true--they also have Te's impersonal logic to balance out Fi's personal values.

    The difference is that for the Fi/Te user, personal ethics are internal and logic is dependent upon the environment.

    For the Ti/Fe user, logic is internal and personal ethics are dependent upon the environment.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

Similar Threads

  1. [Fi] NTJs: how does Fi manifest in your type?
    By Venom in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 02-07-2009, 05:08 PM
  2. [Fi] Fi building
    By BlueScreen in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-01-2009, 03:09 PM
  3. [Fi] What does "Fi" really look like?
    By INTPness in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-25-2009, 02:36 AM
  4. [Fi] Fi -- Why does it drive you nuts?
    By CzeCze in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 164
    Last Post: 11-17-2008, 08:47 AM
  5. [Fi] Fi: You only get it if you got it
    By SillySapienne in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 649
    Last Post: 11-09-2008, 11:05 AM

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