User Tag List

First 344243444546 Last

Results 431 to 440 of 492

Thread: Pretentious Fi

  1. #431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marmalade.sunrise View Post


    You must really ENTJs....or are you confusing them with ENFJs, that's what I'm beginning to wonder.
    What's love got to do (got to do) with it?

    I find ENFJs playful and a bit Fe. But ENTJs are some of the most social and caring people I know. Look after people way, way more than I do. You don't need to be emo to care about ethics or emotions of people. I'm not sure if you get other views off the board, but yeh... they don't need Fe or Fi. Maybe you don't know any well enough.
    Freude, schöner Götterfunken Tochter aus Elysium, Wir betreten feuertrunken, Himmlische, dein Heiligtum! Deine Zauber binden wieder Was die Mode streng geteilt; Alle Menschen werden Brüder, Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.

  2. #432
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    I find all types "a bit [their dominant function]", personally.

    Your experience is just with ENTJs with a healthy use of Fi. Be glad you don't know any really unbalanced ones.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  3. #433

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    I find all types "a bit [their dominant function]", personally.

    Your experience is just with ENTJs with a healthy use of Fi. Be glad you don't know any really unbalanced ones.
    I'm sure there are nuts of all types. I don't think they need to search for their inferior function to be stable though . Maybe most people know the ones they have to work for. I might get a bit different understanding of their actions as a Te tertiary also.
    Freude, schöner Götterfunken Tochter aus Elysium, Wir betreten feuertrunken, Himmlische, dein Heiligtum! Deine Zauber binden wieder Was die Mode streng geteilt; Alle Menschen werden Brüder, Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.

  4. #434
    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 noigmn View Post
    I'm sure there are nuts of all types. I don't think they need to search for their inferior function to be stable though . Maybe most people know the ones they have to work for. I might get a bit different understanding of their actions as a Te tertiary also.
    You could interpret it as Te recognizing that appearing emotionally supportive to family/friends is an important structural component of having a functional and productive life, but without a little Fi balancing it, the ENTJ's empathetic acts would be hollow and used only for deceptive/strategic purposes.

    I don't see that as genuine morality.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  5. #435
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default U

    Quote Originally Posted by noigmn View Post
    What's love got to do (got to do) with it?

    I find ENFJs playful and a bit Fe. But ENTJs are some of the most social and caring people I know. Look after people way, way more than I do. You don't need to be emo to care about ethics or emotions of people. I'm not sure if you get other views off the board, but yeh... they don't need Fe or Fi. Maybe you don't know any well enough.
    Ok - check this out - my Daddy was an ISTJ. He wasn't especially known for his exceptional friendliness and warmth (he was extremely introverted and could be hellishly controlling) but he was also a very, very loving person and I NEVER doubted his love for me. At times he could seem more loving than my ESFJ step-monster. I think of Tertiary Fi as this wonderful thing hiding inside of IxTJs that they give to those they truly care about.

    In the same vein, I'm thinking you saying

    Maybe you don't know any well enough
    about ENTJs is a similar thing. Love has everything to do with it, and I don't necessarily mean any sort of romantic love. ENTJs, as extroverts, are of course going to be social - prolly more social than you if you're NFP, even ENFP. And you may think of them as exceptionally caring because you had a personal connection with their Fi. You aren't really 'splainin' what you mean when you speak of their incredible abilities to care for others....

  6. #436

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    You could interpret it as Te recognizing that appearing emotionally supportive to family/friends is an important structural component of having a functional and productive life, but without a little Fi balancing it, the ENTJ's empathetic acts would be hollow and used only for deceptive/strategic purposes.

    I don't see that as genuine morality.
    Suppose. I don't see my approach as much different. I just see stuff will happen if I do stuff, so don't do stuff. It's really no less logical. It just involves a different object.
    Freude, schöner Götterfunken Tochter aus Elysium, Wir betreten feuertrunken, Himmlische, dein Heiligtum! Deine Zauber binden wieder Was die Mode streng geteilt; Alle Menschen werden Brüder, Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.

  7. #437

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marmalade.sunrise View Post
    about ENTJs is a similar thing. Love has everything to do with it, and I don't necessarily mean any sort of romantic love. ENTJs, as extroverts, are of course going to be social - prolly more social than you if you're NFP, even ENFP. And you may think of them as exceptionally caring because you had a personal connection with their Fi. You aren't really 'splainin' what you mean when you speak of their incredible abilities to care for others....
    I don't think I need to justify that a personality type has a soul by glorifying one of my functions as the key to it. The ones I know do a good job and I like them. They pick up the mess and get people back on track, motivated and enjoying life. And none of it is insincere. Think this will be an agree to disagree.
    Freude, schöner Götterfunken Tochter aus Elysium, Wir betreten feuertrunken, Himmlische, dein Heiligtum! Deine Zauber binden wieder Was die Mode streng geteilt; Alle Menschen werden Brüder, Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.

  8. #438
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noigmn View Post
    I don't think I need to justify that a personality type has a soul by glorifying one of my functions as the key to it. The ones I know do a good job and I like them. They pick up the mess and get people back on track, motivated and enjoying life. And none of it is insincere. Think this will be an agree to disagree.
    Glorifying one of your functions as the key to it? That's not what's going on here.

    We're just trying to explain to you that all T's have F. Plus, everything that I've bolded is you describing Te, not Fi. No one said ENTJs can't love or care for people. Who the hell claimed such a thing? Most - if not all - people have the ability to love. Who ever said that ENTJs in general are insincere? Certainly not me and I didn't see Sim doing it either. He said that a person who "cared" for others simply as a means to an end wouldn't actually be empathetic or moral. No one ever singled out ENTJs.

    I, for one, was challenging the notion that ENTJs are inherently, as a type, more caring or empathetic than NFs. That's all. I can't think of an ENTJ in particular that I dislike, for the record.

  9. #439
    Senior Member The Outsider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    2,424

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ergophobe View Post
    Outsider:
    "Now you listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. /.../ I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you whatever."

    Mutiny in the ranks and cross-type fraternization! So many offences Amar, quick, get the rogue NF trap...
    As long as my fight is for love, you will never catch me.

    Unless you are willing to exploit that.

    And to quote some more, ergophobe...
    "I love you. I have for quite some time now. Just thought you should know." - Dr. Rodney McKay

  10. #440
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by teslashock View Post
    Thanks everybody for the discussion on cognitive functions. I wish it had taken place in a more appropriate thread, but I suppose I can't expect a bunch of NPs, myself included, to stay on topic

    I haven't read every detail of each post, but I believe that I agree more with the position that our cognition is guided by 4 of the 8 functions. It still seems contradictory to me to have introverted judging that's guided both by thinking and feeling, and it also seems contradictory to have two forms of extoverted/introverted perception and extroverted judging. I simply cannot see how there's room for all 8 functions.

    I believe that when we see behaviors that are typical manifestations of a certain function, we attribute such behaviors to said function, but in actuality, there can be more than one motivation for a particular action/belief. I actually think the argument that says we use all 8 functions is more limiting than the one that says we use only 4. The only viable argument behind the idea that we use all 8 functions is the one that says "I see behaviors from one person that correlate to each of the 8 functions, thus said person must be 'using' all 8 functions." This is a rather narrow interpretation of functions, and it's more limiting than the one that says "We use only 4 of the functions, and each of the functions we use can result in different behaviors/cognitive processes based on different contexts and their differing combinations with other functions." Attributing one behavior to one function regardless of context is a lot more robotic than having a more broad intepretation for a given function set.
    Quote Originally Posted by teslashock View Post
    I don't see how there's room for both Fi/Ti together or Te/Fe together, but I don't see why Ti/Te can't be together. I don't see how there's room for all 8 functions, but it doesn't seem completely impossible that one could have Te, Ni, Se, Ti for example, rather than Te, Ni, Se, Fi. I don't see why the former is so impossible because I don't see how Te/Ti and Fe/Fi are contradictory. The only explanation that you gave for why Te/Ti and Fe/Fi contradict is that you can't simultaneously externalize and internalize logic/morality, and again, that just seems like a restatement of the premise.
    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Actually, Jung never said that. The "we use all eight functions" model was introduced by Berens, Beebe and other more recent authors:

    I would like to know what leads you to believe that people use all eight attitudes routinely, then.

    I would argue that these Ti doms are feeling the unfamiliar effect of Si/Fe, not Fi.

    But this is just a question of semantics regarding our definitions of Fi. I would define these "alien experiences" as manifestations of Fe, but obviously we're not going to agree on that. I don't think "I felt something emotional that was unfamiliar" is necessarily Fi, because I don't think the Ti dom in question is fully aware of where these feelings are coming from. For all we know, they might be validated externally even if the Ti dom doesn't realize it.

    Besides that, you just implied that all credible sources use an 8-function model (which isn't actually true--see quote above), and that my functional definitions are "stretched" from the original, "standard" definitions, but now my 4-function model is also "nothing new"?

    For that matter, where does Jung state that people use all eight functions on a regular basis?

    So when I say we don't use all eight functions, I mean we have a mold of four that makes up our worldview and that our worldview has to change profoundly and significantly in a way that clearly contradicts our old worldview in order to move into using the other four--and that once this happens (barring a similar revelatory experience in the other direction) there's no going back. The people I'm taking issue with are the ones who say things like, "Yesterday I used Fi for this and that, and today I'm using Ti for something else! Later this afternoon I'll use Fi again, but then I might use Ti tonight!" That's not how this works.

    So my theory is that we're holding four tools at a time. At some point we may eventually decide to set down two (or even all four) of them and pick up some other ones, but this would be a very gradual and life-changing decision, not something people do on a daily basis.

    Picking up new tools requires setting other contradictory tools down--we can't hold all eight at once.

    I believe that this theory is more representative of Jung's original model (which never actually says that any one person uses all eight functions routinely.) I'll continue to support this theory in my functional discussions until such a time as I change my mind.

    Maybe later I'll end up deciding that we do use all eight functions--but that won't mean that I was a four-function believer and an eight-function believer at the same time, or that I had "access" to believing the eight-function theory before changing my mind. The point is, the four-function theory and eight-function theory cannot simultaneously be true, so I can't believe one without rejecting the other first--Ti and Fi share this relationship.
    Again, the key to properly understanding the eight functions is to go back to (start with) four; --but without the "attitudes" (orientations). i/e orientation is really a preference of the ego, not the functions. This was Jung's original "four function" concept, though I have seen the claim that Jung later modified it so that the orientation is fixed to the function.
    The dominant function is merely used in the preferred dominant attitude. The other three then follow suit in an alternating order (aux--opposite attitude, tertiary--same attitude, inferior--opposite attitude.

    Once you understand it as the ego setting the orientation, it becomes easier to see how that same ego could switch the orientation of the functions at times, for various reasons. This discussion has the "eight functions" as these monolithic solid entities that cannot all "coexist" with each other, but the functions are not entities; the ego is, and the functions are only utilities of the ego. So what you're saying is like saying if I normally use a hammer to drive nails, I can't ever use it to remove them. (i.e the other side of the head). Then, you make them into two separate tools; one to drive nails, and the other to remove them, and you can only use one.
    So the ego will tend to prefer a particular orientation for a particular function, but can switch it, especially under stress, when the preferred combination is not solving the problem.
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

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