User Tag List

First 1119202122 Last

Results 201 to 210 of 216

Thread: Baffled by Fi

  1. #201
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar View Post
    I'm ESFP, remember?
    You bastard -- you lied to me in the prenup???! :steam:
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  2. #202
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,443

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    You bastard -- you lied to me in the prenup???! :steam:

    HONEY BUNNY WUNNY FORGIVE MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE.



  3. #203
    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 Eric B View Post
    Well, I'm the one arguing that he is using a kind of shadowy Fe. What I said is that is starts with the personal values, because that is what is preferred by his ego. When the issue expands beyond personal, to group (usually due to stress, because that's not what's preferred), then, it's shadow Fe.
    He's only using shadow Fe if he makes a moral judgment based on surrounding cultural values over his own. I don't know how to say that any more plainly. Why is it that applying his values to the group automatically turns them into Fe? You don't have to use an extroverted function to interact with others.

    Again it's the source of the values that determines the orientation of the function at that moment, not who the decision is applied to.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    But the question was, what would cause him to change orientation like that? Fi could just as well come to a similar conclusion, and it does lead to "caring" about others, because it's about universal values and can understand that wearing shorts might be offensive. That's why Fi is often portrayed as a weighing of values and importance.
    Yes, Fi could easily come to a similar conclusion, but what you're missing over and over is that the determining factor is what source the values leading to the decision came from (internal or external), not who the decision is then subsequently applied to.

    If he makes a moral decision based on his personal values and ignoring what anyone else thinks about it, he is using Fi, even if he then applies this Fi decision to others by criticizing the group for not following it.

    The decision to wear shorts or not wear shorts could be motivated by Fi or Fe--if his personal values are in agreement with the surrounding cultural values, then this is probably best interpreted as Fi, because he's usually going to place more importance on his own values than the group's.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    Shadow Fe, particularly the ExFP's "witch/senex" (critical parent) archetype, is described as being disgruntled about group expectations. And Fe in general is described as disengaging, as well as engaging. Of course, if one is disgruntled about group values; it likely stems from them not being congruent with his own personal values; hence the Fi connection. Fe shadows Fi in this case. It's really one function, with a preferred and a suppressed orientation.
    We're obviously using different interpretations of what constitutes Fe use. My interpretation is based mostly on Jung/Lenore, where Fi is based on an internal standard and Fe on an external one. So it doesn't matter if the Fi user applies his decision externally; the fact that the decision was made based on internal values implies Fi use and not Fe.

    Shadow Fe would occur when he sets aside his own values in favor of the group's.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    Sure! This is part of what I have been trying to say. It's all about what is preferred vs suppressed from the consciousness. The suppressed functions will tend to come up, but they will generally be negative or dealing with negative situations, in which case, the normal inhibitions we have from engaging them (or responding to stimuli from them) are removed, and they erupt in a reactive fashion.
    That's fine, but you still seem to be defining "extroverted function" as "applying the decision to others after it's been made", whereas I'm defining it as whether the decision came from an internal or external standard. It's the standards upon which the decision was made that matter, not whether it's applied to the self or others. Applying an Fi position to others doesn't turn it into Fe.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  4. #204
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar View Post
    HONEY BUNNY WUNNY FORGIVE MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE.


    Halla? Is that you, snookums???

    ... is there where I am supposed to be wearing the skimpy nurse's outfit to check your tonsils, or is the quarterback/cheerleader pom-pom thingy first?

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld
    The decision to wear shorts or not wear shorts could be motivated by Fi or Fe--if his personal values are in agreement with the surrounding cultural values, then this is probably best interpreted as Fi, because he's usually going to place more importance on his own values than the group's.
    What if I wear shorts just because it is hot, and I don't think really about feeling values at all?

    (or because my suitcase got lost in the airport, and all I have are shorts and stockings?)
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  5. #205
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,441

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    I'm noticing a bit of equating behaviors with cognitive functions, in this and other threads. One would be wise to recall that Keirsey came up with the concept of temperaments to help map MBTI to behaviors, precisely because the cognitive functions do not represent specific behaviors.

    The cognitive functions, both "perceiving" and "judging" are better regarded as perspectives. When one adopts a particular set of these perspectives, there are indeed certain tendencies that can be observed as personality traits. One does not, however, "use" a cognitive function other than to arrive at one's own understanding.

    For example,
    one does not "use Te" to organize one's desk. Rather, one sees a disorganized desk through the lens of Te, and then makes a decision to organize it. It is much like the maxim that if one's only tool is a hammer, then all of one's problems look like nails.

    This goes for all of the functions. I suspect that my metaphorical description of Fi earlier in this thread struck a (happy) nerve with many Fi users, because they could read that, and think, "Yes, that's how I look at the world." From that perspective follows all sorts of possible behaviors, some of which are unique to Fi, but many of which are common to people who predominantly evaluate the world with other cognitive functions.

    The reason I am making this clarification is because I was finding terms like "Fi user" and "Fe user" were leading me to conclusions that are not supported by MBTI analysis. (I have not used these terms/lenses other than in this forum: elsewhere I have treated a cognitive function as one of many properties of a person, not a descriptor.) Upon reading this terms here, I regarded them as placeholders for "person who has evaluated information with Fi", for example, but in common practice there is a lot of baggage attached, where "Fi user" simply brings to mind other connotations and contexts not addressed by MBTI or Jung.

    The real clue to dealing with the behaviors related to Fi and Fe is that the conclusions that one reaches about a particular thing (event/idea/person/object) depend on the function by which one judges the thing. Fi and Fe judgments will sometimes reach similar conclusions and other times reach very different conclusions. Of interest are those conclusions that differ, and result in two people coming into conflict due to a difference in perception.

    It's not an issue of an "Fi user" or an "Fe user" typically behaving badly (or well), but rather that choices made from an Fi context can seem "unjustified" in the Fe context, and vice versa. Sometimes sparks fly. (There is also the case where the bad behavior is just bad behavior, with virtually nothing to do with MBTI or Jung.)
    This is excellent. I think it was Simulated who earlier suggested the functions as "perspectives", and this makes it make even more sense. Jung, or at least Beebe, said that the functions were really forms of consciousness, and that would go right along woth "perspective".

    Then, add in the archetypal complexes I'm always talking about. Those are the real consciousnesses within the ego, which tend to be stimulated by the associated perspectives. If the person has Te as the "hero" function (ETJ), then organizing the desk will be his way of "saving the day". If it's "parent" (ITJ), organizing the desk come out in the form of instructing the other person who left it that way. If Te is child or inferior, the act of straightening the table will be more like a good deed, done innocently, perhaps to win approval, or just because they gain some relief doing so. If it's shadow (TP/FJ), the act of cleaning will tend to be more negative, and they likely won't even be conscious of this (hence, the example of my wife).
    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

  6. #206
    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 Jennifer View Post
    What if I wear shorts just because it is hot, and I don't think really about feeling values at all?

    (or because my suitcase got lost in the airport, and all I have are shorts and stockings?)
    In the former case, that sounds like Si, I would guess. "When it's been hot in the past, I have worn shorts to cool myself and it has worked, so I will do that."

    In the latter, well, I dunno if you can associate that with any function. You don't really have much of an option, do you?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    This is excellent. I think it was Simulated who earlier suggested the functions as "perspectives", and this makes it make even more sense. Jung, or at least Beebe, said that the functions were really forms of consciousness, and that would go right along woth "perspective".
    Yeah, that's what I'm talking about when I equate functions with value systems. The Fi perspective encourages you to make ethical decisions based on your own personal values (which may and frequently does include caring for others), whereas the Fe one encourages ethical decisions based on the prevailing cultural standards in the group(s) you identify with.

    So Fe vs. Fi depends on which perspective motivated you to make an ethical judgment, not on whether you applied that judgment to yourself or others. What uumlau has said here seems to support my point in this regard.

    Frequently both perspectives will agree, but it's the perspective from which you saw the situation and made your decision that matters--not what the actual decision was or who you applied it to.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  7. #207
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    In the former case, that sounds like Si, I would guess. "When it's been hot in the past, I have worn shorts to cool myself and it has worked, so I will do that."
    Really? You would try to assign it to a function preference?

    In the latter, well, I dunno if you can associate that with any function. You don't really have much of an option, do you?
    If I were extremely anal, I suppose i could go buy a new outfit.
    Or refuse to go out at all.
    Or borrow someone else's clothes.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  8. #208
    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 Jennifer View Post
    Really? You would try to assign it to a function preference?
    I'm just guessing blindly on that one, but if you placed your personal physical comfort (not wanting to be hot) over any ethical or logical values, it sounds like some form of the S function. But it would depend on the person and why exactly s/he is doing it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    If I were extremely anal, I suppose i could go buy a new outfit.
    Or refuse to go out at all.
    Or borrow someone else's clothes.
    True...and your perception of these different options seems Ne-related. As for how to make the decision of which one to go with and why, that depends on a number of other variables.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  9. #209
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    I'm just guessing blindly on that one, but if you placed your personal physical comfort (not wanting to be hot) over any ethical or logical values, it sounds like some form of the S function. But it would depend on the person and why exactly s/he is doing it.
    ...Personally, I'm not sure it's worthwhile to assign everything to a cog function.

    True...and your perception of these different options seems Ne-related.
    Nice, you caught me on that one.
    I rapid-fire options without even thinking, thus giving myself away.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  10. #210
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,441

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    ...Personally, I'm not sure it's worthwhile to assign everything to a cog function.
    True. Becoming more and more obvious.
    Forgot to mention that looking at it in terns of perspectives, we are freed from having to force everything into a function like that. While physical comfort IS technically a "sensory" stimulus, it is not in that case part of a particular "perspective" or even "world-view". It is just a physical need at the moment. Love is similar, and an emotional need, and not a "Feeling" perspective.

    Also forgot to mention that perhaps the reason why the term "use" of a function is so common, is simply because it's easier to say.
    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. Easily Disturbed By Things Going Wrong...is this Fi? or a J trait?
    By Thalassa in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 11-11-2009, 05:55 AM
  2. [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
  3. [Fi] Fi building
    By BlueScreen in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-01-2009, 03:09 PM
  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