User Tag List

First 3456715 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 216

Thread: Baffled by Fi

  1. #41
    Babylon Candle Venom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,128

    Default

    LL... I cant make this any more succinct. I'm just going to quote what I wrote in that clusterfuck of the SimW thread:

    Quote Originally Posted by Babylon Candle View Post
    The Fi universal is that things should be decided outside of (this is going to hard to word)...other "facts". Here, I'll let Lenore Thompson say it for me:

    "As an epistemological perspective, Fi leads you to take whatever a person thinks or believes as an expression of that person's unique nature--not to criticize it because it fails to live up to some externally imposed criteria like whether or not it's "logical" or "appropriate". As an ethical perspective, Fi leads you to act out of empathy regardless of the social status or "deservingness" of the beneficiary. Fi leads you to view all living things as equal in value, all needing to thrive in interpersonal harmony without giving up any of their uniqueness."

    In other words, a Te world view might want to take consideration of a whole bunch of facts before ruling on a moral issue: "What will follow as a logical consequence of ruling this way?" "Did the person have a warning?" "Did the victim deserve it?" "How many people did this behavior harm?" "Did the perpetrator break a particular law on the books, regardless of whether that law is conscionable?"

    The Fi world view can decide upon moral things without any of these pertinent facts. This is why non Fi users often feel like Fi users make court rulings without even hearing the case facts! To non Fi users its as if they are blind to cause and effect, "Mr Fi user! you do realize that ruling that way would create moral hazard, adverse selection and a host of other problems as a result of treating everyone equal/forgiving punishment?".

    Its this metaphorical blindness to cause and effect that actual ends up being the Fi redeeming quality however. This is what allows them to simply call out unconscionable acts to our attention. The sort of acts that are simply inhumane regardless of the laws of the book, regardless of past transgressions, regardless of moral hazard, regardless of adverse selection, regardless of how 'effective' something might be. This is why selling body parts, capital punishment and exploitation of labor often come up on the Fi-radar the strongest: they are things that might be perfectly functioning in a society, be totally legal in some places and maybe even solve problems, YET at the end of the day still be unconscionable. Thats Fi.

    These, "thats unconscionable" realizations are however quite rarely as important irl. This is probably why the Fi looks like they are crying wolf so damn much
    Ive had more than one INFP say they like it . If this still doesnt help LL, my advice is to just switch to socionics, which is much easier to type based on action/behavior/motive. You can then "convert" back to MBTI. Its a lot easier for me to quickly recognize myself as EIE (ENFj) than as ENFJ because socionics has more precise function definitions/orders/behaviors (though I still identify with ENFJ more than any other type).

  2. #42
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    To explain:

    Ti starts from objective first principles... but subjectively valuates each of those principles. For example, I consider social stability and cohesion to be the basis for any human society, so my logical determinations for social strategies are going to stem from this key conceptualization. Someone who considers voluntary affiliation to be that sort of basis will come to completely different determinations, though these may still logically connect. These determinations will arise from external logical patterns and connections, but they still relate to one another based on a prioritization that stems from theoretically subjective decisions (though Ti users will argue you to death on why their decision is the objectively true one... hint, guys - you're wrong, I'm right, deal with it). We argue these things to death because Fe desperately wants to get others to agree with us.

    Fi does the opposite. It starts from the objective conclusion (manifested in several ways, for example, in the relative intelligence of Fi users, and in the "Fi mirroring" many people point out), and then winnows its way to the subjective valuation of each of these. The prioritization hierarchy (aka the tert/inf Te) becomes the endpoint of the Fi judging process, rather than the start of it like Ti. Since we're all human, and go through several of the same experiences, many of these valuations will converge in most xxFPs. However, there's no particular reason they have to, and they often do not.

    The thing is, both of these have an emotive and non-affective component to them. The valuation/prioritization is the emotional part. This is demonstrated by the way you genuinely do evoke emotions from a Ti user - attack that person's core logic. "Your conclusions are idiotic" won't do a thing, because we'll simply assume the other person's stupid; however, "your points aren't even worth considering" will get a rise, only because the initial valuation principle will suffer from invalidation.

    Notice where I'm getting to? This is exactly the same sort of reaction Ti users complain of about Fi users when their personal values are offended! Likewise, Fi users do have a non-affective aspect of their judging function - this is how they dauntlessly face all aspects of the world in the first place. Fi seeks these objective conclusions in the first place, without any regard to personal impact. It wants to universalize its valuation/prioritization through experience in much the same way Ti wants to universalize its possible range of conclusion through logical analysis.

    They're really two sides of the same coin, one edge being "subjective" and the other "objective".
    I always saw it as being that simple also. Ti has never seemed foreign to me anyway. I mean, Jung does say that everything that is true of Ti is true of Fi, except Fi is felt instead of thought.

    I take your post to say that Ti has a pretty defined thought it's starting from, but Fi has a holistic, vague feeling that is has to deconstruct and then organize rationally. That's very much true, from my perspective, and it is in line with why INFPs may be called the "harmonizer clarifier", as much clarification needs to be done, and then the parts need to be harmonized to not threaten the whole of the feeling. On the other hand, the INTP is the "architect" working with much more precise materials to begin with.

    In Gifts Differing, it says that a person prefers to use one kind of judgment when either could be used. That's such a simple statement, yet to me it really clarifies how a Thinking person is capable of personal feeling-reasoning and a Feeling person is capable of impersonal thought-reasoning when the realm they are dealing with is clearly one or the other. It's when the realm could swing either way that the preference is most clear. Which is why Thinkers may be artists and Feelers may be scientists, and not be inferior than their T/F counterparts.
    Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

    INFP | 4w5 sp/sx | RLUEI - Primary Inquisitive | Tritype is tripe

  3. #43
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Little Linguist View Post
    In contrast, I need a stable, supportive environment to hold strong values. If the external environment is not favorable, I start mirroring my environment, and I HATE that tendency inside myself.

    Perfect example: At work, if I am in an environment that appreciates my contribution and really challenges me and gives me ways to grow, I'm the happiest lark that ever was, brimming over with ideas, exuding happiness for everyone.

    However, if I am in a negative environment, I mirror my that environment.
    Im shitty at typing people, but let me just say that I can easily relate to this very much.

  4. #44
    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 Little Linguist View Post
    Forgive my silly comment, but doesn't everyone have that?

    When I ask people about my type, people tell me to use Fi and go inside myself to 'find the answer.' Well, damn, I find it hard to go in myself to find any answer. Or maybe I just don't realize it.
    No, despite what various people who haven't actually read Jung will tell you, having a conscience doesn't necessitate Fi, and Fi users don't have a monopoly on morality. Ti-ers either don't use Fi at all or very rarely tap into it, since doing so requires one to set aside the basic fabric of Ti's decision-making (which Ti-ers very rarely do.)

    Ti is just as much of a "conscience" as Fi; its "moral" decisions are just based on an impersonal conception of consistency and congruence instead of actively personal feelings. A Ti+Fe person's morality comes from a combination of this and Fe's observance of externalized moral standards.

    I'm going to get a lot of flack for saying this, but the people who claim to use both Fi and Ti regularly have rarely actually read the original source material (Psychological Types) and don't understand that functions are pieces of one's value system from which the worldview is derived--not descriptions of particular actions. It's truly extraordinary how many people on this forum have no idea what they're talking about in this regard.

    You'll get people telling you that any time you make a logical/impersonal decision you're using Ti and any time you make an ethical decision you're using Fi, but that's not the case. Jung never definitely said that we do or don't use all eight functions; he said he was uncertain about whether the "shadow functions" are ever truly used, and that if they are, use of them would require tremendous energy and happen very rarely.

    So you don't switch between Fi and Ti routinely; you're either Ti+Fe (in which case you derive logic from an internal standard and ethics from an external one) or Fi+Te (in which case you do the opposite.)

    Now, as for what Fi actually is, it's a form of introverted Judgment based on personal emotional values which rejects the idea that internal value judgments should be made on an impersonal basis (and therefore flatly contradicts Ti), focusing instead on the user's feelings and what they dictate subjectively about morality and ethics.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  5. #45
    Away with the fairies Southern Kross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 so/sp
    Posts
    2,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    No, despite what various people who haven't actually read Jung will tell you, having a conscience doesn't necessitate Fi, and Fi users don't have a monopoly on morality. Ti-ers either don't use Fi at all or very rarely tap into it, since doing so requires one to set aside the basis of Ti's decision-making (which Ti-ers very rarely do.)

    Ti is just as much of a "conscience" as Fi; its "moral" decisions are just based on an impersonal conception of consistency and congruence instead of actively personal feelings. A Ti+Fe person's morality comes from a combination of this and Fe's observance of externalized moral standards.

    I'm going to get a lot of flack for saying this, but the people who claim to use both Fi and Ti regularly have rarely actually read the original source material (Psychological Types) and don't understand that functions are pieces of one's value system from which the worldview is derived--not descriptions of particular actions. It's truly extraordinary how many people on this forum have no idea what they're talking about in this regard.

    You'll get people telling you that any time you make a logical/impersonal decision you're using Ti and any time you make an ethical decision you're using Fi, but that's not the case. Jung never definitely said that we do or don't use all eight functions; he said he was uncertain about whether the "shadow functions" are ever truly used, and that if they are, use of them would require tremendous energy and happen very rarely.

    So you don't switch between Fi and Ti routinely; you're either Ti+Fe (in which case you derive logic from an internal standard and ethics from an external one) or Fi+Te (in which case you do the opposite.)

    Now, as for what Fi actually is, it's a form of introverted Judgment based on personal emotional values which rejects the idea that internal value judgments should be made on an impersonal basis (and therefore flatly contradicts Ti), focusing instead on the user's feelings and what they dictate subjectively about morality and ethics.
    You're making me want to read Jung a lot lately. It seems he was a lot more enlightening for you than other MBTI writings.

  6. #46
    Senior Member evilrobot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    nite
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    No, despite what various people who haven't actually read Jung will tell you, having a conscience doesn't necessitate Fi, and Fi users don't have a monopoly on morality. Ti-ers either don't use Fi at all or very rarely tap into it, since doing so requires one to set aside the basic fabric of Ti's decision-making (which Ti-ers very rarely do.)

    Ti is just as much of a "conscience" as Fi; its "moral" decisions are just based on an impersonal conception of consistency and congruence instead of actively personal feelings. A Ti+Fe person's morality comes from a combination of this and Fe's observance of externalized moral standards.

    I'm going to get a lot of flack for saying this, but the people who claim to use both Fi and Ti regularly have rarely actually read the original source material (Psychological Types) and don't understand that functions are pieces of one's value system from which the worldview is derived--not descriptions of particular actions. It's truly extraordinary how many people on this forum have no idea what they're talking about in this regard.

    You'll get people telling you that any time you make a logical/impersonal decision you're using Ti and any time you make an ethical decision you're using Fi, but that's not the case. Jung never definitely said that we do or don't use all eight functions; he said he was uncertain about whether the "shadow functions" are ever truly used, and that if they are, use of them would require tremendous energy and happen very rarely.

    So you don't switch between Fi and Ti routinely; you're either Ti+Fe (in which case you derive logic from an internal standard and ethics from an external one) or Fi+Te (in which case you do the opposite.)

    Now, as for what Fi actually is, it's a form of introverted Judgment based on personal emotional values which rejects the idea that internal value judgments should be made on an impersonal basis (and therefore flatly contradicts Ti), focusing instead on the user's feelings and what they dictate subjectively about morality and ethics.
    It is important to make a distinction between functions that are the main focus of one’s personality and those one has aptitude in or “good use” of. Anyone can have strong usage of a function outside their “order” and use it as a means to an end, but that’s not the same as it being their priority function or the main prism through which they view reality.
    X___________________________________

    If things are not what they seem, and we are forever reminded that this is the case—then it must also be observed that enough of us ignore this truth to keep the world from collapsing. –Thomas Ligotti, The Mystics of Muelenberg

  7. #47
    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 Southern Kross View Post
    You're making me want to read Jung a lot lately. It seems he was a lot more enlightening for you than other MBTI writings.
    Uhh yeah, by a long shot. He invented all the cognitive process labels.

    It's truly hilarious to me that like 95% of the forum thinks they use all the functions, but this is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of what functions actually are.

    Again I will stress that "using a function" = being under the influence of a particular type of worldview. It does not = doing some particular action that people of that worldview are usually good at. This is REALLY important.

    So "using Ti", for instance, means holding the worldview that logic should be derived from an internal standard of innately consistent natural reason, and that logic exists and maintains its consistency independently of any external variables.

    "Using Ti" does not mean, "Durrr I solved a math problem by thinking logically." Fi+Te can solve math problems by thinking logically just as easily; unfortunately, almost everyone on this forum performs function analysis incorrectly by focusing on the action performed instead of the worldview/perspective that motivated the reasoning for that action.

    So when I tell an Fi-er, "You don't use Ti", a lot of the time they get upset and won't listen because they think I'm implying that they can't think logically, but that's not at all what I mean--all I mean is that they don't derive logic from a subjective internal standard. Fi-ers use Te to derive logic from objectively verifiable external conditions; "using Ti" or "using Fi" only refers to the ultimate source of your conception of logic/ethics.

    Reading Jung will show you that that's not at all what cognitive functions actually are.


    Quote Originally Posted by evilrobot View Post
    It is important to make a distinction between functions that are the main focus of one’s personality and those one has aptitude in or “good use” of. Anyone can have strong usage of a function outside their “order” and use it as a means to an end, but that’s not the same as it being their priority function or the main prism through which they view reality.
    Which means they're not actually "using" that function. Doing something that people with that function are good at doesn't mean you're actually using that function. If you're not doing it because you value it innately for its own sake, because it constitutes a crucial piece of your total worldview, you're not using that function--your four regular functions are just doing things that people with functions you don't use are often good at. That's not "using" the other functions at all.

    Again Psychological Types makes this pretty clear in explaining the nature of cognitive functions. They are not skill sets; they are value systems. Some skills are frequently associated with some value systems, but using a given skill doesn't automatically imply subscription to the value system commonly associated with it.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  8. #48
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Now, as for what Fi actually is, it's a form of introverted Judgment based on personal emotional values which rejects the idea that internal value judgments should be made on an impersonal basis (and therefore flatly contradicts Ti), focusing instead on the user's feelings and what they dictate subjectively about morality and ethics.
    The values are not emotionally based. Emotions may be a compass at times, and useful in gleaning self-understanding, but values are reasoned on in a rational manner. Feeling is not emotions, and Jung never implies that. I think it's safe to say that many Fi-dom may feel a conflict of their emotion and feeling at times; I certainly do. Other times, the line is blurred between the two.

    But yes, feeling does have a distaste for impersonal judgment when personal judgment is an option. In situations where it is a clearly an impersonal issue, ie. math, Fi can use its critical thinking in an impersonal way, just as a Ti user can apply their logical reasoning in personal matters. They are both still using their Fi or Ti, whichever is their dom or aux function. Their perception allowed them to see what approach was necessary. It was this realization that assured me I am not Ti-dom, as I often tested INTP.
    Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

    INFP | 4w5 sp/sx | RLUEI - Primary Inquisitive | Tritype is tripe

  9. #49
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Again Psychological Types makes this pretty clear in explaining the nature of cognitive functions. They are not skill sets; they are value systems. Some skills are frequently associated with some value systems, but using a given skill doesn't automatically imply subscription to the value system commonly associated with it.
    Where in the Psychological types do you find that?


    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    I'm going to get a lot of flack for saying this, but the people who claim to use both Fi and Ti regularly have rarely actually read the original source material (Psychological Types) and don't understand that functions are pieces of one's value system from which the worldview is derived--not descriptions of particular actions. .
    Cite the page number where Jung either states or implies that functions are value systems.


    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    It's truly extraordinary how many people on this forum have no idea what they're talking about in this regard..
    I don't think you do either.



    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    So you don't switch between Fi and Ti routinely; you're either Ti+Fe (in which case you derive logic from an internal standard and ethics from an external one) or Fi+Te (in which case you do the opposite.)..
    Is this Jung's view, or your Neo-Jungian typological notion? If the former, cite textual support. If it is the latter, support your view with an argument. Either way, put some meat on those bones.

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    But yes, feeling does have a distaste for impersonal judgment when personal judgment is an option. In situations where it is a clearly an impersonal issue, ie. math, Fi can use its critical thinking in an impersonal way, just as a Ti user can apply their logical reasoning in personal matters. They are both still using their Fi or Ti, whichever is their dom or aux function. Their perception allowed them to see what approach was necessary. It was this realization that assured me I am not Ti-dom, as I often tested INTP.
    Feeling has a distaste, as in feeling is a character? Anthropomorphizing typology much?
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  10. #50
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    Feeling has a distaste, as in feeling is a character? Anthropomorphizing typology much?
    It's a figure of speech. No need to nitpick.
    Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

    INFP | 4w5 sp/sx | RLUEI - Primary Inquisitive | Tritype is tripe

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