I’m just curious what other people think the root of this Fi bias is. A lot of people are equating Fi with authenticity and genuine caring, and feel compelled to view Fe as ‘shallow’ instead of ‘having breadth’.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen any comments about how Ne, Se or Te are more ‘shallow’ or inauthentic than Ni, Si or Ti- nor are there comments from Ni, Si, or Ti types going on and on about how they intuit/sense/think so much more deeply than Ne, Se or Te types (respectively, sticking to same N, S or T comparisons)- so why is this so common with Fe/Fi?
It’s a rather self-serving and one dimensional view. Proteanmix just commented in another thread that it’s like emotional Viagra- the way Fi types feel this need to exalt Fi as being more “genuineâ€- and I have to admit, that’s exactly how it looks to me as well.
There have been somewhat similar arguments (equally as self-serving and one-dimensional) between N and S, but I’m wondering why F is the only function with so much contention between its own E/I attitude.
(I know this discussion is *kinda* going on in another thread, but I didn't want to further derail that thread.)
edit: also, I was hoping to steer clear of the empathy/sympathy debate, and focus on the E/I differences of deep/shallow vs. depth/breadth. I mean, no one ever refers to Ne as being shallow, I don't think there's any argument about it's 'breadth' being significant- so why is it so different for F?
I warn you-I havent read this thread-just the OP. Also I am a bit drunk as I am sad as i think I may have to kill my dog.
Fi is likely the point of an Fi users ego. It defines us internally.
Fe is a step removed from an Fe users ego. For ENTPs, Ti is likely the ego...I dont really know about the rest of the Fe crowd.
Subjectively on Fi -I feel an exceptional strong need to be honest-even if painful to another. I feel an exceptional aversion to lies or emotional manipulation. The thought of using another person's emotions to make them alter their course of action makes me feel ill. To plan such a thing-it makes me feel disgusted with myself. Fi is REAL. It is honest, open, genunie, even if that means displays of emo-puking insanity.
Objectively on Fi-Fi subconsciously manipulates others via emotional reactivity in ENFPs. Who is the intended audience and what is the objective?
The audience is Te doms and Auxs. The (totally unplanned, intended, totally reactive) goal of Fi authenticity seems to be to interact with Te users.
Who plans every single thing they do in objective terms? Te doms and auxs
Who often hurts others due to their own oblivious desire to push forward Te objectives? Te doms and auxs
Who most resents having their own emotions and guilt used against them? Te auxs and doms. (please refer to ayn rand)
Thus to effectively teach them a god damned thing, you have to be REAL. Any sense that you are not REAL, or are planning and plotting...and they assume Te and respond assertively, defensivly, and even aggressively.
Thus to truly impact their judgment on an issue, you must be REAL. Whatever issue it is you feel strongly on....it has to REAL...and it has to force them to hurt just a little via their own internal Fi mirror, small though it may be.
You effectively teach them how to not hurt others with Te, by showing them how they have hurt you. They dont typically mean to hurt others...they just seek effeciency which can sometimes hurt others.
Thus this exceptionally strong desire for Fi to be highly authentic may derive from an evolutionary perogative for Fi-Te social interactions to rest upon Te being used as the controlling factor, while Fi is an effective tool for empathic communications.
Subjectively on Fe-it feels really weird to me...it feels controlling
Objectively on Fe-It is just as effective a system of social interaction as the above mentioned Fi-Te paradigm. It uses control of others based upon an Fe mechanism of emotional influence consciously rather than subconsciously...It isnt bad or good....just effective at maintaining a social balance, a mechanisms for maintaining social equilibrium. There is nothing Wrong with Fe or Fi...they are just meant to be used in different arenas on different audiences...
So what's left?
Why are these two audiences mixed? Each seems totally sufficient and rational if left alone....but why are the two stuck together? I really dont understand this at all....why would evolution find an advantage in mixing the two???