What would the world do without Fe?

[Zarathustra]

Allow me, as the communicator, to try to expand my metaphor in the manner I wish it to be understood.

Say the cake is me. My personality is what my cake "looks" like. My behavior is what my cake "tastes" like.

Let's imagine that the functions are the core ingredients of my cake, the cake of me. So I have a mixture of them all, in varying quantities, as does everyone else. To be complete, let's say we all possess all 8 tasty "ingredients": Fe, Fi, Te, Ti, Se, Si and Ne, Ni.) They get measured in finite quantities creating a huge array of possible combinations. But that's all there is in the basic recipe. These 8 "ingredients". My appearance and flavor can thus be anticipated to a point, based on the commonalities shared from the "basic recipe".

If that's all that was in my cake, perhaps you could be so bold as to imagine you could predict what my cake really "tastes" like. But that's not all that constitutes the cake of "me" at any point in time.

There are other ingredients that are added to the "basic recipe" and thus get mixed into and then baked into my cake, ingredients that you may have no awareness of. My life experience, the kind of parenting I received, my values, relationships, the cultures I participate in, my physiological constitution, my gender, intelligence, other genetic variables etc etc ... arguably these are all factors that mix into the basic recipe to create my "cake." The homogeneous batter that comprises the sum of all of my raw ingredients differs now from the basic recipe, but still we know much of what is "in" the cake, so could still even imagine what it might "taste" like.

But what's important here, what I want to emphasize, is the baking. The process of baking creates new chemical structures, changing the essential nature of the cake. The infinite number of extra ingredients mixed to the batter interact with the basic ones in unpredictable ways, create something new each and every time. Even the time of day, altitude, humidity levels affect the baking, external factors completely unrelated to me, to my "ingredients" and affect the final product.

Thus I become more than just the sum of ingredients; I metamorphosize into something completely unique. What I "taste" like is the totality of a process one cannot fully account for or control. And to un-bake it is impossible; you cannot reverse what is, essentially, a compositional change. You can look at the cake and try to guess what it will taste like, or you can taste the cake and try to discern the various flavors on your palate, be it a refined or ignorant one. But to un-bake it would be to defeat the process of creation, this multivariate expression that combines ad-infinitum beyond your grasp.

By changing my metaphor you changed the whole point of it, the whole essence of what I was trying to say.

tl;dr

 

[Zarathustra]

 

[PeaceBaby]

^ Z's a clear example of what a lack of Fe looks like anyway. *re-rails thread*

 

[Zarathustra]

^ Z's a clear example of what a lack of Fe looks like anyway. *re-rails thread*

That's for damn sure!

And God bless us, every one!

 

[Kalach]

Allow me, as the communicator, to try to expand my metaphor in the manner I wish it to be understood.

Say the cake is me. My personality is what my cake "looks" like. My behavior is what my cake "tastes" like.

Let's imagine that the functions are the core ingredients of my cake, the cake of me. So I have a mixture of them all, in varying quantities, as does everyone else. To be complete, let's say we all possess all 8 tasty "ingredients": Fe, Fi, Te, Ti, Se, Si and Ne, Ni.) They get measured in finite quantities creating a huge array of possible combinations. But that's all there is in the basic recipe. These 8 "ingredients". My appearance and flavor can thus be anticipated to a point, based on the commonalities shared from the "basic recipe".

If that's all that was in my cake, perhaps you could be so bold as to imagine you could predict what my cake really "tastes" like. But that's not all that constitutes the cake of "me" at any point in time.

There are other ingredients that are added to the "basic recipe" and thus get mixed into and then baked into my cake, ingredients that you may have no awareness of. My life experience, the kind of parenting I received, my values, relationships, the cultures I participate in, my physiological constitution, my gender, intelligence, other genetic variables etc etc ... arguably these are all factors that mix into the basic recipe to create my "cake." The homogeneous batter that comprises the sum of all of my raw ingredients differs now from the basic recipe, but still we know much of what is "in" the cake, so could still even imagine what it might "taste" like.

But what's important here, what I want to emphasize, is the baking. The process of baking creates new chemical structures, changing the essential nature of the cake. The infinite number of extra ingredients mixed to the batter interact with the basic ones in unpredictable ways, create something new each and every time. Even the time of day, altitude, humidity levels affect the baking, external factors completely unrelated to me, to my "ingredients" and influence the final product.

Thus I become more than just the sum of ingredients; I metamorphosize into something completely unique. What I "taste" like is the totality of a process one cannot fully account for or control. And to un-bake it is impossible; you cannot reverse what is, essentially, a compositional change. You can "look" at the cake and try to guess what it will taste like, or you can "taste" the cake and try to discern the various flavors on your palate, be it a refined or ignorant one. This multivariate expression of creation combines ad-infinitum beyond anyone's grasp.

It's presumptuous to think you could truly predict behaviour based solely on functions. There's so much more to it than that.


By changing my metaphor you changed the whole point of it, the whole essence of what I was trying to say.

...which was:

the world is an objective, observable place, and even so, introverted functions remain a mostly hidden source of personality content, so there, nasty box creator!

Jung would be so proud.





A world without Fe... half the population would be without external constraint of any kind other than other people being obstinate. They would perhaps be barely even human, running off only Ti as a judgment source and counting the world only as a source of information.

Perhaps one means a world without a constraints system that differs from ones own. A world in which there were not priorities that count as immediately irrelevant, indeed counterproductive, under ones own constraint system.

The trains would run on time.

 

[Amargith]

Sorry folks, I'm curious...

tl;dr

See, I wouldve, if I'd not known Z a bit, taken the tl;dr seriously, if he hadn't posted the smiley afterwards. Maybe I'm a bit slow on this, but it's an interesting problem I've had with....*drumroll please* Fe-users, as they usually do not add the second post ime

As I did with Protean's comment. I'd be interested in Fe-users explaining this inside joking to us, if it's possible. Is this based on those social rules that everyone adheres too (knowing that someone coudn't possibly mean that as it would be ridiculous according to those standards), and/or some sort of subtle bodylanguage? Or is the fact that the bodylanguage is lacking (as far as I can see, in this case emoticons) part of the joke?

 

[garbage]

And yes, protean and I are saying essentially the same thing; that's quite transparent, is it not?

My hope is that it is transparent.

The point being that, by some 'absolute miracle,' a 'Fe user' and a 'Fi user' (again, presumably you.. hopefully) actually agree on something pretty fundamental. Both see the limitations of using just functional theory to perfectly describe others, and both recognize the merit of looking at other factors in order to describe individuals.

So, miraculously, the use of particular functions doesn't dictate whether or not one reaches those conclusions.

(I place '[function] user' in quotes because I pretty much loathe the term, but I recognize that it's a way to get the idea across)

 

[proteanmix]

As I did with Protean's comment. I'd be interested in Fe-users explaining this inside joking to us, if it's possible. Is this based on those social rules that everyone adheres too (knowing that someone coudn't possibly mean that as it would be ridiculous according to those standards), and/or some sort of subtle bodylanguage? Or is the fact that the bodylanguage is lacking (as far as I can see, in this case emoticons) part of the joke?

I don't what know "social rules" you are referring to as far as inside jokes are concerned. You want me to explain what an inside joke is? I've already stated that I was joking about the stereotypical Fe herd mentality. Yes, I think the lack of body language and tone of voice would have made my comment more indicative of a joke.

But once again it's interesting. Look at what she says. I know she didn't address me specifically, but I think Oro and I have had the most intensive discussion. I'll add smilies for when I'm being a bit cheeky.

My idea was incorrect and overgeneralized and was flawed.

Agree. But it's OK, it was thrown out there and people can disagree right? I think this thread has been more respectful than how these usually go, but maybe some people don't think so. Conversely, what was "supposed" to happen? Everyone agree and say " you're so right!"

It was rude of me to have put forth an idea that might have implied how another person thinks or feels.

Putting words into my mouth. Have I (I only can speak for me) stated that it was rude to imply how another person thinks or feels? I do that all the time! But I don't base it purely upon MBTI.

I respect that I am projecting my own problem onto other people.

I'm leaning towards agreeing with that.

Each person is an isolated beautiful individual, and thus to imply they follow a pattern is incorrect.

Totally not what I've said at all...that people don't follow patterns.

There is not truth to the patterns discussed within this thread.

Not so, and I gave reasons why these patterns may exist. I have never said you don't see patterns. I do think your attribution to why these patterns exist is narrowly focused.

Please accept my apologies for the disruption of the thread flow.

It's OK, I won't hold it against you. All I care about is that you drank the kool-aid.

I will assume responsibility for the fact that all burdens of communication are mine to carry,

Overdramatic, melodramatic, and not at all what I have said. Now your spirit is broken and your soul is crushed. Who is the culprit?

and that my own flaws have prevented my clear understanding of the scenario at hand.

That is the case with all of us, thus making it seem like you have been unfairly and unduly attacked for not shouldering a burden you never had to carry.

If I can merge and flow with the group more in a more adequate fashion, then I shall have no problems in communication moving forward.

It's the "shall"...it was just icing on the cake. I couldn't resist dipping my finger into the frosting.

 

[Poki]

Allow me, as the communicator, to try to expand my metaphor in the manner I wish it to be understood.

Say the cake is me. My personality is what my cake "looks" like. My behavior is what my cake "tastes" like.

Let's imagine that the functions are the core ingredients of my cake, the cake of me. So I have a mixture of them all, in varying quantities, as does everyone else. To be complete, let's say we all possess all 8 tasty "ingredients": Fe, Fi, Te, Ti, Se, Si and Ne, Ni.) They get measured in finite quantities creating a huge array of possible combinations. But that's all there is in the basic recipe. These 8 "ingredients". My appearance and flavor can thus be anticipated to a point, based on the commonalities shared from the "basic recipe".

If that's all that was in my cake, perhaps you could be so bold as to imagine you could predict what my cake really "tastes" like. But that's not all that constitutes the cake of "me" at any point in time.

There are other ingredients that are added to the "basic recipe" and thus get mixed into and then baked into my cake, ingredients that you may have no awareness of. My life experience, the kind of parenting I received, my values, relationships, the cultures I participate in, my physiological constitution, my gender, intelligence, other genetic variables etc etc ... arguably these are all factors that mix into the basic recipe to create my "cake." The homogeneous batter that comprises the sum of all of my raw ingredients differs now from the basic recipe, but still we know much of what is "in" the cake, so could still even imagine what it might "taste" like.

But what's important here, what I want to emphasize, is the baking. The process of baking creates new chemical structures, changing the essential nature of the cake. The infinite number of extra ingredients mixed to the batter interact with the basic ones in unpredictable ways, create something new each and every time. Even the time of day, altitude, humidity levels affect the baking, external factors completely unrelated to me, to my "ingredients" and influence the final product.

Thus I become more than just the sum of ingredients; I metamorphosize into something completely unique. What I "taste" like is the totality of a process one cannot fully account for or control. And to un-bake it is impossible; you cannot reverse what is, essentially, a compositional change. You can "look" at the cake and try to guess what it will taste like, or you can "taste" the cake and try to discern the various flavors on your palate, be it a refined or ignorant one. This multivariate expression of creation combines ad-infinitum beyond anyone's grasp.

It's presumptuous to think you could truly predict behaviour based solely on functions. There's so much more to it than that.


By changing my metaphor you changed the whole point of it, the whole essence of what I was trying to say.

-----

And yes, protean and I are saying essentially the same thing; that's quite transparent, is it not?

Looks can be decieving, sometimes the cake has to be tasted If not all you have is a false perception based on what the person wants you to see

edit: the real question is who shaped how you look on the outside. Was it how the ingredients mixed naturally that caused the image or was it "shaped/designed" externally by a chef.

 

[cascadeco]

As I did with Protean's comment. I'd be interested in Fe-users explaining this inside joking to us, if it's possible. Is this based on those social rules that everyone adheres too (knowing that someone coudn't possibly mean that as it would be ridiculous according to those standards), and/or some sort of subtle bodylanguage? Or is the fact that the bodylanguage is lacking (as far as I can see, in this case emoticons) part of the joke?

This isn't exactly on-topic, but thought I'd share my responses/impressions to both Orobas' final post in here and protean's response to it: When I read Orobas' post, I honestly suspected she was being totally facetious, and basically ripping on / condescending of Fe - as she seemed to be adding all of the supposedly-obligatory-and-stereotypical-Fe-'approaches', without really buying into it- it just seemed like a robotic response, saying what she perceives she's 'supposed' to be saying to be Fe-ish - and it just seemed blatantly over the top and I actually thought SHE was being tongue-in-cheek. Thus I thought protean's tongue-in-cheek response/joke was of the same vein.

 

[Poki]

I don't what know "social rules" you are referring to as far as inside jokes are concerned. You want me to explain what an inside joke is? I've already stated that I was joking about the stereotypical Fe herd mentality. Yes, I think the lack of body language and tone of voice would have made my comment more indicative of a joke.

Yes...I would say its a joke on whats "known", not a social standard.

edit: like an acceptance of what is and can get to the point of playing around with it jokingly. Both within and without(with others...outside of ourselves )

 

[PeaceBaby]

I agree there's the possibility of O's reply being facetious.

Regardless, at the core I get a sense of her being frustrated at not being able to get her message across and feeling somewhat attacked in trying to do so. I do genuinely think her feelings are hurt here.

I don't think that is isolated or specifically directed to only protean though. It's an overall sense of being overwhelmed with the reactions to her thoughts in general, and I suspect that's why she's not been present here in thread since that post.

She needs time to work through how she feels about what has been said and regroup.

That's why I am interested to know what was in the two deleted posts protean refers to.

 

[Poki]

I agree there's the possibility of O's reply being facetious.

Regardless, at the core I get a sense of her being frustrated at not being able to get her message across and feeling somewhat attacked in trying to do so. I do genuinely think her feelings are hurt here.

I don't think that is isolated or specifically directed to only protean though. It's an overall sense of being overwhelmed with the reactions to her thoughts in general, and I suspect that's why she's not been present here in thread since that post.

She needs time to work through how she feels about what has been said and regroup.

I could see the logical use of several angles so I couldnt form an opinion on the use. In this case I prefer to just take a back seat and see where it ends up going. My other option would be to just pick one and run with it to see the response.

 

[Zarathustra]

I agree there's the possibility of O's reply being facetious.

Regardless, at the core I get a sense of her being frustrated at not being able to get her message across and feeling somewhat attacked in trying to do so. I do genuinely think her feelings are hurt here.

I don't think that is isolated or specifically directed to only protean though. It's an overall sense of being overwhelmed with the reactions to her thoughts in general, and I suspect that's why she's not been present here in thread since that post.

She needs time to work through how she feels about what has been said and regroup.

That's why I am interested to know what was in the two deleted posts protean refers to.

I second this notion.

 

[garbage]

I've already stated that I was joking about the stereotypical Fe herd mentality. Yes, I think the lack of body language and tone of voice would have made my comment more indicative of a joke.

It is telling that it was pointed to and 'called out' with the perception of--"See! There's freakin' Fe group mentality again! My perspective on Fe was right all along! God! "

I don't mean to imply that I was 'above' not seeing the joke myself. Because I didn't see it at first, either

 

[proteanmix]

I agree there's the possibility of O's reply being facetious.

Regardless, at the core I get a sense of her being frustrated at not being able to get her message across and feeling somewhat attacked in trying to do so. I do genuinely think her feelings are hurt here.

I don't think that is isolated or specifically directed to only protean though. It's an overall sense of being overwhelmed with the reactions to her thoughts in general, and I suspect that's why she's not been present here in thread since that post.

She needs time to work through how she feels about what has been said and regroup.

That's why I am interested to know what was in the two deleted posts protean refers to.

Now HERE is a possible Fe/Fi difference!

When my POV is being severely disagreed with (believe me, I know all about that), I don't feel like it's a "wound" that needs to be nursed. It doesn't require a therapeutic massage and incense! I feel like I put it out there into the public domain and something is going to get said about it. I've put in emergency exits for myself when things start hitting me personally--when I need to stop participating in a thread if it's pushing my buttons. but seriously, I don't expect to be gently patted on the head and coddled. This has more to do with my relationship to internet forums and attachment to my ideas, I suppose. Things I don't want criticized I hold to myself. My preciouses....

Additionally, is this a sign of a person who doesn't tolerate being disagreed with very well? And what about my (possible/hypothetical) feelings of frustration? Because I didn't make a dramatic exit from the thread they don't exist? Squeaky wheels!

It is telling that it was pointed to and 'called out' with the perception of--"See! There's freakin' Fe group mentality again! My perspective on Fe was right all along! God! "

I don't mean to imply that I was 'above' not seeing the joke myself. Because I didn't see it at first, either

Yeah, I have pretty deadpan delivery. People tend to not tell when I'm joking.

 

[Zarathustra]

And what about my (possible/hypothetical) feelings of frustration? Because I didn't make a dramatic exit from the thread they don't exist?

You seem plenty frustrated to me...

 

[PeaceBaby]

Well, no, it's not about coddling ... that's not really it. And O will take lots of stuff head-on and not bail out. I am assuming something has hit a soft spot is all; I have an idea of what that is, but don't want to infer too much.

I hear what you are saying about your ideas, and your feelings about them, and the way you self-regulate when any of your buttons are being pushed. Even in print you are a powerful force; I can only imagine how tremendous your energy is IRL. I sense your passionate feelings on this subject as well and respect them deeply.

I focussed on O here because she's the one who's backed out and the rest of the participants are still in the ring and ready to go (so to speak). The why of that matters to me; I don't see that action as her needing to be babied. I see it as potentially something (that if addressed) can lead to greater self-discovery. I want to get her back in. I want to support her so she can express that inner stuff ... Fi users can find it hard to articulate at times, and can be easily squished by strong Te or Fe convictions.

 

[Zarathustra]

I'm never afraid of over-inference: correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't she feel that all the Fe-users were essentially ganging up on her?

 

[PeaceBaby]

^ more than that, but that's all I am going to say on the subject.