User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 39

  1. #11
    Senior Member Cybin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    105

    Default

    I've thought of the difference between the T and F functions can be (over)simplified to true/false versus good/bad. Logic versus evaluation.

    Fi specifically has a worldview prioritizing a subjective viewpoint. Not what's best for me (although, when the dominant function Fi becomes ego serving, that can become true) but what's best for the individual. I think domFis live with their inner world so loud and so unignorable, they give a lot of heavy consideration on how actions affect themselves and, hopefully, others. An ego-serving Fi will not use Pe to add other pieces of information about other people and use only the values they have set for themselves. A more conscious individual will use what they know from exploring themselves so thoroughly, plus what they can gather from external clues, to gain a better understanding of how the inner life of individuals works.

    Not that a domFi has to be an upstanding moral citizen, or even focus any energy to helping people, but most domFis tend to agree it feels bad to hurt others, and it feels bad to be hurt. It's just a natural conclusion to a fair number of domFis.

    I really do think that there is a very big lack of introverted feeling descriptions that accurately convey what Fi is and does, instead focusing far too much on painting some crazy saintly picture hardly anyone lives up to, or some crazy emotional wreck that underplays why Fi feels so strongly.

  2. #12
    4x9 cascadeco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Enneagram
    4 so/sp
    Posts
    6,931

    Default

    Well, my thoughts on it - from another thread - just adding them here since they're related to the discussion.

    I am not sure I agree that Fi is a people-attuned function. I don't think that's the essence of what Fi is. Many Fi-er's in fact ARE people-attuned, as a result of the individuals' value system incorporating others, but Fi in and of itself has *nothing* to do with others. It has everything to do with one's own self and personal value system. That's what it is: A uniquely personal internal construct.

    ----------

    And a few more thoughts - Fe being an externally judging Feeling function is by definition going to be 'About' other people (for good or ill), whereas Fi being internally judging is in effect 'About' ones own values/self and adhering to that. Contrast with Te/Ti: Te is 'About' other things and organizing them externally and such, and Ti is 'About' ones own *internally consistent* logic structure/understanding - more principle-based, perhaps.

    Basically, Fi IS an internal construct. That construct may or may not dictate a people-oriented focus outside of embodying ones own self. Again, Fi's motivation is more to build that solid internal construct, and to then presumably live ones life in accordance with those solid internal principles. But at its heart it is about Self and staying true to that. That very likely will include treating others as individuals and valuing (or at least recognizing) those other individuals' unique values (however the problem arises with the fact that non-Fi-er's in fact don't have that solid value framework in the same sense that Fi-ers might), and therefore approaching their relationships with that in mind.

    However, Fe too recognizes others as unique individuals -- the distinction though is that Fe's aims/'goals' are insanely different - Fe has external goals/things it's trying to bring about, or a 'goal' of harmonizing or minimizing conflict/maximizing relationships, whereas Fi in and of itself doesn't (rather, Te would be its results-oriented slant, with Ne/Se accompanying or refining Fi). Fe tends to have a goal/definition/outcome that it wants to bring about externally, as one component - although there are many aspects of it. Fi doesn't, as such - only elements of the value system/construct would dictate that, but those elements are unique to the individual and thus not an inherent aspect of Fi.

    Very simplified, based on my understanding as well as a heavy dose of speculating/musing/generalizing and my own opinions which of course others may disagree with. All just according to theory and the contrasts and distinctions in common definitions between the functions.... Edit: and I don't intend offense. These are just some my thoughts/ideas.

    Edit 617: What I'm trying to talk about isn't the actual people who wield these functions, and whether said people are people-oriented, but rather what exactly the functions are themselves. I might be wrong in thinking that Fe is by definition other-people-oriented, and by definition Fi is Self(value)-oriented, in which case this whole post is probably worthless.
    "...On and on and on and on he strode, far out over the sands, singing wildly to the sea, crying to greet the advent of the life that had cried to him." - James Joyce

    My Photography and Watercolor Fine Art Prints!!! Cascade Colors Fine Art Prints
    https://docs.google.com/uc?export=do...Gd5N3NZZE52QjQ

  3. #13
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    7 billion people in the world, and only Fe is the one naturally attuned to other people apparently.

    I think some theories have gone too far.

  4. #14
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,024

    Default

    Or is it that individuals are either people oriented or not and that Fe and Fi are how they source their emotion-based value systems, whether internally (Fi) or externally (Fe).

    Don't listen to me 'cause I really don't have a clue what I'm blabbing on about, more thinking out loud.

  5. #15
    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 marmalade.sunrise View Post
    Fi is about people, but it's more about people in the abstract, I think. Like Rebe was saying, Te is about practical thinking, and it has obvious external results. Ti on the other hand, while still rational and logical, is more abstract ideas which doesn't necessarily have real world results.

    Fi must be people-oriented, because I've had an ISTP tell me that I might be happier if I stopped thinking about other people so much...he noted that many of my interests involve thinking about people (sociology, psychology, literature, history, etc.) and that he saw me go out of my way on my vacation to make sure that I did something for other people.

    The primary difference is the basis of the ethics. Fe is reflecting values of the primary group sometimes at the sake of the satisfying self and Fi is reflecting values of the inner self sometimes at the sake of getting along with the group. Fi and Fe can do similar things and have similar values, just for different reasons.

    It gets very confusing to me, though. because ENFPs "mirror" people much in the way one would think Fe would do, and we also seem to need people. HOWEVER, we can thrive without having to constantly be actually interacting with others...and that's the difference between Fi and Fe. Even an ISFJ, being an introvert, wants to interact with others because of Fe. An INFP on the other hand might be quite self-reliant and need very little social contact, although they do think about ethics and people.

    I know I'm not explaining this well.
    ^ This.

    I'm more focused on humanity and society at large rather than concentrated on people individually. Almost any personal understanding I gain about an individual, I want to use to work out what it means in a larger context (although I can't say how much this has to do with Ne). I'm pretty sure that if someone asked me if I was a 'people person' or even 'interested in people", I would say no without blinking an eye. In reality, people are my biggest interest but this doesn't necessitate much in the way of actual interaction and hearing about people's inane bullsh*t, which to me is often what those statements are generally implied to be about. I separate my general interest in people and society, from an interest in specifically engaging with individuals. Not that I hate dealing with people - its just not my primary concern.

    This makes me think of that quote: "I love mankind; it's people I can't stand"
    INFP 4w5 so/sp

    I've dreamt in my life dreams that have stayed with me ever after, and changed my ideas;
    they've gone through and through me, like wine through water, and altered the colour of my mind.

    - Emily Bronte

  6. #16
    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 Rebe View Post
    fi is more idea-oriented for the sole purpose of the idea while still staying true to people
    Quote Originally Posted by marmalade.sunrise View Post
    Fi is about people, but it's more about people in the abstract, I think.

    he noted that many of my interests involve thinking about people (sociology, psychology, literature, history, etc.)
    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Kross View Post
    ^ This.

    I'm more focused on humanity and society at large rather than concentrated on people individually. Almost any personal understanding I gain about an individual, I want to use to work out what it means in a larger context (although I can't say how much this has to do with Ne). I'm pretty sure that if someone asked me if I was a 'people person' or even 'interested in people", I would say no without blinking an eye. In reality, people are my biggest interest but this doesn't necessitate much in the way of actual interaction and hearing about people's inane bullsh*t, which to me is often what those statements are generally implied to be about. I separate my general interest in people and society, from an interest in specifically engaging with individuals. Not that I hate dealing with people - its just not my primary concern.

    This makes me think of that quote: "I love mankind; it's people I can't stand"
    I can agree with the above posts.... the answer is "yes, no, maybe so" . And that saying SoKross quoted came to mind immediately also.

    Personally, I am also not people-oriented in the way I suspect most people use the phrase. However, I am most interested in concepts that deal with the "human side" of things. I like people as puzzles; they intrigue me, and I want to figure them out, and see how everything fits into a bigger picture. I agree it's hard to know where Fi ends & Ne begins in this sort of mindset. I also like to dig into the nitty gritty of an individual's mind; let's skip the niceties & show me your guts.

    As Marmalade mentions, I also find myself having interests which are connected to people. Even my interest in math and science will be connected to a more human aspect (in my own convoluted way; it may not be apparent to others). If it's not connected to people, then I tend to find it dull. The "Humanities" seem very Fi to me, as far as the kind of thinking associated with them. At the same time, the exploration of the inner self makes you in touch with what it is to be human, so that you do consider people on the individual level & have an interest in their personal inner world (they aren't simply reduced to symbols & puzzles; how scary would that be ). That's where the whole wallowing in emotion & self-absorption aspect can come into play; if I understand every nuance of myself, then I have a springboard for understanding what it is to feel & be a person (especially a moral person). Of course, the Pe function helps to break the door open in that exploration.
    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

  7. #17
    Senior Member Rebe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4sop
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    1,505

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Kross View Post
    ^ This.

    I'm more focused on humanity and society at large rather than concentrated on people individually. Almost any personal understanding I gain about an individual, I want to use to work out what it means in a larger context (although I can't say how much this has to do with Ne). I'm pretty sure that if someone asked me if I was a 'people person' or even 'interested in people", I would say no without blinking an eye. In reality, people are my biggest interest but this doesn't necessitate much in the way of actual interaction and hearing about people's inane bullsh*t, which to me is often what those statements are generally implied to be about. I separate my general interest in people and society, from an interest in specifically engaging with individuals. Not that I hate dealing with people - its just not my primary concern.

    This makes me think of that quote: "I love mankind; it's people I can't stand"
    I find solace in the fact that there are so many people in this world. So what if the person in front of me is a real ass-face, I turn to the group of people who I admire and I feel much better again about humanity and the future. Most things I learn and notice from each individual, I also apply it to the wider context of humanity as a whole, this country as a whole, this group as a whole. When I meet someone awesomely smart and compassionate, I don't just think wow, this person is cool, I think wow, the possibilities for humankind is immense and positive because people like this person right here exists and if s/he exists, there are others...awesome! I am exaggerating a bit. This is how far and wide Fi can be while Fe is just more immediately useful.

    Southern Kross and I are both Social variants so I wonder how Fi differs with SP and SX variants. It'd be more individual and less societal-ly philosophical.

  8. #18
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    I relate to SouthernKross, OrangeAppled, and Rebe and the observations and opinions that they've shared on Fi.

    I'm sx/sp, not so first, so I am probably more inclined to keep it on a theoretical level and apply it more in reality to people I'm strongly drawn to. For many years it was difficult for me to get out of the "Grr this person is such an asshat, leave me alone, I only want to be with my select, preferred people" but now I'm able to apply it to a wider context through self-examination and life experience, I can think about what motivates people to act like an asshat in varying situations, and I find more and more as I grow older I can rationalize a lot of times why someone is behaving badly: "Oh they're tired/hungry/stressed out/don't know any better because their life experience has been xyz." I've grown more compassionate with age, but I think as SX first as a younger person I was more inclined to only like "a certaiin kind of person" and my ENFJ sister once sardonically observed this with a bit of disapproval.

  9. #19
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    I'd say, as others have said, Fi is kind of a holistic, fuzzy-logic approach to things. Specifically, it is the introverted version of such. Ti's approach is far more deliberately logical and objective, but it is still the introverted version.

    The introverted functions are interesting in that they can kind of be regarded as the entity responsible for answering the question, "But what do you really think?" These are the thought processes close to one's heart/self.

    I would draw similar distinctions between Te and Fe. Fe is holistic analysis applied externally, Te is more deliberately objective analysis applied to the same. As extroverted functions, they characterize those things we tend to say openly to others, without fear of revealing our true selves.

    The Fx functions are "people oriented" because their holistic approach is very well suited to analyzing and evaluating people, whether as individuals (Fi) or as groups or part of a group (Fe). The holistic approach of Fx is not as well-suited to more objective "thingies", where a detailed understanding of underlying logical rules is often more applicable than "fuzzy logic." The analytical approach of Tx is not well-suited to analyzing people: people aren't logical, they don't make sense, they don't seem to be based off of clear underlying principles that explicitly dictate everything about them.

    To me more clear about the holistic vs logical, I should note that "holistic" works very well when there is no good way to get a grasp of underlying deterministic principles, that instead one must work with supposition, what things "look like" and characterizing situations/problems in ways that are qualitative but not very quantitative at all. Contrariwise, "logic" works well with good, objective definitions that are always true, and can be quantified.

    So it isn't so much that F is "feeling" or that T is "thinking", but that F has a fuzzy, qualitative approach to judging that, in practice, works extremely well with people and makes both Fe and Fi "people oriented." The fuzzy approach can work with other situations, too, but isn't as reliable with respect to objective metrics/standards, just as much as T can work fine with some "people problems" but often make a botch of things.

    Fi is specifically using that holistic judgment in an introverted way. At it's best, it is good at understanding oneself as a person, and at understanding other people, in terms of how they differ from oneself. This is precisely where the seeming contradiction of being relaxed and forgiving and nonjudgmental but also quite firm and judging and obstinate with respect to particular beliefs comes from. In order to understand others as individuals, one must accept them as is, that there is an inviolable core of other individuals that must be respected.

    Yet in understanding oneself, one's own core is just as inviolable and cannot be violated lightly. One accepts oneself and one's own strengths and flaws, understanding their interdependency (that one cannot be perfect in every way, because different kinds of perfection/strength are mutually exclusive). To that end, a violation of one's "core values" is a violation of one's core, of the kind of person one believes oneself to be. In order to change those values, one must change oneself. It's doable, and Fi users do it occasionally (more frequently when younger and still growing), but one doesn't easily change oneself just because one is told that one is wrong. One must evaluate, understand and accept that the change is right and good, first, which is not a fast process, and then one must work to change oneself, which is also not a fast process.

    I don't believe "abstract" is a good way to describe how Fi handles people (though I understand and agree with the thought/idea behind using the word), because it is too easily confused with Ne (or Ni for that matter). I would describe it as more "internalized", or "not directly dependent upon empirical observation." It tends to understand people as individuals, in terms of others' own self-understanding, as opposed to understanding people in terms of how they interact with other people.

    My T/F distinction might tend to indicate to some that Fi "can't do math," when nothing could be further from the truth. Math is a learned skill, and I do not believe a young IxFP has to "develop" or "differentiate" inferior Te (or Ti for that matter!) in order to do math. Fi is about how one understands and evaluates reality in order to make decisions. I would imagine that the Fi personal "shortcuts" for doing math differ significantly from those of Ti or Te, though I suspect it would be difficult to measure such a thing. It is, rather, the acceptance that the fuzzy logic judgment is "OK" or even preferable in most cases, that means one "uses Fi."

  10. #20
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    It tends to understand people as individuals, in terms of others' own self-understanding, as opposed to understanding people in terms of how they interact with other people.
    @bold: I like this. To me, there's this underpinning of why one interacts with others in the way they do that feels like a deeper truth to me.

    For example, there are a variety of reasons why a person would choose to be polite. From what I understand, Fe would be happy the person was being polite, maintaining a positive social aura, despite any inner reservations. Fi cares more about the reasons why one chooses to be polite, why a person does what they do, what their true feelings are.

    My T/F distinction might tend to indicate to some that Fi "can't do math," when nothing could be further from the truth. Math is a learned skill, and I do not believe a young IxFP has to "develop" or "differentiate" inferior Te (or Ti for that matter!) in order to do math. Fi is about how one understands and evaluates reality in order to make decisions. I would imagine that the Fi personal "shortcuts" for doing math differ significantly from those of Ti or Te, though I suspect it would be difficult to measure such a thing.
    In uni calculus esp, my failing was the ability to follow other people's "logiks" used to solve equations, and to adequately show the work for my own solutions. It wasn't fun.

    Interesting to ponder that.
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt


    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

Similar Threads

  1. Why is Fi the most devauled or unappreciated function?
    By Blackout in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 138
    Last Post: 08-15-2016, 03:45 PM
  2. [Fi] What is Fi like for you?
    By sculpting in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 04-14-2011, 11:33 AM
  3. [Fi] Is Fi an emo mirror?
    By sculpting in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 07-07-2009, 08:10 AM
  4. What is this guys personality type?
    By titanguy in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-31-2008, 10:35 AM
  5. "I" is not one person?
    By nightning in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-29-2008, 03:01 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