User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 39

  1. #21
    Senior Member Noon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    806

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    @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.
    I disagree. Fe, especially Fe-Ti, is all about understanding why people do what they do and how they do it. This reminds me of the notion that Fe users are all about ignoring the truth. I feel like Fe is only relaying the truth in a subtle, action-oriented manner; it's always there if you look closely enough, and I think that enough Fe users do. Fe naturally causes one to drift to what is implied by both what was and was not said, tone or expression [how it was said], reading between the lines and filling in the blanks. I don't believe there's any action [or non-action] that isn't scanned or examined by Fe-Ti to get the meaning/message behind it, to get to a person's true feelings and focus on content instead of solely wrapping. Fe isn't about being polite for the sake of being polite, imo, it's about framing your sentiments in a way that doesn't cause more pain or chaos than it needs to, because few small potatoes are worth so much to sidestep the entire ultimate focus or goal. (To be honest, I also don't particularly like that Fe is associated with groups. It's weird, especially for IFJs. Cultures, ideologies, social structures, languages > groups of people)

    Proteanmix explained it best:

    Quote Originally Posted by proteanmix
    I'm sensitive to ramifications, implications, and what is being communicated...what are my actions communicating to another person, what are my words communicating, what are my and the other person's discrepancies and consistencies? What are they saying to me, what do I expect of them, am I being reasonable, what can I realistically expect, what is most likely to happen between me and this other person, what kind of position am I putting them in, and conversely thinking do they realize what position they're putting me in.

    I'm sensitive to power balances and tend to see people in relationship to one another and myself to another person. What am I to them?
    What is this person typically like? What are their patterns of behavior and thought? What do they want? What are their beliefs and what's important to them? What are their reactions like? How do they typically react to XYZ?
    What is their baseline? How is this person contextually different?
    What kind of tone do I want between me and this person or me and this group of people? How do I approach them?
    How is this person or group of people going to fit in my life? How am I going to "zone" them? How much of myself, my energy and my thoughts do I give to them?

    What is the context and history between these people, or between myself and this person? What's their background? How do our backgrounds intersect?
    How likely is our pattern of interaction with each other to change, is it worth changing, am I invested enough to change myself enough to adapt? Are they invested enough to change?
    What's going on in this person's head, why do they think the way they do, how aligned are we, where do we agree/disagree?

    The resolution on this can get finer and finer, I can zoom into ONE particular relationship and start dissecting that.

    What do things mean between me and this person? What are our personal symbols? What does it mean when we say this or do that? How do I show I care? How do they show me they care? How deeply have they penetrated me and vice versa? How open and free can we be with each other? Do I feel judged? Do they feel judged? Do they feel they can come to me, feel safe with me? Do I feel likewise? How much can be left unsaid between us and how much needs to be explicit? What does it mean when we leave things unsaid...is it trust or something else? How much trust do we have established? Is it OK for me to say that I feel this negative emotion or I need XYZ? Should I expect them to fulfill me this way? Should they expect me to fulfill them in this way, etc. etc.

    I have always felt that as a Fe-dom, I'm operating on multiple tracks. Consciously, I tend to operate on these levels, no particular order of importance and I hope that people can see the distinction between these very similar outlooks:

    * how I see me (looking at myself)
    * how other people see me (other people looking at me)
    * how I see other people seeing me (looking at someone looking at me)
    * how I see myself towards other people (looking at me and another person together as a fly on the wall)

  2. #22
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    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.
    Quote Originally Posted by Noon View Post
    I disagree. Fe, especially Fe-Ti, is all about understanding why people do what they do and how they do it. This reminds me of the notion that Fe users are all about ignoring the truth. I feel like Fe is only relaying the truth in a subtle, action-oriented manner; it's always there if you look closely enough, and I think that enough Fe users do. Fe naturally causes one to drift to what is implied by both what was and was not said, tone or expression [how it was said], reading between the lines and filling in the blanks. I don't believe there's any action [or non-action] that isn't scanned or examined by Fe-Ti to get the meaning/message behind it, to get to a person's true feelings and focus on content instead of solely wrapping. Fe isn't about being polite for the sake of being polite, imo, it's about framing your sentiments in a way that doesn't cause more pain or chaos than it needs to, because few small potatoes are worth so much to sidestep the entire ultimate focus or goal. (To be honest, I also don't particularly like that Fe is associated with groups. It's weird, especially for IFJs. Cultures, ideologies, social structures, languages > groups of people)
    I would say that you're both correct in your own ways.

    Fi cares about "true feelings" in the sense that Fi regards true feelings, which is different from the Fe/Ti sense.

    Fe cares about "true feelings" or motivations in a rather "Ti" way: there is always some "logical reason" why people "really do" what they do. It tends to misread Fi: what is "reading between the lines" to Fe often feels like "writing between the lines" to me. This tendency is, of course, ameliorated with experience: I think it takes a while for Fe to understand Fi in a genuine way, and vice versa.

    This is, in fact, how I meant:
    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.
    What Fi "really thinks" is quite different from what Ti "really thinks." What these differences are has been explored ad nauseum with several Fe/Fi threads.

  3. #23
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    What these differences are has been explored ad nauseum with several Fe/Fi threads.
    Indeed.

    -----

    Hmm, I had a post for you Noon, and seem to have lost it.

    I agree that protean's post is excellent.

    Fe hinges on what one sees and then connecting the dots in a logical way.

    This thread can't bear anymore introspection from me than that atm though, so forgive my imprecision.
    "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

  4. #24
    Senior Member Noon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    806

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    I would say that you're both correct in your own ways.

    Fi cares about "true feelings" in the sense that Fi regards true feelings, which is different from the Fe/Ti sense.

    Fe cares about "true feelings" or motivations in a rather "Ti" way: there is always some "logical reason" why people "really do" what they do. It tends to misread Fi: what is "reading between the lines" to Fe often feels like "writing between the lines" to me. This tendency is, of course, ameliorated with experience: I think it takes a while for Fe to understand Fi in a genuine way, and vice versa.

    This is, in fact, how I meant:

    What Fi "really thinks" is quite different from what Ti "really thinks." What these differences are has been explored ad nauseum with several Fe/Fi threads.
    I guess I can agree with that.

    I'll go and read all of the other Fe/Fi threads.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    Hmm, I had a post for you Noon, and seem to have lost it.

    I agree that protean's post is excellent.
    It's cool.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    Fe hinges on what one sees and then connecting the dots in a logical way.
    As a starting point, yes, but I try to dive as deeply into the person as I can, shifting from logical analysis of basic behavior to trying to understand their fundamental fears, desires, values and most all else, almost trying to 'become' them, through a mix of empathy (not sympathy) and [sometimes blind, sometimes educated] speculation. It's important to me that I understand things from both angles, especially so that I can use it to understand their basic behavior from a logical angle even more so. I always assumed it was just as much Fe-Ti as everything else, because the goal remains the same. Or maybe I'm just missing the point again (in that all I'm describing is just a different way of explaining connecting the dots in a logical way, based on action).

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    This thread can't bear anymore introspection from me than that atm though, so forgive my imprecision.
    No worries.

  5. #25
    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 uumlau View Post
    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."
    Interesting post.

    I do think there is a danger for this to wander into FiNe/NeFi territory with the idea of people in the abstract (the Se Fi users really need to have their say to keep the Ne-ers in line). I can't say for certain that this is true for Fi in general but this is how I see it:

    Fe applies a more universal understanding of people in general in order to make sense of individuals
    Fi applies an understanding of individuals in order to gain a more universal insight into people in general

    So for me as a Fi-dom, individuals only have meaning in how they relate to what I know of others, whereas Fe uses seem to find meaning in individuals alone. Both Fi and Fe put their focus on people (and holistically as you say) but take that interest in opposite directions: Fi starts close up and steps back from people to view the whole and Fe begins further away and moves towards people to investigate the specific. In this sense it can seem like Fi isn't people-oriented because it is to move away from people and be distanced from them to a degree.
    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. #26
    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
    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.
    I'm dipping into Ne here, but I can enjoy people in an inspirational way; as you say, there are individuals you come across who make you aware of more possibilities for people to be good, & that's heartening. It's like a reflection of your own values in reality, and it helps you see how to go about this yourself. I would say that it's Ne which helps me put Fi values into action, where you begin to see my compassionate, caring side (which is still quiet & subtle; it feels like to has to be in order to be genuine & not a ploy for glory). I too easily identify with others' feelings to ignore them. I'm not entirely sure what this has to do with my instinctual variants though....

    The SP instinct can involve helping others feel comfortable, especially through the physical environment. I suppose, being NF, that in dealing with people I also like to make them feel at ease emotionally. The SX adds a need for intimacy; which is why I want to skip the small talk & dig into the main course. Like a lot of INFx types report, I get the stranger spilling their problems to me, as if I have "therapist" tattooed on my forehead. I don't mind it though. In a sense, it's flattering that I have a calm presence so people feel safe to be that vulnerable. Outside of intellectual discussions, this is how I connect with people also; the SX instinct wants intensity. I'm people-oriented on that level. It's also another way of information gathering; all of this is weighed & sifted against the inner ideal, and you form clearer & wider spread pictures of the human condition. This helps you interact with people better, obviously, as you understand the inner workings of them better.

    To reference Marmalade again - when I was much younger, I also automatically disliked people a lot of the time. I don't know why; it was a sort of ornery, knee-jerk reaction. With age, and probably Ne development, I begin to give the benefit of the doubt more, which increased my compassion & softened my demeanor. I don't give too much weight to my first impressions; they're based on limited info. I have a more "wait & see" approach to people. Again, I think this sort of adds to the aspect of people feeling safe with you. They're not going to be judged & have advice shoved down their throats; they can just talk and be heard, and possibly have their feelings sorted & articulated so they can figure out what to do with them.

    I'm just rambling now....it's so easy to build a wall of text .
    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. #27
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    I read that in Thomson's book.. that Fi doms might have some prejudice and stereotypical thinking. Some snubbing here and there - and the way out came over time, with Perceiving being developed.

    I never had that issue myself. If anything, I've always been on the receiving end. If I didn't read more about it, I would have thought it was extreme Si, not Fi. Like, I'd think they people who were caught in some worldview, scanning differences, and how I didn't fit in it at first (then again, I guess that could be Fi too).

  8. #28
    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 KDude View Post
    I read that in Thomson's book.. that Fi doms might have some prejudice and stereotypical thinking. Some snubbing here and there - and the way out came over time, with Perceiving being developed.

    I never had that issue myself. If anything, I've always been on the receiving end. If I didn't read more about it, I would have thought it was extreme Si, not Fi. Like, I'd think they people who were caught in some worldview, scanning differences, and how I didn't fit in it at first (then again, I guess that could be Fi too).
    I also meant to imply there seems a self-preservational aspect to it, at least for me. I didn't know if I could trust people; it was a reject before I am rejected approach. I was also very shy as a child, and I'm sure that was a lot of it.

    It's entirely different from Si; it was not dislike of the unfamiliar or preconceived ideas. It was an apathy towards people in general; it was rejection without judgment. A gut reaction. It was like: I can't relate to you personally & so I don't understand you & you're annoying me; you're disrupting my internal equilibrium & my thoughts & daydreaming, & that is not welcome; I want to be alone, go away. I'd find myself begrudgingly interacting, and then I'd find myself having fun. Now, I'm curious about people & don't feel wary of how they'll affect me internally (as much; I'm still quite shy).

    I read something somewhere about how kids don't fully understand that people around them feel differently than they do; that awareness develops with age in everyone. So I think kids project a lot. I felt unlikable, and so other people were too, or something like that.
    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. #29

    Default

    So, what is the count so far? I think of Fi as a person centred function. I get pegged as isfp over istp because I am so sweet and friendly so I am guessing others do too.

    But yeah, I want to know what the count is. All in favour of Fi as a person centred function say Hai in Japanese.

  10. #30
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    ^ I got the impression all the Fi-ers in here thought of it as people-centered in some way....

    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. 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