User Tag List

Page 35 of 77 FirstFirst ... 25333435363745 ... LastLast
Results 341 to 350 of 765

Thread: Dear Fe User,

  1. #341
    Administrator Array highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    16,398

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by _Poki_ View Post
    The Fi feeling thats described in that video is much different then Fi being an idealist. Its more about "feeling" whats around you, not about being an idealist. Shooting for a certain feeling is an idealist, but just feeling whats around you is different. One is goal oriented and one experience oriented within Fi function.
    You're right. I may be over-emphasizing the idealistic part. The function does feel idealistic to me though. I suppose it is like how Ti is more idealistic than Te. For Fi though, it's more evident because of this focus on personal values.

    Please provide feedback on my Nohari and Johari Window by clicking here: Nohari/Johari

    Tri-type 639

  2. #342
    Active Member Array Poki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    xSTP
    Posts
    9,195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    This may have been posted before, but it seems relevant to the discussion.

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...23601827072974

    Some choice comments:

    INFJ - To me, this whole values thing is like, "What? I don't get that"

    INFP - When we are talking about being at a party. I don't like being around a lot of people. I don't even know them but I am already judging... I don't know if I can trust these people. There is sense of don't get near me unless I know a bit about you... There is a guard up. I can see where the judgmental aspect comes in because i do have that up.
    INFJ - How long does it take for you to make your mind up about someone? 3 second, 3 hours, 3 weeks?
    INFP - Not long. It's about 20 seconds. It is a feeling right in my gut, in my heart. The words that come to mind is are they authentic, are they real, or are they trying to sell me something or try to manipulate me and I usually say no to that.
    The thing about a party and being dominant Ji is that its a social event where you are expected to be a certain way. Guards will go up, and I(as an Ji dom) will judge on whether I can trust them to let me be myself. Take the "party" people and put them in a different environment where they are not comfortable and I am sure a guard will go up. Has nothing to do with Fi judgement, but comfort level.

  3. #343
    Active Member Array Poki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    xSTP
    Posts
    9,195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    You're right. I may be over-emphasizing the idealistic part. The function does feel idealistic to me though. I suppose it is like how Ti is more idealistic than Te. For Fi though, it's more evident because of this focus on personal values.
    I actually see Js holding onto these ideals more strongly then Ps though. IMO the function we hold onto like this is our tertiary function. For IxTJ its Fi idealistic, for ExFP its Te practical.

  4. #344
    Happy Dancer Array uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,715

    Default Thinking in "different spaces"

    There is a concept known as the "Fourier" transform, which can rewrite a set of equations in an entirely new "space." It is especially useful for any set of equations that results in "wave functions." E.g., sound waves, electromagnetic waves, and so on.

    In "real space," the wave equations are complicated partial differential equations, e.g.,


    (Sorry this is in mks rather than the more usual cgs units)

    In "Fourier space," the wave equations instead become linear, algebraic equations, as shown in some detail in this link.

    In practical terms, the solutions to the "real space" equations is a single, evolving wave form that indicates the specific amplitude at each point in space and time of whatever waves (sound, electromagnetic) the equations describe. If one records a sound digitally, for example in a .wav file, the file records the amplitude of the wave as a function of time, its accuracy dependent upon the number of bits and the frequency of the sampling.

    The waves in this wave file don't "look like" the sound at all. It is, rather, the raw data of the sound, the empirical measurement of the values over time.

    The Fourier transform shows a different picture of waves. Instead of the amplitude of a single wave, the solution of the transformed function is a spectrum of frequencies. Some of the frequencies of the spectrum have a low value, others have a high value. Looking at these more closely, these spectra show notes and timbre and actually "look like" the sound. A low note has high values at low frequencies, and is almost nothing at high frequencies, and vice versa. A chord is several peaks, each peak a note.

    The Fourier space, then, is what we hear. We don't hear the amplitude as a function of time, but rather, how the frequencies within the overall wave resonate within our ears.

    The math is entirely qualitatively different, but describes the same physical phenomena! One is a .wav file, the other is an .mp3 file. Same physics, same sounds, completely different math/numbers.

    Which perspective is better? Well, it depends. The "real space" solutions are valuable because they represent values of fields and forces that affect matter. The overall amplitude of a sound wave is important with respect to making sure a microphone doesn't "clip" the peaks. The "Fourier space" solutions are valuable, because they represent the information contained in the wave: the voice, the notes, the "sounds" as a human would hear them. Given the Fourier transform, it is possible to limit the frequencies one plays back from a recording, e.g., enhancing voice-level frequencies that would otherwise be drowned out by the white noise of wind or the low rumbling of a train passing by.

    Thinking in both spaces is useful.

    The reason I know a bit too much about this stuff is that I've modeled a plasma by using a combination of these, switching between both spaces. In real space, I would have electric and magnetic fields pushing particles, because in that space, the math is linear algebra. Then I'd take the densities of the particles and transform them into Fourier space. In Fourier space, the math to solve for the fields is simple linear algebra, so I quickly get a solution there. Then I transform that solution back into real space, using the fields I derived in Fourier space, then transformed to real space, to push the particles as I did before. Wash, Rinse, Repeat.

    By using both spaces to solve things, I'm able to process the plasma equations much faster than otherwise, with remarkable accuracy. Conceptually, the particles live in real space, and the fields live in Fourier space.

    I can use this understanding of real vs Fourier spaces to provide perspective on these endless Fe/Fi threads.

    Fe and Fi think in different spaces, Fe-space and Fi-space. Both spaces model the same things, but measure/describe/decipher real events and understandings entirely differently. If you take "Fi-numbers" and put them in "Fe-spaces" without properly transforming them, the Fi-numbers look like nonsense. In fact, they are nonsense, in Fe-space. The reverse is true, with raw Fe-data looking like nonsense in Fi-space.

    This is entirely the source of differences. What is all-too-often missing is the Fe-Fi transformation of the raw data. At least one of the two people involved in a conversation has to do the work of the transformation, and it's best if both do it. The "transformation" is, in simple terms, the ability to think in both spaces, that is to say, hear the Fi-raw-data in one's own Fi-space, and the Fe-raw-data in one's own Fe-space. The human brain is quite amazing: if one can switch gears, and listen to others in their own spaces, the transformation to the alternative space isn't that difficult. It's not unlike learning and thinking in a foreign language, or learning to play a new musical instrument: it's not a one-to-one mapping, and it's possible to have entities in one space that simply cannot exist in the other, but mostly it translates over.

    I would suggest that while one certainly has one's preferred mode of thinking, it is something of a character flaw to refuse to recognize the validity of the alternative mode of thinking, especially for communication and interpersonal harmony. That means being able to recognize the alternate mode, and making an effort to understand it in its own terms, before applying one's preferred thinking-space.

    Where these threads tend to break down appears to be when a failure to successfully understand/transform the information between thinking-spaces is interpreted as an attack or a willful insistence that information is only properly evaluated in one's preferred thinking space.

    Moreover the question isn't whether Fe vs Fi plays a role in misunderstandings of this nature, but rather how and to what degree. People will occasionally misapply or mislabel aspects of these misunderstandings, but that shouldn't be taken as evidence that Fe vs Fi considerations don't apply, but rather should be understood as a failure of understanding in that particular instance.

    I suspect that part of the problem is that the Fe-Fi transformation is drastically limited by text communication. Body language, tone of voice, awareness of other contexts only visible to those present in person, all contribute to one's ability to do this transformation. One needs to learn new, text-based, cues to properly transform the understandings, e.g., "if someone is speaking in terms of how-I-feel, then one should read the words in Fi-space, not in Fe-space."

  5. #345

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cascadeco View Post
    For me personally? Not that it's necessarily being done in this thread, but just generally speaking: When people attribute specific behaviors to one and only one function (basically similar to the concept of going... oh, I'm INFJ because I am x, y, and z... when in reality, x, y, and z can be attributes of other types as well, under certain circumstances), and basically the tendency, which is easy on this forum to fall into, to try to explain every psychological phenomena and interpersonal situation by using function-speak and only function-speak.
    Hugs for you Miss Cascadeco!

    Since I get highlighted as being a "function junkie" quite often, let me give an illustrative example of how I use this in real life...

    I was chatting with my new entp boss yesterday. He had been passed a book on management by his boss to read because several of the other managers were reading it. I asked him what the book was about and he got the "sketchy" ENTP look. It's that look they get when confused or angsty but arent really sure if they should say anything.

    The book was about how to step outside of the culture of domination that managers in corporate america are trained to act in. The book started off talking about how we ALL innately seek to dominate each other from childhood and control others around us and do so via assertive methods and that has to change in order to be a productive leader-we have to learn to care. It then goes on for awhile about empathy. It is a book meant for douchebag TJs who need to tap into Fi.

    He is an ENTP with tons of Fe, so nothing in the book meant anything to him, it was very alien to him. He cares very, very deeply for those around him and is a heavy Fe user. I have actually been encouraging him to speak up more directly to influence the ENFP and INTJ decision makers above him-which he is loathe to do as he doesnt want to rock the boat and seem rude. He has been making progress in this area, over the last few months, and the more direct nature of his communication has helped (along with many other things like good Ti DATA) convince and initiate change, as well as really push the point of the severity of the problems faced.

    But then he was given this book that says managers should be less direct, be kinder, not be assertive and be less domineering and more open to group feedback-all things he is already superb at, to the point of being negative at times, becasue he will choose to not disrupt the group, even if his Ti analysis disagrees with the actions of the group.

    After hearing about the book I said "read the book and cherry pick things that seem to be of value to you. However recognize that you are not by nature a dominating manager but more manage by consensus, thus many of the lessons in the book may not be applicable in anyway to you. They may actually be opposite of what should be doing as you have to learn to cross the gap and communicate with individuals like those in the book by being more direct."

    He seemed relieved and even though he denies MBTI had validity-because you cant put people in boxes-I was able to give him a bit of guidance to help him based off of my understanding. He thinks MBTI is flawed-but he listens to what I tell him as it works.


    Another example-I did a Step II with an INFJ this morning.

    I mentioned-"sometimes you may find that you have a more tactful, indirect communication style that can lead others to not always perceive the full extent of your unhappiness or disagreement". She laughed and said this had come up with her husband, an INTJ, as they would argue and he would not seem to understand that just because she stopped argueing didnt mean he won-he also didnt pick up on the subtle hints at all. I mentioned that she might note that sometimes she may assume others can communicate with the same forethought and tact that she does and be surpised when they do not. I explained how we can assume others see the world the way do, and when they do things drastically different-we may assume they intended to be manipulative, when they are really being spontaneously emotive.

    She said this explained a lot of the issues she has been having with a coworker-an ENFP-and listed examples of his behavior that were bothering her. I gave her a few suggestions-basically drawing Te style demands from the ENFP-and she was very hesitant to implement as "I am not his manager". So we discussed ways to work the manager of both of them to more indirectly set those boundaries via an authority she was comfortable working with. We spoke about how different his style is from hers and ways to work in concert and tune out his worse behaviors. I also said " Have you directly raised these concerns with the enfp?" She mentioned a lot of small things she had done, but never a direct conforntation as it made her uncomfortable. I explained that the ENFP likely doesnt really appreciate the level of frustration she has reached, and again suggested addressing via built in boundaries for the group which would indirectly draw boundaries for the enfp. The enfp needs to have Te boundaries, but the INFJ feels most comfortable working in Fe ways through the supervisor...

    Fe/Fi Te/Fe Te/Ti and so on.

    I use the jungian functions as a Te framework that I then tailor to the the Fi individual in front of me. This isnt Fe-because I cant see Fe. In the same way, I suspect an Fe dom or aux might have a very hard time seeing my Te approach-they cant make all of the same connections I do or logistically outline and map things.

    The answer ends up very similar-but the approach may look very different?

  6. #346
    wants Mifune clone minion Array Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    INfJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    3,268

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    This may have been posted before, but it seems relevant to the discussion.

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...23601827072974

    Some choice comments:

    INFJ - To me, this whole values thing is like, "What? I don't get that"

    INFP - When we are talking about being at a party. I don't like being around a lot of people. I don't even know them but I am already judging... I don't know if I can trust these people. There is sense of don't get near me unless I know a bit about you... There is a guard up. I can see where the judgmental aspect comes in because i do have that up.
    INFJ - How long does it take for you to make your mind up about someone? 3 second, 3 hours, 3 weeks?
    INFP - Not long. It's about 20 seconds. It is a feeling right in my gut, in my heart. The words that come to mind is are they authentic, are they real, or are they trying to sell me something or try to manipulate me and I usually say no to that.
    A problem I have with that video is that there's a difference between those two that seems to me more accountable by instinct variants than mbti. The guy seems very SP, probably least SO; the woman seems very SO, probably least SP. I relate a lot more to the guy at times, as far as the way he describes the kind of boundaries he needs.

    This part I relate to, as an SP: "When we are talking about being at a party. I don't like being around a lot of people. I don't even know them but I am already judging... I don't know if I can trust these people. There is sense of don't get near me unless I know a bit about you... There is a guard up."

    Not so much this part: "Not long. It's about 20 seconds. It is a feeling right in my gut, in my heart. The words that come to mind is are they authentic, are they real, or are they trying to sell me something or try to manipulate me and I usually say no to that."

    My point is, I'm not so sure the top example is as Fi related as the video makes it out to be. Though there's something about the bottom example that seems Fi flavored, imo.

    edit: Also, for what it's worth, I'm totally with Cascadeco on the function thing. I think people tend to forget that function theory is a man-made construct which represents an underlying phenomenon, made for the purpose of being able to discuss the phenomenon with each other. Instead of refining the construct to better represent the phenomenon, people have a tendency to try to cram the phenomenon into the construct which has already been established. That probably didn't make sense, but I don't have time to stop and better articulate just now. At any rate, I agree with Cascadeco.
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari

  7. #347
    Administrator Array highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    16,398

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    Thinking in both spaces is useful.

    By using both spaces to solve things, I'm able to process the plasma equations much faster than otherwise, with remarkable accuracy. Conceptually, the particles live in real space, and the fields live in Fourier space.
    That's an interesting analogy. You've mentioned something along these lines before I think. It's good to see it explained.

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    Fe and Fi think in different spaces, Fe-space and Fi-space. Both spaces model the same things, but measure/describe/decipher real events and understandings entirely differently. If you take "Fi-numbers" and put them in "Fe-spaces" without properly transforming them, the Fi-numbers look like nonsense. In fact, they are nonsense, in Fe-space. The reverse is true, with raw Fe-data looking like nonsense in Fi-space.

    This is entirely the source of differences. What is all-too-often missing is the Fe-Fi transformation of the raw data. At least one of the two people involved in a conversation has to do the work of the transformation, and it's best if both do it. The "transformation" is, in simple terms, the ability to think in both spaces, that is to say, hear the Fi-raw-data in one's own Fi-space, and the Fe-raw-data in one's own Fe-space. The human brain is quite amazing: if one can switch gears, and listen to others in their own spaces, the transformation to the alternative space isn't that difficult. It's not unlike learning and thinking in a foreign language, or learning to play a new musical instrument: it's not a one-to-one mapping, and it's possible to have entities in one space that simply cannot exist in the other, but mostly it translates over.

    I would suggest that while one certainly has one's preferred mode of thinking, it is something of a character flaw to refuse to recognize the validity of the alternative mode of thinking, especially for communication and interpersonal harmony. That means being able to recognize the alternate mode, and making an effort to understand it in its own terms, before applying one's preferred thinking-space.

    Where these threads tend to break down appears to be when a failure to successfully understand/transform the information between thinking-spaces is interpreted as an attack or a willful insistence that information is only properly evaluated in one's preferred thinking space.

    Moreover the question isn't whether Fe vs Fi plays a role in misunderstandings of this nature, but rather how and to what degree. People will occasionally misapply or mislabel aspects of these misunderstandings, but that shouldn't be taken as evidence that Fe vs Fi considerations don't apply, but rather should be understood as a failure of understanding in that particular instance.

    I suspect that part of the problem is that the Fe-Fi transformation is drastically limited by text communication. Body language, tone of voice, awareness of other contexts only visible to those present in person, all contribute to one's ability to do this transformation. One needs to learn new, text-based, cues to properly transform the understandings, e.g., "if someone is speaking in terms of how-I-feel, then one should read the words in Fi-space, not in Fe-space."
    I think you are probably right about all of these things. I don't know if I'd characterize the failure to recognize the validity of alternative modes of thinking as a character flaw exactly but to the extent you are able to bridge the gap between the two, it would certainly help you to communicate much more effectively. I have often thought over the years that when people are too strongly aligned with one "pole" or the other, it inhibits their effectiveness.

    I also agree that this is much more difficult online for exactly the reasons you describe.

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    A problem I have with that video is that there's a difference between those two that seems to me more accountable by instinct variants than mbti. The guy seems very SP, probably least SO; the woman seems very SO, probably least SP. I relate a lot more to the guy at times, as far as the way he describes the kind of boundaries he needs.

    This part I relate to, as an SP: "When we are talking about being at a party. I don't like being around a lot of people. I don't even know them but I am already judging... I don't know if I can trust these people. There is sense of don't get near me unless I know a bit about you... There is a guard up."

    Not so much this part: "Not long. It's about 20 seconds. It is a feeling right in my gut, in my heart. The words that come to mind is are they authentic, are they real, or are they trying to sell me something or try to manipulate me and I usually say no to that."

    My point is, I'm not so sure the top example is as Fi related as the video makes it out to be. Though there's something about the bottom example that seems Fi flavored, imo.

    edit: Also, for what it's worth, I'm totally with Cascadeco on the function thing. I think people tend to forget that function theory is a man-made construct which represents an underlying phenomenon, made for the purpose of being able to discuss the phenomenon with each other. Instead of refining the construct to better represent the phenomenon, people have a tendency to try to cram the phenomenon into the construct which has already been established. That probably didn't make sense, but I don't have time to stop and better articulate just now. At any rate, I agree with Cascadeco.
    Good catch on the instinctual variants. Funny - I relate to her much more than him - but then I'm not paying so much attention to the boundaries. I think it is probably sharing Ni more than anything else and that she is searching to explore/understand.

    Please provide feedback on my Nohari and Johari Window by clicking here: Nohari/Johari

    Tri-type 639

  8. #348
    Symbolic Herald Array Vasilisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cascadeco View Post
    For me personally? Not that it's necessarily being done in this thread, but just generally speaking: When people attribute specific behaviors to one and only one function (basically similar to the concept of going... oh, I'm INFJ because I am x, y, and z... when in reality, x, y, and z can be attributes of other types as well, under certain circumstances), and basically the tendency, which is easy on this forum to fall into, to try to explain every psychological phenomena and interpersonal situation by using function-speak and only function-speak.
    +1 to the entire post.

    It all reminds me so much of the obsession over nutritionism. Nutritionism is the fixation over analyzing the various nutrients in food and reducing the entire experience of food accordingly. Fetishizing these invisible things and their supposed scientific certainty leads to food science proponents elation for having apparently (this time!) cracked the code and then more pronouncements follow. But the fact is that for all the studies and trends and conflicting reports, the entirety of the way human bodies process food is still not completely understood. There are mysteries yet that science can't even see. A more holistic approach to food is often much better for people.

    Sorry to go off topic
    the formless thing which gives things form!
    Found Forum Haiku Project


    Positive Spin | your feedback welcomed | Darker Criticism

  9. #349

    Default

    I asked my ENTP about how to peacefully explain to an Fe user that you would like to agree to disagree...

    She just stared at me. she said typically you just gently say "Ah that's useful advice, thanks!" then dont take the advice. She said another option is to be very sarcastic and mean but you will typically end the relationship at this point. She didnt have an answer for how to explain to an Fe user you had heard the message but wanted to agree to disagree as you see the world in different ways. This points to a worrying trend-that Fe may have a very difficult time admitting there is another valid way to view the world. As we discussed the issue she said it may be that Fe is offended on a value level by the notion that their are alternatives to Fe-thus will continue forward to insist upon the Fe judgment.

    She also said the INFJs in the thread may be falling prey to Ti being a bit lazy but I dont understand the implications of this or what she meant.

  10. #350
    Active Member Array Poki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    xSTP
    Posts
    9,195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orobas View Post
    I asked my ENTP about how to peacefully explain to an Fe user that you would like to agree to disagree...

    She just stared at me. she said typically you just gently say "Ah that's useful advice, thanks!" then dont take the advice. She said another option is to be very sarcastic and mean but you will typically end the relationship at this point. She didnt have an answer for how to explain to an Fe user you had heard the message but wanted to agree to disagree as you see the world in different ways. This points to a worrying trend-that Fe may have a very difficult time admitting there is another valid way to view the world. As we discussed the issue she said it may be that Fe is offended on a value level by the notion that their are alternatives to Fe-thus will continue forward to insist upon the Fe judgment.

    She also said the INFJs in the thread may be falling prey to Ti being a bit lazy but I dont understand the implications of this or what she meant.
    I would be interested in how Ti is being lazy.

Page 35 of 77 FirstFirst ... 25333435363745 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The reason behind your user name.
    By Yloh in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 255
    Last Post: 09-27-2016, 12:57 PM
  2. NEW USER
    By swordpath in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 01-30-2011, 01:32 PM
  3. That new user smell...
    By ewomack in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 11-17-2008, 12:14 PM
  4. hello from user #982738291
    By Electric in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-10-2008, 04:52 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
  •