Dear Fe User,

[Tilt]

I agree. I am sometimes on the receiving end of this. When people assume they know why I have my opinion, or even what my opinion is, they are usually wrong. I can see through the sugar coating on a harsh message right away, and usually lose respect for the messenger. Better to ask than to assume.

Yes. I learned the hard way that I have a tendency to make unilateral decisions without checking in. Oftentimes, I am correct, but it leads to misunderstandings, hurt feelings, a sense of being condescended to. So I try to summarize my perceptions and ask for clarification. This strategy seems to work especially well with TJs. NPs, on the other hand, see it as an opening for a full-blown brain-storming session. Some FJs seem to take it as me being dense or cold (basically, over-explaining and insecure). It's interesting to observe. ha

 

[Z Buck McFate]

I agree. I am sometimes on the receiving end of this. When people assume they know why I have my opinion, or even what my opinion is, they are usually wrong. I can see through the sugar coating on a harsh message right away, and usually lose respect for the messenger. Better to ask than to assume.

I'm quoting for clarification. When you say you can "see through" sugar coating on a harsh message, what do you mean? Can you give an example?

I ask because you are usually a diehard critic of anyone saying they can "see through" the meaning of another person's words.

 

[Coriolis]

I'm quoting for clarification. When you say you can "see through" sugar coating on a harsh message, what do you mean? Can you give an example?

I ask because you are usually a diehard critic of anyone saying they can "see through" the meaning of another person's words.

I am assuming, first of all, that the message is indeed harsh in its basic content: perhaps news of a death, a difficult medical diagnosis, some serious criticism from the boss, being told your partner is cheating on you, etc. I suppose by "see through" I mean that the sugar coating does nothing to obscure the harsh nature of the message or its actual meaning. However much one tries to sugar-coat, it won't change whatever that harsh reality is. I immediately discard the sugar to focus on that reality, and whatever action I will take to address it. The sugar coating serves no useful purpose, and is just clutter, noise, distraction, or worse. I can try to guess why the other person might employ it but prefer not to do that, since (1) I may very likely be wrong; and (2) it really doesn't matter. The other person is therefore being at best inefficient, at worst condescending, disrespectful, or manipulative, none of which earns my respect.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

Ah. Okay thanks. Yeah that makes sense of it.

 

[Amargith]

[MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION] Im curious - would it help to swap the two around?

I tend to focus on the truth first but try to word it in a respectful and warm way (unfortunately we were not able to, etc), then add extras like ‘ im so sorry, we really did try everything we could.’

 

[Coriolis]

[MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION] Im curious - would it help to swap the two around?

I tend to focus on the truth first but try to word it in a respectful and warm way (unfortunately we were not able to, etc), then add extras like ‘ im so sorry, we really did try everything we could.’

No. I find no worthwhile information in it, and start to wonder what is the point of those remarks. "Unfortunately"? How do they know I don't hate my mother because of long years of abuse? "We were not able to" - that much is obvious. "We really did try everything" - by now, I either know what you tried because I have been checking in, or you give a quick summary so I see what was tried and didn't work, or you don't say it at all and I ask about it.

To me, being direct and focusing on the facts is respectful. Filling up the dialogue with unhelpful fluff is not.

 

[hjgbujhghg]

Dear Fe user,

not everything is necessary about you. Not everyone longs to watch you performing like you're on a theater stage every time you step out of your doorway.

 

[Lyra.I]

Dear Fe User,
I love you for how you're able to absorb all my feeels and think-out-loud self-evaluations of values & emotion, you are appreciated :')


[ Please be a little more patient with your need to get to the happy side of things when i'm working through the sad stuff ;-; ]

 

[Norexan]

Dear Fe user why all suppose to be about you?

 

[SolitaryWalker]

On the one hand, I admire Fe. Its focus on connecting, compassion, giving and being accommodating are a big part of what makes the world a good place to live. It "honors" the feeling of others, which is really wonderful and because of all of these remarkable qualities, it facilitates the building of trusting relationships in the way that perhaps no other function can replicate. Without it, I don't know if harmonious society would be possible.

At the same time, there are things which deeply disturb me about Fe. I don't like the judgements it applies to decide if somebody's actions are appropriate or not based on a generally accepted perspective or the feelings of the group. A combination of the arrogance that its perspective is right along with the fact that it tends to reflect a popular view means that it can lead to all sorts of things such as inaction, maintaining the status quo and conformity. A bad situation can continue to exist in the sake of maintaining harmony. Also, there is the particular challenge that when the Fe perspective is voiced, others quickly pile on, because of course it reflects a popular view - even if that perspective is wrong. An extreme negative example of Fe would be the Salem Witch Trials in which the mob was in agreement and yet all collectively wrong. It's like the sheep all running over the cliff together.

Don't get me wrong. I am a huge Fe fan. As I first stated, I see all of the good that it does in the world. Still, I'm quite happy to be an Fi user, with my own personal and subjective judgments, and to be freed from the tyranny of group think. Trust me Fe user, I've listened to what you said. The fact that I go along doesn't mean that I agree with you, nor does it mean you are right. It means that I've decided it is not a battle worth fighting. If I were to fight for every belief or cause I felt strongly about, I would quickly exhaust myself. When I think something is right or it's wrong, it's my own opinion and not the opinion of others. With that perspective in particular, it is important to pick your battles.

Anyway, I guess what really bothers me is a deep disconnect on the values as to what is important. It is enough to understand this and to see the worth of both perspectives, I suppose for now.

Thank you very much and carry on.

Seemingly, the pathological Fe traits you've described here are a reflection of how the cult of Social Justice has gone completely amuck.

 

[everdream]

honestly I don't relate to what many people said about Fe. Many of these problems aren't only caused by Fe, especially herd mentality thing. Everyone can follow herd mentality or peer pressure. I don't think it's fair to demonize Fe as the only people who do this. I mean, don't Fi users never have group of like-minded people who will support the same cause if your friends said so? Do you really think everyone of Hitler's supporters are Fe users? This is a blatant generalization and I can imagine someone who knows someone irl who tries to manipulate them and think "oh, that's definitely Fe user" which isn't always the case.

 

[Jaguar]

I mean, don't Fi users never have group of like-minded people who will support the same cause if your friends said so?

Not this one, no. What's in bold is mind-blowing to me.

 

[everdream]

Not this one, no. What's in bold is mind-blowing to me.

I've seen that a lot in ExFP types though.

Personally, I've never followed the herd mentality if it's not right, that's what I don't relate to what people kept saying about Fe doing bad things because others people do it. I once got kicked off a group of female friends because I talked them out of bullying another girl, the other time for a bullied nerdy boy I don't even like personally. Fe isn't about having no mind of one's own, it's about valuing group harmony first. That's all. Anyone can be a bully if they're narrow minded or judgmental or ignorant enough. It's not necessarily Fe trait or anything.

 

[Jaguar]

I've seen that a lot in ExFP types though.

Nice try. No cigar. Perhaps one will come along for you.

 

[á´…eparted]

Not this one, no. What's in bold is mind-blowing to me.

I definitely do that, but it's not an instant thing. If I start noticing a large number of people whoms judgement (in a given area) I respect and trust supporting something I currently do not, I will take it into consideration. Essentially, I think that it's unlikely that a large number of those people would collectively support the wrong thing, so there is likely something to it. Over time (it can take years in some cases) I will likely adopt it, but not always. It has to be backed up external to all of them as well.

 

[everdream]

Nice try. No cigar. Perhaps one will come along for you.

 

[Amberiat]

I've seen that a lot in ExFP types though.

Don't know about ESFPs but I doubt your average ENFP would do that, there could be some exceptions of course but if there are, they are rare, very rare.

 

[Coriolis]

I definitely do that, but it's not an instant thing. If I start noticing a large number of people whoms judgement (in a given area) I respect and trust supporting something I currently do not, I will take it into consideration. Essentially, I think that it's unlikely that a large number of those people would collectively support the wrong thing, so there is likely something to it. Over time (it can take years in some cases) I will likely adopt it, but not always. It has to be backed up external to all of them as well.

If I notice something like that, it doesn't change my own opinion, it makes me research it further to try to find out what they might be seeing that I am overlooking. If my research confirms my own judgment, though, I will not change it.

 

[Tilt]

If I notice something like that, it doesn't change my own opinion, it makes me research it further to try to find out what they might be seeing that I am overlooking. If my research confirms my own judgment, though, I will not change it.

I am actually pretty similar. Other people's opinions give me pause, I research it, and then decide based on my findings. I am incredibly stubborn that way. In fact, a good majority of my friends disagree on politics, subjective value systems, etc, but I ultimately let it go.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

If I notice something like that, it doesn't change my own opinion, it makes me research it further to try to find out what they might be seeing that I am overlooking. If my research confirms my own judgment, though, I will not change it.

I tend to distrust groups that think along the same lines, but see that it has a survival advantage. I don't think it has an objective truth advantage, but tends to be a shared, subjective response that enables survival in the way that tribal harmony enabled survival for millions of years.

I do find it compelling when multiple people reach the same conclusion independently of each other. Even though that can also be subjective and based on the ways that evolution has shaped all of our perspectives, still, I find that more compelling because it is only based on internal instinctual drives and brain structure. There are not the added layers of group dynamics.

I'll also respond to the other posts that think Ne can never group think - consider that Ne can create a shared abstracted reality. I've been in some extensive discussions and have seen it happen. Fe can form group think, but it tends to be more behaviorally based conformity, more external like religious groups that share a common morality and behavior, and Ne can create more perceptually focused shared realities like communities of conspiracy theorists who all behave differently with differing life habits, but see the same patterns in reality.