User Tag List

Page 51 of 77 FirstFirst ... 41495051525361 ... LastLast
Results 501 to 510 of 765

Thread: Dear Fe User,

  1. #501
    Filthy Apes! Array Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Well if I did elaborate, I'd be describing an overview of some relatively impersonal aspects of the system as I see it, wouldn't I. And if you have some interest in introvertedly intuitive extroverted thinking, you'd have something to add or discuss or argue against, wouldn't you. The environment would be conducive to that kind of talk and you wouldn't have to create the whole thing anew to make your own points.

    As for examples, ^ that's one. Heavy on the abstraction. Meant for mostly Ni consumption.


    Either way, if people readily and adequately access their "lesser" functional strengths, duality is meaningless. And is it, as a rule?


    (^^and that's (the start of) another example, and that one leans more on using superficial surface data from the outside world to prove that something is "true", aka it's (relatively shallow) extroverted thinking. Wanna join in?)




    Thus, as a rule of thumb, if people are doing something their type structure says they usually can't, then they're probably doing something else. Or the environment is helping in some way. And if that environmental influence was sustained enough that the person genuinely does develop unusual strengths and focuses, pffft, whatever, they're a different type now or they're a stressed normal type with some scars--who cares?! If you want to study environmental impact on persons, go for it. If you want to say environmental impact is more substantial than whatever creates Jungian appearances, go for that too. And some other stuff that I don't care about. Freaking extroverts claiming the environment is most important but still not recognising their own bias toward the environment and thus attempting to alter theory of ALL people?! Pffft.




    (^^^ Ni, Te AND Fi example, booyah.)
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  2. #502
    Active Member Array Poki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    xSTP
    Posts
    9,185

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    Well if I did elaborate, I'd be describing an overview of some relatively impersonal aspects of the system as I see it, wouldn't I. And if you have some interest in introvertedly intuitive extroverted thinking, you'd have something to add or discuss or argue against, wouldn't you. The environment would be conducive to that kind of talk and you wouldn't have to create the whole thing anew to make your own points.

    As for examples, ^ that's one. Heavy on the abstraction. Meant for mostly Ni consumption.


    Either way, if people readily and adequately access their "lesser" functional strengths, duality is meaningless. And is it, as a rule?


    (^^and that's (the start of) another example, and that one leans more on using superficial surface data from the outside world to prove that something is "true", aka it's (relatively shallow) extroverted thinking. Wanna join in?)




    Thus, as a rule of thumb, if people are doing something their type structure says they usually can't, then they're probably doing something else. Or the environment is helping in some way. And if that environmental influence was sustained enough that the person genuinely does develop unusual strengths and focuses, pffft, whatever, they're a different type now or they're a stressed normal type with some scars--who cares?! If you want to study environmental impact on persons, go for it. If you want to say environmental impact is more substantial than whatever creates Jungian appearances, go for that too. And some other stuff that I don't care about. Freaking extroverts claiming the environment is most important but still not recognising their own bias toward the environment and thus attempting to alter theory of ALL people?! Pffft.



    (^^^ Ni, Te AND Fi example, booyah.)
    LMAO. Dont know what it is about it, but I like that last part of that last paragraph. Taken to the extreme it reminds me of one of theose people who write books on how everyone should be extroverted and how much better it is. Then they dont even realize what the hell extroverted is, they just pin it to "social". Pfft, ENTJs, lol. Its like someone who thinks that everyone who is introverted has no personality. Its just that we dont want to talk to you, possibly because we dont like your personality, lol. Its fun to flip things around for the hell of it You do gotta watch though who you do this with, when, and the subject.

  3. #503
    Active Member Array Poki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    xSTP
    Posts
    9,185

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    for example, i have seen a few times in this thread when i have read a Fi user's post that i assumed was a "public broadcast" post - speaking to everyone in an explanatory manner, as myself and many Fi users seem to do. and then a single Fe user has assumed the post was about them, and responded personally, being somewhat upset because they did not align with the personal experience of the Fi user. the miscommunications seem to be that (a) the post is about the Fi user / everyone, not [the Fi user + someone else], so it's an error in the Fi paradigm to interpret it as if it's about someone's relationship with someone else, and (b) that the post is about the Fi user, so it's an error in the Fi paradigm to try to match one's own experience or feelings up with those of the poster.

    i'm curious how it looks from the other side? as if a Fi person is targeting a specific individual or a few, and blanketing them with statements that might not apply to them or to everyone, and assuming those statements are universally true?
    Here in lies where a part of the miscommunication is. Not where you think either. Take this chance of Fe taking it personal to delve into that person instead of seeing it as a miscommunication gap. Be able to take a step back and understand why they felt that way, responded that way. Try to not take it personally, but use it to dig deeper. To me understanding how to work with people "IS" what it takes to communicate effectively, its like a step in understanding someone before you can actually understand them, if that makes sense. You will more then likely get into the meat of the problem, like it opens a door to reasonings, deeper understanding, instead of just piecing together what people say.

    Also understanding differences in poster and other person usually brings up more detail about the situation and leads to a better understanding. Until someone starts name calling *cough Jag* *cough people who get into it with Jag*, lol, just playing. feelings, emotions, redirections, etc. are all part of communication and understanding.

  4. #504
    reborn Array PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,285

    Default

    Hope those who celebrate Christmas had a lovely one yesterday.

    I've missed too much to fully rejoin the conversation atm, but will share on a couple of points.

    Quote Originally Posted by cascadeco View Post
    My ONE system - my 'ONE' unification of ideas - is a composite of various systems. It's the composite that creates the whole. I'm trying to say that I use a variety of systems and while there's 'truth' in one, in terms of what it's trying to capture, there's untruth in the sense that one individual system isn't factoring in other things. The other things are accounted for in another system/approach. Or in a third, or a fourth.
    I agree with this, and the whole concept of relying on multiple models, accompanied with individual assessment tailored to each person, bearing in mind a whole host of other factors, such as life experience, gender, age, upbringing, health - physical, mental, emotional or spiritual etc etc. This is what I think you are expressing here - is that right?

    Using MBTI alone is like having a toolkit yet using only one tool out of it to try to work on everything ... what you really need are all the tools in the box and the knowledge, wisdom and sensibility to know when the usage of each is appropriate.

    When looking at MBTI though, it's interesting to see how far it will stretch out, how far the usefulness of that particular tool extends. It's not that we've forgotten the other tools or their well-documented uses. Sometimes, although all of the above appears forgotten, I think it's simply assumed obvious in the context of trying to see what typology can "do". Is that helpful to explain why you get warning bells that the premise is unsound?

    -----

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    Listen to the Fe side, PB. They feel like they're the ones bending over backwards to understand/translate.
    Hmm yes, I know. I think that although there's misinterpretation that occurs from either perspective, I do think Fe users have a much harder time to "translate" Fi and feel like it makes "sense" in the Fe world. It's not because Fi is more "meaningful": just that any inner workings of the Fi process is not on display IRL, and only sometimes the outer manifestations, thus people with other preferences don't get much "practice" at recognizing Fi, let alone validating it or understanding it. I've been around strong Te and Fe users practically all my life, so have had a lot more exposure to the external workings of each and can (even if imperfectly at times) translate back and forth. As a person who prizes harmony, it's a skill I practice often.

    Although I haven't acknowledged my deep appreciation to the Fe users in this (and other) threads, I do hope everyone here knows how much I sincerely care about you and of the effort being put forth. Please accept this as my heart-felt thank you. I try to acknowledge many of you in reps or wall posts, but maybe a public thank you is more meaningful. So, to my Fe friends who have gone on these long journies exploring both Fe and Fi - fidelia, cascadeco, Z Buck McFate, Tallulah, cafe, proteanmix, Jennifer, Tiltyred, Annwn, MacGuffin .. I appreciate you all. Now I risk leaving someone out, so if I have, forgive me. I'll search through my threads and memory-bank to try to ensure no one is forgotten. <3

    -----

    I think "talking Fi" might be like saying, "Can't I just play heavy metal music really loud and not have anyone complain?!" or "Can't I play Beethoven and not have anyone complain?" Everyone has their tastes. In order to accommodate all tastes, one either needs to express things neutrally (and rather uninterestingly), or state things in several different ways.
    However I choose to express my ideas, it is always "me." I'm not sure why others have a difficulty changing modes of expression. Maybe because to me it just feels like different arbitrary protocols, not a requirement for me to change an integral part of myself.
    In these threads, Fe users ask many questions ... since I see the effort being made to try to understand, I try to explain, thus it does set up a cycle (in these particular situations) where I am trying more to be understood than to understand myself. In my perhaps flawed logic, to understand me, means you can understand a little slice of Fi, so I try to offer myself kind of unvarnished, if you will - the acoustic version of PB ... and then when (if) each Fi user does this, the larger patterns of Fi will be more heard, more visible, more real to people.

    @bold: What I am trying to say, in another way, is that I want to explain Fi by being Fi, by talking in Fi terms, otherwise I am diluting and altering the message. Then, it's not really Fi anymore, not really "me " anymore. To "play" on the music analogy uumlau, you won't really understand heavy metal or one of Beethoven's sonatas until you really listened to each ... me describing the music to you in terms of another style of music is not going to replicate the actual experience of hearing that music for yourself. It's not about expecting everyone to accommodate my music. If a person does try to listen to my music but doesn't like it, I guess one of us has to bend ... either I don't play my music, or I try to make it sound more like yours in order to effectively communicate and have a relationship. Or, I can just keep playing it my way and let the chips fall where they may.

    Going even farther on a personal level with the analogy, instead of being appreciated for playing my music (displaying that level of honesty on this forum) I feel especially lately that I have lost credibility points for doing so. In sharing on my terms, I am well aware I risk alienating the very people I want to make connections with. And I know I likely have; this really saddens me. It's totally clear to me that IRL I have to use all of my tools to communicate with people. Here on the forum, I wanted to try a different approach for a while, let the PB song play a little more loudly. But, since I like harmony too much to keep playing my tune and offending the ears of some of the audience, I need to contemplate turning it down for a while.

    And hey, this is no pity party on my end. It is what it is, and I accept that.

    -----

    Quote Originally Posted by marmalade.sunrise View Post
    Just as an aside, I've paid attention to some of your posts and you appear to be somewhat surrounded by ExxJs, and as an IxxP you may feel drowned out. I simply wonder if this is really an Fi/Fe issue, or you just feel like you're not able to assert yourself the way you'd like to IRL.
    Well, thanks for paying attention to some of my posts ... I am no wallflower, but it's true there are lots of ExxJ's in my life, and I do a lot of accommodating to more defined personas than my own. If anything, I hoped on the forum I could share the less practical aspects of my thinking and have those thoughts be ... welcomed? IDK, will think about that more. Lots of Fe and Te doms in my family, that's true.
    Last edited by PeaceBaby; 12-27-2010 at 02:18 PM. Reason: typo
    "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

  5. #505
    Active Member Array Poki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    xSTP
    Posts
    9,185

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    In these threads, Fe users ask many questions ... I feel as though they are the ones reaching to understand, so I try to explain, thus it does set up a cycle (in these particular situations) where I am trying more to be understood than to understand. In my perhaps flawed logic, to understand me, means you can understand a little slice of Fi, so I try to offer myself kind of unvarnished ... and then wheneach Fi user does this, the larger patterns of Fi will be more visible, more real to people.

    @bold: What I am trying to say, in another way, is that I want to explain Fi by being Fi, by talking in Fi terms, otherwise I am diluting and altering the message. Then, it's not really Fi anymore, not really "me " anymore. To "play" on the music analogy uumlau, you won't really understand heavy metal or one of Beethoven's sonatas until you really listened to each ... me describing the music to you in terms of another style of music is not going to replicate the actual experience of hearing that music for yourself. It's not about expecting everyone to accommodate my music. If a person does try to listen to my music but doesn't like it, I guess one of us has to bend ... either I don't play my music, or I try to make it sound more like yours in order to effectively communicate and have a relationship. Or, I can just keep playing it my way and let the chips fall where they may.
    I agree, look at me and what I do to define who I am. As when I define I will use a part of me to define a part of me and things can get lost in translation within myself. Words are words, functions are functions, but no matter what I say or how I respond i am a representative of me which I believe 99.9% is Dom Ti. Even if I say something I want everyone to compare it to myself and make their own judgement based on what they see. Test me if you have to. Thats all I ask of people is to open your eyes and make your own judgements.

    Define yourself by who you are and what you do. I am learning to define myself by what impression people get of me, but its uncomfortable for me to do that. But it does make me more comfortable to open up a different side of me as I play with it and push things more then I am used to.

  6. #506
    i love Array skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,836

    Default

    (edit.)

    Quote Originally Posted by _Poki_
    Take this chance of Fe taking it personal to delve into that person instead of seeing it as a miscommunication gap. Be able to take a step back and understand why they felt that way, responded that way. Try to not take it personally, but use it to dig deeper. To me understanding how to work with people "IS" what it takes to communicate effectively, its like a step in understanding someone before you can actually understand them, if that makes sense. You will more then likely get into the meat of the problem, like it opens a door to reasonings, deeper understanding, instead of just piecing together what people say.
    that's a good point, i agree with you... the point at which a Fe user reaches out and takes things personally is an excellent place to open up and explore that person deeper. and yes, i would do well in general not to take things so personally, lol

    though i did also want to try to describe how my Fi(/Te) "space" (to borrow uumlau's metaphor) works, so others could better understand the points that myself and others like me are trying to convey. i would enjoy if others would explain their "spaces" in the same way. it wasn't meant to say that i shouldn't be the one reaching out too... i feel like IRL i am reaching out and molding myself to fit Fe requests very frequently.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby
    To "play" on the music analogy uumlau, you won't really understand heavy metal or one of Beethoven's sonatas until you really listened to each ... me describing the music to you in terms of another style of music is not going to replicate the actual experience of hearing that music for yourself. It's not about expecting everyone to accommodate my music.
    ha ha, "play"!

    well, and honestly, as a Ne dom, it's really weird to think of myself as not adapting to my external environment. i am constantly changing and adapting, and other people are part of that environment to which i adapt. an easy example - my parents are from a different place than i was born in, and when i travel to their home, we act and speak differently than the way we do here to better communicate with others.

    i'm not sure i really am in total agreement with this idea of Fi not being willing to change to suit others. i think there is plenty of space within Fi for the accommodation of everyone, but it's a different sort of accommodation than that of Fe. Fe's accommodation is more active; Fi's is passive. Fe directs a chorus to help everyone sing together beautifully while Fi just lets everyone sing what they want and gather at will. angelic choir and dionysian revelry...

  7. #507
    Permabanned Array
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,304

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    Well if I did elaborate, I'd be describing an overview of some relatively impersonal aspects of the system as I see it, wouldn't I. And if you have some interest in introvertedly intuitive extroverted thinking, you'd have something to add or discuss or argue against, wouldn't you. The environment would be conducive to that kind of talk and you wouldn't have to create the whole thing anew to make your own points.

    As for examples, ^ that's one. Heavy on the abstraction. Meant for mostly Ni consumption.


    Either way, if people readily and adequately access their "lesser" functional strengths, duality is meaningless. And is it, as a rule?


    (^^and that's (the start of) another example, and that one leans more on using superficial surface data from the outside world to prove that something is "true", aka it's (relatively shallow) extroverted thinking. Wanna join in?)
    Well...I think it's pretty obvious that some people can access their lesser functions more than others, and that it's not purely a case of communicating with a person who has those functions as their dom or aux. Some ENFPs appear to use Te more than other ENFPs, and INTJs seem to express their feelings and morality different than INTPs, which would indicate to me that their Fi is more obvious than just a passing thing they access when communicating with FPs.

    Duality exists because people who actually have your lesser functions as their dom/aux use those functions more frequently and skillfully, and fall back on them as their default setting. That doesn't mean that I only use Si when talking to SJs or Te when talking to TJs.

    I do see what you're saying though...in order to talk to someone who leads with your lesser functions you MUST access those functions in order to communicate clearly, so then you are forced to exercise those functions in a way you might be able to avoid otherwise if you were so inclined.

    Which brings me to your next point about environment...this means environment surely would play a role if you were frequently in close contact with people who lead with your lesser functions.

    Thus, as a rule of thumb, if people are doing something their type structure says they usually can't, then they're probably doing something else. Or the environment is helping in some way. And if that environmental influence was sustained enough that the person genuinely does develop unusual strengths and focuses, pffft, whatever, they're a different type now or they're a stressed normal type with some scars--who cares?! If you want to study environmental impact on persons, go for it. If you want to say environmental impact is more substantial than whatever creates Jungian appearances, go for that too. And some other stuff that I don't care about. Freaking extroverts claiming the environment is most important but still not recognising their own bias toward the environment and thus attempting to alter theory of ALL people?! Pffft.




    (^^^ Ni, Te AND Fi example, booyah.)
    I tend to think people are a combination of nature and nurture, not one versus the other.

  8. #508
    Filthy Apes! Array Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marmalade.sunrise View Post
    Well...I think it's pretty obvious that some people can access their lesser functions more than others, and that it's not purely a case of communicating with a person who has those functions as their dom or aux. Some ENFPs appear to use Te more than other ENFPs, and INTJs seem to express their feelings and morality different than INTPs, which would indicate to me that their Fi is more obvious than just a passing thing they access when communicating with FPs.
    "The environment" is only FPs? Phew, Fi really does think it owns the world.

    Moving right along...

    Te is a prestige function. It's manly and cool. If anyone was actually able to impersonally assess the environment and decide what was right and wrong with it and perhaps even discover a procedure for dealing with that lack, then one wouldn't have to hope and pray and get angry. Rule that aspect of being FP out of the "I so haz killer Te" story and we can talk some more.

    Furthermore, in my humble estimation it's a deeply anti-Jung thing to suppose lower level functions actually attain any notable prominence without the aid of the higher level functions. ENFPs and any other retard with an extroverted perveiving function in a dominant role USE THE OBJECTIVITY OF THEIR PERCEIVING FUNCTION FAR MORE THAN THE OBJECTIVITY OF Te. "Use". "Rely on". "Are defined by". Etc. It makes far, far more sense to speak of a person who focuses on the outside world as a source of objective imagery and sensation who also tends unconsciously to understand those images and sensations as indicative of an impersonal order to the world.

    In general, no one ever accesses a function. People do however behave in ways that highlight aspects of their consciousness. They are sometimes even aware of doing it, and in that sense a function becomes consciously "used". The person may even promote situations and habits that lead to more "use" and grow objectively better at "that function". Observe however, extrovert, that what happens in the environment isn't the whole truth of what happened. Something else did. I don't know what yet, but I suppose it to have something to do with functions being identifiable aspects of a more complex whole.


    Using functions is like using your arms. They don't actually do very much if you decide to have them do something independent of what they're attached to.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  9. #509
    Permabanned Array
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,304

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    "The environment" is only FPs? Phew, Fi really does think it owns the world.

    Moving right along...
    I meant IF, hypothetically, there were a bunch of FPs around, or a particular FP you interact with constantly, silly.

    Te is a prestige function. It's manly and cool. If anyone was actually able to impersonally assess the environment and decide what was right and wrong with it and perhaps even discover a procedure for dealing with that lack, then one wouldn't have to hope and pray and get angry. Rule that aspect of being FP out of the "I so haz killer Te" story and we can talk some more.
    Te is very manly, I agree. I like having it around me to remind me to stop being such a spaz.

    "I so haz killer Te" should be my new user title.

    Furthermore, in my humble estimation it's a deeply anti-Jung thing to suppose lower level functions actually attain any notable prominence without the aid of the higher level functions. ENFPs and any other retard with an extroverted perveiving function in a dominant role USE THE OBJECTIVITY OF THEIR PERCEIVING FUNCTION FAR MORE THAN THE OBJECTIVITY OF Te. "Use". "Rely on". "Are defined by". Etc. It makes far, far more sense to speak of a person who focuses on the outside world as a source of objective imagery and sensation who also tends unconsciously to understand those images and sensations as indicative of an impersonal order to the world.
    I saw what you did there. Would you like to explain yourself? That didn't seem very objective.

    In general, no one ever accesses a function. People do however behave in ways that highlight aspects of their consciousness. They are sometimes even aware of doing it, and in that sense a function becomes consciously "used". The person may even promote situations and habits that lead to more "use" and grow objectively better at "that function". Observe however, extrovert, that what happens in the environment isn't the whole truth of what happened. Something else did. I don't know what yet, but I suppose it to have something to do with functions being identifiable aspects of a more complex whole.


    Using functions is like using your arms. They don't actually do very much if you decide to have them do something independent of what they're attached to.
    Since I'm such a retard, you'll have to explain what you mean there. Each function doesn't live in a vaccuum, I get that much, it's not independent of the others, so is filtered through the dominant function.

    But then again I know that it's hard for INTJs to have to explain things. Not that you guys are retards or anything.

  10. #510
    Filthy Apes! Array Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marmalade.sunrise View Post
    Since I'm such a retard, you'll have to explain what you mean there.
    Can't. I don't have the answer yet. I'm just doing what my kind of introvert does, insisting that there's something behind the appearances. In this case the something is something about what it is to have, as apparently we all do, some kind of foundational pattern to our consciousnesses.

    Beneath functions is type dynamics and beneath type dynamics is.... something. And if there is... something, then mix-n-match functions and "having" and "using" and "developing" functions and doing anything called "intense" probably all get some meaning other than what play they currently stand in for.


    RARR, I SO AM INTROVERTED!!!!


    grrr
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

Page 51 of 77 FirstFirst ... 41495051525361 ... 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
  •