Dear Fe User,

[highlander]

(And ps, nice summary up at #453. I too was struck by how we're closing in on descriptions that match the standard descriptions. But the discussion is making the descriptions real.


Te)

Oh. Thank you!

To me the descriptions I've read in different places all seem a bit different. They range from Solitary Walkers "pure" ones to more behaviorally based ones (Haas/Hunziker). Since the descriptions are coming from what has been talked about or is happening in the thread, it does make it real though. That's a big part of the value for me personally writing them down - connecting what I've seen/heard from the posters with the theory. It may mean they are biased from a small sample size or narrow perspective though.

 

[Fidelia]

Yeah, I liked your summary of your findings from this thread. Even though it may not represent the full complement of the population, I think the principles that have comes out from it have some merit that could be translated into practical terms.

 

[proteanmix]

2. My feelings/your feelings vs. our feelings - It's been solidified in this thread but previously, I don't think I fully understood the Fe perspective. I used to think that we all individually had our own feelings. I'm not sure I understood the importance of the concept of "our feelings." I have come to understand that Fe types tend look at collective feelings - or "our feelings" - and that this is an important perspective to consider. Also, and I could be leaping to a conclusion but people who prefer Fi seem to understand their own feelings better than the feelings of others and people who prefer Fe seem to understand the feelings of other people better than their own.

I don't know, this is interesting now that I think of it. The clearest example of "our feelings" or collective feelings is morale in a group at work for example and being sensitive to what people are feeling as a cohesive wave of feeling. Or you can go to a party and feel the "vibe" in the atmosphere that people are enjoying themselves. Go to a sporting event and feel the energy of the people. Attend a funeral and feel the sorrow that permeates the atmosphere, or a wedding a feel the joy.

Places have moods I believe. For example, you can walk past a house in your neighborhood and feel something being emitted from the house and the grounds around it. If it's dilapidated and in poor upkeep it (this inanimate object called a "house") you feel neglect being emitted from it. If it's well kept, even if it's got quirky objects and decorations in the yard you feel that it's still cared for. Same thing with neighborhoods, they give off a certain feeling.

These are examples of having feelings or receiving feelings from people and things that aren't necessarily yours. I believe these are objective feeling "facts" that I'm not necessarily projecting because they don't hit me otherwise and I can be in a neutral receptive feeling state and have it shift based on things like this.

Does this make sense? I did believe this was a common phenomenon but is it not?

I'll try to comment on the rest later.

 

[highlander]

I don't know, this is interesting now that I think of it. The clearest example of "our feelings" or collective feelings is morale in a group at work for example and being sensitive to what people are feeling as a cohesive wave of feeling. Or you can go to a party and feel the "vibe" in the atmosphere that people are enjoying themselves. Go to a sporting event and feel the energy of the people. Attend a funeral and feel the sorrow that permeates the atmosphere, or a wedding a feel the joy.

Places have moods I believe. For example, you can walk past a house in your neighborhood and feel something being emitted from the house and the grounds around it. If it's dilapidated and in poor upkeep it (this inanimate object called a "house") you feel neglect being emitted from it. If it's well kept, even if it's got quirky objects and decorations in the yard you feel that it's still cared for. Same thing with neighborhoods, they give off a certain feeling.

These are examples of having feelings or receiving feelings from people and things that aren't necessarily yours. I believe these are objective feeling "facts" that I'm not necessarily projecting because they don't hit me otherwise and I can be in a neutral receptive feeling state and have it shift based on things like this.

Does this make sense? I did believe this was a common phenomenon but is it not?

I'll try to comment on the rest later.

This makes complete sense. I know people who seem very tapped into this group vibe. I know I'm not very good at it. I focus on one person at a time and gaining depth of perspective on how they are feeling.

One fly in the ointment though is what Toonia said:

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=37827&p=1415267&viewfull=1#post1415267

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=37827&p=1419839&viewfull=1#post1419839

She identified with Intrapersonal and External. It doesn't quite fit the model

 

[Poki]

Dunno. At least ideologically I'll always maintain that I'm being objective so when it comes to judging other people's feeling, what I consciously have available is not much more than "Oh, there's a fixed point in the decision landscape--it may change later but currently I'm supposed to incorporate that person's decision, it makes a difference to whether or not s/he's involved with what we're doing next.."

That's what's difficult about dealing with Fe people. You guys don't offer fixed point feeling. Ironically enough, the appearance is of feeling changing unexpectedly. The shifting consensus becomes the focus rather than what I'd prefer as the focus, impersonal determination. I can't do what I do best then. I'm always waiting on the arrival of an actual decision to commit, but it's forever changing!

What really is fixed point feeling? When I try to offer it, I gain a better understanding and at at that point my feeling has changed. Its like a constantly changing landscape where my feelings now about something is different then what they were. Its learning about who the other person is and adapting. And yes because of how easy it is for me to move from Fe to Ti and change my current feeling, I do play with that part of me heavily and can confuse the other person

What do you do best? From my perspective, what IJs do best is to help teach because they have a linear thought pattern. But what is commiting? Is it an external decision or an internal one? I dont wait for a decision to commit. Its the way I am, causes problems, I dont care if the other person commits or not as long as I am happy I have no problem being commited. And so this doesnt get taken the wrong way, my commitment is to help the other person so its not a one way streak. If I get stepped on enough I break my commitment. Im not in this world to be stepped on.

 

[cascadeco]

highlander - I also liked your summary and think you did a good job. I didn't see anything terribly off; seemed pretty good to me!

One thought I had though, that probably doesn't need to be said and is implied, but I'll say it anyway is that the bullet point lists might be more accurate if simply listed as 'Fe' and 'Fi' - rather than 'Fe users' and 'Fi users' (although not that the title really matters.. I'm just trying to explain something). The reason I say this is because in some threads dissonance occurs because Fi users note that they adhere to or relate to some Fe bullet points, and vice versa, which raises the possiblity that individually some may have a wider repertoire between both, whereas others only relate to their own preference.

For example, I identify with almost the entire Fe list, but I also identify very strongly with the first bullet of the Fi list - trying to understand my own emotional state, behaviors, motivations, etc, and striving for that self-awareness. Actually I'd say that's a pretty key component of who I am - really doing a lot of self analysis and all of that.

 

[Poki]

I don't know, this is interesting now that I think of it. The clearest example of "our feelings" or collective feelings is morale in a group at work for example and being sensitive to what people are feeling as a cohesive wave of feeling. Or you can go to a party and feel the "vibe" in the atmosphere that people are enjoying themselves. Go to a sporting event and feel the energy of the people. Attend a funeral and feel the sorrow that permeates the atmosphere, or a wedding a feel the joy.

Places have moods I believe. For example, you can walk past a house in your neighborhood and feel something being emitted from the house and the grounds around it. If it's dilapidated and in poor upkeep it (this inanimate object called a "house") you feel neglect being emitted from it. If it's well kept, even if it's got quirky objects and decorations in the yard you feel that it's still cared for. Same thing with neighborhoods, they give off a certain feeling.

These are examples of having feelings or receiving feelings from people and things that aren't necessarily yours. I believe these are objective feeling "facts" that I'm not necessarily projecting because they don't hit me otherwise and I can be in a neutral receptive feeling state and have it shift based on things like this.

Does this make sense? I did believe this was a common phenomenon but is it not?

I'll try to comment on the rest later.

The problems I have with this kind of feeling is how easy it is to hide neglect in other areas, by fixing the outward appearance. Modifying how people see you to keep things hidden. Its like an talking to an ENFP co-worker at one point where they used more of a joking comedy style to talk about work screw ups, then seeing her talk on the phone to another co-worker display a different feeling. To me that is fake, but it kinda isnt. Its not fake because that how she moves past things, she is being real. But fixing up things that are external to self to me doesnt properly display feelings. I dont know. I am not trying to judge your judgement of things, I just dont agree with your conclusion. Though I do accept that thats how you feel.

 

[Poki]

And I am actually here to provide perceptions, opinions, feedback, thought, etc. I have no clue what I am learning, thats not really my focus. I know my thought pattern will shift as I interact and I will grow and hoepfully others will as well. But its more about learning about interactions then making a decision as to what Fe and Fi is.

 

[Kalach]

This is interesting to me. When you say FP's are not random over time, is it due to the more solid internal value framework that is applied consistently (in theory) to everything in their life (= to their decisions), and that, although it will be finetuned as needed, in general will remain solid?

Potentially, yes. More exactly while an environment will have some effect on them, they, it seems to me, bring their feeling into the environment as an extra, independent consideration. The feeling is meant to be considered as theirs alone, and influential itself as an environmental causal agent. And since there is this assertion of atomism, or at least the appearance of it, I take it for granted that there is a coherence over time. Coherence over time is if not the definition of environmental independence, then at least a logical precondition of that independence.

EDIT: @Poki: ^ that's "fixed point feeling": feeling as a causal agent in the environment which, at least in conscious fundamental foundation, is not itself (wholly) caused by the environment.

I don't really understand what you mean by waiting on the 'arrival of an actual decision to commit'. What sorts of decisions/situations are you referring to? (I am not understanding simply because I think once I make a decision, I'm very solid in that. I mean, I'm very closure-oriented and like things settled. FP's - by definition of their external function being a perceiving one - will be rather opposite, so from my perspective I feel the same way with them (or with TP's) - always waiting on the arrival of an actual decision. You know? Obviously though we're referring to completely different things.)

Me: So we're doing this?
Fe: Yes!
Me: Righto, lets--what?
Fe: *shudders* Just, can you...
Me: You don't want to do this?
Fe: Of course I do. Just--
Me: No, look, you're upset, or something?
Fe: Let's go! We're doing this!
Me: What?! No! You're like--
Fe: Just do it!
Me: Are you sure!
Fe: I'm SURE!!!
Me: Okay.
Fe: *shudders*
Me: Faaa--, c'mon, seriously, you don't want to do this at all, do you?!

Etc.


It's not that there isn't commitment. It's that commission goes haywire. I imagine that this can be overcome by adequate consultation, but my (limited) experience is that even when there is consultation, it is extremely easy to simply not hear what the other side is saying. We are, after all, talking about competing judgment functions. If one side has made a decision about what is right and the other side comes along with a different decision made under terms that the other side doesn't subscribe to...

 

[proteanmix]

The problems I have with this kind of feeling is how easy it is to hide neglect in other areas, by fixing the outward appearance. Modifying how people see you to keep things hidden. Its like an talking to an ENFP co-worker at one point where they used more of a joking comedy style to talk about work screw ups, then seeing her talk on the phone to another co-worker display a different feeling. To me that is fake, but it kinda isnt. Its not fake because that how she moves past things, she is being real. But fixing up things that are external to self to me doesnt properly display feelings. I dont know. I am not trying to judge your judgement of things, I just dont agree with your conclusion. Though I do accept that thats how you feel.

I'm not really sure what you mean. Maybe I'm not explaining this correctly. I'm not talking about "the shape of things" judging by outward appearances. I'm talking about the feeling impressions I receive from a collective group of people.

It's like when I was younger and would spend the night at a friend's house, there were certain friends I preferred being in their home and with their families than other friends. Their family as a group of people gave me a certain feeling that I didn't have before coming into contact with them. The individual friend was not a problem, but once the family as a whole unit was together the feeling of the thing changed. Like maybe I felt that I should be more "proper" because that's how their family seemed to deal with each other. It could be simple clues like how they ate dinner together...how formal the process was. Was the TV going and conversation was happening that didn't consist of asking everyone how their day was in turn. How comfortable and intimate did they naturally seem with each other. Did they ask "please pass the peas" or did they just reach over each other and grab the food. How comfortable did they seem being in each others space or did it seem awkward. The flow and ribbons between the people did they feel knotted or were they smooth. These are external input points but the way they hit me was how the family felt, together.

Yeah, people can fake it, but I don't think you can fake a certain level of intimacy because it will feel like a road full of potholes. When I was a barista at Starbucks you could tell the people who were new on the espresso bar because their movements didn't flow, they couldn't move fast in a rush and not miss a beat. When people are interacting with each other and I'm in an observational mode, I feel like I can see the flow between them. Assess their comfort levels with each other and between each other. When I'm interacting with them as well, I lose some of this particular perspective, but then I gain the one of how I flow with a person 1:1.

 

[cascadeco]

Potentially, yes. More exactly while an environment will have some effect on them, they, it seems to me, bring their feeling into the environment as an extra, independent consideration. The feeling is meant to be considered as theirs alone, and influential itself as an environmental causal agent. And since there is this assertion of atomism, or at least the appearance of it, I take it for granted that there is a coherence over time. Coherence over time is if not the definition of environmental independence, then at least a logical precondition of that independence.

EDIT: @Poki: ^ that's "fixed point feeling": feeling as a causal agent in the environment yet, at least in conscious fundamental foundation, not itself (wholly) caused by the environment.

Got it. Thanks for clarifying.

Me: So we're doing this?
Fe: Yes!
Me: Righto, lets--what?
Fe: *shudders* Just, can you...
Me: You don't want to do this?
Fe: Of course I do. Just--
Me: No, look, you're upset, or something?
Fe: Let's go! We're doing this!
Me: What?! No! You're like--
Fe: Just do it!
Me: Are you sure!
Fe: I'm SURE!!!
Me: Okay.
Fe: *shudders*
Me: Faaa--, c'mon, seriously, you don't want to do this at all, do you?!

Etc.


It's not that there isn't commitment. It's that commission goes haywire. I imagine that this can be overcome by adequate consultation, but my (limited) experience is that even when there is consultation, it is extremely easy to simply not hear what the other side is saying. We are, after all, talking about competing judgment functions. If one side has made a decision about what is right and the other side comes along with a different decision made under terms that the other side doesn't subscribe to...

ahahahha That was actually a good example. Ok, yes, in that sense I can see how the outcome/decision ends up being Contingent. I think part of it for me is that some of the factors included in making decisions like that ARE the input/other people, and how the situation unfolds. So the decision-making ends up being a bit more dynamic, rather than static and my knowing absolutely right away what I think/want and therefore what decision I want to make. Factors that I consider relevant include the discussion, what the other person wants, whether that's good for me, and all of that.

Anyway - great example. I'm having trouble articulating things but I have a great idea of what you mean with that example.

 

[proteanmix]

It's not that there isn't commitment. It's that commission goes haywire. I imagine that this can be overcome by adequate consultation, but my (limited) experience is that even when there is consultation, it is extremely easy to simply not hear what the other side is saying. We are, after all, talking about competing judgment functions. If one side has made a decision about what is right and the other side comes along with a different decision made under terms that the other side doesn't subscribe to...

Yes! What is the arbiter in these situations? I agree, that's when people start holding the line. You have reached the point where there is no more compromise and you may have hit your mental and psychological ceiling in trying to view it from the other's or another perspective.

Even if one person or party gives the appearance of folding, I believe a fault line has begun and that fracture will persist unless there's a mental shift...which can take years to occur with the average person and may not go towards the middle but can go even further out. Once again it depends on going towards the middle is something you value. Common term for this is "agree to disagree."

 

[Poki]

I'm not really sure what you mean. Maybe I'm not explaining this correctly. I'm not talking about "the shape of things" judging by outward appearances. I'm talking about the feeling impressions I receive from a collective group of people.

It's like when I was younger and would spend the night at a friend's house, there were certain friends I preferred being in their home and with their families than other friends. Their family as a group of people gave me a certain feeling that I didn't have before coming into contact with them. The individual friend was not a problem, but once the family as a whole unit was together the feeling of the thing changed. Like maybe I felt that I should be more "proper" because that's how their family seemed to deal with each other. It could be simple clues like how they ate dinner together...how formal the process was. Was the TV going and conversation was happening that didn't consist of asking everyone how their day was in turn. How comfortable and intimate did they naturally seem with each other. Did they ask "please pass the peas" or did they just reach over each other and grab the food. How comfortable did they seem being in each others space or did it seem awkward. The flow and ribbons between the people did they feel knotted or were they smooth. These are external input points but the way they hit me was how the family felt, together.

Yeah, people can fake it, but I don't think you can fake a certain level of intimacy because it will feel like a road full of potholes. When I was a barista at Starbucks you could tell the people who were new on the espresso bar because their movements didn't flow, they couldn't move fast in a rush and not miss a beat. When people are interacting with each other and I'm in an observational mode, I feel like I can see the flow between them. Assess their comfort levels with each other and between each other. When I'm interacting with them as well, I lose some of this particular perspective, but then I gain the one of how I flow with a person 1:1.

You remind me very strongly of my wife with this statement about families.

I like your starbucks example, the thing is that people who are experienced to deliver that kind of intimacy wont miss a beat whether its real or not. The only thing you can ever be sure of is whether you feel like a road full of potholes during that intimacy. It really has to do with where your focus is, some people control the situation and in turn control the focus. They get upset when they cant control it because they lose the focus. To me this is partial intimacy or feelings, its controlled feelings, controlled stability.

 

[highlander]

Me: So we're doing this?
Fe: Yes!
Me: Righto, lets--what?
Fe: *shudders* Just, can you...
Me: You don't want to do this?
Fe: Of course I do. Just--
Me: No, look, you're upset, or something?
Fe: Let's go! We're doing this!
Me: What?! No! You're like--
Fe: Just do it!
Me: Are you sure!
Fe: I'm SURE!!!
Me: Okay.
Fe: *shudders*
Me: Faaa--, c'mon, seriously, you don't want to do this at all, do you?!

I LOLed at this. So what do you do in this case? Just do it. Stop asking questions.

 

[Poki]

I LOLed at this. So what do you do in this case? Just do it. Stop asking questions.

Depends on what "this" is

The real thing is to be supportive along the way if decisions change and be prepared to either not do it or just go about on your own without the other person. They basically havnt made a decision yet.

 

[sculpting]

What type was Bill Clinton again?

I vote ENTP.

Just coming home in the car now, I was thinking. Is Ne sort of like dumping out a big box of different stuff and sorting it a bit at a time? Like if Ne sorted it all by shape first and said, "Here! I have now distinguished between the different types of objects that were in this box!" and Ni protested by saying, "What are you talking about? These are all different colours and sizes. You're oversimplifying!" and Ne argued that all those other factors make it too complicated. As Ne goes, it then does a second round for size and a third for colour etc and ends up arriving at the same conclusions? I'm not sure if that is even close, but I'm wondering. I have less experience looking at Ne/Ni differences.

Ne connects things. It sees consistency across very different things and tries to connect those things together. In the moment it appears very short sighted, very limited as it hops around. In reality-it is building and reaffirming the underlying patterns it build into gigantic interconnected structures. Externally you may see the edges that are being extended, bit by bit and they seem very tentative. You may never see the continuity of the system being built underneath-because it is boring, once built. Funny...I have a better deconstructed understanding of Ni than Ne oddly.....hehehe, I think about how you think as it is more novel and interesting than how I think.

Ni is delightful and nightmarish-as it plucks out pieces of the interconnected structure built and swaps them willy nilly. 10% of the time this is amazingly insightful. 90% of the time it is frustrating to the point of anger as it destablizes the underlying structure as I am building off of the structure. Ni and Ne relationships will require each person to have patience and forgiveness as this can be a little annoying until a pattern is figured out.

It is very important to note if Ne is being applied to TiFe or FiTe-as that will influence the metaphor you describe above drastically.

If I need to decorate a tree .... I need to buy a certain quantity of items to fully decorate the tree. I have a list of specific things that every tree will need to be decorated in my mind- lights, tinsel, balls, candy canes, and angel, ribbon. Hmmm, the tree needs to be red and blue themed so it will match the drapes. So I go to the store with my list to shop. Once at the store I buy all types of extra things that I didnt think I needed in the first place-It wasnt that the list was wrong-just could endlessly be optimized to be more complete. So I go home with all types of extra things in addition to the initial list of things. I may first start with the original red and blue-but very quickly I may note the light hits a corner in a certain way, or that I really like silver and blue better, and after some thought minimize the red. The individual tree will get decorated in a way that seems right-based on a lifetimes understanding of what trees should look like-combined with an individual appreciation that this tree can be totally different and even break those rules-and still be quite beautiful in its individuality.

Another aspect-I cannot use systems back and forth the way Ni doms do-it violates my ethics. (My ethics are involve some level of certainty in the consistency of the tool I am using) If I dont have some level of certainty in the entire system-even if it has holes and patches-I could not use it. DISC is a very common test adminstered due to simplicity-but about 1/3 of folks I spoke with were very unhappy with the results and it was meaningless to them-even disturbing to them as it gives them answers that contradict their own self understanding. Thus I would feel ethically disturbed to try and give the test to others. Since I cant be certain it will work most of the time, I wouldnt use the tool. Ennergram falls in this category as well and I dont see how it can be individualized on the fly for a given person-. There are too many blurry edges in it-thus I would be very hesitant to use it as a tool, albeit much of that blurriness could be my lack of knowledge. NLP has a great deal of Ne promise-but again until I have some notion of consistency of the entire tool-I would not suggest it.

This is what I think some of the differences are:

Ne

Objective, reality oriented
Possibilities
Dispersed
Short term

Ni
Subjective, meaning oriented
Answers
Focused
Long term

As Uumlau said, I think the Ti vs Te preference is also a big part of this too.

Wait - but does this mean that much of the Fe/Fi debate isn't about those two functions at all? It's about other differences?

Ni is amazingly short sighted to me-as it focuses only on one problem at a time.....unless it can translate the particular Se instance to a set of universal Ni truths. In which case I await them earearly with delight as they fix flaws in my underlying structure.

And yes-as Bamboos' beautiful post earlier highlighted-it will never be about just one function-although it is delightful to try and isolate if possible. Each type will have a worldview, types within types will have worldviews, types with types within cultures will have worldviews, types within types within cultures in single parent families will have worldviews-an infinite regression down to the individual. The INFJs are spot on with the conclusion in that regard.

 

[highlander]

Ni is amazingly short sighted to me-as it focuses only on one problem at a time.....unless it can translate the particular Se instance to a set of universal Ni truths. In which case I await them earearly with delight as they fix flaws in my underlying structure.

I don't think "short sighted" is a very good term to describe it because it implies lacking foresight which I can't imagine would be characteristic of Ni. It's drawing from a very large number of data points to converge on a perspective. That's different from being short sighted or myopic.

Another aspect-I cannot use systems back and forth the way Ni doms do-it violates my ethics. (My ethics are involve some level of certainty in the consistency of the tool I am using) If I dont have some level of certainty in the entire system-even if it has holes and patches-I could not use it. DISC is a very common test adminstered due to simplicity-but about 1/3 of folks I spoke with were very unhappy with the results and it was meaningless to them-even disturbing to them as it gives them answers that contradict their own self understanding. Thus I would feel ethically disturbed to try and give the test to others. Since I cant be certain it will work most of the time, I wouldnt use the tool. Ennergram falls in this category as well and I dont see how it can be individualized on the fly for a given person-. There are too many blurry edges in it-thus I would be very hesitant to use it as a tool, albeit much of that blurriness could be my lack of knowledge. NLP has a great deal of Ne promise-but again until I have some notion of consistency of the entire tool-I would not suggest it.

Actually, that's really interesting. Are there some statistics on these tests? I always thought DISC was more reliable than that

Edit: Here is a report on DISC validity. A little complicated to understand though.

http://www.discprofile.com/downloads/2005/2005DiSCValidationResearchReport.pdf

 

[Forever_Jung]

Sometimes I feel shortsighted compared to a Ne-dom though, because they see everything, all at once. It`s like a bird`s eye view. I can only see the big picture once I internalize all the details, I can`t just quickly overview something. When I collaborate with an ENFP friend of mine on stories, she usually creates the stories backbone, and thinks about it holistically. Sometimes, she doesn`t even write the words to the story, she writes what the characters are basically saying and doing. Then she gives it to me to do a lot of the fine brushstrokes. I zoom so far in, that often I lose sight of the big picture, but she reminds me. That being said, just by inserting thousands of little details, the story can be changed a lot, much to my ENFP friend`s surprise. She doesn`t mind though. She creates an unusual and clever story structure, and I work within it. I find it much easier to spontaneously create within an existing structure. She finds it hard to be creative when she has to work within a structure I impose on her.

 

[Fidelia]

I don't really understand your definition of Ni, Orobas, because in my view, Ni is one of the mostly likely functions to explore every possibility that could happen and try to account for what the result would be. It may take what is and extrapolate all of the possibilities from there, but I think if anything, Ni's probably is not narrowing things down enough. Ni very much tends to want to consider the effects of a course of action long down the road and most Ni users I've talked to seem surprised that others do not instinctively see what effect a particular course of action is likely to have in the future.

I see it kind of like doing a puzzle. Ne is willing to consider all sorts of possibilities, even unlikely looking ones. This can lead to novel but effective ways of doing things. Unexpected solutions to difficult problems. It would try pieces that no one else would consider. Ni on the other hand looks at the puzzle piece, then at the hole and compares whether it would fit or if it would be way off base before even trying the piece in the hole. It looks for markers of what is going to be the most likely solution or what could work if that solution does not exist.

That's my perception of it anyway. Perhaps I am mistaken. Sometimes having something as a dominant function means that you see it so close up that you are not even completely aware of how you use it or how it affects your perspective.

 

[Fidelia]

Sometimes I feel shortsighted compared to a Ne-dom though, because they see everything, all at once. It`s like a bird`s eye view. I can only see the big picture once I internalize all the details, I can`t just quickly overview something. When I collaborate with an ENFP friend of mine on stories, she usually creates the stories backbone, and thinks about it holistically. Sometimes, she doesn`t even write the words to the story, she writes what the characters are basically saying and doing. Then she gives it to me to do a lot of the fine brushstrokes. I zoom so far in, that often I lose sight of the big picture, but she reminds me. That being said, just by inserting thousands of little details, the story can be changed a lot, much to my ENFP friend`s surprise. She doesn`t mind though. She creates an unusual and clever story structure, and I work within it. I find it much easier to spontaneously create within an existing structure. She finds it hard to be creative when she has to work within a structure I impose on her.

I found it interesting whne you said that you find it much easier to spontaneously create within an existing structure. I'm very much the same and find that narrowing down some of the possibilities makes it possible for me to much more effectively perform my role.