User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 115

  1. #21
    can't handcuff the wind Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    INfJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    3,680

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    imo:

    Te uses an external, consistent ruler. its units are based upon elements outside the self, and the distances between units don't change.

    Ti uses an internal, consistent ruler. the units are based upon measurements decided upon within the self, but the distances between units do not change.

    Fe uses an inconsistent ruler agreed upon externally - the distances between units can change based on people, and the units are based on external elements.

    Fi uses an internal, inconsistent ruler - it also changes to meet people, but the units are adjusted internally.

    they all have their advantages and disadvantages. Te is completely objective; Ti is the master of formulation of systems. Fe is good at handling people externally; Fi can adapt to meet people internally.
    What's amusing is, this description is very close to one that I wrote once about them. Fi is completely subjective, Te is completely objective, and Fe and Ti are somewhere in between.

    This problem with this description is that it makes it sound like Te is probably the "best" way of making decisions, while Fi is the worst. Who would want to use a subjectively defined and inconsistent ruler? That sounds like the worst kind. I think it would be better if we could define them in a way that doesn't make Fi come across so badly. It makes Fi seem completely unaccountable to anything except itself. But surely it has to be held to SOME kind of standard... or else, there would be no way of correcting corruption or error in an Fi user's values.
    But the thing is, to some extent, Te is subjectively defined, inasmuch as thinking is- in itself- a purely subjective event. The term ‘objective thinking’ is something of an oxymoron: it isn’t possible to think objectively, it’s only possible to think subjectively about objective possibilities. T inherently has more objective criteria in mind, the information is more consistent and predictable- but at the core, all thinking/judging is still a subjective event. Te has the least amount of accounting for one’s own praxis of thought, while Fi probably has the most. Te is most apt to lose sight of its own subjectivity, its own praxis of thought- which it necessarily has- so it’s blind to how values and norms can corrupt its expression of ‘objective criteria’. With this in mind, it’s not the ‘best’ way of making decisions.
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari

  2. #22
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    If "objective" means "not immediately or directly affective", then yes to probably everything everyone said.


    Friends, suck it up. Defining "objective" that way creates an artificial distinction between Fi and Ti. ARTIFICIAL! Unless perhaps there is some reason to say Fi people spend more time not resorting to extroverted functions than do Ti people. Or perhaps there is some reason to say Fi is all about the affect, and little about "objective" assessment/assignment of role and type to this affect and that.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  3. #23
    can't handcuff the wind Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    INfJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    3,680

    Default

    I personally was using 'objective' to describe that which exists outside personal feelings or thoughts. So, not only 'not affective', but also 'external to the mind'.

    I don't follow how introverted thinking about 'objective' criteria is necessarily more extroverted than introverted feeling about subjective criteria. If the judgment itself is introverted (not based on the judgment of others), why does it matter what the focus is on (other than determining T/F, of course)?
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari

  4. #24
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    I personally was using 'objective' to describe that which exists outside personal feelings or thoughts. So, not only 'not affective', but also 'external to the mind'.
    Those two are different, "outside personal feelings or thoughts" and "external to the mind". The former can't be done by anything in your head, while the latter can be accessed (relatively directly) by anything e (except perhaps Fe).

    And I prove this by:

    *waves hands*


    Ti people are attached to something special with this word "objective". It isn't being used as Jung used it. It is being used to mean something, ironically, that one can be attached to. I am unsure how to express it. Something like "being personally interested in being impersonal". But that is a shallow expression implying the position is chosen. It seems rather that it is not chosen. It looks, sounds, and acts like a value, but indeed, that is me using terminology I fill with Fi nuance. So what is it? It's special to the operation of particularly Ti. What is it?

    Yes, Ti people, what's up with this word "objective" you keep using? I know why I use it. It refers to everything that is independent of me. I don't make that "everything". And I discover it mostly just by seeing it and assenting to it. But you guys have something special going on.

    What's up with that?
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  5. #25
    Senior Member INTPness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    2,158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    Something like "being personally interested in being impersonal". But that is a shallow expression implying the position is chosen. It seems rather that it is not chosen. It looks, sounds, and acts like a value, but indeed, that is me using terminology I fill with Fi nuance. So what is it? It's special to the operation of particularly Ti. What is it?

    Yes, Ti people, what's up with this word "objective" you keep using? I know why I use it. It refers to everything that is independent of me. I don't make that "everything". And I discover it mostly just by seeing it and assenting to it. But you guys have something special going on.

    What's up with that?
    There is something innate in me - it's been there since I was a small child - where I want to (not by choice, just by natural inclination) be invisible. I want to observe the world and everything/everyone in it - all the "goings on" and just learn from it. I want to be detached. I remember as a child, going to the lake with my family for vacation. They would all be busy setting up for the week, having fun, doing this, doing that. I would wander off to a place where nobody could see me - a really remote place and I would watch everything that was going on at the lake. All the people, the dogs, the boats, the interaction, the laughing, the water, the birds, the cows, the park ranger driving around doing his monitoring, even the trash man doing his thing. I wanted to see it "as a whole" - as a system, how it was all interconnected and I was learning how human interaction works on a larger scale than just 1-on-1 dialogue. I sometimes wished I could go up in the sky and see it all from a birds eye view, because then I'd be able to see even more things - I'd be able to gather "more information".

    With all of that said, I know that I do live in this world and I can't completely detach from it - it's impossible. I have to interact, I have to be a part of what is going on - just like everyone else. And so there is no way to be totally objective about every single thing. Once you've "interacted" or "made it a part of you" in some small way, then your viewpoint is inevitably biased or skewed in the direction of your experience.

    I guess what I'm getting at is - I have no problem with somoene telling me that I'm not totally objective, or that Ti isn't totally objective. I'd agree with them. But, it certainly strives to be objective - as much as that is possible while living in this world. And, again, it's not something that I consciously set out to do. It's just the natural tendency, the natural inclination. If I'm evaluating a situation or an interaction, I want to bring ZERO bias or preconceived notions to the table. I want to just observe with a totally clean slate and let the observation lead me to wherever it leads me. I don't want to taint it with my own past experiences. Like, if I were a judge for instance, each case that came before me, I would *want to* (even though it's not possible) wipe the chalkboard clean of all the other cases I had previously heard. I want to hear this new case that is in front of me with no "leaning" one way or the other. I want to hear the case and the arguments for their own merit and then make a decision with a fresh, uninhibited perspective.

    The only time I will purposely think to myself "I have to be objective here" is when some situation needs "sorting out". Let's say two family members are arguing and it becomes heated and they ask my opinion. Well, I have a history with both of them and I know the background of the disagreement, etc. And I may have even taken sides in my own mind, to some extent. But, I first think to myself, "don't analyze this as a member of the family". Analyze this as a third party - as if I were someone from the outside - so that I don't bring personal bias into my decision or into my opinion. And I find that I have an ability to detach (to some degree, it can't ever be a FULL detachment) from even my own prior experience and to view the situation, and give an opinion, as if I had no prior information.
    NTJ's are the only types that have ever made me feel emo.
    ENP's are the only types that have ever made me feel like a sensor.


    There are two great days in a person's life - the day we are born and the day we discover why. --William Barclay

  6. #26
    can't handcuff the wind Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    INfJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    3,680

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    Those two are different, "outside personal feelings or thoughts" and "external to the mind". The former can't be done by anything in your head, while the latter can be accessed (relatively directly) by anything e (except perhaps Fe).

    And I prove this by:

    *waves hands*
    I'm not sure how 'external to the mind' is that much different from 'outside personal thoughts'. At any rate, the meaning you seem to get from the assemblage of words I used is different from the one I intended to convey- so I'll rephrase: I personally was using 'objective' to describe that which exists outside personal feelings or thoughts. So, not only 'exists outside personal feelings', but also 'exists outside personal thoughts'.
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari

  7. #27
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,022

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    What's amusing is, this description is very close to one that I wrote once about them. Fi is completely subjective, Te is completely objective, and Fe and Ti are somewhere in between.

    This problem with this description is that it makes it sound like Te is probably the "best" way of making decisions, while Fi is the worst. Who would want to use a subjectively defined and inconsistent ruler? That sounds like the worst kind. I think it would be better if we could define them in a way that doesn't make Fi come across so badly. It makes Fi seem completely unaccountable to anything except itself. But surely it has to be held to SOME kind of standard... or else, there would be no way of correcting corruption or error in an Fi user's values.
    Any cognitive function doesn't process in a vacuum. Other processes can help temper or offset.

  8. #28
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jenaphor View Post
    Any cognitive function doesn't process in a vacuum. Other processes can help temper or offset.
    Still, it looks like Fi would need a LOT more help, and contribute a lot less, doesn't it? I mean, Ti at least contributes precision and analytical skills. Te contributes structure and pragmatism. Fe contributes diplomacy and compassion... what does Fi do? It just has its own values that don't come from anywhere, and judges things by them. It just has feelings about its own ideals. Maybe it gives FPs a lot of internal motivation and self-confidence, but it doesn't benefit anyone else.

    The way it looks to me, is that Ne and Se completely carry an FP through life. The Fi doesn't provide much more than motivation, and has no skills.

    I would like to think there was more to it, but...

  9. #29
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,022

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    but it doesn't benefit anyone else.
    I've isolated this as a Fe judgment based on external values. Many Fi users aren't interested in benefitting anyone else unless they've incorporated this value into their sourced database. Now take the strength and conviction of Fi if a Fi user has embraced this or any other value. Mountains can be moved since there's rigidity and determination in Fi.

  10. #30
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jenaphor View Post
    I've isolated this as a Fe judgment based on external values. Many Fi users aren't interested in benefitting anyone else unless they've incorporated this value into their sourced database. Now take the strength and conviction of Fi if a Fi user has embraced this or any other value. Mountains can be moved since there's rigidity and determination in Fi.
    ^^ Told you Athenian.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

Similar Threads

  1. Fi vs Fe compared to Ti vs Te: Additional personal impressions
    By YUI in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-07-2015, 02:39 PM
  2. Fi vs. Ti and active listening skills
    By The Great One in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 07-10-2013, 03:13 PM
  3. Difference in Fi vs Ti in the conclusion of a god
    By Azure Flame in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 111
    Last Post: 06-15-2013, 08:08 PM
  4. Romney vs. Obama; Te(Fi) vs. Ti(Fe)
    By Istbkleta in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-21-2012, 05:12 PM
  5. Fi vs. Ti
    By G-Virus in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 11-09-2008, 08:58 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO