User Tag List

First 1018192021223070 Last

Results 191 to 200 of 721

Thread: Fe Fakeness

  1. #191
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    MBTI
    ZZZZ
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vala Faye View Post
    Err...NFPs have Te and Si as well dude..that would make us, according to your theory, just as grounded as you.
    This is true. I know my fundamental argument isn't flawed but I do see the illogic in the subpoint. To assume it's not illogical or hide away from the truth would violate me. I'm not perfect and can make mistakes.

    Moving on perhaps what I'm seeing is that Ne is divergent, and Ni converges. So it could actually not that the others cognitives are are grounding as much, but more the fact that, Ne tends to be more ungrounded.

    Or in your opinion are all types equally grounded? Because that makes no sense to me if you implying that.

  2. #192
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    MBTI
    ZZZZ
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Furthermore reality is reality and exists objectively outside our minds or how we want to frame it.

    It's absolutely ludicrous to suggest or assume that Te and Ti are both equally good at dealing with actual objective reality as it exists independent from ourselves.

    Te is far better at making sense of reality. There is no comparison. It's even in the definition of the functions themselves.

  3. #193
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by five View Post
    Sorry I think you misrepresenting me Jennifer, I never once made the claim Te is the most grounded. If you think I did feel free to quote me.
    I did quote you. Your post here and in fact your posting over the last few days is habitually talking about how Te is the most objective function and the only real one that has any handle on the truth. Or do you miss the blatant gist of your own posts?

    Yes, I understand you believe it is "true" but it's no less shrill in the extremity of your delivery. You can make a case for Te being good at what it does in the area of what it does best, but there's more to life and living than just the Te-style analysis you're touting. You're a whole person, and Te (even when coupled with Ni, a combination you seem to adore) does not address every area of life adequately.

    Sensors are generally more grounded than Intuitives. Hence Se, Si and Te are all grounding without qualification on which is "more".
    If you define grounded as "focused on sensing-style data," well, yes; obviously Sensing is better grounded than Intuition, which deals with insinuations of the data.

    I have ISTP buddies that are very grounded. It comes from Se.
    Yes. They're tapped into the raw ongoing data feed.

    NTP's and NFP's seem the least grounded.
    Again, defining "grounded" in a way that is convenient to your position is disingenuous.

    If you want to see the forest without being confused by the trees and simply want to examine the underlying foundations principles of a logical or an ethical situation/question, then I think INPs kick ass and take names compared to other types, for example. In that situation, your approach is entirely ungrounded and irrelevant to what must be accomplished, even if in other situations your approach might indeed be the most grounded and appropriate.

    It's all in the expressed needs of the moment.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  4. #194
    The High Priestess Amargith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Enfp
    Enneagram
    497 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEE Fi
    Posts
    14,658

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by five View Post
    This is true. I know my fundamental argument isn't flawed but I do see the illogic in the subpoint.

    Then perhaps what it is is Ne is divergent, and Ni converges. So it could actually not that the others cognitives are are grounding as much, but more that Ne tends to be more ungrounded.

    Or in your opinion are all types equally grounded? Because that makes no sense to me if you implying that.
    Actually, I have no problem with being rather floaty compared to grounded. But I also think that this is really a matter of personal development and subjective observation, no offense. What I mean is...Ni can be mighty floating as well. Especially when Te is ignored. I don't think Ne is inherently more floaty than Ni. I do think however that Ni-floatiness isn't as in your face as Ne as Ne is an extraverted function and therefore more clearly present to outsiders. I agree that Te, but also Fe seem to have grounding qualities tying them into reality, at least to me. Again..this is subjective though. I know an ESFJ who lives and breathes reality but cannot see what's *actually* going on as she's too busy with her little rules and how things 'ought to be'. Is that grounded? I'd beg to differ. The INTP that married her is more grounded than she'll ever be, from what I can see. And Se-dom going nuts in the moment and living for the high in life...is he grounded? I sincerely doubt it. I'd say that someone who's grounded, is likely someone who's got both dom and aux function working together perfeclty. And who's able to use their Tertiary and even inferior when the situation calls for it. Who's aware that that reality isn't confined to their own preferred perspective. I'd call that grounded. Or rather..I'd say those people have the ability to be grounded when they need to be. And floaty when the situation calls for it as well.

    I agree that Se, Te and Fe are likely to be more grounding than some of the other functions. But if they turn obsessive with their own truths..they very much are able to NOT be grounded.
    ★ڿڰۣ✿ℒoѵℯ✿ڿڰۣ★





    "Harm none, do as ye will”

  5. #195
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by five View Post
    Moving on perhaps what I'm seeing is that Ne is divergent, and Ni converges. So it could actually not that the others cognitives are are grounding as much, but more the fact that, Ne tends to be more ungrounded.
    Ne is not an "anchoring" function, it is Pe and thus an exploring function... unless you consider it anchoring to highlight and expose the full range of possibilities in a given situation.

    Then again, I could also say that Ne is connective and Ni is selective. Which is a kind of opposite flow of your pair above. Ne is finding commonality between two things, Ni is distinguishing between them.

    Both comparisons seem true to me, even if compared to each other they might seem contradictory. It depends on what you are examining at the time.

    Quote Originally Posted by five View Post
    Furthermore reality is reality and exists objectively outside our minds or how we want to frame it.

    It's absolutely ludicrous to suggest or assume that Te and Ti are both equally good at dealing with actual objective reality as it exists independent from ourselves.

    Te is far better at making sense of reality. There is no comparison. It's even in the definition of the functions themselves.
    Dude.

    They are different scopes.

    Te is describing practical process, the specifics of what to do in order to accomplish a goal.
    Ti is describing underlying principles that the Te processes use to accomplish their goals.

    Why are you insisting on comparing them like this, and then definining "reality" as "whatever Te is good at"? They both deal with reality... just different aspects of reality.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  6. #196
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    what is "grounded"?

    NPs natively search for meaning in the spaces between things. we look where others often do not, hence they may think we are removed from reality. yet how funny it is to us that they do not see what we see so readily.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vala Faye
    I do think however that Ni-floatiness isn't as in your face as Ne as Ne is an extraverted function and therefore more clearly present to outsiders. I agree that Te, but also Fe seem to have grounding qualities tying them into reality, at least to me.
    this is true. and as counterexample, i would definitely call my ESFJ mom more grounded in terms of practical matters - dealing with the outside world and realities of existence on a daily basis - than INTP dad. but dad runs on hard logic, so when mom's freaking out emotionally, he's a bastion of groundedness.

    as for Fe fakeness...

    Quote Originally Posted by Gingko
    If TJs and FPs only use Fi, and Fi invariably causes Fi users to assume that displays of emotion are fake, then are demonstrations of Fe fake?
    i try to think of it in terms of Fe being about "you" and Fi being about "me". Fe works on the perspective of "you" so it seeks to communicate the emotion between oneself and the other... to create/develop/maintain an external Feeling. thus Fe demonstration of emotion may seem disingenuous to an FP or TJ - because it is not a wholly personal phenomenon - and Fi checks for complete internal consistency. Fi notices that something is "missing", which is the space that Fe is allowing for the other person(s) to engage in. Fi notices that the Feeling is not entirely self-generated; it will change based upon external variables. but from a Fe perspective, not allowing that space would be self-absorbed and pointless, because a wholly personal experience cannot be shared with another.

    mathematically it is like
    Fe: 5x
    Fi: 3

    Fi: Fe, why won't you come up with a solid number of your own?
    Fe: Fi, why won't you account for the external world in your choice?

    Fe: because i would sacrifice being able to affect and be affected by the outside world.
    Fi: because i would sacrifice the spark of individuality i bring to the world.

    both are right.

  7. #197
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    The reason why even Te is not objective is because it is applying the principle of reason and logic from inside to the external object in external world. because this external object(that some INTJs seem to confuse of being true in objective sense) is created by applying subjective understanding of reason and logic to the external world, it isnt objective. INTJs(and some other types like immature INTPs) dont seem to understand that the reasoning and rationalization of the external object comes from subjective reasoning and rationalization. even tho this subjective reasoning has been created by learning how the laws of reality works, it is still subjective reasoning that tries to follow the laws that the person has learned. also because it is impossible to learn all the laws of reality, this reasoning that some people see as objective, doesent cover the whole reality, it is bound to miss out something. naturally minor differences between the actual object in the external world and the image of the external object can be usually overcome by leaving out what is seen as irrelevant and having too little meaning(aka simplification), the differences between the actual object and image of the object may not be noticed. but this leaving things out is creating a subjective view on the object, because whether its true or not depends how closely the object is examined. now if there wouldnt be any simplification, it would be impossible to know everything about the object, thus the image of object is lacking and as long as the image is lacking something about the actual object, the image is subjective.

    Thus even Te is subjective, even tho some people using Te dont want to see this, but tries to rationalize it. rationalization is what Te does with the external world also, bit the process of rationalization is by definition a subjective understanding because the rationalization comes from a source that is not seeing ALL of things in reality(just what the person sees as important) -> its lacking. not only that but the person has biases towards the object that he may not realize due to rationalization. rationalization like "this fits here" "this doesent matter to the end result" is subjective and people seem to have hard time understanding that. whether something is important or not to the end result depends on how accurate you want the end result to be -> its subjective whether the end result is correct or not. whether something fits is also subjective, because whether it fits or not, depends on how accurately it must fit and that is determined by the subjective factor.

    Its funny how some people are unable to see obvious things like this, still they think that the other person is dumb.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  8. #198
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,133

    Default

    [YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7M-cmNdiFuI"]Cunt and Neetchy[/YOUTUBE]

  9. #199
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    [YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7M-cmNdiFuI"]Cunt and Neetchy[/YOUTUBE]
    Oh now i get it. this totally debunks everything i say, because someone says that kant is wrong and apparently kant had the same kind of ideas that i have .

    INTJ has shown his excellent reasoning skills yet again
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  10. #200
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    Oh now i get it. this totally debunks everything i say, because someone says that kant is wrong and apparently kant had the same kind of ideas that i have .
    Though you might hear laughin’, spinnin’, swingin’ madly across the sun
    It’s not aimed at anyone, it’s just escapin’ on the run
    And but for the sky there are no fences facin’
    And if you hear vague traces of skippin’ reels of rhyme
    To your tambourine in time, it’s just a ragged clown behind
    I wouldn’t pay it any mind
    It’s just a shadow you’re seein’ that he’s chasing

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    INTJ has shown his excellent reasoning skills yet again
    I believe we only have INTP here. He's a real varmint, though.

Similar Threads

  1. [Fe] Any INFJs who think Fe is "fake"?
    By SilkRoad in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 12-26-2011, 12:42 AM
  2. [NF] Other NF's hate salespeople's fake Fe?
    By Lily flower in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 10-15-2011, 11:09 AM
  3. [Fe] Is Fe fake or manipulative?
    By jixmixfix in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 341
    Last Post: 08-05-2011, 11:28 PM
  4. [Fe] Fe is fake and manipulative (proofs inside)
    By INTP in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 07-21-2011, 01:04 AM
  5. [Fe] Fe: No cute title...I just don't get it
    By sakuraba in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 106
    Last Post: 11-18-2008, 09:07 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