User Tag List

First 123451353 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 721

Thread: Fe Fakeness

  1. #21
    Glycerine
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    I don't think they're fake.. but might have a harder time getting swallowed up by.. the umm.. expected expressions/emotions/demands/etc.. If someone were to keep some time and space for themselves though, they wouldn't let that happen.

    Displaying emotion at all though is not Fe. This would mean that Fi is stoic. Which is not the case. I think?
    That was my point exactly!

  2. #22
    Anew Leaf
    Guest

    Default

    this

    Quote Originally Posted by allegorystory View Post
    It will appear to be fake to that Fi user - if they are under the assumption that displays of emotion are fake. But will it make it fake? Not necessarily yes and not necessarily no.

    What is "more real"? The way a colourblind person views the colour red or the way a non-colourblind person views it? There can't be a definitive objective answer because it changes depending on who is doing the viewing.
    and this

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    Since Fe is a "shadow" to an Fi type, and shadows are projected, then the feeling of "fakeness" is a projection. That's how you feel when imagining yourself looking at the situation through an objective lens, when your ego thinks humane evaluation should be the realm of the subject.
    Make the most sense to me in looking at the situation.

    I like Fe in moderation. (There is nothing quite like an ENFJ hug when you are feeling down.)

    I recently saw the movie "The Help" with my ENFJ and INTJ girl friends. The INTJ and I were pretty stoic throughout the movie, although her and I did admit to a tear here and there. The ENFJ sat between us and SOBBED the entire movie. I loved it. She was emoting everything I was feeling and in a way it was rather calming for me. I didn't feel such a need to bottle myself up, but at the same time since some kind of emotions were being expressed, I also didn't feel the need to "chime in" with my own tears.

    I tend to find Fe "fake" when it pushes at me. When Fe people expect me to share my innermost self with them no matter what it costs to me - just because they want to get some kind of emotional connection with me... And have no clue how much effort and vulnerability this involves for me.

    Otherwise I think there is a great deal we can learn from each other. I really DO need to be more forthcoming about what I am feeling, but sometimes my Fe friends could take a page from the book called "Keep it to yourself at times."

  3. #23
    Iron Maiden fidelia's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1w2 so/sx
    Posts
    11,132

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    This construction is highly problematic from the get-go.

    It's not anywhere close to accurate to say that "Fi invariably causes Fi users to assume that displays of emotion are fake".

    When would any Fi user say that there is no such thing as an authentic display of emotion? That doesn't even sound close to the truth...

    And how would Fi users simply assuming that demonstrations of emotion are fake actually cause demonstrations of Fe to be fake?

    One's assumption about something doesn't cause that something to be a particular way (except in cases when the interpreting agent causes changes in the interpreted agent by virtue of his interpretation); the interpreted is whatever it is by virtue of what it is; the interpreter's assumption about its nature is completely secondary to its nature.



    Meh.

    Nice "proof".

    Unfortunately, it's disconnected from reality.

    Even using your method: why can't one's judgments as they relate to external social norms be demonstrated?

    It seems like they would be a rather easy thing to demonstrate, really.

    And such demonstrations would be called a demonstration of Fe.

    You see them all the time (on this forum and irl).



    This is spot on.



    This is also highly accurate, but it's general and vague enough of that there are some caveats I'd need to add to fully accept it.

    I'm not so sure about the accuracy of the last clause -- it doesn't really ring true to me. Kinda hollow. Might be because it's an Fe-user's attempt at describing Fi.

    I also think that there's another way of looking at the fakeness of Fe that is not merely projection.

    But that's a more complicated matter.



    This is about the most blatantly false thing I've read in a long time.

    See allegorystory's post.



    This, I actually agree with.

    It's somewhat related to what EricB said...

    You can still see that way of judging as inauthentic, though...

    Value and inauthenticity are not necessarily mutually exclusive ideas.
    Do you really, really care about accuracy this much and it drives you nuts when people generalize too much, do you do this for entertainment, are you looking to provoke a response by poking those around you, or do you feel this kind of exchange is what sharpens real discussion? (I'm not heckling, really!)

    What I take away from an exchange like this is "You are of low intelligence" "You cannot even construct an initial argument properly", "You know nothing compared to me", "I have all the answers". It frustrates me, because I expect you have some interesting thoughts to consider, and I would like to be open to them, but the overwhelming waft of arrogance and superiority that that communication style conveys to me (and I'm not saying others would perceive it in the same way), makes it hard for me to listen open-mindedly. Please give me some context for why that is your initial reaction and conversations response to most discussions, or what your intent is so that I can perceive it differently.

    I would be the first to say that I have a real disconnect with the thought process/communication style of many INTJs and I would like to understand it better. I would think that both being Ni doms would make it easier to understanding each other. Seems to be method of communicating, as well as maybe Te/Fi thrown in there.

  4. #24
    Glycerine
    Guest

    Default

    If we are talking about the manifestations of values rather than emotions, I think I could see where this is going. I guess trying to "gauge" where another person is coming from before deciding what you want to do would look "fake" to someone else who has figured it out. ex. person A: Glycerine, do you want pizza for dinner? Me: No. Person A: Me: Did you want pizza? Person A:..... yes.....

    If I answer in the affirmative, Person A: Glycerine wants pizza (code for "I really wanted pizza too but I am going to answer vicariously through Glycerine")

    I could see why that would piss off more internally focused folks.

  5. #25
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Honestly, Fidelia, I'm glad you asked.

    This is how I used to communicate on this forum, and I haven't done it much for quite some time (other than that one thread, I haven't posted much in a long time).

    I know it can seem like I'm just being an asshole, but there are answers to all of the questions you had.

    I actually thank you for asking so that I could publicly clarify my intentions.

    Quote Originally Posted by fidelia View Post
    Do you really, really care about accuracy this much and it drives you nuts when people generalize too much[?]
    Yes.

    To be more accurate, it bothers me when people pass something off for truth that is not truth.

    It would be rather easy (and accurate) to ascribe this to Te.

    Quote Originally Posted by fidelia View Post
    ...do you do this for entertainment[?]
    Eh...

    sorta?

    I dunno, I'd say "entertainment", if it is a reason, ranks reasonably low down on the scale...

    That's not to say that I can't derive pleasure from doing so, but there are bigger reasons than merely entertainment.

    Quote Originally Posted by fidelia View Post
    ...are you looking to provoke a response by poking those around you[?]
    That would depend on what you mean by "response"...

    I would say I intend to provoke many different kinds of responses.

    It always depends on the context...

    Quote Originally Posted by fidelia View Post
    ...or do you feel this kind of exchange is what sharpens real discussion?
    Yes.

    Iron sharpens iron.

    But I don't go around swinging my sword just to provoke conflict.

    I genuinely swing my sword depending on the truth value of what I read.

    If there is something blatantly untrue, I take a hack at it.

    If the creator disagrees, they can choose to defend and hack back.

    Perhaps I will learn something new or realize something about what they said that I had not before.

    Or perhaps I will show their position to be as untruthful as I originally suspected it to be.

    This leads me closer to the truth.

    It also leads the other person closer to the truth.

    They might be butt hurt about it, but I try to frame my language in such a way that it gives the person what I believe they deserve (and can take). If they're still butt hurt about it, then they should consider realigning themselves to be more closely in line with the truth.

    I am working on putting less insults into my messaging, but sometimes it is completely deserved (people actually thank me in reps for it).

    I'm trying to calibrate how best to eviscerate the argument without getting personal, if getting personal is undeserved.

    In some cases, I think it weakens the effect of my argument; in some cases, I think it does not.

    In the end, for me, it's all about which most effectively presents my position.

    And I try to make my position as consistent with the truth as possible.

    Quote Originally Posted by fidelia View Post
    (I'm not heckling, really!)
    I believe you.

    Quote Originally Posted by fidelia View Post
    What I take away from an exchange like this is "You are of low intelligence" "You cannot even construct an initial argument properly", "You know nothing compared to me", "I have all the answers". It frustrates me, because I expect you have some interesting thoughts to consider, and I would like to be open to them, but the overwhelming waft of arrogance and superiority that that communication style conveys to me (and I'm not saying others would perceive it in the same way), makes it hard for me to listen open-mindedly.
    There's a lot to say about this.

    See, for me, the truth of the argument is what matters.

    If you let your emotions get in the way of evaluating the truth-content of my message, then that's your problem, not mine.

    My argument's relationship to the truth does not change based on your emotional response.

    I find it a weakness to let such things get in the way.

    Perhaps I know the effect my language can have, but I use it intentionally to say, "Your emotional response does not matter! Only the truth matters!"

    Kind of a way of jarring people a bit psychologically so they must ask themselves, "I am being bothered by this message, but it seems somewhat true as well... I don't know, my emotions seem to be clouding my ability to properly evaluate it... Why is this happening? What should I make of it? What should I do?"

    *

    I think it should also be noted that I don't just go around berating people, nor do I only cast negative opinions.

    I evaluate truth content of utterances.

    As such, I correct when appropriate, I eviscerate when appropriate, I agree when appropriate, and I give praise when appropriate.

    Look at what I originally wrote: 3/6 evaluations were some form of positive response, and 3/6 were some form of negative response.

    And by "positive" and "negative", I'm not so much referring to the tone of my response as I'm referring to my evaluation of their truth content.

    The tone will go along with the evaluation of truth content, but it comes only secondarily.

    *

    From another angle, you might want to consider this a performance piece.

    It would be dishonest of me to say that I didn't somewhat craft my response to demonstrate the stark difference between what I come here for and what, for example, you come here for, or, perhaps, better put, what types of communication are perfectly acceptable, in my opinion, but, obviously, not too acceptable, in yours.

    Why do you think the INTJs in that other thread are more-or-less on my side?

    We feel that our method of communication is not considered acceptable here, but that yours is.

    Imagine that, coming to a typology forum "for all types", but finding that your method of communication is not considered acceptable.

    We have to pare back on our natural inclinations in order to be accepted here, but you do not.

    *cue the "yeah, but my method is acceptable, and yours is not" instinctual response*

    Quote Originally Posted by fidelia View Post
    Please give me some context for why that is your initial reaction and conversations response to most discussions, or what your intent is so that I can perceive it differently.
    I think I've described it pretty well above.

    If not, I am willing to further clarify.

    Quote Originally Posted by fidelia View Post
    I would be the first to say that I have a real disconnect with the thought process/communication style of many INTJs and I would like to understand it better. I would think that both being Ni doms would make it easier to understanding each other. Seems to be method of communicating, as well as maybe Te/Fi thrown in there.
    I would say, and I know you know this, the difference in method of communicating is caused by the Te/Fi-Fe/Ti divide.

    I think INJs are actually one of the best windows into perceiving and understanding that divide, since we are Jungian cousins whose functional order starts with the same function, and then goes straight into the dividing difference.

    Frankly, you do get a lot of what I'm doing, cuz whenever you offer up possible interpretations of why I do what I do, you list a bunch of good ones, but, the fact of the matter is, you just don't like how it tastes.

    Truly, and I don't mean this offensively, the same holds true for how yours tastes to me...

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    MBTI
    ZZZZ
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    To be more accurate, it bothers me when people pass something off for truth that is not truth.
    Whilst this is a general NT trait. NTP's don't seem to do anything about untruth and ENTJ's get distracted and move on (being extroverts). I think it really really bugs INTJ's though.

    General untruth, I'm ok with. There are plenty of deluded souls out there. It's untruth by someone I care about or respect that must be dealt with.

    Being together with a highly subjective ESFJ has been challenging

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Iron sharpens iron.
    Absolutely.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    See, for me, the truth of the argument is what matters.
    If you let your emotions get in the way of evaluating the truth-content of my message, then that's your problem, not mine.
    My argument's relationship to the truth does not change based on your emotional response.
    I find it a weakness to let such things get in the way.
    Everyone should just stop and think about this. I've said the same thing for years, yet it seems to fall on deaf ears. It's such an important point. I've seen so many communities devolve into ignorant, untruthful Fe-parties with too much noise and no signal, because niceties are placed above truth.

    It's INTJ's achilles heal.

    Zarathustra, I had a realisation that has helped me. Maybe you see it already, but there are 2 simultaneous data channels in all communication. Both are carrying information in real time.

    Content information and Feeling information.

    ESFJ's for example are internally very conflicted because often Content and Feeling are saying two different things and sometimes they are forced to listen to Content. However they are also generally tuned into just the Feeling channel. They not really listening to the Content or decoding it.

    It's very exausting for NTJ's to package something nicely, but when the Feeling and the Content channel match then it creates Impact.

    Since INTJ's are generally only tuned to the Content channel we make bad persuaders. The upside is it's far less distracting and easier to discern truth.

  7. #27
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by five View Post
    It's very exhausting for NTJ's to package something nicely...
    This.

    So much this.

    I've been meaning to say this for like five days.

    It's like, look, I'm giving everything I got to give you pure unvarnished truth, but that's not good enough for you?

    You want me to wrap it in a pretty basket, too?

    I don't have the time or the energy for that!

    Take it or leave it!

    *

    I think this is where the problem of relativism sneaks in and does its ugly work.

    How many times do you hear people say some feeble-minded bullshit like, "Oh, well, we all have our perspective."

    Great. But that doesn't mean that all perspectives are equal. So don't try to cram your bullshit down my piehole.

    Quote Originally Posted by five View Post
    The upside is it's far less distracting and easier to discern truth.
    An interesting way to look at it.

    Makes sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by five View Post
    ...but when the Feeling and the Content channel match then it creates Impact.

    Since INTJ's are generally only tuned to the Content channel we make bad persuaders.
    I feel you in the sense that people might not like us, and therefore might not want to join our side.

    But I think people do have a hard time denying the truth of what we say, when we say it effectively.

    Interestingly enough, there is a very distinct rub between the two statements you've made above.

    When the right time aligns, I can actually become a very persuasive person.

    I suppose it happens when my emotion runs parallel to the emotion of the audience.

    In these situations, I become very good at tugging on the Feeling strings.

    **

    In most situations, though, I'm the asshole saying things most people don't know and/or don't want to hear.

    They just happen to be things that, by my measure, they most need to hear, regardless of whether they want to.

    I suppose this is why Jung said, if it weren't for Ni-doms, there would've been no prophets in ancient Israel.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    MBTI
    ZZZZ
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    In most situations, though, I'm the asshole saying things most people don't know and/or don't want to hear.
    For sure, society has deemed

    Anti-Fe = asshole

    I get called an asshole too, but it doesn't mean "bad" in my head. It just means, "(Five) is not delivering the message or actions with enough good feelings". So I don't mind the label.

    For example. I'd rather a gruff doctor save my life, than an incompetent (Fe)riendly doctor with charm bungle my op. Consequence matters more to Fi users.

  9. #29
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by five View Post
    I get called an asshole too, but it doesn't mean "bad" in my head.
    I wear it as a badge of honor.

    Quote Originally Posted by five View Post
    For example. I'd rather a gruff doctor save my life, than an incompetent (Fe)riendly doctor with charm bungle my op. Consequence matters more to Fi users.
    Word.

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    MBTI
    ZZZZ
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    When the right time aligns, I can actually become a very persuasive person.

    I suppose it happens when my emotion runs parallel to the emotion of the audience.
    Ok. Yes that sounds like it would.

    Have you also considered though that your emotion is not logically connected to that of the audience.

    In other words I can deliver Content with Feeling, even though I do not feel it. I call this our Marketing department.

    Furthermore along a similar line, whole industries are built upon exploiting irrationality of people, but the people running these businesses do so rationally.

    Eg Casino operators.

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