Fe Fakeness

[Thalassa]

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

Don't worry - my INTP friend who has a PhD is a Kantian philosopher, and his level of academic rigor, impersonal detachment (um...he doesn't go around trying to make himself look smrt or put other people down about their intelligence), and general kindness beats the hell out of many of the NTs on this site who troll around boasting about their intelligence.

Besides, Nietzche was a self-absorbed wacko.

 

[Thalassa]

Right, so let tell you whats happened here. This whole forum lacks Se and Te and as a consequence this guy appears to be like that because he is the most "INTJ" here.

Yes he is of course he is rational and objective, compared to an NF or SF, which he loves to argue with. Which is ironic because to me he seems subjective and overly emotional compared to me. I have seen this constantly in my debates over the years with NTP's.

SFs aren't as dumb as we seem. I can tell that he's subjective and overly emotional, which is why I referred to the hilarious Ayn Rand disease...I also notice that he greatly enjoys putting down NFs and SFs cuz it makes him feel smrt.

It's sort of like a big guy beating up on people who are physically smaller.

It's also like saying "my talent beats all of your talents"...which gives me the image of a sculptor insulting the Bolshoi Ballet because they can't make statues like he can, while completely disregarding their dancing.

And I agree with you that it does come off as rather ENTP-ish. I've actually asked him before if he was ENTJ because INTJ just seems a little off in some ways. But I'm not discounting the possibility that he's an INTJ who just has Ayn Rand disease. "I R OBJECTIVE! EVEN WHEN TALKING ABOUT NUDE MEN JUMPING INTO WATER! ART IS EVEN OBJECTIVE! I'M SO OBJECTIVE I'M GOING TO CALL MY OPINIONS OBJECTIVISM"...even while generations of people laugh about how she wasn't a real philosopher. I personally think she was projecting her issues from her childhood in Soviet Russia on to her beliefs rather than being truly objective by any stretch of the imagination. Oh, teddy, why has mommy given teddy to the poor children.

 

[Eric B]

There's two different definitions of objective at play in this thread, one that means "without the distortion of emotion" and another that means "stipulates according to cues in the environment". The first is, for want of a better expression, a value, and is associated with introverted thinking. The second is (pretty much) the whole of the technical content of the claim that extroverted judgment is objective. (Looks outside to the objects, not inside to the subject.) That first definition is a value for Ti because--and here I'll launch into a possibly novel claim about the nature of cognition--there is no such thing as Ti without Fe.

I mean to say that, literally, there is no cognition "Ti" without there being cognition "Fe". The two cannot exist alone. You cannot embark upon evaluation of environmental affect without some inner anchor of judgment that isn't tied to the environment. And I don't know how this is true just yet, nor exactly how to express it, particularly when it comes to trying to spell out "Fe" in real words that actually describe what kind of cognition happens (as opposed to say describing behavior). For the present I'll make do with evaluation, environment, stipulate, and so on. But in any case, this is not a requirement that you be conscious of both kinds of judgment. It's just the suggestion that one cannot occur without containing some aspect of the other.

And this is great, right? Extroverted feeling, doing what it does and being all objective, calls upon a person to alter evaluation of data to accord with (changing) environmental stipulations and introverted thinking plods along regardless, removing the taint of emotion and building independent evaluation instead. That's a pleasant and useful dynamic balance right there, one set of evaluative processes pulling one way, another set pulling the other way, both ideally adding their strengths and resulting in a complex third judgment. Holla back, consciousness.

So, in the end, to identify Fe as in general fake requires Ti as a system to tolerate untruth quite well. Does it? Naturally, there should be questions of the relative consciousness of the Fe and the Ti but, and you know what, I don't even know what this all means, it might even be something really simple.

But not something about authenticity as determined by some other judgment system. Maybe just something about, pffft, whatever, I don't know, your mom.

Yes, the functions are basically reflections of each other. This how I've put it on my pages in the discussion of functional differentiation:

The opposite functional perspective [from the one we prefer] is always implicit in a situation, because when we look at it through a function and orientation, we are in essence dividing the situation that in complete form consists of both tangible and conceptual [N], and technical [T] and humane [F] aspects, which both emerge [P] and vary [J], and can be stored or set in our memory.
So if I pick out of a situation the technical and variable elements [T+P], then the humane and set elements [F+J] are implicit, in having basically been differentiated or set apart.

(There's also the preferred function in the opposite attitude, and the opposite function in the preferred attitude, but these are not as immediately implicit, because they share one thing in common with the preferred perspective, and thus, not either wholly preferred, or wholly suppressed. Hence, they end up even further from consciousness).

 

[onemoretime]

I'd even say that one adopts the reflected judging preference because of the need to compensate for the deficiencies presented by the stronger function preference.

 

[Ginkgo]

You can't spell 'fake' without 'fe'!

 

[five]

You spent 774 words to explain your conception of truth yet none of these 774 words is 'truth'. In the end, you did not explain it at all. Frankly, this does not strike me as particularly efficient.

I wasn't explaining "truth". What gave you that impression? Nor was it a Magnus opus on how wonderful I am. I'm just stating my world view because you asked.

 

[Esoteric Wench]

You can't spell 'fake' without 'fe'!

+1 for the Fi user.

 

[five]

And I agree with you that it does come off as rather ENTP-ish. I've actually asked him before if he was ENTJ because INTJ just seems a little off in some ways. But I'm not discounting the possibility that he's an INTJ who just has Ayn Rand disease. "I R OBJECTIVE! EVEN WHEN TALKING ABOUT NUDE MEN JUMPING INTO WATER! ART IS EVEN OBJECTIVE! I'M SO OBJECTIVE I'M GOING TO CALL MY OPINIONS OBJECTIVISM"...even while generations of people laugh about how she wasn't a real philosopher. I personally think she was projecting her issues from her childhood in Soviet Russia on to her beliefs rather than being truly objective by any stretch of the imagination. Oh, teddy, why has mommy given teddy to the poor children.

Indeed. You have Se (AKA common sense) and I can see that. You may not grasp the rational debate or be able to dominate that doesn't mean you don't have something to contribute.

He comes across ENTP because he is one. You see the pattern because my Ni saw it. And BTW I was wrong at first. I actually emailed someone and said, "This guy is an INTJ". So I was dead wrong. I jumped to a conclusion. I can make mistakes, he was doing a good job emulating one though until I dug beneath the service. It's one of my biases, I tend to trust people too much and expect they operate with the same level of self scrutiny.

Also he has gone all quiet now after a stiff appraisal. Surprise surprise. He is doubting his "INTJ"ness. I know their are others that doubt he is an INTJ, yet they don't speak up. Why? Because of Fe obviously. It's not polite. Duh.

I have absolutely non-existent feelings around that. My only emotion is Fi and it's more like a passion. Passion for truth and accuracy, passion for efficiency, passion for building systems.

No doubt as we speak Zarathustra mind is trying to reduce the cognitive dissonance by introducing a new counter attack. It's how mind viruses like religion perpetuate for so long. Whatever arguments people come up with against it, the mind creates new ones in defence. Also everyone here is too polite to go around correcting other people's perceptions of themselves.

Even his username and profile pic reeks of trying too hard to be "INTJ". "Zarathustra" subtle?

Furthermore he has to overcome the public embarrassment of not knowing his own type and being delusional, I am assuming he would find it embarrassing, I personally wouldn't but I think most would. But don't worry there are plenty of other "INTJ"'s here. Economica is not an INTJ either. In fact I haven't seen one yet. Maybe they can all get together and feel good and come up with a touchy feely way to dismiss my opinion and hence go back to "normal" thinking they all INTJ's.

You know what we call creative sensitive INTJ's in the real world? ISFP's.

I find it ironic that I get called too INTJ, then everyone else knows what an INTJ is, but the one guy calling everyone else out who actually is one.. he must just be deluded or have some hidden agenda. Sure. That make sense <sarcasm>

Here's what's happened. There are "levels" of Fe around here so that:

Lots of Fe = Fe
Moderate Fe = "Fi"

That's how he can explain away the fact he has Fe when he's not meant to as an INTJ.

It's very dangerous to go typing on the internet because it's an information medium that is less infallible than real life. First get good in real life. Build up a warchest of typing skill and make sure you have an excellent feel for all the cognitives. THEN possibly go onto the internet and try typing people.

It's much fucking harder.

• You don't have context about anyone.
• Hard to tell if they lying.
• You can't see mannerism etc
• So starting here online is just recipe for disaster.

Also I don't type alone. Another bad idea.

Make sure all cognitives are covered by the typing team to avoid cognitive biases creeping in. I type with an INTP and ENTJ.

I can see the typing club around here lacks Ni Te.

 

[Zarathustra]

Indeed. You have Se (AKA common sense) and I can see that. You may not grasp the rational debate or be able to dominate that doesn't mean you don't have something to contribute.

He comes across ENTP because he is one. You see the pattern because my Ni saw it. And BTW I was wrong at first. I actually emailed someone and said, "This guy is an INTJ". So I was dead wrong. I jumped to a conclusion. I can make mistakes, he was doing a good job emulating one though until I dug beneath the service. It's one of my biases, I tend to trust people too much and expect they operate with the same level of self scrutiny.

Also he has gone all quiet now after a stiff appraisal. Surprise surprise. He is doubting his "INTJ"ness. I know their are others that doubt he is an INTJ, yet they don't speak up. Why? Because of Fe obviously. It's not polite. Duh.

I have absolutely non-existent feelings around that. My only emotion is Fi and it's more like a passion. Passion for truth and accuracy, passion for efficiency, passion for building systems.

No doubt as we speak Zarathustra mind is trying to reduce the cognitive dissonance by introducing a new counter attack. It's how mind viruses like religion perpetuate for so long. Whatever arguments people come up with against it, the mind creates new ones in defence. Also everyone here is too polite to go around correcting other people's perceptions of themselves.

Even his username and profile pic reeks of trying too hard to be "INTJ". "Zarathustra" subtle?

Furthermore he has to overcome the public embarrassment of not knowing his own type and being delusional, I am assuming he would find it embarrassing, I personally wouldn't but I think most would. But don't worry there are plenty of other "INTJ"'s here. Economica is not an INTJ either. In fact I haven't seen one yet. Maybe they can all get together and feel good and come up with a touchy feely way to dismiss my opinion and hence go back to "normal" thinking they all INTJ's.

You know what we call creative sensitive INTJ's in the real world? ISFP's.

I find it ironic that I get called too INTJ, then everyone else knows what an INTJ is, but the one guy calling everyone else out who actually is one.. he must just be deluded or have some hidden agenda. Sure. That make sense <sarcasm>

It's so funny what's happened. There are "levels" of Fe around here so that:

Lots of Fe = Fe
Moderate Fe = "Fi"

That's how he can explain away the fact he has Fe when he's not meant to as an INTJ.

It's very dangerous to go typing on the internet because it's an information medium that is less infallible than real life. First get good in real life. Build up a warchest of typing skill and make sure you have an excellent feel for all the cognitives. THEN possibly go onto the internet and try typing people.

It's much fucking harder.. You don't have context about anyone. Hard to tell if they lying. You can't see mannerism etc. So starting here online is just recipe for disaster.

Also I don't type alone. Another bad idea.

Make sure all coginitives are covered in your typing team to avoid coginitive biases creeping in. I type with an INTP and ENTJ.

I can see the typing club around here lacks Ni Te.

Simple.

:yim_rolling_on_the_

 

[Nicodemus]

I wasn't explaining "truth". What gave you that impression?

You were asked to explain your conception of truth, then you quoted that request and wrote a response to it. Why you did indeed fail to explain your conception of truth I do not know.

Nor was it a Magnus opus on how wonderful I am. I'm just stating my world view because you asked.

I never asked for your world view.

 

[five]

You were asked to explain your conception of truth, then you quoted that request and wrote a response to it. Why you did indeed fail to explain your conception of truth I do not know.

I never asked for your world view.

Oh ok. My bad then.

Probably was on that train of thought at the time. My apologies for the bore fest then.

What is truth? is a huge and fantastic question. One I've struggled with for years. Because of temporal dimensions (eg truth in the past present and future), spacial truth (truth at a particular location in the universe), subjective truth (truth from a particular persons perspective), objective truth (applying to all objects)

I can definitely give you a write up on that. But now it's time to relax with Breaking Bad.

 

[Nicodemus]

I can definitely give you a write up on that.

That might be what I was asking for. It should answer the question: What makes a statement true? If you do that, you have answered my request.

 

[Ginkgo]

+1 for trolling me.

Fix'd

 

[INTP]

Hmmm. Well, there must be some sort of language malfunction then, because I'm certainly not the only one who has expressed that opinion when interacting with you. In fact, it seems to be the dominant perception. So if you don't mean it, it would still seem like it's coming out that way to people of various type perspectives.



lol. You have completely changed your attitude/tone of voice in the last half hour or so.

Yeah, I'll grant you that you have a skill that is useful -- you can analyze and explain rational process.
But you haven't been talking about it on that meager level.

Look, your skills are not my skills, but earlier in my life I went through phase where it was very important for me to "always be rational" so that no one could challenge my opinion and I would know I was always right. I remember arguing with people -- the ex, friends, acquaintances, people online -- about how as an INTP I was naturally "more objective" than they were because I thought through everything, analyzed it, understood the principles, didn't just make decisions from emotion or instinct but checked everything. It wasn't that I didn't have a point about INTP strengths, but that (1) I equated the INTP perspective with the way that EVERYONE should view and operate within the world, it was the ideal they always needed to live up to, and (2) I didn't properly recognize that my skills would not work within some key areas of life importance and that other skills would.

Later, after I had had a change of heart and a realignment of my thinking (due to uncovering some inadequacies of my view), even my INTP best friend told me I had been insufferable and he was glad I had gotten my head out of my ass. I didn't have much to say about it at that point but to apologize. I also realized that I had been doing exactly what I hated when other perspectives (like Fe) saw my Ti concerns as negligible or irrelevant across the board, because I wasn't living up to THEIR views of what they thought reality was. Despite my vaunted "objectivity," I was the embodiment of the same arrogance i despised in others.

You have a valuable skill, and it will serve you well.
It is one valuable skill among many, and other skills will help you get an even fuller picture of the width and breadth of existence.

INTJs are simply unable to get stuff like this, or at least the ones under 85. its pretty hard to realize and differentiate Fi compared to Si. and this differentiated third is required for using inferior properly.

 

[INTP]

Lol zaharuska(or what ever) cries on rep

 

[Zarathustra]

The one thing that makes me sort of willing to accept that when Jung said he was "often at variance with reality" it could still be evidence that he's an INTP, not an Ni-dom, is how at variance with reality every one of your posts is.

 

[Zarathustra]

Just wondering: how much would you be willing to pay for an hour of watching [MENTION=8064]Lex Talionis[/MENTION] and [MENTION=13748]five[/MENTION] alone in a room together?

 

[INTP]

The one thing that makes me sort of willing to accept that when Jung said he was "often at variance with reality" it could still be evidence that he's an INTP, not an Ni-dom, is how at variance with reality every one of your posts is.

Yay. im same type as god of psychology

 

[Z Buck McFate]

That tie-breaker comes necessarily from Fi. But not feeling, exactly. Rather, some "value" that has grown up over the years to summarize those years worth of reaction to the environment. (EDIT: Hmmm, that claim about how the "value" arises could be thought about more... as could the question of whether there is a value or not, but let's move right along... [<- example of stipulation in action, hope the Ti doesn't get too inflamed]) So, it's less that Fe is invisible, and more that the Fe style of organisation will positively be ignored if we are to keep functioning in a way that we identify as "me". I'll go ahead and assume a similar deal applies for INFJs with Ti.

Yeah, in IJs (probably moreso INJs) it’s that behind-the-scenes advisor-judging function which gets all bent out of sorts at tiny details- it has a big influence on the way information is organized, but it’s never directly visible (to others, unless they’re the same way). From that site, about tertiary temptation (which my link no longer works for, but I copied this before):

Tertiary Ti (IxFJ): "I can't possibly go along with this, because it makes no sense. It's filled with internal contradictions. It's crude and not true to the real principles of how this works. It's trying to shove an inappropriately a priori conceptual structure onto the reality.

Tertiary Fi (IxTJ): "I can't possibly go along with this, because it would mar my soul. It's not 'me'. I am a good person, and in order to maintain my integrity, I need to steer clear of this.

I know this^ describes it rather well for me. It seems to me like the EJs I know have something similar going on- the more reasonable they are, the less they try immediately imposing what they already know on others and withdraw slightly to assimilate new information to take other viewpoints into account- but they still do it according to their own respective underlying priorities.

It's a damn interest question, what most generates the conflict. For one, it is true that Fe and Te construct external organisation differently. For two, (and particularly in INJs), back-up judgment not only gets inflamed when there is Je conflict, but that inflammation is less conscious, less open to subtle distinction, and more likely to be insisted upon in a peremptory manner. And not only that, but the back-up judgment has a built in aversion to exactly the kind of extroverted judgment the other side is attempting. Introverted judgement WILL NOT accept stipulations based only on environmental cues. It doesn't work that way, and finds that method to be not just misleading but also CORRUPT!

Yeah, the bolded, that’s a big ‘un. And the less aware we are individually of the ‘corruptness’ being an internal value, the more we are at the mercy of the unconscious priority and the less objective we will be able to perceive any given situation. What I find troubling is that even if we do the work to understand how our unconscious priorities affect how we organize and perceive ‘reality’- it does little to help us understand unconscious priorities that are foreign to us (as you state in the next paragraph). It helps us understand how an unconscious priority can have an affect- but how that affect manifests where the priority is foreign will remain unintelligible.

Is communication beyond these issues possible? Or is it just the case that in the history of the world the real tie-breakers are most often merely contingent factors, like say the context gives one person more institutional authority to bull their position ahead over the other's, or the other type is faster with a knife, or one of them has more friends nearby or whatever? Or does it ever happen that one person backs down because he saw advantages in the other type's choices? Is that ever universalizable?

Or is it just the case that the only tool of cooperation we have is the compromise of our values?

You know, statistically speaking, and in the history of the world, there have to have been successful Fe/Ti and Te/Fi relationships out there. I don’t think most people want to do the work of really finding an OMG11! same page, so it probably does come down to the ersatz resolution via contingent factors. I suspect this event in its most common form passes without incident, or is quickly replaced by other concerns like what to eat for dinner. When looking at it under a microscope like this, though, it does seem almost overwhelming- like, how do we even communicate at all?

 

[Kalach]

You know, statistically speaking, and in the history of the world, there have to have been successful Fe/Ti and Te/Fi relationships out there. I don’t think most people want to do the work of really finding an OMG11! same page, so it probably does come down to the ersatz resolution via contingent factors. I suspect this event in its most common form passes without incident, or is quickly replaced by other concerns like what to eat for dinner. When looking at it under a microscope like this, though, it does seem almost overwhelming- like, how do we even communicate at all?

Yeah. e5's un-unite! *air hi5*

The concepts of differentiation/maturity tell us eventually we make--or learn to make, or aspire to make--conscious distinctions between the two kinds of judgment we employ. Eventually, it would seem, we "get" the difference between (and the different conclusions that follow from) subjective inner focus and objective outer focus in our own functioning. Something about this process suggests to me that perhaps there comes a time for, or there is a process that sees us one day actually, granting other people, in our own consciousness, the right to be different. I wonder how that works.

Re the thread topic though, it did occur to me to wonder, if INTJs lose some of their "not influenced by emotion" objectivity to the existence of relatively unconscious subjective feeling (and blah blah blah, the same for all other Te/Fi types), then what do we say for INFJs (and blah blah blah, possibly all Fe/Ti types)....?

That the seemingly penetrating empathy and the search for harmony is sometimes diminished by a semi-conscious attachment to reason?


LOL. That possibly sounds like I'm trying to be rude, but it's more or a reductio ad absurdum attempt. The seeming contradiction of a "faker" being driven around by unconscious attachment to truth suggests there is some... something... to talk about, the meaning of "authenticity" maybe.