R
RDF
Guest
Across time I have been looking for a way to describe how Fi works internally. In past posts, I've described Fi as a process of self-definition. IOW, some event occurs in the outer world, and the Fi-Dominant person asks himself, "What *do* I feel about this? What *should* I feel about this? How does it affect me? Should I get involved and do something about it?"
Initially I ask a lot of questions of myself; and then with time and experience I find answers to those questions; Fi is a "judging" function. As I find answers to my questions, I build up a personal ethical system that guides my actions. Once I have determined ("judged") how I feel about some situation, I'll know how to react to it in the future.
And thus, over time, I build a framework of judgments and self-definitions that guide my actions and give me a sense that I'm grounded in something bigger and more permanent than mere action/reaction. As I grow older, life's events don't buffet me or torment me as they did when I was young; my past Fi "judgments" provide a compass and roadmap; I can choose to float above events and take a philosophical approach to life.
However, it's tough to demonstrate that initial process to outsiders (people who aren't Fi-Dominant): that initial self-questioning process that occurs every time I'm faced with some new situation.
Recently I was reading an advice column; a guy wrote in and said that he becomes jealous and needy when his girlfriend interacts with other guys; sometimes the jealousy comes out and he becomes overbearing with his girlfriend, poisoning the relationship. In the end, the guys asks the columnist how he should deal with his jealousy:
In response, the columnist (Carolyn Hax, featured in the Washington Post) prescribes a course of "introspection." She asks him a series of questions to help him build some personal values and ethics for dealing with the situation:
The list of questions sounds very Fi in nature to me (that is, if one were asking these questions of oneself). The list goes a bit overboard, perhaps; the columnist is making a point, so she goes on a bit ad nauseum.
Still, these are the kinds of questions that I have raised with myself, particularly when faced with a new situation in relationships. The questions give me a series of "prisms" through which to view the situation, and the answers (as I find or develop them) give me guidelines for behavior beyond merely reacting to the situation at hand or expressing the whims and emotions of the moment.
Such long lists of questions don't arise for every situation that comes along. As I get older, I have my act down pretty good and can arrive at a conclusion or course of action quicker and quicker. But I remember younger days when I encountered unfamiliar situations and wrestled with questions and scenarios much like this.
And the columnist's advice at the end seems like a good way for people to develop their Fi when it's not their dominant function:
Almost daily, I advise introspection -- to know your own mind, and to open your mind to the ways other people think, feel and behave. This time I've typed out a recipe. Put in mental oven, and bake.
Anyway, here's my question: Do any other Fi-Dominants (INFPs or ISFPs) or even Fi-Auxiliaries recognize this kind of introspective, self-questioning scenario? Is this a good representation of how Fi-Dominants react to new situations and build their "ethical systems"? Or do other types recognize this as something familiar to them as well?
Just for future reference, here are two other posts where I've tried to play around with other aspects of Fi:
What it's like to be Fi-Dominant:
http://www.typologycentral.com/foru...n-inferior-functions-developed.html#post68873
Fi being about analyzing ethical situations and arriving at situations that create the greatest "harmony" (as opposed to T, which deduces universal rules in order to achieve the greatest fairness)
http://www.typologycentral.com/foru.../4004-superego-mbti-functions.html#post136632
Initially I ask a lot of questions of myself; and then with time and experience I find answers to those questions; Fi is a "judging" function. As I find answers to my questions, I build up a personal ethical system that guides my actions. Once I have determined ("judged") how I feel about some situation, I'll know how to react to it in the future.
And thus, over time, I build a framework of judgments and self-definitions that guide my actions and give me a sense that I'm grounded in something bigger and more permanent than mere action/reaction. As I grow older, life's events don't buffet me or torment me as they did when I was young; my past Fi "judgments" provide a compass and roadmap; I can choose to float above events and take a philosophical approach to life.
However, it's tough to demonstrate that initial process to outsiders (people who aren't Fi-Dominant): that initial self-questioning process that occurs every time I'm faced with some new situation.
Recently I was reading an advice column; a guy wrote in and said that he becomes jealous and needy when his girlfriend interacts with other guys; sometimes the jealousy comes out and he becomes overbearing with his girlfriend, poisoning the relationship. In the end, the guys asks the columnist how he should deal with his jealousy:
Beyond counseling (which I definitely think is a good idea), what can I do to stop myself from worrying that, even if she's not cheating, she's just one super-funny cute guy away from hitting the road?
In response, the columnist (Carolyn Hax, featured in the Washington Post) prescribes a course of "introspection." She asks him a series of questions to help him build some personal values and ethics for dealing with the situation:
Are you just one super-funny cute girl away from hitting the road?
If not, then why question her commitment but not your own?
And if so, then why do you have a girlfriend, both in general and this one specifically? Have all girlfriends brought out this jealousy?
Either way, which one scares you here: her cheating, leaving you, or both? Is it humiliation you fear? Loss? Both?
Do you think limited exposure to other men is what keeps women faithful? If only ignorance kept her around, would you feel loved?
What do you think will happen if she leaves or cheats -- that you will heal eventually, or won't?
If you anticipate never healing, would you attribute it to her mistreatment, or to emotional limitations that would prevent you from enjoying single life?
Would you never trust anyone again? Would only women be suspect?
Can you envision being better off without a girlfriend who would dump you for the first available super-funny cute guy?
Can you envision a future that's better for your having suffered?
Do you think your girlfriend thinks about these things, too? Isn't it possible you'll lose interest/fall for someone else/make a stupid mistake? What is it that makes you "safe" but her such a risk?
Is it just that you know your own mind but can't possibly know hers?
And if that's true, isn't she (or anyone else who loves someone) in the exact same position as you?
And if that's true, why isn't everyone jealous?
By letting things run their course, and trusting yourself to handle whatever happens, what do you have to lose? Be specific. Make a list even.
If you don't think that works, what do you think others do to stay emotionally in balance?
Almost daily, I advise introspection -- to know your own mind, and to open your mind to the ways other people think, feel and behave. This time I've typed out a recipe. Put in mental oven, and bake.
washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines
(Carolyn Hax's 4/13/08 column.)
The list of questions sounds very Fi in nature to me (that is, if one were asking these questions of oneself). The list goes a bit overboard, perhaps; the columnist is making a point, so she goes on a bit ad nauseum.
Still, these are the kinds of questions that I have raised with myself, particularly when faced with a new situation in relationships. The questions give me a series of "prisms" through which to view the situation, and the answers (as I find or develop them) give me guidelines for behavior beyond merely reacting to the situation at hand or expressing the whims and emotions of the moment.
Such long lists of questions don't arise for every situation that comes along. As I get older, I have my act down pretty good and can arrive at a conclusion or course of action quicker and quicker. But I remember younger days when I encountered unfamiliar situations and wrestled with questions and scenarios much like this.
And the columnist's advice at the end seems like a good way for people to develop their Fi when it's not their dominant function:
Almost daily, I advise introspection -- to know your own mind, and to open your mind to the ways other people think, feel and behave. This time I've typed out a recipe. Put in mental oven, and bake.
Anyway, here's my question: Do any other Fi-Dominants (INFPs or ISFPs) or even Fi-Auxiliaries recognize this kind of introspective, self-questioning scenario? Is this a good representation of how Fi-Dominants react to new situations and build their "ethical systems"? Or do other types recognize this as something familiar to them as well?
Just for future reference, here are two other posts where I've tried to play around with other aspects of Fi:
What it's like to be Fi-Dominant:
http://www.typologycentral.com/foru...n-inferior-functions-developed.html#post68873
Fi being about analyzing ethical situations and arriving at situations that create the greatest "harmony" (as opposed to T, which deduces universal rules in order to achieve the greatest fairness)
http://www.typologycentral.com/foru.../4004-superego-mbti-functions.html#post136632