The experience of the inner world, sure, but I'm using experience to mean experiences outside of your own head on one hand, and then experience to mean content you perceive on the other (as opposed to judging that content after having perceived it). I'm saying Fi is not about something happening to you & having an emotional reaction, and then making a value judgment based on that. That's not what it is.
Yeah...so? I never said it wasn't.and aren't right and wrong, good and bad, just different descriptions of the idea of value?
I'd disagree with that, but I think you're using subjective differently, and that's what I was trying to clarify before.I wasn't trying to suggest that there is no reasoning beyond emotion in Fi though only that they give more weight/value to their subjective experiences.
You're using subjective to mean "personal" as in concerning humanistic matters, specifically ones which affect that individual, but I'm using it to mean coming from the mind of the individual. Okay here: subjective - 1. relating to properties or specific conditions of the mind as distinguished from general or universal experience; existing in the mind. 2. belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought.
This may be how you experience it, but in reality that is not Ti. Jung notes that both dominant rationals basically use the self as their gauge. What you're stripping away is what you see as irrelevant aspects of yourself, such as emotion. You will also bring in some external info that you deem relevant, such as facts; but isn't deciding that judgment too? This means Ti is not about using facts to judge; it's deciding how to make sense to begin with. Ti is creating a structure to arrange those facts. Well, Fi creates a structure to arrange humanistic matters, so that they "make sense".Where a lead Ti might try to strip away as much of their self as possible to get to the facts, a lead Fi wants to determine value and in doing so must relate what they are evaluating to their preexisting opinions of what is valuable. Basically I was under the impression that Ti leads value subjectivity less and Fi leads value it more.
So yes, a Fi-dom strips away less of that "personal stuff", because it is NOT irrelevant (or not always) in judging value. Whether such things are relevant or not is part of the Fi process though.... But according to Jung, we resist being affected by external things, & so even our own personal experience can be found irrelevant, because it's too specific to an external context, and we're trying to funnel things down to the deepest, fundamental value concept. The inner world is kept "pure" then, so that what happened to me last week doesn't necessarily change how I view whatever category it falls under. I'm able to separate that from my idea of value still.
As for the bolded, I would say things may be compared to a predetermined concept of what a value category (such as "good") means. Fi is less focused on determining what is good so much as what good means in relation to being human (not just in relation to themselves, but the self is a guinea-pig). Is that clearer?
I just didn't see your initial description as having much to do with Fi. It sounded like a P style of thinking, where they "see" what is & what is not & comprehend things immediately without a line of reasoning because it's "obvious". Fi types reason; it's not some mysterious answer emerging from a haze.
"What is" is not necessarily objective. You can come up with a multitude of systems for labeling & defining things & one may not be more true than the other. Otherwise, all Ti-dom would agree on everything (and it's not just Pe or intelligence making them differ.... it's because Ti, like any function, is subjective, and like any introverted function, the inner world is the focus)."what is" being objective. value being subjective. Neither necessarily better.
My point was simply that people often confuse Feeling with Perceiving, and that's what it sounded like you were doing. That may very well describe the OP, but not Fi.... so maybe the OP is not INFP? What you said sounded like ENFP or INFJ to me.
That doesn't mean I think the OP is Ti-dom either.... but as I said before, there is no point in trying to type someone who is not open to it. You will just make them defensive & stubborn. No offense to the OP - carry on with your self-exploration, please.