• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

What type of communication or phrasing offends you as a fe/fi user?

five sounds

MyPeeSmellsLikeCoffee247
Joined
Jul 17, 2013
Messages
5,393
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
729
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
[MENTION=15291]Mane[/MENTION], well said with the degrees of cookedness. That explains the disconnect I often have with NJs perfectly. How can you say you know? It seems much less scientific than my own "further research needed" stance.
 

Siúil a Rúin

when the colors fade
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
14,037
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
496
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
If I have time to calibrate, then I'm comfortable with a wide range of communication styles from overly apologetic and polite to cursing like a sailor and grouchy.

1. There is one thing I don't want to calibrate to and that is when someone tells me what I'm feeling, what my "true" motivations are. I suppose I can tolerate it until the exchange where I tell them they are wrong and they insist to know better than me. At that point it seems time to just leave the argument or debate so they can just say what I'm thinking/feeling, declare all the problems with it, then say what they're thinking/feeling and so forth. When people argue at me like that it does annoy me. Almost every Fi/Ti dom I know has done this and it's the only thing I can think of that I dislike about my communication with them, but it is a doozy. They do it less or stop when not very upset.

2. Edit: Regarding the Ni/Ne question of uncooked ideas, I don't mind it. I can get offended by too much certitude, especially if it is an irrational and snap judgment. I have had to eliminate some political discussions with people who are too personally focused without actual analysis. I love it when people are open to further discussion which [MENTION=7111]fidelia[/MENTION] demonstrates all the time, so I think the "uncooked ideas" are referring to something else.

3. I also dislike a deriding, belittling, flippant attitude. I adore humorous people, but if the belittling smacks of arrogance then I find a way to offend right back with the opposite of flippancy. This is the only instance where I go on the attack. The other two I tend to just leave, but I must have a childhood trigger for the arrogant "nanners" type behavior because even with self control I can leave a path of verbal carnage in response.
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
[MENTION=15291]Mane[/MENTION], well said with the degrees of cookedness. That explains the disconnect I often have with NJs perfectly. How can you say you know? It seems much less scientific than my own "further research needed" stance.
It is scientific more in an empirical sense than a theoretical one. Stilll, I understand that people will have the highlighted question. I have it myself, though might give another Ni user the benefit of the doubt if his/her conclusions have been correct in the past, and I know this is how he/she operates. If I cannot provide at least a top-level answer to this question, I usually keep the thought to myself unless there is some urgency. Then I will use all resources at my disposal to impose it (it's not that bad - often a simple "please trust me on this one" will do).
 

pinkgraffiti

New member
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
1,482
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
748
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
[MENTION=7111]fidelia[/MENTION] i have a question for you, if you don't mind. i was out earlier with an INFJ friend. and she was telling me how a certain work experience lowered her self-esteem. so, since we work in the same area, i offered my personal experience of it, and of other people, and explained how we all have self-esteem issues with our work. my goal was to make her see that she wasn't alone, and that it was normal and she shouldn't blame it on herself.
is this good advice for an INFJ or would you have preferred a different approach? because i'm never sure if my INFJ friends like hearing words like these. thanks.
 

Fidelia

Iron Maiden
Staff member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
14,497
MBTI Type
INFJ
Yeah, that sounds like a great response! I don't think the issue is so much relating your own personal experience (Fe users do that too). It's just remembering to bring it back around to the person in question and their problem. Most people like to know that they are not alone, particularly when it's an issue that is really making them question their own competence or ability at something that matters to them. Probably too, the more overtly you can state your intentions (as you have here), the better!
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Lady X said:
What type of communication or phrasing offends you as a fe/fi user?

Interest has been expressed in more T input to this thread. I have already made some comments on [MENTION=7111]fidelia[/MENTION]'s initial post, particularly with respect to how Fi/Fe differences might play out when not in dom/aux position. I will add a few more comments, but first a caveat. I can comment on what annoys me about different communication styles, but I am not sure I can separate what comes specifically from using Fi vs. Fe. I suspect T vs F differences or even J vs. P might predominate in many of my observations. I will make them nonetheless, and perhaps others can figure out what drives what.

To start, I agree substantially with Highlander here:

This might be because I'm tert Fi, but I don't analyze my feelings. I have certain beliefs and convictions. I'm valuing what is important and what is not. I judge what is good and bad. I assess if I'm acting in accordance with my beliefs. I notice when people are acting phony. The way I look at it is I have my convictions/feelings and you have yours. It's really just that simple. I'll engage is a discussion about such things and it's not like they are completely unchangeable but they serve as a sort of core for me. As far as how that works or how these judgments are arrived at - I'm not sure.
I don't analyze my feelings much, either. I can recognize when I am feeling overwhelmed or distracted by feelings, when it is getting in the way of my thinking processes, or just generally making me feel "bad". At these times, I try to look beyond it to what is causing the unpleasant feelings. Once I figure this out, the feelings themselves either dissipate, or at least are easily set aside to address the cause.

Values and beliefs are another matter. I willingly discuss them if the circumstances warrant. I value internal consistency in my values and beliefs, and have little patience when the values/beliefs of others seem to lack this. I don't see it as my business to "correct" them, but will call them on it if they bring it up, especially if they are trying to push their values on me.

I can't say I really take offense to different communication styles, simply because it is hard for me to take any of it personally. Even a style that is very combative and insulting I will see as a reflection on the speaker, and little to do with me. It is annoying to have to deal with, but no more offensive than the attire of someone who I think has terrible taste. With that, here are some things that really annoy me in communication:

  • Beating around the bush, using 100 words to say something that can be said in 30. Such a style is full of conversational red herrings and dead ends. This is inefficient, and makes it hard for me to figure out what the real point is. Just say it already.

  • Saying anything other than what you mean, unless as a joke, or in some dire situation where a lie might really be necessary. I take my words seriously, and yours as well. I listen carefully, and want to respect what you say. Don't rely on me to override what you tell me based on such nebulous "cues" as body language or tone of voice. Even if something tips me off that you don't mean what you say, it probably won't be enough to tell me what you DO mean. This forces me to ask, and depending on how forthcoming you are at this point, we may now be into "beating around the bush". It makes the whole discussion seem more bother than it is worth.

  • Mirroring back what I have just said, unless you are very briefly condensing a large amount of material. Again, this is inefficient, and makes me want to tell you to get on with it. Of course you should ask if you have questions. Time answering those is well spent.

  • Sugar-coating things - if there is a bitter pill inside, sooner or later we will get to it, might as well be sooner. This includes formulas like, "give a compliment before making a criticism". Share the comments you actually have, whether critical or complimentary. Say what needs to be said. As long as it is courteous and factual, I won't mind at all.

  • Touching during casual conversation - I cannot understand what people get out of this. Please keep your distance, unless we need to touch, or you want to shake hands as a greeting.

  • Smalltalk - why, just why? If you are someone I feel I must be very polite with, I will tolerate it, for awhile.

  • Asking personal questions - if you aren't someone very close to me, you probably don't need to know. I will volunteer what I want to share.

  • Asking me about emotions, commenting on what you think I am feeling, or heaven forbid, expecting me to feel what you would be feeling in similar circumstances. Comments that start with "you must be . . . " are bad: "you must be so relived that . . . ", "you must be excited to . . . ", "how sad it must be for you that . . . ". I have my own feelings about the events in my life, and prefer to keep them to myself. If you want to ask about the actual event - a death in the family, new house purchase, etc. that is better, as long as it is relevant and you are someone I will share that level of information with.
 

Ene

Active member
Joined
Aug 16, 2012
Messages
3,574
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
5w4
[MENTION=7111]fidelia[/MENTION]

I apologize for taking so long to respond to your questions. I've been kind of overwhelmed at work lately and haven't had a lot of free time.

I am unsure of how Fi users handle offenses. I've known some who are like me and give the offender the opportunity to explain themselves. I know some who curse, mutter, mumble and fret over offenses and imagined offenses. I say imagined because I was there when the "offense" occurred and I heard the same thing but didn't take it to be an attack on anyone's person but rather a general statement. I also know Fi users who fly into the offender with an onslaught of colorful metaphors and interesting verbs, name calling, etc.

However, on the flip side, I have an ENFJ sister and if she gets offended, the offender's gonna know it and there will be know doubt in anyone's mind that she is worked up.

Me? I initially give the offender the benefit of the doubt and try to reason with the person. I'm pretty calm and I rarely get ruffled, at least not on the surface. However, if push comes to shove, I can get militant. I don't know of a better way to describe it.
 

pinkgraffiti

New member
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
1,482
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
748
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
[*]Beating around the bush, using 100 words to say something that can be said in 30. Such a style is full of conversational red herrings and dead ends. This is inefficient, and makes it hard for me to figure out what the real point is. Just say it already.
I also hate it

[*]Don't rely on me to override what you tell me based on such nebulous "cues" as body language or tone of voice.
See, I've had this problem before with thinkers. This is the instance where I think we have to reach compromise, because non-verbal conversation is actually pretty important in my universe (and has been proven to be more important than verbal-communication for humans in general)

[*]Touching during casual conversation - I cannot understand what people get out of this. Please keep your distance, unless we need to touch, or you want to shake hands as a greeting.
This is another thing I've been accused of doing but I don't even notice it. If I don't mean you harm, then what's the problem? It's not like I want to eat you, it's just an involuntary reaction and its part of my body language.

[*]Asking me about emotions, commenting on what you think I am feeling, or heaven forbid, expecting me to feel what you would be feeling in similar circumstances.
this i may also understand. because if i'm talking to a thinker and i'm feeling he's distant, and in particular if i notice that there must be hidden feelings and/or desires to why he's reacting or talking to me in a certain way, then i'll probably like to prod him for a while to see if we can increase the authenticity/productivity level of the conversation.

Conclusion: I better stay away from INTJs!? lol
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
1. There is one thing I don't want to calibrate to and that is when someone tells me what I'm feeling, what my "true" motivations are. I suppose I can tolerate it until the exchange where I tell them they are wrong and they insist to know better than me. At that point it seems time to just leave the argument or debate so they can just say what I'm thinking/feeling, declare all the problems with it, then say what they're thinking/feeling and so forth. When people argue at me like that it does annoy me. Almost every Fi/Ti dom I know has done this and it's the only thing I can think of that I dislike about my communication with them, but it is a doozy. They do it less or stop when not very upset.

This might not have anything to do with Fi/Fe because when people do this to me, it can very much annoy me. I think it would be fine if they were right but 9 times out of 10, they are completely wrong and probably projecting some of their own stuff onto me. This even happens with people who know me really well. I think this kind of behavior leads to a lot of misunderstandings. If you want to know what my feelings or motivations are, just ask me. I may not even know but a dialogue would be better than you guessing.

Values and beliefs are another matter. I willingly discuss them if the circumstances warrant. I value internal consistency in my values and beliefs, and have little patience when the values/beliefs of others seem to lack this. I don't see it as my business to "correct" them, but will call them on it if they bring it up, especially if they are trying to push their values on me.

A lot of your comments resonate with me. That consistency you mention is a big deal for me. It does bother me when others are inconsistent with their supposed values. I can think of a recent situation with a relative who is a quite religious person. She goes to church every day. She did something to really harm another relative (a very sweet an nice ISFJ) for little valid justification. She was overly controlling, unfair and allowed her ego to get in the way. I find this kind of inconsistency totally unacceptable and offensive. It bothers me on a moral level. Now she is generally a wonderful person, I hold no grudges against her and this whole situation was really none of my business but it makes me seriously question her judgment and in general think a whole lot less of her.

Beating around the bush, using 100 words to say something that can be said in 30. Such a style is full of conversational red herrings and dead ends. This is inefficient, and makes it hard for me to figure out what the real point is. Just say it already.

Yes. Absolutely. This I believe is related to us being TJs.

Saying anything other than what you mean, unless as a joke, or in some dire situation where a lie might really be necessary. I take my words seriously, and yours as well. I listen carefully, and want to respect what you say. Don't rely on me to override what you tell me based on such nebulous "cues" as body language or tone of voice. Even if something tips me off that you don't mean what you say, it probably won't be enough to tell me what you DO mean. This forces me to ask, and depending on how forthcoming you are at this point, we may now be into "beating around the bush". It makes the whole discussion seem more bother than it is worth.

I understand and agree with what you are saying but I think we have to recognize that there is such a thing as diplomacy and there is a reason for it. So I'm a bit more accepting of this.

Mirroring back what I have just said, unless you are very briefly condensing a large amount of material. Again, this is inefficient, and makes me want to tell you to get on with it. Of course you should ask if you have questions. Time answering those is well spent.

I disagree with you on this. Paraphrasing is an effective communication technique.

Sugar-coating things - if there is a bitter pill inside, sooner or later we will get to it, might as well be sooner. This includes formulas like, "give a compliment before making a criticism". Share the comments you actually have, whether critical or complimentary. Say what needs to be said. As long as it is courteous and factual, I won't mind at all.

Again, there are the comments on diplomacy, which does have value. I heard a wise person once say, "People won't remember what you said but they will always remember how you made them feel." This being said, you have to get to the point and say what you need to say eventually.

[*]Touching during casual conversation - I cannot understand what people get out of this. Please keep your distance, unless we need to touch, or you want to shake hands as a greeting.

I think some people really have a problem with this and they are born like that. You have to respect it. This doesn't bother me at all though.

Smalltalk - why, just why? If you are someone I feel I must be very polite with, I will tolerate it, for awhile.

:)
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
See, I've had this problem before with thinkers. This is the instance where I think we have to reach compromise, because non-verbal conversation is actually pretty important in my universe (and has been proven to be more important than verbal-communication for humans in general)
I have heard the claim before, that nonverbal communication is more important than verbal, and it it hogwash. It is impossible to convey most content without using words: how a sick relative is doing in the hospital; the pluses and minuses of various apartments someone is considering; why we should vote for candidate A vs. B; all of these require verbal language. What especially bothers me is when someone's body language and spoken words are contradictory. I can see not wanting to say something, and letting one's body language convey one's attitude, but then support it if you open your mouth.

This is another thing I've been accused of doing but I don't even notice it. If I don't mean you harm, then what's the problem? It's not like I want to eat you, it's just an involuntary reaction and its part of my body language.
If you know my name is Jane and you call me Sally, is it OK if you mean no harm? How about if you take a pen out of my briefcase to use just for a minute, and then put it back? Just because you mean no harm, doesn't make it OK or well-received. That's what "personal space" means here. I have involuntary reactions, too, and am expected to curb them to be polite, and sensitive to others ("that's stupid!" rarely goes over well). You can as well.

this i may also understand. because if i'm talking to a thinker and i'm feeling he's distant, and in particular if i notice that there must be hidden feelings and/or desires to why he's reacting or talking to me in a certain way, then i'll probably like to prod him for a while to see if we can increase the authenticity/productivity level of the conversation.
I can understand your end of the conversation as well. It is frustrating to feel there is important information that you are not getting. Best here just to ask, but be prepared to accept that the other person won't be willing to share. In that case, maybe there is nothing to be gained by continuing the conversation.

I understand and agree with what you are saying but I think we have to recognize that there is such a thing as diplomacy and there is a reason for it. So I'm a bit more accepting of this.

I disagree with you on this. Paraphrasing is an effective communication technique.

Again, there are the comments on diplomacy, which does have value. I heard a wise person once say, "People won't remember what you said but they will always remember how you made them feel." This being said, you have to get to the point and say what you need to say eventually.

I think some people really have a problem with this and they are born like that. You have to respect it. This doesn't bother me at all though.
Presumably we are asking questions like "what offends users of Fi vs. Fe" because we recognize everyone is not the same, and want to understand and even accommodate these differences. What you and Pinkgraffiti are saying about touching, nonverbal communication, and mirroring assumes we are all the same, and what is good or effective for you will be the same for me. This assumption denies reality and makes for bad diplomacy.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Presumably we are asking questions like "what offends users of Fi vs. Fe" because we recognize everyone is not the same, and want to understand and even accommodate these differences. What you and Pinkgraffiti are saying about touching, nonverbal communication, and mirroring assumes we are all the same, and what is good or effective for you will be the same for me. This assumption denies reality and makes for bad diplomacy.

Not exactly. I really think there are people who don't like to be touched or have their personal space invaded by people they don't know really well. I don't disagree with it all and I'm saying it's fine to be that way, you need to respect others being like that, though I have to admit, it bothers me a little. I'm stating my personal preferences. Of course, if you live in Brazil, you likely get over that sort of thing because the culture is just like that. They don't have such a concept for personal space and people are always touching you.

Criticism is a difficult thing. Many many people are easily offended by it, including Fi and Fe types. ENFPs are among the most sensitive to criticism and they obviously prefer Fi. I think it takes a while to get to know people's preferred style and how they react to things. Direct, factual, respectful criticism in my experience needs to be handled with kid gloves. I can be extremely direct and right away but I reserve that kind of interaction for people that I know well where there has been a level of trust built up and I know how they are going to react.

On paraphrasing - people hear one thing when the person meant another. It happens all the time. Paraphrasing is a highly effective communication technique to restate in your own words what you heard so that you're sure you understand. It also shows the other person that you are listening to what they are saying. If you parrot back exactly what the other person said, that's likely not as useful. Perhaps that's what you mean If not, I suggest you reconsider usage of the technique. INTJs by the way are not known as the world's most effective active listeners because even if they are listening acutely they don't acknowledge what the other person is saying. They don't express reactions. They don't nod their head. They don't look at the other person while they're talking. Etc. Combine that with a tendency to be silent on the 90% they agree on and disagree on the 10% they don't, and others can have the impression they are stubborn and don't listen. I will say that Fe types do a better job of active listening on average - they appear to listen at least and that's comforting to people because feel supported.
 

Cellmold

Wake, See, Sing, Dance
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
6,266
I don't know really. Usually I tick along just fine and them something...perhaps a certain phrase or moment of intensity..will make me blow and put me into a state of frenzy and rage.

It's somewhat random though and most people don't really seem to understand why I would be angry at all. Usually it is the content of what is said, but occasionally it is also tone and inflection and the intention behind it.

Which is hard to get angry or offended by really, because you cannot PROVE an intention without express admittance.
 

Julius_Van_Der_Beak

Up the Wolves
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
19,444
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
No one is owed anything just 'cause. Fi-users don't oblige easy, and that "positive" Fe attitude can end up looking like so much self-entitled bullshit to us. Your uniqueness, your value as an individual is inherent to you, and can't be diminished by me acknowledging it or not. It's yours; it's sacrosanct and inviolate. Give me the chance to give you something real and genuine, freely. Being compelled to externalize the feeling that I have for you, that connectedness between us, is like being violated. It creates grounds for heartfelt loathing.

I understand why Fe could find such an attitude to be selfish. There is more in play and at stake than how I feel about something individually. There is some greater good to be considered out there somewhere, I guess. And, moreover, I'm apart of that greater collective whether I "choose" to be or not. While there are no islands, there are the things that we share in common. Those things can be anything--material, intellectual, emotional, whatever--and it's the voluntary giving and taking of them that creates relationships. Fe entitlement, in my view, utterly corrodes that interaction.

This is a pretty good articulation of a Fi perspective, and also the issues Fe takes with it.

I do feel though, that it's not entirely true that Fi doesn't think it is "owed" anything. A lot of Fi users do seem to demand a positive attitude, and place a lot of importance on the optimism of those surrounding them. Is that inaccurate? I find that FJs seem to spend much less time complaining about "negative vibes" or insufficent levels of "enthusiasm"" shown.

I mean, ENFJs definitely seem to be a little bubbly, but I get the impression that they don't seem to be so bothered by the "negative vibes" of others. They don't really seem to "absorb" negativity.
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Criticism is a difficult thing. Many many people are easily offended by it, including Fi and Fe types. ENFPs are among the most sensitive to criticism and they obviously prefer Fi. I think it takes a while to get to know people's preferred style and how they react to things. Direct, factual, respectful criticism in my experience needs to be handled with kid gloves. I can be extremely direct and right away but I reserve that kind of interaction for people that I know well where there has been a level of trust built up and I know how they are going to react.
I don't understand the highlighed. I see direct, factual, respectful criticism as the ideal; in what sense and why would "kid gloves" be required?

On paraphrasing - people hear one thing when the person meant another. It happens all the time. Paraphrasing is a highly effective communication technique to restate in your own words what you heard so that you're sure you understand. It also shows the other person that you are listening to what they are saying. If you parrot back exactly what the other person said, that's likely not as useful. Perhaps that's what you mean If not, I suggest you reconsider usage of the technique. INTJs by the way are not known as the world's most effective active listeners because even if they are listening acutely they don't acknowledge what the other person is saying. They don't express reactions. They don't nod their head. They don't look at the other person while they're talking. Etc. Combine that with a tendency to be silent on the 90% they agree on and disagree on the 10% they don't, and others can have the impression they are stubborn and don't listen. I will say that Fe types do a better job of active listening on average - they appear to listen at least and that's comforting to people because feel supported.
In professional or businesslike situations, I find most communication clear enough the first time, that I and whoever I am speaking with need only ask questions when we really don't understand. Socially I find I am often asking questions, either because I really don't understand, or I want them to elaborate and provide more detail. Perhaps this is why the idea of simply restating what they have said seems pointless. When people restate what I have said back to me, it does come across as mindless parroting. IME, the more someone does this to me, the more I have the impression that they don't really understand what I am saying, even though they can approximate the words.

As for those missing head nods, silence, and even looking away, I admit this is my usual state when intently listening. I am actually very focused on what the person is saying. I don't want to interrupt with any noise or gesture on my part. Looking away from the person sometimes helps me focus better, especially if the setting is noisy. I will turn back to them eventually, especially if I need to ask a question, or they ask one of me.

I do feel though, that it's not entirely true that Fi doesn't think it is "owed" anything. A lot of Fi users do seem to demand a positive attitude, and place a lot of importance on the optimism of those surrounding them. Is that inaccurate? I find that FJs seem to spend much less time complaining about "negative vibes" or insufficent levels of "enthusiasm"" shown.

I mean, ENFJs definitely seem to be a little bubbly, but I get the impression that they don't seem to be so bothered by the "negative vibes" of others. They don't really seem to "absorb" negativity.
I agree with [MENTION=7254]Wind-Up Rex[/MENTION] also. If I feel I am owed anything, it is privacy and non-interference. Leave me alone, stay out of my space, and don't tell me what to do. If you need help, ask. If I'm bothering you, tell me and I will do my best to stop. Anything else, I have to earn from you.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I don't understand the highlighed. I see direct, factual, respectful criticism as the ideal; in what sense and why would "kid gloves" be required?

Because of what I said. People get offended, defensive, etc. Nobody likes to be criticized.

As for those missing head nods, silence, and even looking away, I admit this is my usual state when intently listening. I am actually very focused on what the person is saying. I don't want to interrupt with any noise or gesture on my part. Looking away from the person sometimes helps me focus better, especially if the setting is noisy. I will turn back to them eventually, especially if I need to ask a question, or they ask one of me.

You know that and I know that but I can assure you that 90% of the human race does not.

And for those of you who are not INTJs - listen to what [MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION] is saying. It is exactly right!
 

Siúil a Rúin

when the colors fade
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
14,037
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
496
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
The three things I listed that have offended me: being told my motivations/feelings, irrational snap judgments, and arrogant derision, can all be summed up in one idea - people being too judgmental. There is some range of tolerance I have for the intolerant, and I have some capacity to feel their anxiety and pain, but if someone gets too picky, extreme, mean, and/or irrational in their judgmentalism, then I don't care for their company or conversation. I tend to respect people who can ease up the judgmental attitudes at least a bit.
 
R

RDF

Guest
I've been having interpersonal difficulties with my INTP office mate over the last several months that basically can be boiled down to a fundamentally different view of relating. The best I can articulate the distinction is that it's something akin to positive versus negative rights. Relating and connectedness for Fe is understood in a "positive" sense in that it is active and generally obliges action. The existence of a relationship between two people is dependent upon their participation in it--the things those involved do to outwardly acknowledge the bond they share, and the extent to which they act out the role that that bond has created for them. I'm not exactly doing the mindset justice, but it's what I seem to get from it.

The Fi perspective takes a "negative" view of attachment. The inaction that preserves the integrity of individual space. Fi relationships are about that freedom to simply be without anything interfering with the other party's expression of themness. There's that desire to get to that point where you feel connectedness on that deepest level to glimpse deeper still into that common thing that gives rise to us all. That emphasis, though, on individual space also leads to the mentality that what happens in your space is on your terms. No one is owed anything just 'cause. Fi-users don't oblige easy, and that "positive" Fe attitude can end up looking like so much self-entitled bullshit to us. Your uniqueness, your value as an individual is inherent to you, and can't be diminished by me acknowledging it or not. It's yours; it's sacrosanct and inviolate. Give me the chance to give you something real and genuine, freely. Being compelled to externalize the feeling that I have for you, that connectedness between us, is like being violated. It creates grounds for heartfelt loathing.

I understand why Fe could find such an attitude to be selfish. There is more in play and at stake than how I feel about something individually. There is some greater good to be considered out there somewhere, I guess. And, moreover, I'm apart of that greater collective whether I "choose" to be or not. While there are no islands, there are the things that we share in common. Those things can be anything--material, intellectual, emotional, whatever--and it's the voluntary giving and taking of them that creates relationships. Fe entitlement, in my view, utterly corrodes that interaction. When someone's basic attitude is that they have some sort of "right" to partake in what's yours, or have some say in how you manage yours without any greater justification than some vague appeals to "common courtesy", it's hard to construe it as anything other than a power play.

That gets at the heart of my issues with Fe. Despite all it's anxious feelings about it's myriad obligations, it's fundamental lack of respect for individual choice means that it has no real concept of responsibility. Or freedom. You can't have either without respect for choice.

These things only crystallized for me as of late. Not totally unrelatedly, I've been catching up on Breaking Bad over the past month or so, and have joined many others in my contempt for Walter's ENFJ wife, Skyler. Anna Gunn, the actress who plays her, wrote an op-ed for The Times a couple of weeks ago defending her character by saying that people hated her because she was a "strong woman", and, you know, sexism. To be fair, I don't see her as particularly strong. I think if your basic attitude is that everyone owes you something, it'd probably be pretty easy to go around being demanding, controlling, and generally placing what you feel to be best above any other consideration. Why would you ever be otherwise?

Your post isn’t so much about the communications between Fi and Fe; it’s more about the *attitudes* underlying the communications.

Still, that’s as strong an exposition of Fi attitudes as I’ve ever seen. I like it. So I would figure I would springboard off of that and try to find some middle ground. For example, taking Fi-users first:

Fi users are all about autonomy and independence: the integrity of personal space. They consider the concepts of individual choice, responsibility and freedom as central: These are the things that create “genuineness.” In the opinion of Fi-users, Fe seems to be the opposite of this; Fe puts emphasis on obligations, exchanges of mutual courtesies, and taking guidance from the feelings of others. But to the Fi-user, all that Fe stuff is superficial and gets in the way of true connection; Fe entitlement frustrates Fi autonomy. The Fi-user says that true connection comes from voluntary exchanges, i.e., from a spontaneous upwelling of emotion and not from exchanges of emotion in accordance with some etiquette manual.

The other side of the coin is the viewpoint of Fe-users:

Fe-users see Fi individuality as egocentrism and narcissism. In contrast, the Fe-user stands for something outside himself, something objective and solid: an ideology, a community, a good product. The lives of people are benefitted and enriched by Fe-users in very tangible ways. The Fe networker helps the participants in his network connect with each other and benefit from the network; the network brings the community to the aid of each individual in the network. The Fe team-leader uses the power of the team to achieve a benefit far beyond what the individuals could have achieved themselves. The Fe salesman provides a service to the community by informing them of a good service or product, listening to the customer, and ensuring a good fit between product and buyer, etc.

Naturally there are some downsides to both functions (with the Fi-user first):

Many Fi-users basically aim to get from point A to point B while interacting with other people as minimally as possible. So they ignore common courtesies in their hurry to get to the meat of the transaction, they tread on people’s toes (figuratively, that is), they cut people off and neglect to give them a full and fair hearing. It gets interpreted by others as obliviousness and laziness, and that’s not far from the truth: Fi-users simply don’t pay attention to the common courtesies that others take for granted or the not-so-subtle signals provided by others. So a big downside to being internally-oriented is that sooner or later Fi-users find themselves embroiled in conflicts that they simply didn’t see coming. Another downside of being internally-oriented is that when Fi-users finally do decide to pursue an objective in the outside world, they are typically clueless about how to maneuver in the IRL environment; they know only themselves, their own needs, and their goals; so they easily get sucked into bad relationship deals such as enabling and codependency.

As for Fe-users:

There’s an old saying that when you’re a hammer you see everything else as a nail. If you identify yourself too closely with an external product or service or idea, it becomes hard to see much beyond that framework. The Fe networker may have no use for people outside his network; the Fe team-leader may get a “get-aboard-or-get-out-of-the-way” mentality. Another downside of being externally-oriented is being unable to function without a high degree of consensus in the immediate environment. This can lead to a variety of problems: If Fe-users are unable to advocate for their own needs (or identify personal needs apart from their product or service), they can burn out and become martyrs. Or they may have difficulty maintaining relationships due to an inability to tolerate minor differences of opinion or tolerate petty rebuffs from the other party.

Solutions for both Fi-users and Fe-users:

Obviously, a meeting place in the middle is preferable. I won’t go into detail on the specific solutions, because such suggestions tend to raise hackles; neither side likes to hear that they should be doing things differently. Most people are getting by just fine in life, doing whatever comes natural to them. They just wish *everyone else* would do things differently. :)

But, having said that:

Fi-users can mitigate the worst faults of their position by practicing some mirroring on a daily basis: Give people a fair and full hearing, and then reflect the concerns and courtesies of the other party at the start of your response before talking about your own concerns. It may feel fake, but it will help attune the Fi-user to the environment around them and the cues of others, thereby smoothing their way in the real world.

Fe-users can mitigate the worst faults of their position by practicing some self-actualization. For example, don’t be thrown off when you can’t reach a high degree of consensus in your environment. As I said in an earlier post, “We don’t have to like each other; that’s immaterial in a boundaried relationship.” If you can’t achieve consensus, then focus on what’s most important to you personally: your personal mission or agenda. Focus on that thing, restate your case with that as your main point, and you can often get pretty close to what you need from the interaction even in the absence of consensus. If you wish, think of it as “mirroring” the Fi-users around you.
 
S

Stansmith

Guest
Are most Fi users expecting the same Fe-related courtesy from others, or is it a construct that only Fe users notice? Is it only Fe-users we're looking to please by becoming 'balanced'? Is the larger "group" people talk about offending really just the Fe-users?

Because I don't think I even notice such things. Or maybe I do (noone likes to be treated rudely or selfishly), but I don't put as much weight into externalizing it.
 

five sounds

MyPeeSmellsLikeCoffee247
Joined
Jul 17, 2013
Messages
5,393
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
729
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Are most Fi users expecting the same Fe-related courtesy from others, or is it a construct that only Fe users notice? Is it only Fe-users we're looking to please by becoming 'balanced'? Is the larger "group" people talk about offending really just the Fe-users?

Because I don't think I even notice such things. Or maybe I do (noone likes to be treated rudely or selfishly), but I don't put as much weight into externalizing it.

Good question. Here's my take. I do appreciate being treated kindly and with respect, but I don't think that's unique to Fe users. What I do like is Fe users' ability to talk openly about feelings and to help me feel less weird about having unpleasant ones. My ENFJ and ISFJ friends can really make me feel so much more normal and at ease when I feel like I'm in some kind of terrible hopeless place. (Maybe all Fi users struggle with feeling alone in their feelings? Never thought of it this way, but it makes a lot of sense).

The thing I expect of others, though, that Fe doesn't seem to jive with naturally is for others not to take responsibility for my feelings. I can feel some of the Fe users in my life tiptoe around subjects that they're afraid will make me feel stressed out or something, and while I appreciate the effort and the place it comes from, I wish they wouldn't do it. I like to practice dealing with emotions as they come from within myself, and being vague or falsely relaxed about a topic to try to not create a negative emotion for me is by no means 'saving' me. It goes the same way when I'm feeling a negative feeling, and Fe instantly takes on the responsibility of fixing it. I am responsible for my emotions, and expect them to be responsible for theirs. It just isn't practical to think you can control everyone's feelings around you.
 
Top