User Tag List

12 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 14

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    24

    Default Help understanding Fe and social etiquette?

    How do they correlate to one another? I'm an ENTJ but I quite particular about dining etiquette etc and politeness. I cannot stand rudeness. I was raised in a household where my parents were part of societies like Freemason's etc and I was dragged along to these dinners so I do know how to conduct myself in public. Is this Te, Fe or just a factor that is caused by upbringing? I find my ESFJ riends tend to do things that are quite embarrassing(talking in a cinema for example) but they're very concerned about the well being of others. My ESFJ friends and my ENFJ friend would take a blame for something that wasn't their fault just so other people wouldn't have to face the music. They're very self sacrificing but the ESFJs do tend to do some embarrassing things. On the other hand, I don't really care about others(I only care if I'm VERY close to them) and I'm definitely not self sacrificing, yet I place emphasis on things like these and my friends jokingly call me a snob LOL.

    When I was younger, I used to say hurtful things to people without realising that they would get hurt, and I started to recognise what can and cannot be said around age 14. That being said, I do have moments of cluelessness every now and then.

    The other Te doms I know are two ESTJs. I didn't really like them when I first met them because I found them bossy and slightly rude. However, I started to get along well with them after a while. The ESTJs I know have high moral standards but because of their relatively poor social skills, they are disliked whereas I am not.

    Do I have well developed Fe or are there other factors that influence people and social etiquette?

  2. #2
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    There are definitely other factors too. I think upbringing is possibly the most influential.

    As far as I understand it, Fe is less etiquette and more natural interpersonal awareness. Fe is, like you noted, more about noticing and accounting for the wellbeing of others. The extraverted Feeling "landscape" is one of social cues, signals, personal distance, roles, boundaries, culture, expression of emotion, relationships, and behaviors - people with strong Fe will interact with this landscape dynamically and use their awareness of these elements to impact their environments accordingly. Etiquette is based on many of those elements, but it's more rote and less dynamic, more learned and less native. Typically Fe dom/aux will be naturally socially graceful because of this awareness, but they will not necessarily follow traditional etiquette. In contrast, you have been raised to be aware of much of the social landscape, and know the correct paths for response, but you're not as naturally attuned to it nor do you naturally make the immediate connection with using that social landscape to facilitate wellbeing.

    The difference I believe is in how much people naturally use those social dynamics (Fe) versus how much it's just a set of social roles and responses that they've learned (etiquette). My mom is an ESFJ, for example, and can blend seamlessly into basically any social situation and facilitate everyone being happy and getting what they need at the same time. She has little emphasis on etiquette, but she's so naturally aware of others that I've never really seen her have much need for etiquette beyond the basics. Then in contrast, my bf's sister is an ENTP and their mom really emphasized them learning proper etiquette, so she's very socially appropriate but she'll still be a bit harsh, sharp, and more brusque than you would generally see out of a Fe dom/aux, and more importantly she doesn't constantly consciously dynamically interact with her social landscape - it's more of a tool that she uses when she sees the need for it. It very clearly turns "on" and "off" for her, though she still maintains that grace that comes from being raised in an etiquette-focused home her whole life.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Extroverted Feeling's primary domain is engagement within a common community with others, to build a sense of "togetherness" with culture and ideology. The Extroverted Feeling type, therefore, attempts to learn the rules and dogma of certain communities and engage others with them. Fe is more about noticing the dynamic nuances of culture, being able to "keep up with the times" (socially/culturally) and being cognizant of others' changes in mood or spirit, and how people react to certain things (Fe types live to get emotional reactions out of people, so that they can learn what you like and what you dislike). Fe types seek to create a feeling of belonging and togetherness, by establishing communities and cultures or joining them/associating with them, which can be seen in unhealthy extremes with examples such as cults or nationalism, and in more healthy examples like "band-wagoning", community-service oriented communities, or spiritual/religious communities. Therefore, Fe is not so much in charge of social etiquette in the broader sense, but is actually the absorption of common culture into the self.

    For Social Etiquette, JCF doesn't provide a function specifically associated with it (though the F preference would undoubtedly be considered), but Socionics does account for this with the static IM Element of (Fi), which is cognizant of the constant, non-changing aspects of society (allowing the Fi user to actively indulge these aspects or rebel against them), and is generally referenced any time social etiquette, common courtesy, or good manners is mentioned.

    If you are an LIE (ENTJ) who exhibits these behaviors, then this would be your Suggestive function, where you are trying to create this kind of professional, formal atmosphere by yourself but might not be necessarily good at doing so* (in which case Socionics recommends you to enlist the help of an ESI (ISFP for Jungian Types/MBTI)).

    *
    When I was younger, I used to say hurtful things to people without realising that they would get hurt, and I started to recognise what can and cannot be said around age 14. That being said, I do have moments of cluelessness every now and then.

  4. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Thank you!

  5. #5
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Feeling in general:

    Quote Originally Posted by http://www.literoscope.org/en/jung-psychological-types/122-feeling/
    20. Feeling (Fühlen): I count feeling among the four basic psychological functions. I am unable to support the psychological school that regards feeling as a secondary phenomenon dependent upon presentations or sensations, but in company with Höffding, Wundt, Lehmann, Külpe, Baldwin, and others, I regard it as an independent function sui generis.

    Feeling is primarily a process that takes place between the ego and a given content, a process, moreover, that imparts to the content a definite value in the sense of acceptance or rejection ('like' or 'dislike'); but it can also appear, as it were, isolated in the form of 'mood', quite apart from the momentary contents of consciousness or momentary sensations. This latter process may be causally related to previous conscious contents, though not necessarily so, since, as psychopathology abundantly proves, it can take origin equally well from unconscious contents. But even the mood, whether it be regarded as a general or only a partial feeling, signifies a valuation; not, however, a valuation of one definite, individual, conscious content, but of the whole conscious situation at the moment, and, once again, with special reference to the question of acceptance or rejection.

    Feeling, therefore, is an entirely subjective process, which may be in every respect independent of external stimuli, although chiming in with every sensation. Even an 'indifferent' sensation possesses a 'feeling tone', namely, that of indifference, which again expresses a certain valuation. Hence feeling is also a kind of judging, differing, however, from an intellectual judgment, in that it does not aim at establishing an intellectual connection but is solely concerned with the setting up of a subjective criterion of acceptance or rejection. The valuation by feeling extends to every content of consciousness, of whatever kind it may be. When the intensity of feeling is increased an affect (v. Affect) results, which is a state of feeling accompanied by appreciable bodily innervations. Feeling is distinguished from affect by the fact that it gives rise to no perceptible physical innervations, i.e. just as much or as little as the ordinary thinking process.

    Ordinary 'simple' feeling is concrete (q.v.), i.e. it is mixed up with other function-elements, frequently with sensation for instance. In this particular case we might term it affective, or (as in this book, for instance) feeling-sensation, by which a well-nigh inseparable blending of feeling with sensation elements is to be understood. This characteristic fusion is universally present where feeling is still an undifferentiated function, hence most evidently in the psyche of a neurotic with a differentiated thinking.

    Although feeling is an independent function in itself, it may lapse into a state of dependence upon another function, upon thinking, for instance; whereby a feeling is produced which is merely kept as an accompaniment to thinking, and is not repressed from consciousness only in so far as it fits in with the intellectual associations.

    It is important to distinguish abstract feeling from ordinary concrete feeling. For, just as the abstract concept (v. Thinking) does away with the differences of the things embraced in it, so abstract feeling, by being raised above the differences of the individual feeling-values, establishes a 'mood', or state of feeling, which embraces and therewith abolishes the different individual values. Thus, just as thinking marshals the conscious contents under concepts, feeling arranges them according to their value. The more concrete the feeling, the more subjective and personal the value it confers; but the more abstract it is, the more general and objective is the value it bestows. Just as a completely abstract concept no longer coincides with the individuality and peculiarity of things, only revealing their universality and indistinctness, so too the completely abstract feeling no longer coincides with the individual instant and its feeling quality but only with the totality of all instants and their indistinctness. Accordingly, feeling like thinking is a rational function, since, as is shown by experience, values in general are bestowed according to the laws of reason, just as concepts in general are framed after the laws of reason.

    Naturally the essence of feeling is not characterized by the foregoing definitions: they only serve to convey its external manifestations. The conceptual capacity of the intellect proves incapable of formulating the real nature of feeling in abstract terms, since thinking belongs to a category quite incommensurable with feeling. In fact, no basic psychological function whatsoever can be completely expressed by any other one. This circumstance is responsible for the fact that no intellectual definition will ever be able to render the specific character of feeling in any adequate measure. The mere fact that feelings are classified adds nothing to the understanding of their nature, because even the most exact classification will be able to yield only that intellectually seizable content to which or with which feelings appear connected, but without thereby apprehending the specific nature of feeling. Thus, however many varying and intellectually seizable classes of contents there may be, just as many feelings can be differentiated, without ever arriving at an exhaustive classification of feelings themselves; because, beyond every possible class of contents accessible to the intellect, there still exist feelings which are beyond intellectual classification. The very idea of a classification is intellectual and therefore incommensurable with the nature of feeling. Hence, we must content ourselves with our attempts to define the limits of the concept.

    The nature of a feeling-valuation may be compared with intellectual apperception as an apperception of value. An active and a passive feeling-apperception can be distinguished. The passive feeling-act is characterized by the fact that a content excites or attracts the feeling; it compels a feeling-participation on the part of the subject* The active feeling-act, on the contrary, confers value from the subject it is a deliberate evaluation of contents in accordance with feeling and not in accordance with intellectual intention. Hence active feeling is a directed function, an act of will, as for instance loving as opposed to being in love. This latter state would be undirected, passive feeling, as, indeed, the ordinary colloquial term suggests, since it describes the former as activity and the latter as a condition. Undirected feeling is feeling-intuition. Thus, in the stricter sense, only the active, directed feeling should be termed rational: the passive is definitely irrational, since it establishes values without voluntary participation, occasionally even against the subject s intention.

    When the total attitude of the individual is orientated by the function of feeling, we speak of a feeling-type.
    Extraverted feeling:

    Quote Originally Posted by http://www.literoscope.org/en/jung-psychological-types/185-b-the-extraverted-type/
    3. Feeling

    Feeling in the extraverted attitude is orientated by objective data, i.e. the object is the indispensable determinant of the kind of feeling. It agrees with objective values. If one has always known feeling as a subjective fact, the nature of extraverted feeling will not immediately be understood, since it has freed itself as fully as possible from the subjective factor, and has, instead, become wholly subordinated to the influence of the object. Even where it seems to show a certain independence of the quality of the concrete object, it is none the less under the spell of traditional or generally valid standards of some sort. I may feel constrained, for instance, to use the predicate 'beautiful' or 'good', not because I find the object 'beautiful' or 'good from my own subjective feeling, but because it is fitting and politic so to do; and fitting it certainly is, inasmuch as a contrary opinion would disturb the general feeling situation. A feeling-judgment such as this is in no way a simulation or a lie — it is merely an act of accommodation. A picture, for instance, may be termed beautiful, because a picture that is hung in a drawing-room and bearing a well-known signature is generally assumed to be beautiful, or because the predicate 'ugly' might offend the family of the fortunate possessor, or because there is a benevolent intention on the part of the visitor to create a pleasant feeling-atmosphere, to which end everything must be felt as agreeable. Such feelings are governed by the standard of the objective determinants. As such they are genuine, and represent the total visible feeling-function.

    In precisely the same way as extraverted thinking strives to rid itself of subjective influences, extraverted feeling has also to undergo a certain process of differentiation, before it is finally denuded of every subjective trimming. The valuations resulting from the act of feeling either correspond directly with objective values or at least chime in with certain traditional and generally known standards of value. This kind of feeling is very largely responsible for the fact that so many people flock to the theatre, to concerts, or to Church, and what is more, with correctly adjusted positive feelings. Fashions, too, owe their existence to it, and, what is far more valuable, the whole positive and wide-spread support of social, philanthropic, and such like cultural enterprises. In such matters, extraverted feeling proves itself a creative factor. Without this feeling, for instance, a beautiful and harmonious sociability would be unthinkable. So far extraverted feeling is just as beneficent and rationally effective as extraverted thinking. But this salutary effect is lost as soon as the object gains an exaggerated influence. For, when this happens, extraverted feeling draws the personality too, much into the object, i.e. the object assimilates the person, whereupon the personal character of the feeling, which constitutes its principal charm, is lost. Feeling then becomes cold, material, untrustworthy. It betrays a secret aim, or at least arouses the suspicion of it in an impartial observer. No longer does it make that welcome and refreshing impression the invariable accompaniment of genuine feeling; instead, one scents a pose or affectation, although the egocentric motive may be entirely unconscious.

    Such overstressed, extraverted feeling certainly fulfils aesthetic expectations, but no longer does it speak to the heart; it merely appeals to the senses, or — worse still — to the reason. Doubtless it can provide aesthetic padding for a situation, but there it stops, and beyond that its effect is nil. It has become sterile. Should this process go further, a strangely contradictory dissociation of feeling develops; every object is seized upon with feeling- valuations, and numerous relationships are made which are inherently and mutually incompatible. Since such aberrations would be quite impossible if a sufficiently emphasize subject were present, the last vestige of a real personal standpoint also becomes suppressed. The subject becomes so swallowed up in individual feeling processes that to the observer it seems as though there were no longer a subject of feeling but merely a feeling process. In such a condition feeling has entirely forfeited its original human warmth, it gives an impression of pose, inconstancy, unreliability, and in the worst cases appears definitely hysterical.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  6. #6
    Blind Guardian Haven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Enneagram
    2w3 so/sp
    Socionics
    ESFj Ti
    Posts
    1,076

    Default

    You talk like some ISFJs I've known, with being worried about etiquette and embarrassing things, and being called a snob. Weird.
    {The Diplomat}
    Slytherpuff
    s|L|OAx
    Meow.

  7. #7
    Paranoid Android Video's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ESI Fi
    Posts
    3,174

    Default

    It doesn't come naturally; I had to educate myself in it. If natural mastery of it was Fe, I wouldn't be Fe, but it isn't. The meaning of Fe is that I wanted to learn it.
    4w3 6w5 1w2 sx/sp ISFP

    RLOAX (don't do it)
    Melancholic Hufflepuff
    A lonely island where only what is permitted to move moves, becomes an ideal. Jung

    Kiss Kiss [johari] Bang Bang [nohari]

  8. #8
    untitled Chanaynay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Posts
    5,150

    Default

    Echo @skylights completely. I'm so glad another thread clarifying Fe has popped up.

    I think etiquette can be valued by almost any function for different reasons, such as creating efficiency in interpersonal dynamics, looking out for the well-being of others, establishing a static and intrinsic meaning behind certain mannerisms, etc.

    I will say though that etiquette is probably valued most by ExxJ types usually, as they're usually most aware of the responsibilities they have towards their environment.

    Just for kicks, here's a fun (albeit fictional) ESTJ character super concerned with etiquette:



    (@EJCC, if you liked Ishimaru from Danganronpa as almost a parody of an ESTJ, I think you'll enjoy her too )
    7w6 - 2w3 - 8w7 sx/so


  9. #9
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,517

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    The difference I believe is in how much people naturally use those social dynamics (Fe) versus how much it's just a set of social roles and responses that they've learned (etiquette). My mom is an ESFJ, for example, and can blend seamlessly into basically any social situation and facilitate everyone being happy and getting what they need at the same time. She has little emphasis on etiquette, but she's so naturally aware of others that I've never really seen her have much need for etiquette beyond the basics. Then in contrast, my bf's sister is an ENTP and their mom really emphasized them learning proper etiquette, so she's very socially appropriate but she'll still be a bit harsh, sharp, and more brusque than you would generally see out of a Fe dom/aux, and more importantly she doesn't constantly consciously dynamically interact with her social landscape - it's more of a tool that she uses when she sees the need for it. It very clearly turns "on" and "off" for her, though she still maintains that grace that comes from being raised in an etiquette-focused home her whole life.
    This is similar to my experience. I was raised to learn and employ various formulas for social interaction, though many of them don't make sense to me and I would not naturally figure them out. When I am in a very unfamiliar social environment, I fall back on what I hope is a least-common-denominator rule set that at least keeps me from being unintentionally rude, and observe others carefully to learn the rules of this setting. I find such experiences rather stressful. Of course, all this assumes I care about following the rules. Sometimes I just can't be bothered, or find them too objectionable to follow. This works because my goal in such situations is quite different from that of Fe, as described below.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    Extroverted Feeling's primary domain is engagement within a common community with others, to build a sense of "togetherness" with culture and ideology.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  10. #10
    Senior Member Sanjuro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    MBTI
    Ne
    Enneagram
    468 sx/so
    Socionics
    :-( None
    Posts
    822

    Default

    Yeah. There are many other things that influence social etiquette, including the social instinct, your enneagram type, your upbringing, the customs of your culture, and life experiences as to what's important.

    I am an ENTP. I am, upon realization, a ragin' Fe user. I promise you, this does not make me socially ept. Actually, I came onto this planet utterly devoid of social skills or normal behavior, and the Fe I developed really is a mask to hide the fact that I have no social skills. Every time I use my salad fork for my salad, or remember the correct place for the US Secretary of State to stand according to the handbook of Diplomatic Protocols (yes, such a thing exists), that's my Fe hiding the fact that I don't actually have manners or social skills.

    For me, it is a social code. I know how to interact and exactly the right thing to say when I do, because I've worked out this whole manner of things to say as charmingly as possible. I know the appropriate interaction in any circumstance because I calculate all interactions according to the "Fe code" (if the nature of the interaction is outside the "system", or if my Fe is out to lunch, I fail). It took some time to develop, but I got there.

    Disclaimer: I cannot speak for those with Fe higher in their preferential stacking. (I also think some of the instances of ESFJs you mentioned were embarrassing. Like I've said, Fe doesn't necessarily make you socially "right" in all circumstances; it can be a mask for underlying deficiencies).

    In the OP's case, I'd recommend seeing if the interest in etiquette is based on social calculation (which would be Fe), based on some emotive impulse or other directive (e.g., it's not "right" not to follow the dining etiquette), or based on some internalized message from other sources.

Similar Threads

  1. Fe, Social instinct, and Social Pressure
    By skylights in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 10-23-2013, 10:44 PM
  2. Fe/Fi and the desire to improve empathy and social abilities?
    By TenebrousReflection in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-26-2011, 03:01 PM
  3. [NF] Almost identical Fe and Fi? Can you help me decipher my cognitive functions result?
    By Lightyear in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-05-2010, 06:00 PM
  4. [Fe] Fe and how it works
    By Poki in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 101
    Last Post: 09-04-2009, 12:57 AM
  5. [MBTItm] INFJ female seeks help understanding ESTJ female and former friend
    By mwv6r in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 12-26-2008, 04:06 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