• 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.

[Fe] Fe and Selflessness: a misconception

Kheledon

New member
Joined
Oct 5, 2015
Messages
572
MBTI Type
ENFJ
Enneagram
136
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
[MENTION=1180]whatever[/MENTION] lol, how do you know they're just using Fe back just to hide themselves from being offended and keep the status quo?

Ooooohhhh. Lol but you don't need to over analyze situations like me.

Speaking for myself, I am fairly certain that my own Fe (dominant function) is primarily a self-defense mechanism. I developed it as a child because I needed to be able to sense how others were feeling. Ultimately, I needed them to react positively to me--for various personal/historical reasons.
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Just some rather unrefined thoughts about what I believe is a misconception of Fe. I don't think "putting others before the self" is the most accurate way of looking at Fe behavior. It can take that form, but there is something more fundamental. I think this idea is related to a Christian doctrine of selflessness which we as a culture have absorbed. There is another way of looking at it which is not selfless and which is still Fe.

Being selfless is not sustainable. It has no foundation. It will eventually collapse in on itself and produce the opposite of what it is trying to accomplish. You see, if you don't love yourself you will be continually seeking it from someone else. Including God. Then whatever relationships you form in which you are giving without regard to self will involve need and the expectation and unconscious hope that they will return what you give. To truly be selfless you must not resent the other for failing to love you and failing to be grateful. Because you love you and you are grateful. You have to have a surplus of love in order to effectively give it away. If you are in a position of neediness you can never be truly selfless. You can never be selfless if you are expecting something in return for your actions.

The answer is not to deny your needs, but to fulfill them yourself. When you are happy and secure the decision to give to others will be free and you will be happy with it. To be selfless you must be selfish first.

Jesus said "Love your neighbor as yourself", which implies that you have to love yourself as much as you intend to love your neighbor, otherwise you have nothing to measure it by.

So I propose the idea of self transcendence as opposed to selflessness. Separation is an illusion. Love is an awareness of connectedness, of seeing the self in the other. It is a perception of collective wellbeing and a desire to promote that wellbeing, founded upon empathy. Fe is continually aware of the self as being collective, which is why it can readily focus on the needs of others and assume that the self's needs will be taken care of. There is no perception of separation.

Fe is collective and Fi is individual. I can talk more about Fi later.

I believe that most of this can be resolved without typology. Where typology comes in, typology serves as kind of a map saying "you are here" and a rough sketch of the terrain. So with Fe vs Fi, it's the same terrain, but Fe is where you start and Fi is where other people start (or vice versa).

What you're doing here is mapping out the terrain. You're starting with those things obvious to Fe, and progressing to those things more obvious to Fi. In particular, Fe types tend to lack a degree of emotional "self-awareness". That isn't a "lack of feeling", but a lack of how internal processes affect feeling. Fe types think in terms of external processes affecting feelings, and deal with feelings in terms of those externalities. That's the scrap of the map of human emotions that Fe types start out with.

There's nothing wrong with this starting point, just as there is nothing with its introspective opposite, focusing so much on self-awareness that while an Fi type can be highly aware of others' emotions, the "Fi map" maps these all back to the introspective paths with which they're familiar. It's not in terms of Fe externalities.

I had an INFJ friend telling me about her dealings with an INFP friend who is helping her deal with some difficult emotional stuff. Aside from chatting and just being a friend, the INFP took my INFJ friend to a meditation session that she found very helpful. The INFP is effectively lending her the Fi half of the map, helping her with the introspective side of things.

As far as "selflessness" goes, I see both Fi and Fe types go overboard on being "selfless", and see no reason to attach the phenomenon you observe to a particular function. They do it for very different reasons. The Fe types do it typically because they lack that internal sense of self-awareness to maintain boundaries. The Fi types, on the other hand, should be totally aware of their boundaries (and they are, sort of), but deliberately allow them to be violated because of "love". Superficially, the behavior is kind of the same. Internally, the psychological landscape is different (different parts of the same "map", to continue my map metaphor).
 

Forever

Permabanned
Joined
Aug 30, 2013
Messages
8,551
MBTI Type
NiFi
Enneagram
3w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Speaking for myself, I am fairly certain that my own Fe (dominant function) is primarily a self-defense mechanism. I developed it as a child because I needed to be able to sense how others were feeling. Ultimately, I needed them to react positively to me--for various personal/historical reasons.

Well needs can be changed, but those are your talents.. so use them wisely. :)
 

Mustafa

Permabanned
Joined
Sep 17, 2015
Messages
471
MBTI Type
INFP
First of all, I am sorry that I didnt read all, and most replies are agreeing i saw maybe, which is none of my interest. I want to say like my uncle said to me, that religion denies the instintincts and kinda makes you a robot. So all religion wants you to be selfless and here you are chanting that we should love ourselves and be selfish first before we can love others. Even Plato i read once said rulers who come first as kind (with emphasis on kindness as a consequense of loving oneself) get rebellious and dictatorial later. And those who comes as "angry" are kind later, they are angry because their needs arent fullfilled.

We dont need instant gratification. If we endure absence of goods, then after some time our pain will cease. God will provide. Like me for example, I habe Aspergers and it is a life penetrating condition, i suffered absence of good since i was 14 to age 26 and still (I am now 29) because of selfless kindnes, loving kindness like Buddhists says, and after a long time I got retired at a young age with a high salary and I have two people with me everyday because it is normal for us to help. It is instinct.

I like in Iraq and the poor world when it says, collective community service. Because if one person starts to pick up garbage from the street selflessly, then everyone else who doesnt will win. Therefore collectivly. So if we in the democratic world all agreed on that we should be selfless and love our neighbours collectively. Then there would be vast riches to be exploited by us. But we dont! Because we are rich and too lazy from the the pleasure we get while poor people suffers.

Peace
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I believe that most of this can be resolved without typology. Where typology comes in, typology serves as kind of a map saying "you are here" and a rough sketch of the terrain. So with Fe vs Fi, it's the same terrain, but Fe is where you start and Fi is where other people start (or vice versa).

What you're doing here is mapping out the terrain. You're starting with those things obvious to Fe, and progressing to those things more obvious to Fi. In particular, Fe types tend to lack a degree of emotional "self-awareness". That isn't a "lack of feeling", but a lack of how internal processes affect feeling. Fe types think in terms of external processes affecting feelings, and deal with feelings in terms of those externalities. That's the scrap of the map of human emotions that Fe types start out with.

There's nothing wrong with this starting point, just as there is nothing with its introspective opposite, focusing so much on self-awareness that while an Fi type can be highly aware of others' emotions, the "Fi map" maps these all back to the introspective paths with which they're familiar. It's not in terms of Fe externalities.

I had an INFJ friend telling me about her dealings with an INFP friend who is helping her deal with some difficult emotional stuff. Aside from chatting and just being a friend, the INFP took my INFJ friend to a meditation session that she found very helpful. The INFP is effectively lending her the Fi half of the map, helping her with the introspective side of things.

As far as "selflessness" goes, I see both Fi and Fe types go overboard on being "selfless", and see no reason to attach the phenomenon you observe to a particular function. They do it for very different reasons. The Fe types do it typically because they lack that internal sense of self-awareness to maintain boundaries. The Fi types, on the other hand, should be totally aware of their boundaries (and they are, sort of), but deliberately allow them to be violated because of "love". Superficially, the behavior is kind of the same. Internally, the psychological landscape is different (different parts of the same "map", to continue my map metaphor).

That's an excellent interpretation. Spot on I think!
 

Duffy

New member
Joined
Jun 13, 2015
Messages
344
I think the member Kullervo was a good example of unorthodox Fe. People typed the guy as INTJ, but I don't think so. He's IxFJ, and I think his example of how he uses Fi with the story of his sister's marriage sounds very much Fe. Seeking to apply his values universally, eg. his disapproval of his sister's marriage and withholding as a means to shame and guilt the person into doing the "right" thing. Fe is, in a way, as blunt as Te. And Fi is as nuance seeking as Ti. I also think Fe in males can be deceiving, at least superficially, and may be mistaken for NT. Fe is aware of what's universally valuable (like gender normality) whether they admit it or not -- So they can choose to submit to it, or seek to rebel against it by embodying the ideals and taking said ideals towards the social sphere (gathering liked minded individuals who believe in the same thing) in the name of a cause.

And I might sound like broken record by now, but I think a lot of the stereotypes regarding Fe is it's association with ISFJ e2. Just like the stereotype of Fi is INFP e4. Which is why I keep seeing people type Marilyn Manson as NTP/INFP and Plath as INFP.
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
And I might sound like broken record by now, but I think a lot of the stereotypes regarding Fe is it's association with ISFJ e2. Just like the stereotype of Fi is INFP e4. Which is why I keep seeing people type Marilyn Manson as NTP/INFP and Plath as INFP.

Yes, a lot of the "tone" of a person's personality doesn't come from the functions or MBTI type, but from Enneagram type. There are overlaps, to be sure, but an e8 is going to seem like a Te dom even if they're F or introverted - e.g., e8 Fe dom (overbearing motherly type) or e8 INTJ (combative but introverted intellectual type).

I'm very sure there are a lot of mistyped MBTI types whose supposed MBTI type's typical personality very closely matches their Enneagram personality.
 

thoughtlost

Honeyed Water
Joined
May 20, 2013
Messages
745
Enneagram
N/A
I believe that most of this can be resolved without typology. Where typology comes in, typology serves as kind of a map saying "you are here" and a rough sketch of the terrain. So with Fe vs Fi, it's the same terrain, but Fe is where you start and Fi is where other people start (or vice versa).

What you're doing here is mapping out the terrain. You're starting with those things obvious to Fe, and progressing to those things more obvious to Fi. In particular, Fe types tend to lack a degree of emotional "self-awareness". That isn't a "lack of feeling", but a lack of how internal processes affect feeling. Fe types think in terms of external processes affecting feelings, and deal with feelings in terms of those externalities. That's the scrap of the map of human emotions that Fe types start out with.

There's nothing wrong with this starting point, just as there is nothing with its introspective opposite, focusing so much on self-awareness that while an Fi type can be highly aware of others' emotions, the "Fi map" maps these all back to the introspective paths with which they're familiar. It's not in terms of Fe externalities.

I had an INFJ friend telling me about her dealings with an INFP friend who is helping her deal with some difficult emotional stuff. Aside from chatting and just being a friend, the INFP took my INFJ friend to a meditation session that she found very helpful. The INFP is effectively lending her the Fi half of the map, helping her with the introspective side of things.

As far as "selflessness" goes, I see both Fi and Fe types go overboard on being "selfless", and see no reason to attach the phenomenon you observe to a particular function. They do it for very different reasons. The Fe types do it typically because they lack that internal sense of self-awareness to maintain boundaries. The Fi types, on the other hand, should be totally aware of their boundaries (and they are, sort of), but deliberately allow them to be violated because of "love". Superficially, the behavior is kind of the same. Internally, the psychological landscape is different (different parts of the same "map", to continue my map metaphor).

YES!

I believe that in colloquial feeling/empathy/fluffy-wuffy stuff, Fi and Fe are equal; and they are equally not fluffy-wuffy. The difference is exactly what you said. It's really hard for me to put it into words, but Fe people can "see" themselves clearly when there sense of self/values/perspectives/logic is reflected outward somehow. How the Fe person does that will vary from person to person. Fi people do need that to understand their perspectives really. I think that is why I notice some Fi people really being comfortable with differing perspectives because it doesn't disrupt their own train of thought like it would with an Fe person.

To make things simpler for myself....

Fe people = cannot multitask (in terms of juggling multiple thought patterns). It's why Fe doms/auxs are seen as rigid. They are flexible... you just need to be patient with them/let them do the math in their own heads. Fi people are not given the label "rigid" or whatever label you want to use, because even though they have a solid holding on their own perspectives, they don't seem to be so boggled when someone brings up something different ...so they look flexible.
 

Ribonuke

New member
Joined
Mar 16, 2012
Messages
255
MBTI Type
esTP
Enneagram
845
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Yes. Selflessness is indeed unsustainable, due to emotional entropy.

I used to think I was an xxFJ, based on how parasitically I was obsessed on trying to impress other people and gain their approval.

Only now have I realized that I actually use my Ti much more accurately than I use my Fe, which is admittedly in a Childish, "histrionic" and overly impressionistic reaction style.
 
Top