User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 44

  1. #21
    DoubleplusUngoodNonperson
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    Hype
    Posts
    2,078

    Default

    "All emotion is relative to a chosen frame of reference. That is, you can only understand the feelings of others by inferring what you would have to be feeling in order to act that way."

    Mirror neurons and their implications easily support this. If emotion is basically subjective/inferred empathy then it explains a lot of the core differences between type, and can also explain extreme things like psychopathic behavior.

  2. #22
    Plumage and Moult proteanmix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Enneagram
    1w2
    Posts
    5,514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    ...Fi only puts you in touch with what you feel yourself, and thus causes you to use yourself as a frame of reference, no matter how distraught or calm you may happen to be (which will interfere with your ability to understand the feelings of others). Fe tries to "calibrate" itself to an average frame of reference inferred from the feelings of those around them, thus correcting for some of the deviations produced by their own mood and allowing them to maintain more equilibrium and consistency in their assessments of the moods of others. It also allows them to be more consistent in their responses to the moods of others, rather than behaving in a way that is totally based on their own moods, desires, and whims.

    I don't argue that Fi is deeper, more "authentic" (although the value of that is debatable) and more aware of itself, but Fe is honestly a lot more useful in interacting with others, and assessing their current feelings in a manner that is useful to the person assessing them, because it is accurate enough, and less likely to overwhelm them. It is also useful in giving people a standard code to use in communication, simplifying it greatly. If we all come to a consensus about what, say, a smile should mean, then we'll all interpret it correctly when it is expressed. BlueWing even admitted that having consistent standards in mathematics such as using decimal and standard arithmetic notation is desirable, so why would this be undesirable in terms of dealing with emotions? It's the same principle, establishing standards to ensure clarity in communication.
    Yes, that is very well stated! And that's the one of problems I have when people discuss Fe and it's seeming lack of depth. People have tendency to vie Harmony vs. Authenticity against each other as if they're incompatible or you can't act in line with your own principles and still harmonize with others. Then BW sets up these false dichotomies like individualism vs. communalism (did he compare Fe to the communism? did he say that prejudice arises from Fe? I don't if I read that correctly) The word conforming and conformity have negative connotations on this forum. And most members are American for whom individualism is like Manifest Destiny or something. I'm not contrary just to be contrary or rebel just because it strikes my fancy and if a standard is reasonable and just then I don't have a problem abiding by it. You sound like you want to get rid of traffic lights and stop signs because they impede radical introversion. There are external standards that have merit and integrity and ones that don't. And some people's introverted judgment isn't in the best of shape either and some crazy ideology can emerge. It's like dissing pop culture just because it's popular. It's not all good, but it's not all bad either. More common, more base, more unnecessary. Also BW makes it sound like there isn't an original thought in a Fe-dominants head unless somebody opened up their skull and planted it there in a bed of sweet smelling tulips and makes Fe into didactic mindless conformity. You know, "all my friends are doing it."

    And LLNF brings up a good point. Fe seems to be a function that everybody thinks they understand because the products of Fe are ubiquitous, pliable, and easy to manipulate (holidays, birthdays, anniversaries, funerals, weddings, fashion, etc.) but rarely does anyone every stop to ask how an EFJ experiences their own Fe. And once again I want to reiterate that he failed to emphasize any positive aspects of Fe like community welfare or interpersonal relationships.

    I suppose this is because at best most forum participants have Fe as their auxiliary which still isn't the same type of Fe that emerges from a Fe dominant. And I'm limiting my comments to what I see on the forum, because this isn't even an issue in my real life. One good thing about extroverted judgment is it's excellent at gaging your relationship to the object and in this case it's other people. I know when someone doesn't like me and I know when someone does. I'm good at knowing how people feel about me so I'm rarely blindsided by anyone's feelings or attitude towards me because I already fairly accurate hunch they were there. And for the most part I'm a well liked and pleasant person to be around. And most (not all of course) of the EFJs I encounter are also pleasant people so once again, my experiences don't align with other people.

    I've aimed some of my weak mind bullets at the situation and I realize I probably influence my satisfying interactions with people so I'm more likely to have them. For example, recently a group of coworkers in another department came up to my cube we had a little conversation and they went on their merry way. One of my direct coworker's came to me after hearing the conversation and told me they never speak to her. I know I've been very friendly to these people even though they work on a different floor. At the very least I smile whenever I see one of them. My behavior towards them puts me in a better relationship towards them because I've shown myself to be a friendly person and they probably feel more at ease in conversating with me. Is that my Fe? Probably so. Someone else seeing this interaction may view it as fake and contrived that the only reason why I'm friendly is because society tells me too and if not I stomp on their toes and sneak white out into their coffee. I find pleasure in those type of interactions as superficial as they appear to others.

    To BW's credit I would like to say that I think even though it seems capricious, he has explained that Fe is more flexible than what most people believe. I think Fe-doms are generally very realistic about people and their behavior and are therefore quite actually quite tolerant. I encounter way more EFJs (mostly ESFJs because I don't know any ENFJs) that forgiving to the point of being pushovers. I also know plenty of ESFJs who work themselves into exhaustion taking care of others and their willingness to work with and around people, or should I say take people's bullshit. He's also right about the reading body language and why I'm flying completely blind on the internet because I can't see how a person is reacting and another person can't see me. Most communication is non-verbal anyways and I'm more likely to trust non-verbal communication more than what a person says. You'll basically know where you stand with an ENFJ because you won't get any of that passive-aggressive, indirect communication, much to your chagrin.

    He also gives a good description of how an ENFJ can improve by cultivating Ni, but really any person that hasn't cultivated at least their auxiliary function is wack as hell. Also (and LLNF touched on this) I don't have a problem with his description of the Fe-meld, which once again is called clingy or co-dependent or some such nonsense. If I thought someone thought me expressing my affections towards them was clingy, you won't have to worry about that anymore. As warmly as I felt towards you before, you'll get absolute zero from me after. Setting up proper boundaries are also a problem that I've been getting at and not worrying and caring about people more than what they seem to care about themselves. I detest apathy and the "It's all about me" mentality.

    I may slightly agree to these:

    Even though he may have little or no understanding on how to solve the most basic problems of mathematics or physics, and the nuance of such intellectual enterprises are bound to leave him baffled and intimidated, he knows every last nuance in regards to how attain power in his community and how to win the approbation of the multitude.
    I can't add worth a damn but get me in front of the masses and it's Showtime at the Apollo!

    Very often superstitious beliefs concerning the nature of logic and impersonal occurrences are harbored and since the Introverted Thinking does not require much grounding in the external world, the Extroverted Feeler is free to concoct all sorts of absurd laws concerning the nature of reasoning.
    There is a thin line between insanity and genius.



    And sciski: I've written some posts about how I experience Fe. You may want to run a search with ENFJ in the title of the thread.

  3. #23
    Senior Member sciski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    NSFW
    Enneagram
    6w7
    Posts
    468

    Default

    Thank you to both littlelostnf and proteanmix for your posts! They do reinforce my view of the expression of Fe and its motivations - and my view was actually rather rosy already.

    I've never experienced manipulation at the hands of an ExFJ - just persuasion, and the benefits of listening to their persuasion. The choice of action, however, was always mine - so I wouldn't call it manipulation, as that implies no choice.

    I do think that BW's definition wasn't all that off base - isn't Fe defined as the obeying of external values over your own? However, it's also very clear that not many actual people would be mindless slaves and puppets to forces outside. I read BW's profile as more of an exercise in theoretical unbalanced Fe dominance than an ENFJ profile.

    At the risk of incurring some wrath, I would suggest that it's actually the ExFJ's Fi (by definition) that stops an ExFJ from becoming a puppet to the outside, just as it's an IxFP's Fe (though some have not learned the skills all that well, possibly because of Fi's influence) that stops them from becoming a self-obsessed asshole who simply goes around judging everyone and frowning. This comes purely from the definition of each Feeling function, rather than any perceived inequality in each function's virtue - which seems to be a sticking point here (that BW is biased in favour of Fi)?

    I think where he caused offense was in labelling his analysis as an "ENFJ profile", thus applying it as a definition for all ENFJs, rather than calling it a study in the behaviour/thinking pattern of unbalanced DomFe. Actually, I would quite like to see that - an analysis of what a person with an overwhelming dominant function would behave or think like... theoretically. Thus instead of seeing it as an attempt at The definition of our type, we would be more able to see it as an archetype, and draw differences/similarities/lessons/offense that way.

    I agree that it does not seem as balanced as the introvert profiles I've seen so far. Then again, this could be the result of the functional definitions themselves.

    Introverted functions, in their sphere of influence, tend only to hurt the bearer of such function. Extroverted functions, particularly the judging ones, tend to want to influence others. So naturally, you would see more complaints about an extroverted judger cropping up, compared with an introverted perceiver. Generally, complaints about introverted perceivers are about a person's lack, rather than excess... so lack of smiling, lack of involvement, lack of initiative - very annoying things, but their effects on other people tend to be secondary - ignorable if you ignore the person or exclude them. Extroverted judgers are harder to ignore because they seek to act on others. Maybe that's the source of the greater volume of complaints against DomFes and DomTes.

    Please note I am fully aware that I'm talking about the outside shows and effects of these behaviours. I do not doubt that Fe (and Te) are truly well meant... as are all the functions, in good people.

    Then again, you also see a greater volume of approbation, like, love, passion, inspired feelings, camaraderie, shows of efficiency and gratitude for extraverted judgers (here the introverts kind of vanish into the background- again, defined by a lack of impact, though of course we still do have an impact)... so I would say it all balances out.

    It does seem to depend on the recipient's level of understanding of the motivation of each person. Once I understood the selfless motivation behind DomFes, I realised that their behaviour was not contrived, but was instead motivated because they actually... liked.. being socially acceptable and (ugh) pleasant! *horrified*

    rarely does anyone every stop to ask how an EFJ experiences their own Fe.
    Yay, I did! It's not the usual thing that comes up in conversation though. "Soooooo, how's your Fe hangin'?" *feels sudden urge to waggle eyebrows*

  4. #24
    Plumage and Moult proteanmix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Enneagram
    1w2
    Posts
    5,514

    Default

    Some posts moved here.

  5. #25
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Athenian, as I understand your argument that Fe is more accurate than Fi because it is objective in the regard that it relates to the object or the external world directly, not like Fi that interposes subjective interpretation between itself and the world.


    However, objective in this sense is different from objective in the regard of standing devoid of your prejudices. To use the two interchangeably means to succumb to the fallacy of equivocation.


    There are two ways to gain knowledge, either through your own reflection, or by having someone else instruct you. The former is akin to Fi methodology, the latter to Fe.

    Which is more objective with respect to the second definition? Fe is at the whims of whatever pernicious external influence may come by, and has difficulty extricating itself from that as the external influence is the fuel Fe runs on. Fi certainly easily falls victim to internal influences, yet since it is always in process of thought, it has the proper tools to combat the influences should they be pernicious.

    Sriv, check my disclaimers and the personality/type distinction. Fe is but an unconscious tendency towards applying the human element to external entities. All other statements I have made concenring that notion are examples of how Fe may or may not manifest through personality. This is all but means to the end of evincing how Fe works in our unconscious tendencies. I was trying to make a point that as a matter of psychology, Fe derives its own identity from the outside. Most of the comments stated in reply to my profile were irrelevant as they deal with personality and not type. Such notions are best examined in the realm of social sciences such as psychology or sociology.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  6. #26
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Athenian, as I understand your argument that Fe is more accurate than Fi because it is objective in the regard that it relates to the object or the external world directly, not like Fi that interposes subjective interpretation between itself and the world.


    However, objective in this sense is different from objective in the regard of standing devoid of your prejudices. To use the two interchangeably means to succumb to the fallacy of equivocation.
    I think what I meant was that the prejudice of subjective interpretation is worse than that created by being directly related to the object. Because it's often more ridiculous and irrationally certain of it's own correctness, and certain that it's standards of corruption and perfection apply to everyone absolutely. It cannot be modified when it is clear to others that it is flawed because of it's own internalized value and self-certainty. It doesn't seem to accept that morality only exists within the context of a particular situation, and humanity in general, and that morality and emotion is not a separate entity that exists in and of itself, but exists on top of an impersonal world as an effect emanating from it. This understanding would seem to be a flaw.

    There are two ways to gain knowledge, either through your own reflection, or by having someone else instruct you. The former is akin to Fi methodology, the latter to Fe.
    But F has nothing to do with knowledge. Focusing on one's own feelings doesn't help you understand those of other people, and the only useful application of feeling is to help others through their problems and experience the feeling of empathy and connection. What good is it to brood about feelings alone? They'll never really make sense or resolve themselves that way.
    Which is more objective with respect to the second definition? Fe is at the whims of whatever pernicious external influence may come by, and has difficulty extricating itself from that as the external influence is the fuel Fe runs on. Fi certainly easily falls victim to internal influences, yet since it is always in process of thought, it has the proper tools to combat the influences should they be pernicious.
    Why is the external influence assumed to have a greater potential to be pernicious than the internal one? In my experience, leaving people alone with their own feelings just causes them to brood and intensify, possibly exaggerating them and making it into a large mess. And Fi refuses to be given a helping hand from outside, and seems irrationally intent on imploding.

  7. #27
    Don't Judge Me! Haphazard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    I don't argue that Fi is deeper, more "authentic" (although the value of that is debatable) and more aware of itself, but Fe is honestly a lot more useful in interacting with others, and assessing their current feelings in a manner that is useful to the person assessing them, because it is accurate enough, and less likely to overwhelm them. It is also useful in giving people a standard code to use in communication, simplifying it greatly. If we all come to a consensus about what, say, a smile should mean, then we'll all interpret it correctly when it is expressed. BlueWing even admitted that having consistent standards in mathematics such as using decimal and standard arithmetic notation is desirable, so why would this be undesirable in terms of dealing with emotions? It's the same principle, establishing standards to ensure clarity in communication.
    The only problem I have with this is that even though 'calibration' is useful it's flawed because it's only an average. There may be an average, but with every average there's deviation from that norm, and that deviation can go pretty damn far.

    I wouldn't say that either is 'wrong' but there seems to be a clash whenever the two meet. For Fi, emotions may be more involuntary, so for example, a smile might not exactly be what Fe thinks it is. It's still the same symbol, but it's not going to be interpreted correctly. And, in this case, what are you going to do? A 'smile' should mean 'this' but when this person does it, it idiosyncratically means something completely different. The rules that Fe have set up are not going to change for this person, while this person's internal feelings, Fi, are not going to change because some external rules said so.

    And thus we have reached an impasse...
    -Carefully taking sips from the Fire Hose of Knowledge

  8. #28
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haphazard View Post
    The only problem I have with this is that even though 'calibration' is useful it's flawed because it's only an average. There may be an average, but with every average there's deviation from that norm, and that deviation can go pretty damn far.

    I wouldn't say that either is 'wrong' but there seems to be a clash whenever the two meet. For Fi, emotions may be more involuntary, so for example, a smile might not exactly be what Fe thinks it is. It's still the same symbol, but it's not going to be interpreted correctly. And, in this case, what are you going to do? A 'smile' should mean 'this' but when this person does it, it idiosyncratically means something completely different. The rules that Fe have set up are not going to change for this person, while this person's internal feelings, Fi, are not going to change because some external rules said so.

    And thus we have reached an impasse...
    My interpretation of this is that the person's internal feelings are abnormal, and communicating with them would require effort I'd prefer not to expend unless they know something that justifies me having to put up with this. Basically, if someone is going to demand effort for me to communicate in an abnormal language, then they'd darn well better be intelligent and insightful enough to justify me spending my time and energy trying to learn it. Otherwise, I'd just prefer to avoid them because they seem selfish and arrogant (not saying they are, but that's how it feels to most people).

  9. #29
    Don't Judge Me! Haphazard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    My interpretation of this is that the person's internal feelings are abnormal, and communicating with them would require effort I'd prefer not to expend unless they know something that justifies me having to put up with this. Basically, if someone is going to demand effort for me to communicate in an abnormal language, then they'd darn well better be intelligent and insightful enough to justify me spending my time and energy trying to learn it. Otherwise, I'd just prefer to avoid them because they seem selfish and arrogant (not saying they are, but that's how it feels to most people).
    Hmm, that's a little judgmental, isn't it?

    As far as I can see, FJ at its best can get a good temperature reading of the emotional intensity of a room and work from there. FP at its best, however, will suspend judgement and accept the differences because it can understand that there will be differences because it's different itself.
    -Carefully taking sips from the Fire Hose of Knowledge

  10. #30
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    I think what I meant was that the prejudice of subjective interpretation is worse than that created by being directly related to the object. Because it's often more ridiculous and irrationally certain of it's own correctness, and certain that it's standards of corruption and perfection apply to everyone absolutely. It cannot be modified when it is clear to others that it is flawed because of it's own internalized value and self-certainty. It doesn't seem to accept that morality only exists within the context of a particular situation, and humanity in general, and that morality and emotion is not a separate entity that exists in and of itself, but exists on top of an impersonal world as an effect emanating from it. This understanding would seem to be a flaw.



    But F has nothing to do with knowledge. Focusing on one's own feelings doesn't help you understand those of other people, and the only useful application of feeling is to help others through their problems and experience the feeling of empathy and connection. What good is it to brood about feelings alone? They'll never really make sense or resolve themselves that way.


    Why is the external influence assumed to have a greater potential to be pernicious than the internal one? In my experience, leaving people alone with their own feelings just causes them to brood and intensify, possibly exaggerating them and making it into a large mess. And Fi refuses to be given a helping hand from outside, and seems irrationally intent on imploding.
    You're absolutely right that the internal influence weighs a heavier toll than the external, as the external is more or less confined to the occurences of the outer world, yet the internal can stretch nearly as far as your imagination can. (Of course it is confined by the constraints of external occurences, but not nearly as much).

    However, the introvert, by virtue of being in closer affinity with the faculties of contemplation has better tools to extricate himself from his biases. Think of it this way, I'd have an easier time travelling a thousand miles by car than you would travelling 50 miles by foot.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

Similar Threads

  1. [INFJ] INFJ personality type descritpion
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs Type Profiles
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 11-08-2015, 10:44 PM
  2. [INTJ] INTJ personality type descritpion
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs Type Profiles
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 06-03-2015, 02:29 PM
  3. [INTP] INTP personality type descritpion
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs Type Profiles
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 12-08-2013, 06:58 PM
  4. [INFP] INFP personality type descritpion
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs Type Profiles
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 07-22-2012, 09:06 PM
  5. [ENTP] ENTP personality type descritpion
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs Type Profiles
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 06-13-2010, 11:50 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