[Fi] Fi: You only get it if you got it

[Moiety]

It is clear that the actions are a result of an emotional investment, but this does not exonerate the Fi from the charges of irrationality. Because the reasons for having such an emotional investment are illegitimate (logically invalid and often grounded on false premises), the Fi fully deserves the censure of its critics, if not ridicule. That is the point I have made to Blackmail earlier.

What the? Who are you?


Maybe you can explain then, if it's all so irrational, why the number of serial killers and rapists doesn't amount to 50% of the worlds population. If Fi is so arbitrary why don't most people "irrationally" cling to "evil" values?

 

[nonsequitur]

This is so immature...

Wow, you know it's really obvious when even an ENTP notices immaturity.

(joking!)

(OK, half-joking. )

 

[Economica]

I agree with ajblaise that Fi is a "gut reaction".

If anything, I find that more the reason to follow it. Listen to your body.

My gut tells me to do impulsive, short-sighted, needy things. I much prefer the outcomes when I am able to override my gut with my Ni vision of how things will turn out if only I stick to the rational Te plan of action.

Of course, my Fi is tertiary... Your gut is probably more useful than mine.

 

[disregard]

My gut tells me to do impulsive, short-sighted, needy things. I much prefer the outcomes when I am able to override my gut with my Ni vision of how things will turn out if only I stick to the rational Te plan of action.

Of course, my Fi is tertiary... Your gut is probably more useful than mine.

Yes, I thought about this after I wrote my post..

Let me clarify.

With a developed thinking faculty and the wisdom to tell the difference between your ego's voice and your gut instincts, listening to your gut is admirable, to me.

 

[Simplexity]

Yes, I thought about this after I wrote my post..

Let me clarify.

With a developed thinking faculty and the wisdom to tell the difference between your ego's voice and your gut instincts, listening to your gut is admirable, to me.

Personally I would just like to point out the MUCH better word choice used here.

 

[Haphazard]

My gut reactions only get full authority on tests when I honestly can't think of the answer.

Otherwise, all gut reactions must go through careful cross examination. Sometimes they're right, sometimes they're wrong.

 

[Simplexity]

This is so immature...

Lucky for you, you recognized early on and didn't engage. I wish I would have had the same foresight and discipline. It would have saved me about two hours.

 

[Jack Flak]

I must be extremely immature, because the entire concept (of maturity) means nothing to me. So, if you think I'm immature, I gladly admit it.

 

[Simplexity]

I must be extremely immature, because the entire concept means nothing to me. So, if you think I'm immature, I gladly admit it.

I think the maturity lies in the fact of recognizing that no matter what you say, how good your arguments may seem that in the end the discussion will go nowhere and nothing will be made more clear. I can almost bet that you could devote all your energy and efforts in stating your case or trying to make the concept of Fi clear but in this thread it will get you nowhere.

 

[Jack Flak]

I think the maturity lies in the fact of recognizing that no matter what you say, how good your arguments may seem that in the end the discussion will go nowhere and nothing will be made more clear. I can almost bet that you could devote all your energy and efforts in stating your case or trying to make the concept of Fi clear but in this thread it will get you nowhere.

I believe CC started the thread because we were debating typing songwriters who seemed to be using Fi to compose lyrics, and I made a case against that, among other things. I'm satisfied. I provided the information I felt necessary to the conversation, and if it isn't absorbed by others, well, there's nothing more I can do.

 

[disregard]

It was a great thread. I learned a lot.

 

[Simplexity]

I believe CC started the thread because we were debating typing songwriters who seemed to be using Fi to compose lyrics, and I made a case against that, among other things. I'm satisfied. I provided the information I felt necessary to the conversation, and if it isn't absorbed by others, well, there's nothing more I can do.

Then I would in fact call you mature, because you recognized the fact that you've done all you can do and any further efforts won't really get you anywhere.

 

[CrystalViolet]

nothing to see

 

[nonsequitur]

Um Aimahn/Jack Flak, that wasn't what I meant when I agreed that the immaturity in this thread is "obvious".

What I meant was that all of the personal attack was incredibly immature. CC doesn't make sense! CC doesn't inspire respect! CC doesn't justify what she says! I misunderstood what she said, and that's her fault! That's because she's an ENFP! (one form of immaturity)

Second form of immaturity: What you're describing can't be the function, because YOU DON'T HAVE THAT FUNCTION! From a typological perspective, you can't possibly use that function, it's just an invert of the extraverted form of that function (as I define it), and you're completely mistaken (because I know you better than you know yourself because I've written a book about typology)!

Third form of immaturity: Ti is so much better than Fi for making decisions! People with Ti as their primary function are so much less likely to be delusional, because hello, Ti = logical = objectivity! ZOMG! Context disappears in the wake of a specific ability to reason!

I would say that I haven't learnt much from this thread, and most of what I learnt was from FineLine's long post. Sigh. Why have I bothered to type this out? It'll only offend people and can't bring any benefit. Screw it. I'll post it anyway.

 

[Simplexity]

Um Aimahn/Jack Flak, that wasn't what I meant when I agreed that the immaturity in this thread is "obvious".

What I meant was that all of the personal attack was incredibly immature. CC doesn't make sense! CC doesn't inspire respect! CC doesn't justify what she says! I misunderstood what she said, and that's her fault! That's because she's an ENFP! (one form of immaturity)

Second form of immaturity: What you're describing can't be the function, because YOU DON'T HAVE THAT FUNCTION! From a typological perspective, you can't possibly use that function, it's just an invert of the extraverted form of that function (as I define it), and you're completely mistaken (because I know you better than you know yourself because I've written a book about typology)!

Third form of immaturity: Ti is so much better than Fi for making decisions! People with Ti as their primary function are so much less likely to be delusional, because hello, Ti = logical = objectivity! ZOMG! Context disappears in the wake of a specific ability to reason!

I would say that I haven't learnt much from this thread, and most of what I learnt was from FineLine's long post. Sigh. Why have I bothered to type this out? It'll only offend people and can't bring any benefit. Screw it. I'll post it anyway.

Yes!!

Honestly thats what I meant. That despite whatever the hell was being argued it would likely devolve to that and I should have recognized that before engaging. For that I am regretful.

Yes I have sighed many times as a result of this thread.

 

[Jack Flak]

As for arriving at the truth, all perception is subjective, 'tis the human condition, BUT at least the NF are somewhat more honest about how feelings affect their truth.

Of course they are!

As far as feelings affecting truth for me, I get a lot more "truthful" the closer I get to the edge, as being nudged toward it recently...

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Is Objectivity caused by adherence to logic and laws of reasoning.?

One attains an objective understanding of reality by thinking logically.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

I also love to play with theory, for fun, but you treat it as more real than the people and behavior which are more important in this context. That doesn't follow logic if your goal is understanding the human mind, and helping others to. If your goal is simply to get the blood flowing in your brain, you might really have something.

You have to have a theory first before you make any observations. As you first have to arrive at a place where you can do empirical testing on an idea. If you do not have a theory, and only observations you cannot have any knowledge.

This is not what you do for fun, this is the only way to come up with ideas.

 

[Jack Flak]

You have to have a theory first before you make any observations. As you first have to arrive at a place where you can do empirical testing on an idea. If you do not have a theory, and only observations you cannot have any knowledge.

This may be your philosophy, but it's not fact. I know I'm not the only one who observes, composes hypotheses based on observation, and then analyzes further. I do not need a starting theory.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

I paraphrase: "Thinkers debate truth; Feelers arrive at truth." .

CC did make a statement as follows, Thinkers dispute truth and Feelers understand/sense/see the truth. It is unclear from this statement whether she meant that Feelers have conclusively attained an objective understanding of the truth, or merely attempt to do so.

For instance, when somebody is telling me a complicated story and I am just beginning to listen, I could say I see, or I understand, meaning I am paying attention and trying to know what is going on.

I know you wouldn't make a statement like this if you realized it was conjecture, but it is. This isn't fact, and there's no evidence whatsoever to support it, only the theory of function order, which is also conjecture.

It could hypothetically be true, and it could hypothetically be false, so I choose not to rely on it. It's just as likely that it actually is Fi, and just as likely it's something we don't understand.

It is not conjecture.

Consider the following.

Axiom: Thinking, Feeling, Intuition, Sensation outline the basic tendencies of the human mind. These faculties we call the functions because they perform operations of thought. Extroversion, Introversion, Judgment and perception are attitudes as they merely describe how we perform such operations of thought.

For example, Extroversion and Introversion directs what our cognitive processes focuses on, the inner world or the outer. Judgment and perception specify what cognitive activity we are engaging in, merely perceiving or moving towards a decision.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Axiom 2: Cognitive faculties of Thinking, Feeling, Intuition and Sensation are antithetical to each other.

Proposition : We have earlier established that Introversion and Extroversion specify the direction of the cognitive process. Therefore because we know that an Introverted function and an Extroverted function advance in different directions they do not contrapose each other.

Thus, for the INTP, Introverted Thinking is the dominant function. The most opposed function is Introverted Feeling because it is the Feeling faculty in the Introverted realm. Extroverted Feeling is not opposed by Introverted Thinking because it is in a different typological zone.