User Tag List

First 789101119 Last

Results 81 to 90 of 273

  1. #81
    Nickle Iron Silicone Charmed Justice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by poki View Post
    What I have found is if I take care of an Fi user they will take care of me with Fe. But it is never expected.

    No matter what I do an Fe user will take care of me and it is expected in return.
    Could you elaborate on this Poki, especially the bolded? Fe=unwavering and Fi=circumstantial...
    There is a thinking stuff from which all things are made, and which, in its original state, permeates, penetrates, and fills the interspaces of the universe.

  2. #82
    man-made neptunesnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5&4 sx
    Socionics
    INFj
    Posts
    1,232

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    It's not about the noise. It's about the inconsideration.
    But the Fi-user wasn't trying to be inconsiderate. By bringing the issue [our waking you up] to our attention, the next step for us was to try not to wake you out of your sleep in the future. I see no legitimate reason to go stomping around the house the next night because the Fi-user didn't exactly say the words "I apologize for disrespecting you," even though the apology was implicitly there and it was genuine.

    I don't see how this pertains to the discussion. Enlighten me?
    I was trying to switch the dialogue so the Fi-user was the one offended in the situation, and I probably confused you in the process.

    I would change it, but I'm too lazy to.

    I apologize.



    Here's the logic - you've disrespected me. You said nothing to indicate that you even care that you've disrespected me.
    Yes, the Fi-user did.

    "Okay, I'll be more mindful" implies at least to me that I'll be extra careful so as not to wake you up, or rather "disrespect you," next time.

    So therefore, why do you demand that I act respectfully in turn, when you won't grant me the same level of consideration?
    Isn't the assumption here that we intentionally meant to disrespect you? Isn't it clear that the person didn't intend to?

    I really don't understand why anyone would want to "disrespect you" because they would just know that you felt disrespected, give you a "piss-poor apology," and then are surprised when you make noise the next night. That doesn't make any sense to me.

    You indicated that you didn't think waking someone up was a big deal...
    If I did, that's not what I meant.

    I don't like to wake people up from out of their sleep because I don't like to be woken up by noise either. However, I do understand that sometimes we aren't aware that we're making noise that is disturbing other people. In that case, when the person brings it to our attention, we adjust.

    An apology is in the adjustment.

    then you act like it was a big deal.
    No, we make a big deal out of your being spiteful.

    As we see it, you complained to us about making noise while you were sleeping and we adjusted. Thus, when we complain about the noise, we expect you to adjust, too, because we had to. I figured adjustment was a sign of consideration and thus respect.

    Is that difficult?

    There's a few ways of interpreting this - you're either acting selfishly in that what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander, you're acting childishly in not remembering the previous issue, or you're trying to mock me for having made the issue in the first place - which disrespects me even more.


    I really think you're being overly paranoid here when you don't have to be.


    With Fe, if you don't mend the status of disrespect, you'll remain categorized as disrespectful, and the worst will be assumed of you. On the other hand, if you validate and respect the other person, there's practically no limit to the benefit of the doubt that's extended toward you.
    Yeah. I got that, but don't you think that's a little rigid and unforgiving?

    Think about offending an Fi value. That's what we feel when others act inconsiderately towards us.
    I already explained how Fi-users would believe if a value is trampled. Notice in my explanation that the Fi-user doesn't act preemptively (aka "being petty and spiteful") because he realizes that sometimes what he considers offensive isn't always apparent to others, unless he's young or unhealthy.

    When a statement is made that's factually true, but offensive toward you, do you think it's right to be disregarded in that instance?
    Well, most of my values aren't irrational, so for the most part yes, but I'd have to think about it a little more. I don't think it's usually that cut and dry.

    Lack of respect puts you in the "distrusted" category. People in that category are seen as potential threats. The competition is an attempt to neutralize that potential threat. Admitting fault and apologizing for the inconsideration is a sign of respect that puts you back into the "trusted" category, also known as "good graces".
    The thing is that I would apologize if I knew that I disrespected you to such a degree, but to me as long as I'm sincere whether the apology is explicit or implied does not matter.

    I think we're just going to have to disagree here.

    It's just so beyond my comprehension that anyone would put so much emphasis on the principle of the thing. That seems kind of divisive and contradictory to what Fe is actually supposed to do: unite.

    Implied apologies are piss-poor apologies, for the above reasons.
    Like I said before, that you need an explicit apology seems ridiculous to me because I'm not naturally inclined to think along those Fe lines and I'm definitely going to slip up on those social rules, so I'm not going to give you an apology for something I can't necessarily help (i.e, feeling comfortable, confident, and apt inside of those conventional lines). I feel as long as I'm sincere, which I am, that whether my apology is implied or not doesn't matter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cybin View Post
    It would really baffle me if I offerred (and followed up) to be more mindful of someone's feelings and they considered that disrespectful because I didn't admit fault explicitly. I suppose Fi types are more comfortable with implicit statements in that regard. If I felt that I was at fault, I would probably say something along the lines of 'I'm sorry, I'll be more mindful in the future.' If I felt I wasn't I would say why 'The door creaks and there just nothing that can be done about it.' or what have you. Really though, the person at fault is only a side issue as long as the issue gets resolved. Someone can admit fault all they want, but the true measure of whether they understand and are sorry is what they do to keep it from happening the the future. No changing the past.


    Yeah.

  3. #83
    The High Priestess Amargith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Enfp
    Enneagram
    497 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEE Fi
    Posts
    14,658

    Default

    I have to agree on the whole 'insisting on an appology when someone clearly had no intention of pissing you off, or did something on purpose.' It seems petty.

    Honestly, that's the thing that wears me out about Fe. It expects you to catch every little consideration for everyone around with an overabundance of thank you's, pleases, and sorries, to the point where it becomes a bully. It like feels self-righteous to demand these things from people and becomes rude and rather uncivil in the process, which just looks ironic and hypocritical to me. Not to mention judgemental. This is also why Fi always feels Fe is judgemental, coz it expresses leading thoughts, jumping to conclusions according to the social norm and according to what social bonusses you received by your actions which you haven't even thought of but they won't even believe you hadn't, instead of listening to the reasoning as to why a Fi-user did something. It assumes. And, gets paranoid about the correction of its assumptions. Drives me mental that. Then it demands that you confess your lies or you're deceitful, lying, selfish, cruel or worse, in denial and need a reality check.

    At this point, I just wanna cry. Really. How you can believe such things about me, it's just downright hurtful. I give you the benefit of the doubt and all you can do is accuse me and demand I appologize for trivial things coz they weren't up to your standards. And when I refuse, you slander my name and guilttrip me for being a horrible person?

    At that point, I'd give anythign to wake up and discover it's all a bad dream.

    /rant.
    ★ڿڰۣ✿ℒoѵℯ✿ڿڰۣ★





    "Harm none, do as ye will”

  4. #84
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amargith View Post
    LOL. This is exactly what I do when I'm in a group. Coz yeah, it is the only way of keeping the peace...Fe. At least...if I'm not in a pissy mood after that first comment, or consider it smart to not let it get to me, coz it might be beneficial to keep the person as a friend.

    When it's someone I know well though, it is nice to just be able to drop those forced 'manners'
    Unfortunately, the "manners" are hardwired into our evolutionary survival strategy. That's not to say Fi has no part in it - it takes Fi to identify what those manners are in the first place.

    Quote Originally Posted by Uytuun View Post
    You're missing what I'm saying here, namely that tert Fe is looking for trouble if it invests so much of itself in these stupid little things and refuses to look at it beyond literal and self-preservational Fe.
    And I'm not sure you're understanding what I'm saying here - this isn't "looking" for anything. It's how humans instinctively handle other people. The things I'm describing all go on subconsciously; I never think about any of those steps except in retrospect.

    These aren't "stupid little things", they're the very mortar that keeps humans banded together, which is one of the deepest of instinctive impulses. It's the reason F is so distinct from other forms of cognition as to exist separately as a function within the Jungian scheme. Yes, we have an evolutionary imperative to eat. T handles practically all of that. However, we have just as strong an evolutionary imperative to stay together in social groups. That's entirely F's province. Reproduction mixes the two.

    You can't just reject some of them because you find them personally distasteful, because they're deeply important within the psyche of many people, and what else, it's entirely rational and logical for them to be so. A person who doesn't act respectfully indicates a few things - one, that he's different enough from you to possibly not share relatively much in the way of genes with you. Second, it indicates that this person considers you a competitor for resources, and as such is probably a competitor for resources himself. Third, it indicates that given the opportunity, it would make rational sense for him to eliminate you as a competitor to his genes. So naturally, you don't trust the person, and assume the worst of him.

    I realize that this is the source of much of the strife in this world - but it's entirely reasonable. Humans aren't getting rid of ingroup-outgroup dynamics, but we make peace by expanding the size of the ingroup.

    Same here, It does not add up with what you said before, namely that something needs to be expressed if it is to be complained about in a non-hypocritical manner. So if he follows that reasoning, then why does he expect me to apologise for something he hadn't expressed before?
    He's expressing right then that you acted inconsiderately and disrespected him. In his mind, that's what's "so obvious," and what needs to be addressed.

    Also, admitting wrongdoing may be a sign of respect for someone, but not for everyone and definitely not to the same degree. ETPs seem to forget that.
    And we get back to the initial point - Fi selfishness... but once again, it's really about Te. If what I'm thinking's correct, Te sees apology as a sign of weakness and submission. It doesn't give a damn about the other person's feelings, nor the bonds of sociality - it just sees something that needs to be corrected. Of course, because it deals in the objective realm, it completely misses that the problem doesn't exist in the objective realm one bit - it's in the social realm.

    Refusing to apologize for disrespect is just as painful and offensive to Fe as invalidating personal feelings is to Fi. They reject and objectify the other person.

    Ah, I thought you advised the "I want you not to bug me" approach, my bad. And that's just sugar-coating. In the end you want to read now (what you want over his needs). There's no need to be rude about it and you can slap on some sugar, but you'll always have some priority conflicts unless you find someone that wants what you wants (or is capable of manipulating you to want what they want) all the time (sounds familiar, yeah?). It's not sustainable like that. The most selfish acts can be made while trying desperately not to be selfish. Similarly for Fi, the most horrific acts can be made while trying desperately not to be immoral.
    Sigh... it's not sugar-coating, and if you want to learn something, you need to get that conceptualization out of your head, because it'll cause you nothing but harm. Maintaining that social bond is your priority, period. It's written into our genetic code. Alienating others will lead to nothing but depression, because on a base, limbic level, alienation equals impending death.

    Maintaining that bond doesn't mean having to drop everything for that person. It just means that when you do have priority conflicts, you've got to validate that person before you shift to what you were doing.

    I'm under the impression that unhealthy (tert) Fe users expect everything to revolve around (them) getting validation and respect and really overdo it, driving many people away in the process. It also seems that their perception of themselves as goody-two-shoes trying to do best for everyone ("woe is me and other people are disappointing me all the time because they don't go with what I want") and the way they come across to other people (Fi and Fe users) is radically different. Selfless - selfish respectively. And I mean you've mostly been instructing me on how to handle ETPs to their benefit, not really discussing things or responding to critical remarks...
    Everything does revolve around this. To deny this is to be ignorant of what makes humans human.

    The problem with tert Fe users is that oftentimes, a sense of perpetual, unequivocal validation is never established at critical ages (attachment issues). As such, they're unable to get past the post-infant stage of emotional development, because they're constantly searching for that one person who will love them unconditionally, and will treat them with kindness and affection, even when they've acted wrongly. For example, the movie Good Will Hunting.

    This isn't instruction in how to handle ETPs, btw. This is explaining why descriptions of ETPs at their best consistently include their "charm", and why our leadership styles center around building people up to make them better. It's also pointing out deeply subconscious levels of how humans interact with each other, and things that simply can't be ignored when it comes to preserving social cohesion.

    Rejection does suck and I think a lot of people feel your pain regardless of type, but then why not look at yourself a little instead of at what other people can do for you? Methinks you might enjoy embracing some Fi.
    Have you missed the point of all of this? That both sides have to act respectfully and take consideration of one another? I'm not going to modify my behavior to make it more Fi-palatable if I don't believe the same consideration will be granted toward me, and the more these conversations go on, the more intransigent it seems Te-users (because this is a Te issue) become toward changing any aspect of their behavior. Asking someone to act toward your own benefit without providing something in return isn't establishing a relationship with them, it's exploiting them. That's fine if you see other humans as objects to be exploited, but as you probably can tell, most people find that deeply offensive.

    Fe asks that we all engage on common ground, and act with common respect. Te demands that things be done its own way. Fe balks at this inconsideration of social cohesion, and either retaliates, or excludes Te. However, the Te-user still needs the safety of the group. There are a few options - either learn the rules and play by them, or attack the group and force them to follow your will through fear of reprisal. As appealing as that might seem to some, that's where the issue with xxTPs comes about - their purpose (especially xSTPs) is to eliminate those who would subjugate the group. That's where our anti-authoritarian bent comes from.

    Like it or not, you're still going to have to learn how to play nice with the other kids, because if you don't, they're not going to let you play with them. You might be able to bully them into letting them play with you, but if you do that, eventually one of those sarcastic kids is going to kick the crap out of you, and you'll be alone once again.

    Yes and it may lead to the aforementioned paranoia if you don't balance it out with logical reasoning.
    It isn't paranoia. It's a perfectly rational and stable strategy, when you know very little about the other actor.

    PS: speaking of practicing what you preach - how does your addressing me with the rather rude and perspectivally narrow "where you screwed up" fit into the Fe construct? (honest question)
    The "you're trying to frame me as a bad person, and I'mma smack you upside the head for attacking me" part of the Fe construct. But that's mostly Ti, really.

  5. #85
    Senior Member Uytuun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    nnnn
    Posts
    1,633

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    I'm not going to modify my behavior to make it more Fi-palatable if I don't believe the same consideration will be granted toward me
    Heh. I suggested it because you might benefit from it (aka be a happier person), not in the context of interaction at all.

    You don't seem particularly open to discussing this well...openly, so that's it for me.

  6. #86
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Really though, the person at fault is only a side issue as long as the issue gets resolved.
    That's objectifying me as a person.

    Quote Originally Posted by neptunesnet View Post
    But the Fi-user wasn't trying to be inconsiderate. By bringing it to our attention that we woke you up, you brought the issue to our attention and the next step for us was to try not to wake you up again out of your sleep in the future. I see no legitimate reason to go stomping around the house the next night because the Fi-user didn't exactly say the words "I apologize for disrespecting you," even though the apology was implicitly there and it was genuine.
    And how, exactly, am I supposed to know that? I am not a mind-reader. I don't know if you are genuinely contrite for acting disrespectfully toward me, or if you really don't care and just want to brush the issue aside.

    Here's the thing - I don't care about intent in that circumstance. I'm assuming good faith by raising the issue, and giving you an opportunity to confirm my good faith by expressing regret for acting disrespectfully. If you don't do this, then what reason do I have to assume good faith on your part from that point forward?

    I was trying to switch the dialogue so the Fi-user was the one offended in the situation, and I probably confused you in the process.

    I would change it, but I'm too lazy to do it.

    I apologize.

    Accepted.

    Yes, the Fi-user did.

    "Okay, I'll be more mindful" implies at least to me that I'll be extra careful so as not to wake you up, or rather "disrespect you," next time.
    Objectification, once again. It's implying that you'll be extra careful to not cause a response. It's saying nothing about the feelings of inconsideration that were the result of the action, which is the actual issue.

    Isn't the assumption here that we intentionally meant to disrespect you? Isn't it clear that the person didn't intend to?
    Once again, intent has nothing to do with it. An action happened. The action indicated a lack of regard for the other person. This offends Fe. Fe then wants you to realize this, and revalidate your social bond through a respectful apology. Reciprocity - you harmed me through disrespect. Recognizing that, and showing a little humility through apology, demonstrates that you're not trying to exploit or take advantage of me.

    I really don't understand why anyone would want to "disrespect you" because they just know that you were disrespect, give you a "piss-poor apology," and then are surprised when you make noise the next night.
    Intent has nothing to do with it.

    If I did, that's not what I meant.
    See above.

    I don't like to wake people up from out of their sleep because I don't like to be waken up by noise either. However, I do understand that sometimes we aren't aware that we're making noise that is disturbing the other people. In that case, when the person brings it to our attention, we adjust.

    An apology is in the adjustment.
    But it doesn't address the issue of harm through disrespect.

    No, we make a big deal out of your being spiteful.

    As we see it, you complained to us about making noise while you were sleeping and we adjusted. Thus, when we complain about the noise, we expect you to adjust, too, because we had to. I figured adjustment was a sign of consideration and thus respect.

    Is that difficult?
    The harm outstanding hasn't been remedied. To make a gross exaggeration, if you negligently chop off someone's arm with a chainsaw, do you think they'd find it acceptable if you said "K, I'll be more mindful in the future" without addressing the fact that you just cut his arm off? Same deal.



    I really think you're being overly paranoid here when you don't have to be.
    I'm not "being" anything. This is what happens subconsciously.

    Yeah. I got that, but don't you think that's a little rigid and unforgiving?
    Not at all. "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me".

    I already explained how Fi-users would believe if a value is trampled. Notice in my explanation that the Fi-user doesn't act preemptively (aka "being petty and spiteful") because he realizes that sometimes what he considers offensive isn't always apparent to others, unless he's young or unhealthy.
    So why not accept that we're harmed in the same way? We generally make allowances for Fi values once we get to know that person.

    The thing is that I would apologize if I knew that I disrespected you to such a degree, but to me as long as I'm sincere whether the apology is explicit or implied does not matter.
    Great. You've resolved your own emotional state without any regard for the other person's emotional state.

    Can't you see why this may be seen as somewhat... selfish?

    It's just so beyond my comprehension that anyone would put so much emphasis on the principle of the thing. That seems kind of divisive and contradictory to what Fe is actually supposed to do: unite.
    Unite and protect the group. This is the protection side of it. Fe looks for the people who may potentially harm the group. Social graces such as these are shibboleths which indicate to others that you're trustworthy.

    Like I said before, that you need an explicit apology seems ridiculous to me because I'm not naturally inclined to think along those Fe lines and I'm definitely going to slip up on those social rules and not give you an apology for something I can't necessarily help (i.e, feeling comfortable, confident, and apt inside of those conventional lines). I feel as long as I'm sincere, which I am, that whether my apology is implied or not doesn't matter.
    And you've still done nothing to address the other person's emotional harm. Once again... selfish.

  7. #87
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    Have you missed the point of all of this? That both sides have to act respectfully and take consideration of one another? I'm not going to modify my behavior to make it more Fi-palatable if I don't believe the same consideration will be granted toward me, ...
    The best way to make sure that people will almost never pay you any respect is to insist that they act respectfully first. It is by acting respectfully in the first place, and by acting respectfully even when they're being complete and total ass-hats, that you will gain genuine respect from most everyone you know.

    This truth is not dependent on MBTI-type, though different types might express it differently.

    (To be clear, by "respectfully" I don't mean deferentially, or expressing honor towards others above and beyond simple respect and courtesy. "Being nice" would be a reasonable synonym.)

  8. #88
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    The best way to make sure that people will almost never pay you any respect is to insist that they act respectfully first. It is by acting respectfully in the first place, and by acting respectfully even when they're being complete and total ass-hats, that you will gain genuine respect from most everyone you know.

    This truth is not dependent on MBTI-type, though different types might express it differently.

    (To be clear, by "respectfully" I don't mean deferentially, or expressing honor towards others above and beyond simple respect and courtesy. "Being nice" would be a reasonable synonym.)
    You also don't gain any respect, and may very well lose it, when you let someone insult you without standing up for yourself.

    I don't ever throw the first punch, but I'm committed to throwing the last one.

  9. #89
    The High Priestess Amargith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Enfp
    Enneagram
    497 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEE Fi
    Posts
    14,658

    Default

    Ok, no offense, OMT, but now you're defending Fe-tiranny, imo.
    ★ڿڰۣ✿ℒoѵℯ✿ڿڰۣ★





    "Harm none, do as ye will”

  10. #90
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amargith View Post
    Ok, no offense, OMT, but now you're defending Fe-tiranny, imo.
    If caring about the feelings of others is tyrannical, well, call me an enlightened despot.

Similar Threads

  1. [JCF] XNFPs and Knowing the "Essence" of People
    By finalcount in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 07-30-2012, 10:36 AM
  2. [MBTItm] XNFPs and the Discussion of Events/Feelings
    By SubtleFighter in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 06-23-2011, 02:04 PM
  3. [MBTItm] The XNFP and restlessness.
    By CrystalViolet in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 04-06-2011, 09:06 PM
  4. Hate to do this guys but...types and selfishness
    By FalseHeartDothKnow in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-01-2010, 11:11 AM
  5. [Fi] Are Fi and selfishness related?
    By Lightyear in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 235
    Last Post: 07-16-2009, 05:51 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