By the way, I don't want Seymour's comments to get left in the dust. I agree for the most part and would still like to get around to commenting more extensively.
Thanks skylights and Orobas for your perspectives. The two paradigms we look through the world from are so different and yet when translated to the opposite functions have a lot of similarities. I'm beginning to see some basic principles emerging in dealing with both types which I think are helpful for seeing where we approach differently and what will work better. I'd like to yet put those findings into a thread for some discussion and refining.
Seymour makes a very good point about the source of the ideas being somewhat removed in importance with Te because they are going to be examined closely anyway - all ideas are given consideration. I see that same dynamic happening with Fe in some sense. That is why less weight is given to the individual members of the group and their intentions, and more weight is placed on what result is. Both EJCC and one of the ENFPs (who was it who gave the example about telling a secret that a Fe user had been told in confidence?) have mentioned this business of trying to explain their intentions to a Fe user, to little avail. I think this is why.
I laughed at that example of yours, O, because it rang so true. I may see that a product is a great one, but if someone tries to sell it to me in an offensive, overly pushy or annoying way, I will purposely not buy it, even if I can see from the data that it is good. I just can't ignore the people element that goes along with it and on some level that carries more weight with me. Of course I do care about quality as well, but if there are two places offering products with equal quality, I will always purchase from the one that connects with me best in a personal way. I wonder what implications this has for Fi using inventors, writers, business people etc getting people to "buy their product"? Do they understand that data or a good product is not enough to speak for itself with some people? Do they develop their own Fi brand of salesmanship, or do a lot of good ideas and products go by the wayside?
skylights - I can understand your frustration with Js at times - I have had a few very dominant friends in the past that you either had to mold your plans to or else forget about it. It didn't seem fair. I also don't like people who are too rigid with plans. Mostly I'll be really easygoing, but if it was something I was really counting on, it takes me a few minutes to get over my disappointment at things changing, even if it is changing to another good thing. In this sense it can seem that the Ps remain in control and spring things on me sometimes. I think all the way around, it's a matter of being flexible and communicating needs directly instead of just feeling irked either way.
Thanks both skylights and Seymour for explaining the puzzle piece thing. That makes absolute sense when explained from that perspective.
Re critiquing ideas - I think there certainly is a place for that skylights and it is important to do. The key lies in the approach more than anything. Being aware that this is a very personal thing, you might use the example of how you would critique a piece of art you happened to see at a flea market or bazaar (not knowing the painter), or when a friend shows you their own art. You are still allowed to critique both, but you would likely do it differently because of your relationship to the person. (Maybe that's just a Fe perspective though, I don't know). Same thing with what a person likes. If you went to someone's house and they had spent a lot of money on certain decor, you wouldn't look around (usually) and say, "I've always hated that style of furniture. It's impractical and what's more, it looks ridiculous". You would wait until you were invited to give your opinion, or you could tactfully make a suggestion of what would make the place look even better (addition of a certain piece of furniture, pattern, colour, taking something away etc). You could start impersonally, and then gradually get more personal, testing the water for what the reaction is. You could look at what you agree on and then comment on what you might have done differently, allowing them time to mull it over. (Actually, come to think of it, this just sounds like Fe/Ti). Ideas would be the same, so would our personal tastes and likes in people, music etc. It's not that the topic is off limits, but you have to be careful in how you would approach, much as we ought to be careful about wading in with comments on your values etc without taking time to gather information, find out how important something is to you and how close it is to your heart.
Replace feeling with the word thought, and you'll better understand why critiquing our thoughts is not invited unless we deem you someone who has earned the right to be heard. If someone wanted to critique a feeling of yours, what is the appropriate approach? Would it be similar to what I've described with thought? What would a conversation like that look like? Obviously for either of us, doing it privately is much more preferred than doing it publicly. Beyond that though, I'm not sure...hence critiquing an idea is okay - anyone can discover a truth - but critiquing a feeling is much more dangerous ground, because you are not privy to the full range of circumstances which invoked that feeling.
Also, I've noticed that Ti asks all sorts of questions about the things it's not sure of and appreciates having the same done back. It's a way of showing interest and validation. Would Fi do the same thing for values or feelings, or would they consider that too intrusive. Would you want to be plied with questions about your feelings in the way that we do with our thoughts? I was thinking about how Te seems demanding to me and puts me on the spot because it wants an oversimplified and quickly given, impersonal version of our thoughts. Does Fe feel like that to you? If so, how can we approach in a less intimidating, demanding manner?
skylights - Your point about going towards people when you are stressed, whereas Fe/Ti moves away is bang on. Do you think this has anything to do with extroversion/introversion, or is it solely a Fe/Ti and Fi/Te thing? I'm inclined to think the latter, but I'm not sure. I hadn't thought of it in those terms, but I think that's a big source of conflicts on the forums. Right when I want to distance myself slightly so that I can come back and be gracious, the Fi/Te person follows me there and I get short with them. They feel rejected because I don't want to engage and it feels to them like maybe I am also being inauthentic. Yet if I give them the full load of how I am feeling at that moment, it won't be pleasant for them and may do damage. I want time to recalibrate my emotions and return when I am able to be more even keeled. In any of the situations where I have seen problems, I think this is at play. I'd be interested in hearing from the INFPs though and seeing their take on it.
Like with Te "protecting" Fi, I believe that the strong-looking offensive Fe stance is actually a sign of a Ti user trying to be defensive of their area of vulnerability (Ti). It may look like they are being bossy, but really they are trying to reduce the critics to those they have deemed people who either have the qualifications, understanding or consideration to present things to them in such a way they can hear them. You don't appreciate Fe users coming in and making light of your Fi, even though they really do see feelings as something more impersonal that you examine, move around, change, add to, take away from, probe etc (much in the way you see their Ti ideas) and so you respond with Te to defend that and keep your Fi safe. By keeping people who will not understand away from those areas, you allow yourself to still want to be around them. Otherwise, it will deeply wound the relationship if they do not have the information or understanding they need to respect their surroundings and act accordingly.while i get this, doesn't it seem kind of unfair? i don't really have any opinion on EW's participation in the INFJ conversation - especially because i did not read the thread and have no idea what happened - but it sounds so much like the Fe person totally controls the conversation - they decide if and when someone gets their ideas considered.
This is always going to be an issue, but I think if both parties understand why they tend to respond in the ways they do (Te brings out uber Fe and Fe brings out uber Te), it will help us speak in ways that will lessen the extremeness of the reaction and be more equitable from both viewpoints.