User Tag List

View Poll Results: Fi ONLY: Do you feel safe to freely share your thoughts about Fi on TypoC?

Voters
36. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    23 63.89%
  • No

    13 36.11%
First 2101112131422 Last

Results 111 to 120 of 368

  1. #111
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    xkcd
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Socionics
    INT_
    Posts
    10,733

    Default

    LOL, this is slightly OT, but what fineline wrote reminded me of


  2. #112
    RDF
    Guest

    Default

    That's about the sum of it.

  3. #113
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FineLine View Post
    But at some point the personalized and subjective viewpoint has to be synched up in some fashion with the objective viewpoint as well. We share the world with other people; it can't just be about us sitting around and insisting on our Fi personal values. {...} I feel like I'm talking about things that should be taken for granted, i.e., the need for Fi-users to accommodate objective realities and real-world considerations. I had this same debate many times over at INFP-GC, and it gets old fast.
    I see this as a statement of the obvious. Of course we all know this; we all live in the real world and make accommodation to it every day.

    However, when the collective viewpoints of Fi users synch up, it becomes more than just isolated subjective information, do you not agree?

    Or are you saying that every Fi participant is so subjective that any collective opinions they bear have no relevance to the group as a whole?

    Curious to know your thoughts, for if that is so, we must toss your opinion in the waste bin as well.
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt


    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  4. #114
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    Meantime, when the non-Fi-users in this thread raise objective real-world (Te/Fe) limitations and objections, you say that you have been living according to those rules for a lifetime, you're tired of living according to those real-world restrictions, and that you want the real world to accommodate your Fi instead.
    And to clarify, actually no, I don't expect this. BUT I expect a forum about typology to accommodate my Fi from time to time. Here I get to be Fi, don't I? (16 types, we're all important and special?) Especially in a thread about Fi, where I was having such a nice nit-picky conversation with other lovely Fi users about it.

    -----

    If someone doesn't want to read my Fi nit-picking, they are free to put me on ignore or go elsewhere instead of making fun of it. And apparently 50% of all Fi users agree. Add to the discussion or go elsewhere.
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt


    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  5. #115
    Uniqueorn William K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    986

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    And to clarify, actually no, I don't expect this. BUT I expect a forum about typology to accommodate my Fi from time to time. Here I get to be Fi, don't I? (16 types, we're all important and special?) Especially in a thread about Fi, where I was having such a nice nit-picky conversation with other lovely Fi users about it.
    Yeah, this is a major source of frustration. I expect my colleagues to look at me as if I have grown another head if I go full Fi-mode, but that is the reason to haunt this forum no? If we can't lower at least a part of our inhibitions to discuss things and act freely here, where else is left for us to be ourselves but in our heads?
    4w5, Fi>Ne>Ti>Si>Ni>Fe>Te>Se, sp > so > sx

    appreciates being appreciated, conflicted over conflicts, afraid of being afraid, bad at being bad, predictably unpredictable, consistently inconsistent, remarkably unremarkable...

    I may not agree with what you are feeling, but I will defend to death your right to have a good cry over it

    The whole problem with the world is that fools & fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts. ~ Bertrand Russell

  6. #116
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    270

    Default

    To all the Fi users who don't feel safe talking about Fi, gain comfort in this: with Fe, I always have the fear of people calling my Fe shallow and fake or getting insanely jealous of my Fe. I feel more safe talking about Ni.

  7. #117
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    3,278

    Default

    Obviously it's not safe for non Fi Doms and Aux's to speak their mind
    Last edited by Arclight; 11-26-2010 at 02:50 PM. Reason: modded

  8. #118
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Keps Mnemnosyne View Post
    This is an assumption, that only FiPe users are adjusting or adjusting more. It could easily be argued back and forth.
    It's not an assumption.....it's an observation. It's not the same in reverse. This is why: Fe is more about consensus in these cases, and Fi is about integrity (I'm not saying these are mutually exclusive; I'm talking about what is dominant in motive in such situations). That makes Fe types operate from the standpoint that anything out of line with their Fe consensus is a threat. Fe types seek to maintain their consensus - a form of integrity really - hence, requiring others to accommodate it & adapt to it; so yes, they adapt, but it's still on their terms. 99% of the time Fi types do this on their, Fe, terms also, but not when it's a threat to integrity. Then we'll point out the elephant in the room, the naked emperor, and begin a process to explore what the truth really is.

    Even in this thread, the Fe types seem to assert that consensus = truth. It doesn't matter if a gazillion people agree on something, that does not make it true. PB clearly set up a poll to appeal to this need for consensus Fe types have. I am convinced that what was most threatening in that quick guide Fi thread was that a Fi consensus was forming, one that asked to be acknowledged. After initial questioning of the integrity of the author and a comparison to the other F function, the discussion was mostly about how Fi as a process works, and as the Fi types began to put together a picture they agreed on, the NTs were simply antagonistic.

    To me, this suggests good points were being made, truth was being hit on, & the crux of the issue had emerged (that the OP failed to describe Fi as a process). However, it was easier to invalidate the FPs than to address their arguments, and the chief means of dismissal was, "we didn't like the attitude you started off with". There was no effort to accommodate another communication style....

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallulah View Post
    I have to back Mac and fidelia up on that. I'd say Fi can/often does come off as self-absorbed and/or unnecessarily disruptive to Fe users.
    Eh, and Fe can seem the same from another perspective; although I see this as stemming more from inferior & tertiary Fe users, who have a poor guage in these situations. One only has to witness the pedantic squabbles of INTPc - oh the double standard; it's like INFPs complaining about inefficiency (inferior Te).

    It is also selfish to demand others to constantly adapt to the group style with no give in return, especially when a large chunk of the group participating prefers another style. It is unnecessarily disruptive to conveniently ignore thoughtful posts to harp on one or two that you've arbitrarily deemed invalid based on type bias & willful misunderstanding of its points. That disrupts an otherwise productive discussion that others find stimulating. That was the case with the thread in question, concerning the conduct of the NTs in particular.

    I would also like to note that in the recent, long Ni thread, the majority of the non NJ types taking great interest in the discussion were FPs. The same method of exploration was applied towards something not "personal" to us, but I suppose since we were mainly dealing with INTJs & their tert Fi, it was not misinterpreted. So much for "self-absorption".

    Quote Originally Posted by FineLine View Post
    But in fact our emoting and fussing and complaining is like fingernails on a chalkboard to many other types. And as much as NTs (for example) say that they aren't affected by emotions, they still get plenty irritated if they have to listen to big doses of it.
    It's nails on a chalkboard to me to hear a poor definition of something touted as unquestionable truth to those who dare to explore alternatives. It's nails on a chalkboard when said description has emotional overtones that suggest a lack of integrity on the part of the author. It's nails on a chalkboard when a similar emotional overtone comes through in posters who do little more than mock valid attempts to explore those alternatives.

    To put it simply: our emotionality and lack of boundaries have the ability to superheat a thread. And after we've trashed and tangled up a thread with our complaining and emoting, frankly it sounds fake when we sit around and play the victim afterwards.
    I'm seeing Fe victimhood. "Things were so peaceful until Fi types disrupted it by questioning a supposed authority" - yeah right. The questioning started with trepidation & slight suspicions, but then quickly cut to the core of the matter, until the NT posters attempted & apparently succeeded at undermining it. Now they're pretending they were the sufferers of some Fi outburst. No one is ever blameless in these situations, but that does not change the fact that the other types handled themselves very poorly also, and they exacerbated a small thing into something larger than it needed to be, and the ones who actually tried to put the thread back on track were the FPs. An effort to accommodate another communication style could have prevented all of that.


    Quote Originally Posted by JocktheMotie View Post
    I can certainly understand disagreeing with a functional description, as Lenore's Ti description is, in my mind, awful, so there's understanding there. What I found to be absurd was how concerned a lot of the Fi users were regarding the Fe thread. If you want to talk about Fi, and dissect Fi, "in a Fi way," then why bother with Fe at all? To me, the concept of Fe sounding "too good" or not having any kind of balance in the description is such a ridiculous thing to be concerned about, so it appears petty and whiny. Like Fe was somehow drinking Fi's milkshake. Fi didn’t seem to be concerned with just Fi, Fe needed to be dragged through the mud too, for things to be “fair.” Laughable. Then for some posters to paint the Fi description as the result of some kind of Fe agenda, and be surprised when it's perceived as the expression of a victim complex, well...the hilarity continues, from my point of view.

    Naturally, there's going to be a good amount of overlap when you compare F functions, a lot of the times, output will look identical and the only difference is the direction of the process and where that process originates from. Same with Ni and Ne, how many times do each N dom/user maintain they can do both? I thought it'd be interesting to see the process broken down by some of the users since they thought the original description was lacking, but alas, it was one big pity party and became tedious for me.
    No, the bolded is exactly what was being attempted to discuss. You simply chose to dismiss it because it was not done to your personal liking.

    As I said above: After the initial questioning of the integrity of the author and a comparison to the other F function (valid positions to start from; the motivations of the author are fair game, as are comparing the tones of the other descriptions to verify the author's potential bias), the discussion was mostly about how Fi as a process works, and as the Fi types began to put together a picture they agreed on, the NTs were simply antagonistic.

    I see a lot of people discuss Fi, as NOT separate from themselves. The way I see Fi is that it’s not your feelings, it's not your values...it's how you process and work with those values. I think this causes a lot of disconnect, since Fi does work with feelings and impressions, which are inherently personal. So maybe it does feel close to home.

    What I’ve noticed with Fi descriptions, as that because Fi has such a large range of how one can personally identify with it, the description has to be pretty general to try to get everybody in. But because of the generality, Fi sees the description as incomplete and lacking both precision and depth of their own intricate self understanding. It’s the downfall of personal, subjectively operating decision making function. It’s going to be so unique to you, that any general overview is always going to be missing, so you need to fill in the blanks.
    The entire crux of the FPs' complaints of the Fi quick guide description was that it did not describe a general process, but was focused on too specific, personal values. What you're arguing here is what the FPs were arguing. If you hadn't dismissed it because you did not like the communication style, you might have actually gotten the point. And that is the point of this thread.
    Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

    INFP | 4w5 sp/sx | RLUEI - Primary Inquisitive | Tritype is tripe

  9. #119
    Professional Trickster Esoteric Wench's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    950

    Default

    ^^^ Epic post OrangeAppled. Loved it.
    ENFP with kick*ss Te | 7w8 so | ♀

  10. #120
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FineLine View Post
    Sure, the Fi viewpoint has something to offer the world; it's a source of useful primary data. It's the viewpoint of the first-hand participant or the empathetic observer. But at some point the personalized and subjective viewpoint has to be synched up in some fashion with the objective viewpoint as well. We share the world with other people; it can't just be about us sitting around and insisting on our Fi personal values.
    ^^^ This.

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    It's not an assumption.....it's an observation. It's not the same in reverse. This is why: Fe is more about consensus in these cases, and Fi is about integrity (I'm not saying these are mutually exclusive; I'm talking about what is dominant in motive in such situations). That makes Fe types operate from the standpoint that anything out of line with their Fe consensus is a threat. Fe types seek to maintain their consensus - a form of integrity really - hence, requiring others to accommodate it & adapt to it; so yes, they adapt, but it's still on their terms. 99% of the time Fi types do this on their, Fe, terms also, but not when it's a threat to integrity. Then we'll point out the elephant in the room, the naked emperor, and begin a process to explore what the truth really is.
    @bold: Wow! Nicely said.

    Even in this thread, the Fe types seem to assert that consensus = truth. It doesn't matter if a gazillion people agree on something, that does not make it true.
    Interesting. I didn't read that in any of the "Fe" statements.

    I did note a few accusations of "hypocrisy" which is a typical of the Ti/Fe mode of communication: lack of logical self-consistency (whether real or imagined) is reason enough to question others' assertions. What I think is missed is that Fi "hypocrisy" is not of similar value to Fi ... or rather that the analogous Fi(Te) notion is "lack of integrity," not "hypocrisy." That when Fi says, "Hey, wait, there's something wrong here," it doesn't mean "logically wrong," but rather wwwrrroooooonnnng.

    PB clearly set up a poll to appeal to this need for consensus Fe types have. I am convinced that what was most threatening in that quick guide Fi thread was that a Fi consensus was forming, one that asked to be acknowledged. After initial questioning of the integrity of the author and a comparison to the other F function, the discussion was mostly about how Fi as a process works, and as the Fi types began to put together a picture they agreed on, the NTs were simply antagonistic.
    *ahem* "NTs" you say?

    To me, this suggests good points were being made, truth was being hit on, & the crux of the issue had emerged (that the OP failed to describe Fi as a process). However, it was easier to invalidate the FPs than to address their arguments, and the chief means of dismissal was, "we didn't like the attitude you started off with". There was no effort to accommodate another communication style....
    Agreed.

    This might explain how the INTJ approach doesn't seem to run into the same crash and burn as the NFP approach.

    INTJ: You're wrong. <explains in detail why you're wrong>
    non-INTJ: We don't like your attitude.
    INTJ: Um, you're still wrong.
    non-INTJ: You're so f-cking arrogant and you don't even know it.
    INTJ: Uh huh. You're still wrong.
    non-INTJ: Well, you might have a point, but you're still arrogant.
    INTJ: Well, if by "arrogant" you mean that I always seem to be right, I must agree.

    versus

    NFP: There's something wrong here.
    non-NFP: What are you complaining about now?
    NFP: This isn't right.
    non-NFP: It's perfectly fine.
    NFP: What do you mean it's perfectly fine? I just explained what was wrong with it.
    non-NFP: There you go getting all emotional and sensitive again.
    NFP: <now upset> I am NOT getting emotional! And it's unfair of you to change the topic like that!
    non-NFP: You're proving my point for me.
    NFP: Arrrrgggghhhh!

    [The above is not meant to be insulting to INTJs or NFPs or non-INTJs or non-NFPs, but is intended solely as tongue-in-cheek humor to demonstrate a point.]

    I believe this is where FineLine has made a very meaningful distinction. It is well and good to point out the emperor has no clothes, but at some point Fi needs to have a bit more of an iron will and not buckle in to intimidation or be distracted by jabs and taunts. Every post that says no more than "Stop being so mean!" ends up saying/meaning/implying/communicating A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT MESSAGE THAN YOU INTEND!!!!! The intended message is "the emperor has no clothes" not "you're mean."

    The way to get others to "accommodate another communication style ..." is to stick to your main message, ignoring distractions. The communication style to emphasize is pointing out those things that Fi is so good and understanding and pointing out.

    The kind of things Fi points out are big. They have to be pretty darn big in the first place to get meek Fi to speak up at all. They're so big in fact, that a lot of people don't want to hear them in the first place. This is why I like the "emperor has no clothes" metaphor: the whole point of the story is that a LOT of people had a vested interest in ignoring that truth. Those people will not simply just say, "Oh darn, the jig is up," and throw in the towel. No, they're going to fight and disagree and say all sorts of mean things.

    Those arguing from an Fi perspective say that they're fighting for their integrity, and I believe that is an accurate statement. Note, however, that people saying mean things is no threat to anyone's integrity! It is the denial of the truth that is the threat to integrity. So if you're going to take a stand for truth, fight for the truth. Don't fight for your ego. Don't fight for your bruised feelings. To "defend" against such "attacks" is a disservice to your integrity.

    This is one of the hardest Fi-lessons to learn.

    [A brief aside ... There is a reason I use hands-holding-the-sun as a metaphor for Fi in my own experience. There is a kind of light, a kind of warmth, a kind of truthiness emulated by the sun. Nothing dims its light. It might be night, but that's just cuz the sun is lighting up someplace else. Clouds might hide the sun momentarily, but even so, the sun's light penetrates, makes them glow: heck, it makes the silver lining, too! The sun has been shining for 5 billion years, and it's got another 5 billion or so to go. Every evening we go to sleep fully confident that the sun will rise in the morning. We know it's absurd to issue it orders to move at the whim of a king or a legislature. What better model for integrity? What better model for staying true to oneself?]


    I would also like to note that in the recent, long Ni thread, the majority of the non NJ types taking great interest in the discussion were FPs. The same method of exploration was applied towards something not "personal" to us, but I suppose since we were mainly dealing with INTJs & their tert Fi, it was not misinterpreted. So much for "self-absorption".
    Agreed.

    It's nails on a chalkboard to me to hear a poor definition of something touted as unquestionable truth to those who dare to explore alternatives. It's nails on a chalkboard when said description has emotional overtones that suggest a lack of integrity on the part of the author. It's nails on a chalkboard when a similar emotional overtone comes through in posters who do little more than mock valid attempts to explore those alternatives.
    Perhaps this is why the Fi-objections get characterized as "whining." The "reason" that is heard for it being wrong is the emotional tone of the objection when the real reason is, "it's wrong."

    The entire crux of the FPs' complaints of the Fi quick guide description was that it did not describe a general process, but was focused on too specific, personal values. What you're arguing here is what the FPs were arguing. If you hadn't dismissed it because you did not like the communication style, you might have actually gotten the point. And that is the point of this thread.
    Agreed.

Similar Threads

  1. [INFP] INFPs, how much do you feel similars with ESFPs?
    By Speed Gavroche in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-14-2016, 03:27 AM
  2. [ENFP] ENFPs: Do you ever feel like this under pressure or stress?
    By SingSmileShine in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-05-2013, 04:56 PM
  3. [ENFP] ENFPs - Do you feel the need to constantly (and suddenly) move?
    By Malkavia in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 07-05-2013, 12:52 PM
  4. [ENFP] ENFPs, do you ever feel more like SPs or NTs than NFs?
    By Elfboy in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 11-14-2011, 10:19 PM
  5. [INFP] INFPs, Do You Feel Workaday Norms Interfere with Flow?
    By SquirrelTao in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 06-24-2008, 03:29 AM

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