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 3111213141523 Last

Results 121 to 130 of 368

  1. #121
    Senior Member sculpting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MacGuffin View Post
    In short, the Fi-users conflated a few incidents to a widespread attack, and non-Fi-users (let's see if I can add another hyphen) threw out the baby with the bathwater by combining legitimate complaints with some overly dramatic whinging and dismissing it all.

    I agree, but I'd be hesitant to label oneself a "victim" to claim moral high ground. Real victimization is rare on the internet (just log out, no one is forcing you to participate). If you view every major clash or disagreement in this light, eventually no one will take you seriously and just see you as a drama queen.
    There is something bizarre that happens when an Fe user tries to give feedback to an Fi user. It appears as though we totally miss all the subtle hints being tossed out, then when finally the message becomes more overt and direct-we way over react. Typically when the message is delivered it is like this (sorry not picking on you MacGuffin ) :

    Quote Originally Posted by MacGuffin View Post
    Just know I'm not the only one that sees them in that way.
    Since Fi users primarily interact 1:1, when we get this sort of message above....we may promptly extrapolate that to the entire group. Because most of us are Fe-Blind, (not the learned social nicieties, but the ability to innately pick up on group mood), we cant seem to understand if it is just macGuffin saying we are being bad but bluffing about the others, if it is MacGuffin and three friends he chatted with in PM, or if it is MacGuffin and the other 1300 members of typology central.

    In a thread if we start to see multiple people-say 3 to 5-attacking the same point, I suspect we start to assume it is a much larger group. It feels like you have been turned into a target for attack-like you are being singled out. ENFPs in particular are notorious for paranoia about what others think of us and assuming the worst, so to remain functional human beings, at some point we learn to just ignore the Ne negative feedback that is subtle in nature. I cant properly interpret it or trust the interpretations thus it is disregarded as it would make me a fucking basket case to do otherwise. I realize some people hate me as a result and I regret this, but I dont really have an alternate path.

    I have tried a few times to suggest that if you really feel direct feedback needs to be given, and the person seems oblivious, to leave them a rep or send a PM to try and alleviate the potential for confusion and minimize escalation of these sorts of issues. The Fe response was that "It should be obvious and is a natural part of social interactions, and we shouldnt have to tell people when they are disturbing a social group." This frustrated me at the time, but in retrospect I recognized it was just Fe being projected onto others-ie the assumption we can all use Fe as well as that individual can.

    The NFJ discussion style makes this even worse as NiFeTi assumes the idea is the person. So when they question the idea-they actually begin questioning the person ...how they arent really a valid originator of ideas, thus need to go work on themselves some more. I bet, when this is applied to an NTP, the NTP STFU very quickly as he has been publically censured. But to an NFP-you are attacking Fi at that point, so instead of a shameful retreat, you get Te bitchslapped at least until the NFP has a total emo breakdown because you have told them everything they hold sacred and that is self defining is horribly flawed. The feelings this evokes can be nightmarishly painful-thus the feeling of being attacked.

    At the worst, you just told them the entire social group finds their Fi values to be flawed-thus they are too broken to be a part of that social group anymore. In real life this evokes suicidal tendencies. Thus the NFP message board suicides.

    I suspect it has something to do with how one Fi user gives another negative feedback-one on one, directly, but gently or through gentle ignoring until the other person behaves-subtle looks and gestures. Fe seems to instead prefer a gentle rebuke in a group setting through phrases intended to induce slight shame at one's innappropriate behavior-or innappropriate sharing of ideas. Which Fi totally misinterprets.

    We each insist that others must be held to the standards of our judging functions and regard alternate perspectives/judging worldviews as flawed rather than insightfully different. We also insist upon projecting our internal worldviews onto others as mandatory, without every understanding we are doing so.

    (Again, sorry MacGuffin, I find you to be very thoughtful and reasonable so I dont mean to poke at you at all, your comment above was a useful starting point. Also the NFJs here are actually a really awesome group as well. )

    (toddler inserted) (toddler inserted) (toddler inserted)

  2. #122
    Senior Member sculpting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    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.
    I think the hard part of this is that NFPs have Ne on the top side, not Ni. We are designed to incorporate external emotional feedback a lot for Ne doms or a little for Ne auxs. We cannot help but hear those external emotional messages as a result-something INTJs are almost immune to. I suspect this is important in where and when we choose to externalize Fi values and is an important part of being an NFP.

    If we do pick a cause which is important enough to stand up for-to pull out the Te walls of steel and fortitude-if we are given feedback by the masses that our cause is totally unreasonable-well I suppose that is an important thing to know....if we didnt take that feedback in we would end up with terrorist or PETA mindsets. We are designed to take in external feedback, unlike an INTJ.

    I think maybe here-the Fi users are MUCH MUCH more open than in real life. Thus you see all the little causes as well as the big causes??

    Also Ti sees Fi as insanely nonsensical thus reads "whining" or "stupid" because it cant always understand the Fi arguments-Ti is actually the, ummmm, stupid one in these cases and responds with the Ti version of "you are being mean" which goes something like "you are being illogical". It's kind of funny oddly.


  3. #123
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    xkcd
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Socionics
    INT_
    Posts
    10,733

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orobas View Post
    There is something bizarre that happens when an Fe user tries to give feedback to an Fi user. It appears as though we totally miss all the subtle hints being tossed out, then when finally the message becomes more overt and direct-we way over react. Typically when the message is delivered it is like this (sorry not picking on you MacGuffin )
    If you can believe it, I edited it several times to be less harsh than my first draft.

  4. #124
    Vaguely Precise Seymour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/so
    Posts
    1,565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    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.
    Fi hones in on inconsistencies in values, connotations and aesthetics. It can be a relatively small inconsistency (like noticing the connotation of a particular word choice is off) or a big, ethetical one.

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    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 don't think it's offensive at all and it does explain a big challenge for Fi, in particular. Te and Ti are logically based, and so can be more easily communicated and separated from their context. You can validate them externally. Fe has a external social framework it uses for validation. Fi lacks any of that, and can be very difficult to articulate. Most of us are forced, by training and necessity, to learn to turn "something feels off here" into a "(semi)-detailed (perhaps metaphor laden) explanation of why things are wrong." But again, we are continually translating out of our native tongue to do so, and some of us are better at it than others.

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    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.
    In the real world that things that make Fi become externally uncompromising are big, I agree. One of the attractions of a forum for some of us is that it provides a venue where we can share some of our normally less visible style and process with others. Trying to figure out what Fi is internally is a difficult process for NFPs, because it's normally not very visible to others, even other NFP-ers.

    Sharing the personal, subjective experience is the only way to make it visible. Sadly, that gets interpreted as self-absorbed ("It's not all about your subjective experience, bucko!") or whiny ("Why do you keep talking about your emotional response to things? My 7 year-old knows better!").

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    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.
    I agree that saying mean things is not an attack on integrity. Instead, it's an attack on the integrity of our process. While emotions aren't Fi, they are valuable input to Fi decision making. If someone attacks, they muddy the very sensitivity we use to hone in on what's out of balance. We are then forced to shift gears, deal with whatever emotional response their attack engendered, and only then can we recalibrate and return to the original problem.

    It's as though there's someone deliberately singing out of key during a choir practice. Yes, you can try to ignore them and keep singing ("no one is stopping you from singing, after all"), but the chances of actually getting anything worthwhile done drops to near zero.

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    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 emotional tone created is part of why it's not just ignorable. It's disruptive and stops real communication and the sense of a shared Fi process (something relatively rare for us).

  5. #125
    Plumage and Moult proteanmix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Enneagram
    1w2
    Posts
    5,514

    Default

    Ahh, vanity search. I see my name popped up!

    It's a lot of stuff to address here and I don't really have the energy to do so, but this whole "the emperor wears no clothes" metaphor comes across as disingenuous. To me (I speak for no group) it's implying that Fi holds some kind of truth that no one else recognizes or is so dangerous that it must be suppressed and squelched. Does that not seem over the top and stretching it a bit or is it me?

    A phrase that's been tossed around in this thread is "my radar has gone off and I must investigate." So be it. I also think when "radar" goes off part of investigating it is checking to see if it's even functioning correctly. I'm not trying to piss anyone off, but I'm going to say this plainly: checking with others who are likely to share your perspective isn't a very thorough, reliable, or trustworthy way of checking.

    If I may continue with the radar metaphor, wiki says there are these things called limiting factors that can decrease the accuracy of the radar. It seems to me that FineLine (as a Fi user) and non-Fi's are addressing these limiting factors and it's being portrayed as trying to hide the truth, suppressing NFPs from speaking freely or not having a safe place to speak.

    I see little acknowledgment of Fi limiting factors going on here. Frankly, I see people trying to make themselves the underdog and victimized, that anything they say is quickly suppressed and they're a few steps away from being locked in a cellar. Dollar for dollar, Fi is the most discussed function on this forum, second only to either of the intuition functions, which everyone knows are the Holy Grails. These are just a few I grabbed:

    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...ou-got-61.html
    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...ms-subs-5.html
    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...bonding-6.html
    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...tage-fi-4.html
    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...-analysis.html
    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...ride-doom.html
    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...affled-fi.html
    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...349&highlight=
    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...772&highlight=
    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...013&highlight=

    I challenge people to find the same amount of threads where Fe is discussed in isolation of another function to plumb its depths (Fe has depths? Er?). Fe doesn't even usually get a thread solely dedicated to itself unless it's negative (manipulative, conformist, EVIL) or another Fe vs. Fi feeding frenzy.

    Now time for some numbers. I'd like to point out that if NFPs (is this extended to SFPs and TJs?) feel like they're a oppressed minority on the forum, why don't you check your numbers? There are 1738 members on this forum who identify as NFP, compared to NFJ 1064, and SFJ 126. The largest source of Fe is from NTPs at 1608. I searched this through the member list and it only takes into account people who list their type. To me it seems like NFPs represent the largest single typological clump on the forum. And this isn't even the first time this has come up, this is the latest in a history of threads that claim Fi is the little wimpy kid getting pushed of the swing and pounded in the dirt by the mean ol Fe bully.

    How is your "voice" repressed? You certainly have the majority even if you don't use it. It seems to me that NFPs have very much taken advantage of having the mic, over and over again. Which is fine, no one is stopping you that's what makes the forum active and communal. Just please don't do the whole unsafe, victim thing. I definitely agree with orobas that your message is weakened when you come at it from this angle. And it's not even a matter of it being true, and no one being receptive to it and shut it down. I frankly don't see adequate foundation for the premise. I speak for myself and not any group.

    If NFPs don't feel "safe" on this forum is it necessarily a problem with the forum or it a problem more central to yourself...that you don't feel comfortable not that some outside force is making you feel uncomfortable. Then I'd ask if others also felt uncomfortable to see if there are any similarities. But once again, I realize that's my Fe talking; figuring out is it just me or am I the only one is a big deal to me...I don't view my feelings as automatically justified and valid without seeking some external confirmation.

    Regarding the Fe Quick Reference Guide, go back and check. Within the first 10 posts of the thread, there were Fi users complaining about the Fi Quick Reference in the Fe thread. Keep your complaints about your Quick Reference in your Quick Reference. Why contaminate two threads? Yes that is my Fe talking, it looks it was necessary to ruin someone's else because you didn't like yours. I looked again at the Fi QR and it wasn't Fe users in there complaining about the Fe QR, which is the parallel.

    I did wonder why the Fi QR soured, fermented, and exploded so quickly, when the other QR's came and went without much fanfare. The question that comes to me is why were the others so neutrally received and commented on, while the Fi QR was totally wrong, nothing was right about it, completely off-base and unrepresentative of Fi. If the author was accurate enough to get the others right, why was the Fi one so wrong? Certainly, they would have gotten some of the others wrong as well? There did seem to me to be a Princess and the Pea/Goldilocks situation going on that it was never going to be right no matter what.

    These are really all the comments and observations I have, so don't feel slighted or like I'm ignoring anyone if I don't respond if someone directly addresses me.
    Relationships have normal ebbs and flows. They do not automatically get better and better when the participants learn more and more about each other. Instead, the participants have to work through the tensions of the relationship (the dialectic) while they learn and group themselves and a parties in a relationships. At times the relationships is very open and sharing. Other time, one or both parties to the relationship need their space, or have other concerns, and the relationship is less open. The theory posits that these cycles occur throughout the life of the relationship as the persons try to balance their needs for privacy and open relationship.
    Interpersonal Communication Theories and Concepts
    Social Penetration Theory 1
    Social Penetration Theory 2
    Social Penetration Theory 3

  6. #126
    Senior Member Adasta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    394

    Default

    This forum has a pernicious tendency towards inane conflict.

    proteanmix, I don't really understand why the number of Fi users here has any bearing people's feelings regarding the expression of Fi. It's not a battle, which is what you seem to be saying, but then undermine your argument by saying:

    Fe doesn't even usually get a thread solely dedicated to itself unless it's negative
    What of it? Is Fe now the one victimised? So now Fi is "bad"? The answer is that it doesn't really matter at all. This argument/situation strikes me as very petty from both sides. We're not (or, at least, I'm not) attempting to laud Fi over Fe, or denigrate Fe, or Te, or anything else. I'm just talking about things in these threads. There really is no need, ever, to become haughty or angry or upset in these threads. It's just a forum after all.

    This place isn't a playground, yet there seems to be a lot of egos on show, from all sides.
    That girls are raped, that two boys knife a third,
    Were axioms to him, who'd never heard
    Of any world where promises were kept,
    Or one could weep because another wept.

  7. #127
    He who laughs
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    1,327

    Default

    one point: infpgc


    /end thread

    EDIT: I really like xnfps, but you need to stop idealizing Fi so much

  8. #128
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orobas View Post
    I think the hard part of this is that NFPs have Ne on the top side, not Ni. We are designed to incorporate external emotional feedback a lot for Ne doms or a little for Ne auxs. We cannot help but hear those external emotional messages as a result-something INTJs are almost immune to. I suspect this is important in where and when we choose to externalize Fi values and is an important part of being an NFP.
    I think the bolded observation is quite apt.

    I feel the same frustration with lack of validation as the Ne+Fi people do. I listen to others value-laden observations and take them to heart, thinking that they couldn't have said anything so harsh as they did and not really mean it, and not really see/understand something I'm missing. Keep in mind, this routes to my Fi, which has that very same, similar approach/feeling as it does for NFPs. The hurt feeling is just as "loud."

    But in my case, with Ni instead of Ne, and especially because Ni is dominant, it just bounces around inside me. I feel a very strong dischord, but I do not express that discord. This is very similar to just Ni+Te, except Fi is strongly involved, too.

    In the plain Ni+Te case, when I don't understand something, I sit back and observe and assimilate and let the ideas bounce around in my head. Eventually, the ideas "settle," and because I let them settle of their own accord (an Ni sort of thing to do), I know I have things figured out correctly, and then I can express them. The certainty/arrogance with which I express those ideas is largely derived from this kind of "internal, subjective validation." Ni "just knows" that the ideas are valid.

    In the Ni+Te+Fi case, there is a lot more turmoil, a lot more "bouncing around," but it still isn't extrovertedly expressed. When it settles, I "just know" that I have it figured out. Note that it isn't just the Ni piece that settles. Fi has to settle within me, too. Then, when I express myself, I've "counted to ten," so to speak. All the nonsense that was in the message sent to me (whether intentional or inadvertent, it doesn't matter and I don't care which) has been filtered out, and I am no longer distressed by the dischord that was initially invoked.

    For the Fi+Ne case, there is no "count to ten" period. The invoked response is immediately extroverted, without any waiting period or time to settle and filter out nonsense. Or rather, the nonsense has been detected, and that's what the Fi reaction means, but its expression is "Ne": Ne is wired into the people and the world around, and the signals go both ways.

    Note that Ti+Ne has the same thing going on, as Oro noted, it's just that expressing annoyance at others' illogic doesn't gain the same kind of rebuke as expressing annoyance at others' insensitivity. Similarly, "you're being too logical about this" doesn't have the same sting as "you're being too sensitive about this".

    I wonder how Se instead of Ne, for SFPs, changes things. Might this be an Ne issue more than an Fi issue? Is Se+Fi more likely to give a context that others readily understand, and thus avoids the projection of "being oversensitive?" I'd be interested in SFP input, here.


    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    I don't think it's offensive at all and it does explain a big challenge for Fi, in particular. Te and Ti are logically based, and so can be more easily communicated and separated from their context. You can validate them externally. Fe has a external social framework it uses for validation. Fi lacks any of that, and can be very difficult to articulate. Most of us are forced, by training and necessity, to learn to turn "something feels off here" into a "(semi)-detailed (perhaps metaphor laden) explanation of why things are wrong." But again, we are continually translating out of our native tongue to do so, and some of us are better at it than others.
    I hear you ... but I'm continually translating out of my Ni tongue, too. Just read the INxJ posters who haven't quite differentiated a strong Te or Fe to give their remarks context. The main difference is the "pure Ni" comes out has harmless babble or weird crazy talk, that sort of sounds like it means something meaningful, if only one could figure out the context. "Pure Fi" on the other hand comes out as emo-sensitive talk, similarly lacking context, except others project their own context (that it's whiny, for example).

    In the real world that things that make Fi become externally uncompromising are big, I agree. One of the attractions of a forum for some of us is that it provides a venue where we can share some of our normally less visible style and process with others. Trying to figure out what Fi is internally is a difficult process for NFPs, because it's normally not very visible to others, even other NFP-ers.
    I get this: note my remarks about letting it bounce around inside me for a while.

    Sharing the personal, subjective experience is the only way to make it visible. Sadly, that gets interpreted as self-absorbed ("It's not all about your subjective experience, bucko!") or whiny ("Why do you keep talking about your emotional response to things? My 7 year-old knows better!").
    Yep. This is the projection of others' context onto the "pure Fi".

    I agree that saying mean things is not an attack on integrity. Instead, it's an attack on the integrity of our process. While emotions aren't Fi, they are valuable input to Fi decision making. If someone attacks, they muddy the very sensitivity we use to hone in on what's out of balance. We are then forced to shift gears, deal with whatever emotional response their attack engendered, and only then can we recalibrate and return to the original problem.
    @bolded: I find that I must disagree. The next step is to intuitively equate the "integrity of our process" with "our integrity," which leaves us back at square one.

    Let me take a step back and state a more general rule:
    Quibbling over the terms of debate (e.g., in this case, complaining that someone is being whiny, instead of attempting to understand the full message) is a common means of obfuscating the debate. The counter is to resist the temptation to enter this "meta-discussion" about how communication "should" occur, but to stick to one's original topic.

    I think Oro's point about Ne is apt, here. Ne seems more likely to get drawn into tangential topics, at which point it is almost too late for Fi to object and bring the focus back to the main topic.

    It's as though there's someone deliberately singing out of key during a choir practice. Yes, you can try to ignore them and keep singing ("no one is stopping you from singing, after all"), but the chances of actually getting anything worthwhile done drops to near zero.

    The emotional tone created is part of why it's not just ignorable. It's disruptive and stops real communication and the sense of a shared Fi process (something relatively rare for us).
    I would agree with you up to a point. This is an internet forum. It isn't like someone is singing off key in real time. We have every chance to just get up and walk away from the computer screen. We don't have to immediately submit a post expressing our outrage or dismay. In real life, we have maybe a few seconds to think about what we say, but here, we have, in theory, hours, if not days. Yes, the emotional tone is jarring, but it isn't as compulsory, is it?

    Given the time to think, why is it still so tempting to reply with, "Why are you attacking me?" We have seen thread after thread disintegrate the moment we go down this path, yet the temptation persists? Is the lesson never learned?

    OrangeAppled noted an uncommon stability in my thread about Fi from a while back:
    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    I noticed that when an INTJ made a Fi thread some time ago, the discussion was validated by others, and the viewpoint from the INTJ was taken seriously (can't remember the poster name....sorry). That's frustrating. It's not that the thread was not interesting or not accurate, but it illustrates how Fi discussed by Fi-ers in a Fi way is invalidated by comparison. I wonder if we had "NT" under our avatars if our comments would be taken differently (I think so)*.


    *It's also interesting how that loooong Ni thread was explored in a similar vein, and no one got all pissy about it.
    I believe her observation that the "INTJ discussion of Fi" had a tone of respect that is often lacking in other Fi threads is apt. It is so very easy to dismiss it as having "NT" under one's avatars. But go look at that thread: it was not without it's accusations/attacks.

    In particular, Night was accusing PeaceBaby of being unfair to me. I addressed that issue by explicitly saying I wanted to hear her input, and no mod needed to come in and "prune" any "offending" posts.

    Sim chimed in with points about Fe. It could have devolved into an Fi/Fe debate. I PM'd him that he could start his own Fe thread, but that this discussion was about Fi.

    You see what I was doing? I wasn't responding to any perceived attacks in a defensive way. Rather, I stuck to my topic, namely Fi. In so doing, I think we can objectively read that thread and see that I perhaps created the very "safe space" that PB would like to see.

    "The discussion was validated by others," as OrangeAppled so aptly puts it. Why? Surely not just because there's an "NT" below my name.

    How do I know this?

    Because we're having the same kind of discussion here, in PB's thread.

    This thread doesn't lack the antagonistic elements, but PB has been systematically and respectfully addressing them, just as I did in my thread.

    In other words, it's doable. The lessons in communication can be learned and put into play.

  9. #129
    Vaguely Precise Seymour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/so
    Posts
    1,565

    Default

    Nice post, Uumlau!

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    For the Fi+Ne case, there is no "count to ten" period. The invoked response is immediately extroverted, without any waiting period or time to settle and filter out nonsense. Or rather, the nonsense has been detected, and that's what the Fi reaction means, but its expression is "Ne": Ne is wired into the people and the world around, and the signals go both ways.
    I do agree about the NTJs letting things bounce around a bit more. And, most of us NFPs learn not make the vast majority of our initial emotional response visible, and to analyze it until it can be expressed in ways that are palatable to other types. However, that means we are limited to our own evaluations, and what's visible externally isn't the thought process that led us to our conclusions.

    So that means a lot of our perceptions and "early warning cues" remain internal, and the value of those responses is lost unless we personally can reach a conclusion. When interacting with other Fi-ers, you can sometimes pool your individual Fi-based responses, and then analyze them to see if a pattern emerges. That's rare to find in real life, but something I value here.

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    Note that Ti+Ne has the same thing going on, as Oro noted, it's just that expressing annoyance at others' illogic doesn't gain the same kind of rebuke as expressing annoyance at others' insensitivity. Similarly, "you're being too logical about this" doesn't have the same sting as "you're being too sensitive about this".
    Good point. And I think it's true that annoyed logical critiques sometimes use words that NFPs wouldn't use unless they trying to hurt. That doesn't help the dynamic... since the causes of the responses on each side get misattributed, and then things cascade from there.

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    @bolded: I find that I must disagree. The next step is to intuitively equate the "integrity of our process" with "our integrity," which leaves us back at square one.
    Well, I actually waffled on word choice there. I tried "mechanism of our process," but the machine/technology connotations of "mechanism" seemed ridiculous to apply to Fi. Still, I agree that it does lead back to the original problem, so some other phrasing might have been better. Nonetheless, the problem of the disruption to process remains.

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    I would agree with you up to a point. This is an internet forum. It isn't like someone is singing off key in real time. We have every chance to just get up and walk away from the computer screen. We don't have to immediately submit a post expressing our outrage or dismay. In real life, we have maybe a few seconds to think about what we say, but here, we have, in theory, hours, if not days. Yes, the emotional tone is jarring, but it isn't as compulsory, is it?
    Actually, that's a big struggle for me (and I think many Fi-ers). In a way, our emotional reactions are compulsory to a certain degree. We can't avoid awareness of them. We can ignore them, but in doing so we lose our primary means of evaluating the world around us. I often become very irritated with myself that I just can't just let certain things slide off my back. Sometimes my emotional reactions are unreasonable (on some level), but I still have to deal with them, reasonable or not. Still, in those cases I try to minimize their impact on others. And, as we get older I think we gain a greater ability to influence and manage our emotional states, but it's never absolute.

    Personally, when I am irritated I try to avoid posting until I've cooled down and can analyze why I'm irritated more fully or can express my reasons in calmer terms.

    In some ways, that feels unfair, since it feels as though a logical critique can be delivered in highly emotional language and gets regarded as valid, but a Fi-based critique seems to need highly neutral language backed by some logical reasoning in order not to be dismissed. Perhaps that's just the way the world works (or even a misperception caused by my own bias), but does get a little subjectively tiresome at times.

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    You see what I was doing? I wasn't responding to any perceived attacks in a defensive way. Rather, I stuck to my topic, namely Fi. In so doing, I think we can objectively read that thread and see that I perhaps created the very "safe space" that PB would like to see.

    "The discussion was validated by others," as OrangeAppled so aptly puts it. Why? Surely not just because there's an "NT" below my name.

    How do I know this?

    Because we're having the same kind of discussion here, in PB's thread.

    This thread doesn't lack the antagonistic elements, but PB has been systematically and respectfully addressing them, just as I did in my thread.

    In other words, it's doable. The lessons in communication can be learned and put into play.
    I agree that it is doable, and it's something we should strive for. That kind of patient, measured, consistent management of the process seems like the kind of thing that Je is better at, typically. I think it's very much a learned skill for NFPs. (Although maybe I'm wrong, and just can't think up good examples to the contrary... other than PeaceBaby's thread management.) Still, it's something that can be learned.

  10. #130
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by proteanmix View Post
    It's a lot of stuff to address here and I don't really have the energy to do so, but this whole "the emperor wears no clothes" metaphor comes across as disingenuous. To me (I speak for no group) it's implying that Fi holds some kind of truth that no one else recognizes or is so dangerous that it must be suppressed and squelched. Does that not seem over the top and stretching it a bit or is it me?
    I find that this is a helpful observation.

    Note how a simple metaphor, intended to describe something from a particular point of view, immediately strikes you as "disingenuous." Instead of using the metaphor as a bridge to figure out what is being meant, and ironing out your own cognitive dissonance, you instead apply a judgment to the metaphor, dismissing it because you find it inapplicable.

    It is this very dismissal that gets Fi up in arms.

    I should note that I'm not saying "it's you" or blaming you or Fe or Fi or anyone for how these interactions go down. I'm saying "let's take a step back and see how the interaction plays out." Further, note that my prior posts don't let Fi "off the hook" for contributing to further misunderstanding. I'm making a strong effort not to pick sides.

    What I see playing out is that that kind of dismissal (and dismissal or devaluing is a common Fi point in these threads) essentially says, in Fi terms, "What you say doesn't count." Not "it doesn't make sense to me" or "I don't understand what you mean, could you be more clear" or even "perhaps that is a bit off the mark" but "You are wrong" and "Your ideas don't matter."

    This is not what the Fe side is saying at all, of course. It's that the Fe/Ti confusion over the Fi remarks tends to get expressed in ways that Fi can easily take personally.

    A phrase that's been tossed around in this thread is "my radar has gone off and I must investigate." So be it. I also think when "radar" goes off part of investigating it is checking to see if it's even functioning correctly.
    Right. You're analyzing the metaphor. You're double-checking. You're asking, "are we sure this is correct?" This is a valid approach.

    I'm not trying to piss anyone off, but I'm going to say this plainly: checking with others who are likely to share your perspective isn't a very thorough, reliable, or trustworthy way of checking.
    Except it's Fi-dar, not Fe-dar. We've got two brands of radar, here, that work very differently. This is one of Jung's primary points.

    It's an Fi-dar user who is double-checking that his/her Fi-dar is working correctly. Fe-dar expertise isn't merely "a different perspective" but a qualitatively different approach. Radar (Fe) and sonar (Fi) work on similar principles, but the sonar guys are using techniques that are very different from what the radar guys use. The radar guys see very specific dots on a screen, and (to push the analogy further) wonder why those dots aren't obvious to the sonar users. But the sonar users don't have dots on a screen, they have "pings" and "signatures." The "pings" are similar to the "dots", but the "signatures" are a completely different concept altogether, and contain information that is unavailable to radar. [E.g., different submarines/propellers/engines/ships sound different. See the movie "Red October" for a popular dramatization.] So Fi points out a "signature" and the Fe openly wonders what's up with that, because there is no such thing as a "signature" in radar, and thus questions whether Fi is reading things correctly at all.

    If I may continue with the radar metaphor, wiki says there are these things called limiting factors that can decrease the accuracy of the radar. It seems to me that FineLine (as a Fi user) and non-Fi's are addressing these limiting factors and it's being portrayed as trying to hide the truth, suppressing NFPs from speaking freely or not having a safe place to speak.
    Thus if I may continue with my radar/sonar metaphor, the sonar has different strengths and limiting factors that don't exist for radar. The "expertise" in one doesn't transfer to the other, though both rely upon seemingly similar techniques.

    I did wonder why the Fi QR soured, fermented, and exploded so quickly, when the other QR's came and went without much fanfare. The question that comes to me is why were the others so neutrally received and commented on, while the Fi QR was totally wrong, nothing was right about it, completely off-base and unrepresentative of Fi. If the author was accurate enough to get the others right, why was the Fi one so wrong? Certainly, they would have gotten some of the others wrong as well? There did seem to me to be a Princess and the Pea/Goldilocks situation going on that it was never going to be right no matter what.

    These are really all the comments and observations I have, so don't feel slighted or like I'm ignoring anyone if I don't respond if someone directly addresses me.
    It's definitely an odd phenomenon. I think looking at Ni vs Fi helps a bit. Ni is tough to describe/understand and most people with any understanding of Ni acknowledge that it's just a difficult topic to cover, and extend a degree of patience when covering it for that very reason.

    Fi is just as tough to describe/understand, with one major difference. Fi is emotionally loaded, where Ni is not. For whatever reason, Ni tends to accept being misunderstood with equanimity (though we find it endlessly frustrating), but Fi tends to more readily become upset by being misunderstood.

    This is why I compared the INTJ (NiFi) and NFP (NeFi) approaches, earlier. The hard lesson for Fi to learn is to accept being misunderstood as part of the process of communication. I believe "integrity" (as Fi/Te understands "integrity" in a very specific way) is the path for Fi to follow; that being misunderstood, no matter how painful, is not a violation of integrity. The "signature" of being misunderstood is a different signature than "integrity violation," but to many Fi people, especially those younger and more inexperienced, they have the same signature.

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