As for "not because the ideas are so precious and personal that we don't want them messed with," from what I've observed, it is that while there is a fear of looking stupid, the real value is a need to "be reasonable." That's where it gets personal. Other people being unreasonable or illogical or what have you, seems to be innately offensive to Ti, such that it is for all intents and purposes taken as a personal affront. (Not that it is felt as such, but it is shunned/rejected as such.)
That's what Fi is doing when other people are "being mean." Fi often tends to value tolerance, acceptance ... for lack of a better word, "niceness." So just the same way Ti gets riled and snippy when others are perceived as being unreasonable or illogical, Fi gets riled up when others are perceived as being mean, intolerant, etc.
My main point, in terms of the personal, is that it's almost instinctive, to the point that one wonders why it isn't obvious to others.
Yes, that's how Fi feels about Fe.Now, no one wants to look like an idiot, and INTPs in particular hate looking stupid. So there might be a bit of a personal element there, but I think in general, Ti likes to be given information that could make it better-informed. I think Te bugs Ti because we go, "How could you possibly know that for sure? How do you know you haven't missed something crucial?" Is this how Fi feels about Fe?
As much as Ti has spent a lot of time considering things, so has Fi, in its terms. Imagine, Ti-wise, having thought through something in extensive detail, and then this Te guy comes along, asserting a half-assed theory that sort of deals with your subject matter, but it's SO WRONG!!!! So many details and nuances are left out. He doesn't understand anything, and when you try to explain it, he goes off with a brand new half-assed theory that only demonstrates his ignorance. Now replace Ti with Fi, and Te with Fe. Same thing.
Keep in mind, I'm not insulting Fe, and I'm Te aux, so I'm used to being the one doing the offending in this regard. The key to realize is that the verbal expressions of those who emphasize extroverted judging only SOUND half-assed. There is an introverted perceiving function that has also analyzed and collated and so on, but the extroverted verbal communication would be crippled if one tried to explain "the whole truth, omitting nothing." Just as Ti understands that no one knows the whole truth, so does Te. It is the mode of communication and its underlying assumptions that differ. Te people fully understand that, too, we just speak about it differently.
Similarly, Fe doesn't mean one feels different emotions or assert substantially different truths, but rather than their mode of expression involves different underlying assumptions than the Fi mode.
I like this. You're saying essentially what I was saying, but with different emphasis. I emphasized that their expression is impersonal. Note that I mentioned the feelings are the same, where I said:Well, it's not that feelings are impersonal. It's that they're TOO personal. Ti/Fe tends to feel that since feelings are personal, easily manipulated, mercurial, they aren't reliable data. For us, leading with our emotions makes us do stupid stuff. (Maybe I should speak for myself.) Leading with feelings makes us project our feelings onto others, makes us act out of petulance, pettiness or revenge, makes us lose our ability to see clearly. Creates drama. Far too often, leading with my personal feelings would lead me to act selfishly. So, really, it's not that feelings are impersonal, it's that they're nearly irrelevant in the decision-making process, FOR US. We consult them, but we are also able to override them if necessary. I think this perception of how we might deal with feelings (and I can't really speak for INFJs--this is probably more of an INTP thing?) is based upon our own experience with our feelings and our observation of how personal feelings can impact a group.
(I suspect that it is this property of being "impersonal" that makes Fi read Fe as less than genuine, when nothing could be further from the truth. The Fe is how one deals with "feelings", it is not how one feels feelings.)
Fe naturally sets "feelings" apart from oneself. As Fe/Ti, the preference is to subjectively delve into "logic and reason" and set "feelings" apart as unreliable. It's a feeling: it might be useful, it might not be useful, but its an entity unto itself, not an aspect of oneself.
Te sets "ideas" as apart from oneself. It's an idea: it might be true, it might not be true, but as an idea, it is an objective entity on its own, not an aspect of oneself.
Fi, if we continue to follow this pattern, naturally delves into "feelings," and with Te sets ideas apart. Now, keep in mind, it isn't that Fi/Te regards feelings as "reliable," but rather that its what one keeps intimate, close-to-the-chest, whose expressions are tentative because they're unreliable. ... Where Ti keeps its expression tentative because it might not be true.
Thank you for this, Tallulah. I've long been trying to figure out how to best encapsulate Ti/Fe vs Fi/Te. It's obviously there and I see it in everyday interactions, and applying that knowledge makes things SO MUCH smoother for me. But I'm still trying to delve into the how and the why. I'm wondering if that at some point one "just decides" how to regard "ideas" vs "feelings", that one is tentative and the other is asserted? I've had this ideas juggling around in my head for about a year, and they still haven't settled into an obvious pattern, so I think that I may have some piece or another slightly off. After your input, I still feel that something is missing, but you've clarified several specifics for me, so I feel a LOT closer to a real understanding than before.