[Fe] Presumptuous Fe

[sculpting]

So first-I would like to set the tone of this thread. This is an exploratory thread, not an attack, not even a complaint. I would request the thread remain civil and polite, if it is to be productive.

***********************************************************

Last year Tesla started a thread that went on for a long time called presumptuous Fi. One of the main complaints was that Fi users think they understand how other people feel and will insist others MUST feel this way, based on Fi observations.

"You look sad, so you MUST be sad". This works on other Fi users-dom to inf-but is FAIL on Fe/Ti users and is also pretty offensive.

*************************************************************

Symmetrically, Fe seems to presume to understand the motives of others around them.

"You acted this way, thus you MUST have been thinking this"
"You made a big public ordeal of the issue, thus you MUST be an attention whore."
"You were being very friendly and sweet and laughing, thus you MUST have been intending to flirt"
"You exhibit this behavior as an adult and it MUST because of the relationship with your mom as a child"

I suspect this may work well on other Fe/Ti users, but is a total FAIL on Fi/Te users. Perhaps this is the Fe/Ti combo working together, I am uncertain.

This most striking last year in some of the threads where ENTPs insisted that ENFPs had underlying conscious manipulative agendas.

On the receiving end, often the proposed motives seem incomprehensible. Sometimes, if phased as questions, suggestions or poised as potential possibilities, there can be great value in the Fe correlations. They are great starting points and external observations. But often are incorrect.

*************************************************************

The other aspect of Presumptuous Fe, is the presumption that Fe behaviors are "Obvious", "innate", "everybody does this" and the presumption that if you do not do them, you are broken and need to be quiet and simply conform.

Fe seems to assume that the individuals Fe values are the same values that the rest of society holds. Given half of society doesnt use Fe, this is false. But when the Fe user comments, they seem to think they are speaking for what everybody does...not what Fe users do. They speak in terms of "known" social truisms, which are not actually true. There is a very marked tendency to not want to analyze behavior in a way that segregates the group-Te categorization aka MBTI, but instead insist that the whole group conforms to the same set of motivators in the same way-Fe assumes we are all in the Fe group, and will be motivated using the same tools that motivate others in our group.

Forgetting that half the group doesnt use Fe.

I notice this the most in NTPs as I suspect it is almost subconscious at times given tert/inf placement.

************************************************************
Again, I really seek feedback and communication, not to hurt other people or to work through a bunch of defensive Fi/Fe functional butthurt. I suspect that Fe users almost always have the best intent, and are not always aware of how this comes across and I would like a productive meta discussion not fighting or name calling.

Also, please! please! correct my above understanding if I have described things in ways that could be better described in other ways from the Fe perspective. I can only with work with the way I see the world-thus be default my descriptions will not suffice.

 

[Fidelia]

I believe that Fe users are not so much ascribing motives to you because they are upset with you, but rather because your actions seem incomprehensible to them. Remember how Te sounds quite sure of the assertions being made, but is actually much more flexy than Ti? I think Fe users are trying to get you to clarify or offer more information than what appears to be visible at the time. Just as Te feels challenging and tyrantish to us, Fe feels the same to Fi. In the absence of further information, Fe users project what their motives would be given the same situation and call it as they see it.

In addition, it is often not apparent to either Fe or Fi users that they have completely different reasons or motives for communicating information. Therefore their actions and style of communication are misunderstood by each other. One type's course of action seems inefficient and strange because it is being applied to the wrong goal or purpose. The Fi mode of communication is generally not very action based. The Fe mode of communication generally is used to confirm facts or to communicate what is felt as needing to be done. Therefore, it seems like Fe communication is doing a poor job, when really their reason for sharing information is very different. It's well suited to their objective, but not to the Fi users.

From my vantage point, Fe users mostly communicate information to be translated into some kind of action, often outside of what they can do on their own. Fi users do it to share their experience of the world and to gather others' viewpoints and experiences so that they can process information.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

Symmetrically, Fe seems to presume to understand the motives of others around them.

On the receiving end, often the proposed motives seem incomprehensible. Sometimes, if phased as questions, suggestions or poised as potential possibilities, there can be great value in the Fe correlations. They are great starting points and external observations. But often are incorrect.

I think I know what Orobas is talking about with the motives/intentions. I have noticed in a few Fe’ers I know- and I’m pretty sure this is a result of having introverted perception- when a person stops paying attention to what their own motives and intentions are, they start to dogmatically project their own motives and intentions on to everyone else. I mean I agree with Fid- that often it’s because we’re waiting for more information, and we’re just going with what we know until we’re told more. But sometimes a Fe’er will be the sort who absolutely resists. A little while back, Highlander commented in another thread about Te doms doing something very similar (he spoke specifically in regard to ENTJs, I’m not sure if his comment extends to ESTJs or not): they have to tendency to jump to conclusions and stick to whatever conclusion they jumped to- even getting offended if someone questions it. I’ve seen the same thing in Fe’ers. I think this is the stuff Fe horror stories are made of.

Firstly- and I can’t stress this enough- it’s not in all Fe’ers, it isn’t even in most, imo. I think it’s so heinous to deal with that people associate it with Fe, and the majority of thoughtful Fe doms kind of fade unnoticed in the background (in other words, the squeaky wheels get noticed...). Having this kind of behavior so strongly associated with Fe- as if: where there’s Fe, there’s the urge to control and tell other people how they should think and feel about everything- is exactly why so many of us Fe’ers get so nonplussed.

Secondly, about this unsavory Fe behavior:
I think they notice certain motives and intentions and attach them to certain behaviors (because perception is directed inward- it’s what we see), and it just becomes an auto-pilot type of assumption that they go together. Then they fail to notice that the motives and intentions they ‘perceive’ are their own because they haven’t spent time reflecting on/taking responsibility for their own motives, personal reactions and/or perceptions (they haven’t spent time separating their own motives, personal reactions and perceptions from the simple condition of being human- and so assume the motives, etc, are universal and inherent). The connection is ‘so clear’ to them, they feel like someone is treating them like they are stupid for insisting it isn’t true.

Unfortunately, I’ve got to take off for some errands right now- but I’ll be back in a while.

 

[skylights]

my suspicion is that introverted functions in general lead to presumptuousness when we stop paying attention to external information - like an NFP on a Fi binge. so Fe presumptuousness really is less about Fe and more about Ni or Si, but because Fe is the more "active" function, being Judging, it manifests in Fe-mediated actions.

like my mom when she thinks she's doing what will be best for me but she either doesn't ask me, or, more usually, will listen to me but doesn't actually consider my input. she'll decide a different option is better for me, and pursue that, when in reality it turns out to be a hindrance.

 

[Esoteric Wench]

Wow! This thread only has three responses so far, but already five stars. After reading the OP and responses I now know why. I feel like I need to smoke a cigarette after reading what Orobas, Fidelia, Z Buck McFate, and Skylights wrote.

There are so many wonderful things written about Fe that it's hard to pick one or two things to comment on... but that's never stopped me before...

[Some though not most Fe users] have to tendency to jump to conclusions and stick to whatever conclusion they jumped to - even getting offended if someone questions it....I think this is the stuff Fe horror stories are made of...

[A]bout this unsavory Fe behavior: I think [some Fe users] notice certain motives and intentions and attach them to certain behaviors (because perception is directed inward- it’s what we see), and it just becomes an auto-pilot type of assumption that they go together. Then they fail to notice that the motives and intentions they ‘perceive’ are their own because they haven’t spent time reflecting on/taking responsibility for their own motives, personal reactions and/or perceptions (they haven’t spent time separating their own motives, personal reactions and perceptions from the simple condition of being human- and so assume the motives, etc, are universal and inherent). The connection is ‘so clear’ to them, they feel like someone is treating them like they are stupid for insisting it isn’t true.

Z Buck McFate, this blew me away. I think it really helped me understand Fe run amuck. And, I want you to know that I agree with you completely that most Fe users don't do what you are describing above... or at least don't do it often. Most Fe users I know are very thoughtful and kind people.

But I have noticed... and would love to hear some Fe user comments on this... that Fe users who don't have an important Fi user relationship in their life will tend more in the direction that Z Buck McFate so aptly described above. In other words, Fe unchecked by Fi input is more want to go on Fe auto-pilot.

(And, just to make sure it's clear to everyone who reads this, I am not trying to be critical of Fe or Fe users. I'm just trying to understand Fe better so I can be a better friend / attribute motive better to the Fe users in my life.)

So back to my question / observation... it seems to me that some Fe users have a tendency to create a safe little world that's filled with other Fe users; and in which no one challenges the Fe assumptions all the people in this little world share among themselves. I can get along famously with such Fe users UNTIL my Fi has the audacity to challenge some of the Fe core assumptions going on. And, boy howdy... when I do... I am cast in one of a very predictable set of roles:

• She's well-intentioned but misguided. Poor thing!
• She's crazy so it's best to ignore her.
• She's misinformed and must be educated on the "right" response.
• She's rude and stirring up trouble needlessly.

I'll give you an example:

I'm involved in a lot of committee / volunteer work. The mover and shaker set is a very finite / known set in my medium-sized city. Some of the Fe users that I interact with keep choosing the same people over and over and over and over for [insert committee role / nomination / performance / etc. here]. When I have suggested that perhaps we don't pick the known quantities and try to find some fresh talent for [insert committee role / nomination / performance / etc. here].... Well all hell breaks loose. I make the suggestion with the skill of an experienced politician... and yet, this particular set of the Fe-users (who are all friends in private life and run in the same social circle) are appalled that I would even hint at not supporting the known-quantity.

This baffles me because these particular Fe-users seem to cling to their position beyond reason. The other day, I said exasperatedly to my Fi-user friend, "Jeez Louise. Those people are in serious need of some Fi. It feels to me like their Fe has been unchecked by any Fi for so long that they have forgotten that what seems normal to them is just their Fe assumptions... unchallenged for so long that they mistakenly believe them to be immutable truths. Yuck!"

I'd love to hear thoughts on this... and how to reach an Fe user who is in this place.

 

[stalemate]

I have to say, Z Buck McFate's post really blew me away as well. I kept thinking about it this morning but I couldn't find which thread I had seen it in.

It is really great for me to read that because I have trouble understanding introverted perception even as a concept.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

I'm wondering if what I wrote isn't exactly what Orobas meant with her op. I know she brings up xNTPs in the op- which doesn’t especially apply to what I wrote, since they’re Pe dom/aux. I’ve been slowly catching up with reading that Fe/Fi antics thread, and some of the things said in that thread have triggered thoughts about xNFJs that seemed relevant to the op. I have noticed that xNFJs can sometimes cross over into the dark side- and start taking the first intuitive leap that pops into their head as some end-all truth, no matter how ridiculously off it is. I think all people are capable of projecting their own motivations and intentions, obviously, but xNFJs tend to do it with a special maddening NFJ panache.

I was focusing on a sort of extreme, though. I think her op might have been more focused on run-of-the-mill occurrences.

Under more general circumstances, I agree with what Fid wrote. I can’t help but instantly connect certain motivations/intentions to other’s behaviors/words- and if it isn’t available to find out from the person if my assumptions are correct, then I’ll just loosely categorize them according to my own assumptions. As far as positing motives and intentions- in lieu of the Fi tendency described to posit basic feelings- I’ll agree that this is something I (and many fellow Fe’ers) do. I think because it’s what I notice- which I assume is due to perception being directed inward, as I mentioned in previous post- but that doesn’t explain why NTPs would do it. It might have something to do with Ti, and instantly wondering ‘why?’ when noticing someone else’s behavior.

I need the information I perceive from another person to make sense- so if the person tells me something that doesn’t seem plausible, I’ll weigh all the mental post-it notes I’ve made about the person since knowing them. If they’ve always been honest with me, I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt; but, of course, I’ll also make a new post-it note about giving them the benefit of the doubt for an implausible claim. If the individual is someone I’m not familiar enough with to make such a call, then I remain on the fence about it until I’ve accrued enough experience of the person to know how much credit I can give their judgment.

I’m always wholly aware that my own experience of the world isn’t the extent of everyone else’s experience, and that it’s entirely possible for someone else to have motivations/intentions that aren’t going to make sense to me. I also know that people, in general, aren’t always honest with others (or even themselves) when it comes to expressing motivations/intentions- and it’s often the case that people shape their motivations/intentions in such a way to get something from me they wouldn’t otherwise get (cooperation, resources, esteem/respect, whatever). I always take both of these precepts into account (as well as my previous experience of them) when evaluating whether or not to believe someone else when their explanation of their own motivation/intention doesn’t make sense to me.

This^ last paragraph sort of addresses the extreme I mentioned- it’s like some Fe’ers don’t take into account that their own experience of the world isn’t so complete, and so they stick with ‘what makes sense’ according to their own experience of the world. I don’t know why this happens.

"You look sad, so you MUST be sad". This works on other Fi users-dom to inf-but is FAIL on Fe/Ti users and is also pretty offensive.

*************************************************************

Symmetrically, Fe seems to presume to understand the motives of others around them.

"You acted this way, thus you MUST have been thinking this"
"You made a big public ordeal of the issue, thus you MUST be an attention whore."
"You were being very friendly and sweet and laughing, thus you MUST have been intending to flirt"
"You exhibit this behavior as an adult and it MUST because of the relationship with your mom as a child"

I suspect this may work well on other Fe/Ti users, but is a total FAIL on Fi/Te users. Perhaps this is the Fe/Ti combo working together, I am uncertain.

As for dealing with someone who ascribes motivations/intentions on my actions which I disagree with- it if happens regularly with that particular individual, then I tend to see it as a flaw with that individual’s judgment and only get wound up about it if it significantly inconveniences me (if their opinion of me effects my position at work or in some social arena). If it’s someone whose judgment I’ve grown to trust, then I’ll consider what they’re saying. Either way, once again, it only ‘works’ on me if it makes sense to me- if the motivation/intention template someone is trying to place on me doesn’t make as much sense to me as my own understanding of my motivation/intention, then I reject it. In the end, it’s just someone else’s opinion.

It is interesting that I do find it a bit less grating than having someone try to posit some specific feeling in me that I’m pretty sure I’m not actually feeling- especially after I claim I’m not feeling. I’m not sure why that is- I guess the latter just doesn’t make much sense to me, and even seems oafish at times.


@esoteric: I just noticed your post and have a response but I wanted to post this^ now.

 

[Tiltyred]

Well all hell breaks loose. I make the suggestion with the skill of an experienced politician... and yet, this particular set of the Fe-users (who are all friends in private life and run in the same social circle) are appalled that I would even hint at not supporting the known-quantity.
...
I'd love to hear thoughts on this... and how to reach an Fe user who is in this place.

Campaign on your newbie's behalf on the grounds that you like her (him, whoever). Maintain that you and the newbie are (have become) friends, and you think she would be such an excellent addition to the group, and that it would be good to give the regulars a break from their long, hard service and let them serve more in an advisory capacity -- after all, it's good to train up new people, and this newbie would so appreciate the opportunity.

 

[Salomé]

I have to say, Z Buck McFate's post really blew me away as well.

+3. Makes so much sense.
Great thread!

 

[sculpting]

Zbuck-it may be that the sort of like ENFPs have baby ESTJs inside of them due to tert Te and inf Si, the ENTPs have a baby ESFJ and the INTPs have a baby ISFJ. The things the NTPs say can be so very knee-jerk and very much embody the "mistaken universality of the individual's Fe" that I would suspect perhaps they are almost unaware that it is that more undeveloped FeSi combo that yields the resultant judgment? It just feels right to them and obvious, since it bubbles up from the inf/tert position? "Doesnt everybody do this?" sort of thoughts.

I must admit I personally, was taken aback at how badly I can be influenced by NFJ critique, especially the first time I found myself on the receiving end. It was heartbreaking and at that moment was part of a game being played by another. It felt totally incorrect, yet everything I said kept getting twisted around and pointed back at me. Once I figured out the pattern-mostly by watching the NFJs at INTJf, it doesnt bother me anymore. I think because so much of Fi is authenticity-to be ascribed motives that are not mine is terrible painful if I like you and fairly offensive if I dont know you or am neutral towards you.

I asked my entp about motives as well-She said very much what Fid and you are saying-that Fi and Te users will do something that seems to make no sense. She projects her Ti onto the situation (since the gut assumption/projection would be that everybody uses Ti) and then since it makes no sense tries to use Fe to identify a motive-which ends up incorrect. (I could have introduced error in what she was trying to convey) She said it was much more terryifing once she understood we just have NO Ti. She says we just DO things-meaning FPs and TJs across the board. She says this is very scary to her. Hehehe..

I also second estoteric's experience-if I disagree with the universality of the Fe judgment or even point out that I personally differ....then I am broken or weird or unhealthy. I know myself very, very well and I work very hard to own my own shit, so to have someone pass judgment who does not know me, simply because I disagree..... Very often the discussion of an objective idea turns into a personal attack. If I wasnt so messed up, I wouldn't have had that idea??? seems to be the message.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

Either way, once again, it only ‘works’ on me if it makes sense to me- if the motivation/intention template someone is trying to place on me doesn’t make as much sense to me as my own understanding of my motivation/intention, then I reject it. In the end, it’s just someone else’s opinion.

What happens if it doesn't make sense to you, but in the end it is found to be true?

 

[Fidelia]

I'd like to just note that rarely do I initially ascribe a motive to someone's behaviour if I find their behaviour incomprehensible - I do some digging first and I also review my past post-it notes. However, I've found in some cases (perhaps due to communication differences) that no matter how hard I seek out information from the other person that would give me insight into their thought process or some context for their behaviour, I can't get any feedback. Those are the cases in which I tend to project most. It's frustrating not being able to be given anything to work with. I keep turning it over and over in my mind if it's someone that impacts me or that matters to me. If it is not, then I tend to be more dismissive than I would normally be of someone.

 

[uumlau]

To refine the OP's original statements, I would suggest that:

Fe tends to ascribe purpose to others' emotional expression.
Fi tends to ascribe a state of being to others' emotional expression.

This is common projection. Thus these corollaries would also hold true:
Fe tends to purposefully express emotions, always considering the effect of such expression upon the world.
Fi tends to express one's current state of being, often without regard to the effect such expression has on others.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

But I have noticed... and would love to hear some Fe user comments on this... that Fe users who don't have an important Fi user relationship in their life will tend more in the direction that Z Buck McFate so aptly described above. In other words, Fe unchecked by Fi input is more want to go on Fe auto-pilot.

This is curious to me. I don’t really have an important Fi user relationship in my life, I’m not sure how the dreaded Fe dark side needs it to escape auto-pilot thinking. I consistently test higher on Fi than Fe in cognitive tests though, so there’s enough of something similar in me to make it a moot point- whether it’s Fe + Ti, or Fi itself, always turns into a silly and somewhat nonsensical debate. I’m inclined to simply see it as taking responsibility for our own perceptions.

I think what it boils down to is that that Fe’ers who pay attention to their own motives and intentions have less of a problem with realizing the extent to which the motives and intentions which they ‘perceive’ in others might actually be their own. I can’t speak for Fe + Si, but Fe + Ni has a tendency to make all incoming information about other people implode with possibilities as it enters our head. We don’t just see “friend stops to visit with cupcake”; we see “friend stops to visit with cupcake + possible motives based on past experience of friend + possible motives based on our own motives in past when visiting friend with cupcake.” Fe’ers who don’t stop to recognize this implosion as part of their perception seem to fall into the one-size-fits-all, my-own-experience-of-the-world-is-enough-to-reliably-understand-everyone Fe auto-pilot. They make the instant connections of motives/intentions, but fail to realize how they came to the conclusion that they did.

So back to my question / observation... it seems to me that some Fe users have a tendency to create a safe little world that's filled with other Fe users; and in which no one challenges the Fe assumptions all the people in this little world share among themselves. I can get along famously with such Fe users UNTIL my Fi has the audacity to challenge some of the Fe core assumptions going on. And, boy howdy... when I do... I am cast in one of a very predictable set of roles:

• She's well-intentioned but misguided. Poor thing!
• She's crazy so it's best to ignore her.
• She's misinformed and must be educated on the "right" response.
• She's rude and stirring up trouble needlessly.

I'll give you an example:

I'm involved in a lot of committee / volunteer work. The mover and shaker set is a very finite / known set in my medium-sized city. Some of the Fe users that I interact with keep choosing the same people over and over and over and over for [insert committee role / nomination / performance / etc. here]. When I have suggested that perhaps we don't pick the known quantities and try to find some fresh talent for [insert committee role / nomination / performance / etc. here].... Well all hell breaks loose. I make the suggestion with the skill of an experienced politician... and yet, this particular set of the Fe-users (who are all friends in private life and run in the same social circle) are appalled that I would even hint at not supporting the known-quantity.

This baffles me because these particular Fe-users seem to cling to their position beyond reason. The other day, I said exasperatedly to my Fi-user friend, "Jeez Louise. Those people are in serious need of some Fi. It feels to me like their Fe has been unchecked by any Fi for so long that they have forgotten that what seems normal to them is just their Fe assumptions... unchallenged for so long that they mistakenly believe them to be immutable truths. Yuck!"

I'd love to hear thoughts on this... and how to reach an Fe user who is in this place.

I’m inclined to think this kind of thing is more about Pi/Pe than it is about Fi/Fe. It really drives me crazy sometimes when it seems like someone wants to change something around me for the sake of change- which is an assumption I might make if the person is apt to suggesting change often without a strong argument for why they think it should be changed.

Something tells me that Pe types often feel the benefits of a change are obvious in a way that they aren’t to Pi types, making us seem like unreasonable stick-in-the-muds. Just like Pi has implosions of internal possibilities- Pe types (maybe especially Ne types) can have implosions of external possibilities. So it might seem like we're passing unreasonable judgment on someone for 'going against Fe values', I guess, when really it's about us not being able to relate because it's our blind spot. Unnecessary change = crazy talk; not because it goes against 'Fe values', but because it doesn't make sense to us as readily as it does to you.

This is me theorizing here^, it might be half-baked.

So I agree with what Tiltyred wrote- campaign on the newbie’s behalf- taking into account that you might be dealing with people who need the entirety of ‘why’ change could be beneficial put on the table, spread out before them, every single thing you can think of (which you might feel should be obvious). If you stick to one single suggestion at a time long enough, they might be willing to give it a try- and if THAT goes well, they’ll be more open to listening to suggestions for change about other things.

I asked my entp about motives as well-She said very much what Fid and you are saying-that Fi and Te users will do something that seems to make no sense. She projects her Ti onto the situation (since the gut assumption/projection would be that everybody uses Ti) and then since it makes no sense tries to use Fe to identify a motive-which ends up incorrect. (I could have introduced error in what she was trying to convey) She said it was much more terryifing once she understood we just have NO Ti. She says we just DO things-meaning FPs and TJs across the board. She says this is very scary to her. Hehehe..

What happens if it doesn't make sense to you, but in the end it is found to be true?

I don’t really understand, you mean if it initially doesn’t make sense- but then makes sense later on? Only speaking for myself here- the only way I can see finding something to be ‘true’ in the end is if it eventually makes sense to me.

There are plenty of situations in which- as Fid just brought up- some experience I have of another person never ends up ‘making sense’ in a way that I feel comfortable passing any kind of judgment on, in which I have no clue what to believe about the other person’s judgment. I’ll loop about it until the looping becomes a distraction, at which point I’ll have to let it go as a matter of necessity. I may perceive the other’s position as *seeming* untrue, but I won’t completely dismiss the possibility that I’m just not seeing the truth in it.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

I'd like to just note that rarely do I initially ascribe a motive to someone's behaviour if I find their behaviour incomprehensible - I do some digging first and I also review my past post-it notes. However, I've found in some cases (perhaps due to communication differences) that no matter how hard I seek out information from the other person that would give me insight into their thought process or some context for their behaviour, I can't get any feedback. Those are the cases in which I tend to project most. It's frustrating not being able to be given anything to work with. I keep turning it over and over in my mind if it's someone that impacts me or that matters to me. If it is not, then I tend to be more dismissive than I would normally be of someone.

I can relate to this. I tend to get a sense of so many possible motivations that it's hard to guess at the right one without more information. When in doubt I try to assume one of the better motivations because it is a better mistake. If the behavior is problematic you can solve the problem without judging the motivation. That's why it is easier to hold off on the conclusions about the motivation. In some cases it is just something that cannot be known.

 

[Seymour]

I’m inclined to think this kind of thing is more about Pi/Pe than it is about Fi/Fe. It really drives me crazy sometimes when it seems like someone wants to change something around me for the sake of change- which is an assumption I might make if the person is apt to suggesting change often without a strong argument for why they think it should be changed.

Something tells me that Pe types often feel the benefits of a change are obvious in a way that they aren’t to Pi types, making us seem like unreasonable stick-in-the-muds. Just like Pi has implosions of internal possibilities- Pe types (maybe especially Ne types) can have implosions of external possibilities. So it might seem like we're passing unreasonable judgment on someone for 'going against Fe values', I guess, when really it's about us not being able to relate because it's our blind spot. Unnecessary change = crazy talk; not because it goes against 'Fe values', but because it doesn't make sense to us as readily as it does to you.



This is me theorizing here^, it might be half-baked.

Actually, that's a really interesting thought. It does make sense that those with Ni (in particular) are able to adjust their perspective to see the maximum good and maximum utility in the current system (be it Fe or Te). In a sense, that's going to make them hyper-aware of the cost of changing the system, because they've already become habituated to maximizing it's use and effectiveness.

Ne types, conversely, see the external potential but with the current reality keeping that (Ji-tuned) vision of potential from being realized. Ne-er's Ji is less amenable to external adjustment, and so they tend to see the gap between the imperfections their Ji sees in current reality, and all the possible improvements.

There's a similar dynamic with Si/Je vs Se/Ji... one being far more investing in maintaining the current external structures than another.

Still, it does make me wonder where that J sense of inevitability and time-awareness comes from. Sometimes I feel like that perceivers feel that each time is unique, and things can always be changed and optimized as you go. This leads us to a certain ahistorical and time-unaware perspective. This time is always unique, and with sufficient effort (no matter what the calendar says) things can always turn out better.

Also, I have been struck in years past at how my good INFJ friend would respond when when I described some personal problem ("I wish I had more local friends"). He almost always responded with some way to take advantage of existing social structures ("Well, you liking doing <activity>, why don't you join an <activity> club/group?").

This always rubbed me the wrong way, because as an INFP I wanted to solve the problem internally first (by working on what was keeping from maintaining friendships, for example) before applying external solutions. Of course. the right answer varies, and INFPs can definitely get caught in the trap of ignoring simple external solutions while focusing ever more internally to "fix" something that isn't the real problem. Still, it's been helpful understanding the difference in perspective, because it makes me more tolerant of his suggestions and more aware of my own blind spots.

I think it also helps to keep in mind that Je-ers tend to see the existing systems, in part, as tools. Just because you use a tool doesn't mean you necessarily buy into its value system. The tools you use are selected from the ones that are available. If everyone around you only speaks English (or whatever language), refusing to speak English (or whatever) doesn't make you moral, it makes you ineffective at communication.

 

[Random Ness]

I think they notice certain motives and intentions and attach them to certain behaviors (because perception is directed inward- it’s what we see), and it just becomes an auto-pilot type of assumption that they go together. Then they fail to notice that the motives and intentions they ‘perceive’ are their own because they haven’t spent time reflecting on/taking responsibility for their own motives, personal reactions and/or perceptions (they haven’t spent time separating their own motives, personal reactions and perceptions from the simple condition of being human- and so assume the motives, etc, are universal and inherent). The connection is ‘so clear’ to them, they feel like someone is treating them like they are stupid for insisting it isn’t true.

I totally agree. I have a hard time seperating my own feelings from someone else's. It's not that I'm selfish. It's that I take on someone else's feelings, especially their pain, and feel intensely for them. And that leads to assuming I know what they're thinking/how they'll react. I'm not mean...I just don't have emotional boundaries yet.

 

[Random Ness]

Going off what fidelia said...

Non-Fe-users, if an NFJ is projecting on you, make them understand. NFJs HATE not being able to understand you. Give them something to think about, and then give them TIME TO DIGEST IT. Ni is ten steps ahead of itself, so when new information comes into play, the NJ has to alter their entire opinion. If the NFJ is nice and mature enough, they'll adjust their behavior accordingly.

 

[Fidelia]

Excellent point - we do prefer to go on accurate information. What we can't stand is NO information.

I liked the points that umlauu made several posts ago.

 

[cascadeco]

To refine the OP's original statements, I would suggest that:

Fe tends to ascribe purpose to others' emotional expression.
Fi tends to ascribe a state of being to others' emotional expression.

This is common projection. Thus these corollaries would also hold true:
Fe tends to purposefully express emotions, always considering the effect of such expression upon the world.
Fi tends to express one's current state of being, often without regard to the effect such expression has on others.

I know this holds true for myself. I'm definitely purposeful in pretty much everything that I do. So yes, when it comes to expression of myself, I absolutely take into account how that will impact the other person, the likely ways they will react to it (repercussions that will occur, not only immediately but in the nature of the relationship and our interaction down the road), etc. I do think though that this general lack of spontaneity and inability in being 'ok' with showing my current state of being can be detrimental to certain relationships at times, so there's room for growth for me there.