[Fe] Is Fe fake or manipulative?

[crack]

I disagree with Resonance's assertion that Fe should not be expected to be taken as an indication of one's internal state.

When one professes an opinion, are they not professing the content of their internal state?

What is Fe? It is the outward expression of an opinion (sweet talking, as in INTPNess's example, conveying he feels fine about people showing up late when he's really mad about them doing so, etc). I understand that Fe's purpose or intention/motivation/whatever is social harmony... but to say people should understand that what opinion they are professing is NOT HOW THEY ACTUALLY FEEL THEMSELVES, EVER [and can even run completely opposite(?!)]? Nonsense.

In this way, Fe, because it is NOT a reflection of one's inner state, -when it professes to be- (<- key), is fake.

But I'm not saying only Fe is fake. Any human can be fake. And being fake is furthermore just a fact of life, that is not always bad. Just defining the action of professing an opinion that you do not actually hold as "fakeness." I contend Fe is fake if you define Fe as "espousing an opinion [or stance] designed to promote social harmony even when your internal opinion [or stance] on something may be contradictory"... which is what seems to be what is being said (may be misunderstanding, disregard and sorry if so).

Disclaimer: I don't hate Fe. Also, my use of "is" and "can be" is a bit mixed in this post. I don't mean Fe is always fake, but I don't feel like figuring the proper wording to make "can be" work in the relevant sentences.

 

[jixmixfix]

hahaha

 

[onemoretime]

I disagree with Resonance's assertion that Fe should not be expected to be taken as an indication of one's internal state.

When one professes an opinion, are they not professing the content of their internal state?

What is Fe? It is the outward expression of an opinion (sweet talking, as in INTPNess's example, conveying he feels fine about people showing up late when he's really mad about them doing so, etc). I understand that Fe's purpose or intention/motivation/whatever is social harmony... but to say people should understand that what opinion they are professing is NOT HOW THEY ACTUALLY FEEL THEMSELVES, EVER [and can even run completely opposite(?!)]? Nonsense.

In this way, Fe, because it is NOT a reflection of one's inner state, -when it professes to be- (<- key), is fake.

You're still not getting it.

Part of their internal state may feel crappy. At the same time, a greater part of their internal state feels better for upholding social harmony. When someone's sweet talking, it's not out of being "fake," it's because even if that person's upset at their tardiness, they feel better by keeping the peace around them. THAT's why it's genuine.

But I'm not saying only Fe is fake. Any human can be fake. And being fake is furthermore just a fact of life, that is not always bad. Just defining the action of professing an opinion that you do not actually hold as "fakeness." I contend Fe is fake if you define Fe as "espousing an opinion [or stance] designed to promote social harmony even when your internal opinion [or stance] on something may be contradictory"... which is what seems to be what is being said (may be misunderstanding, disregard and sorry if so).

I contend that it's very presumptuous of you to cast judgment on someone else's internal cognition, when you show little inclination to listen to their perspective, never mind consider that your understanding of the subject may be inaccurate or deficient.

 

[OrangeAppled]

Part of their internal state may feel crappy. At the same time, a greater part of their internal state feels better for upholding social harmony. When someone's sweet talking, it's not out of being "fake," it's because even if that person's upset at their tardiness, they feel better by keeping the peace around them. THAT's why it's genuine.

Very true. The part of the internal state that seems incongruent with their feeling is simply NOT their feeling-judgment (it's their emotions or perceptions). Their emotional awareness is more likely dealt with via Pi.

The concept of judging based on feeling in an extroverted manner is that feeling stems from the object, and that feeling is very real. The personal feeling IS what the object asks for in terms of harmony (that object being another person or even just a general people-related goal). Fe is not about the internal state - so how can it be true to it? That's not its realm; it's about recognizing the value of things outside of the internal state.

Fi, being the opposite, has the downside of not adjusting to the object, resisting it even, meaning moodiness can prevail even when circumstances are good. This is because it IS about the internal state, and the internal state only.

Both are tempered by their P function, so that each individual can be aware of both their inner state & outer reactions. FJs will be more aware of their internal state through Pi, not via their value judgments. This is just hard for Ps to grasp (Ji + Pe types) because it's so different from how their mind is oriented, and I'm sure Js find it hard to grasp the way P way of thinking & relating to objects & understanding yourself.

 

[jixmixfix]

It's hard to understand why someone would value social order and harmony higher than their own internal state, the way I come to see it the persons internal feelings should matter more than what is going on around them externally. When a house is built it is built for the ground up from it's most basic foundation. The Fe user stems their internal feelings through their external affairs.

 

[Rail Tracer]

Both are tempered by their P function, so that each individual can be aware of both their inner state & outer reactions. FJs will be more aware of their internal state through Pi, not via their value judgments. This is just hard for Ps to grasp (Ji + Pe types) because it's so different from how their mind is oriented, and I'm sure Js find it hard to grasp the way P way of thinking & relating to objects & understanding yourself.

That is really how I think I began seeings things when I started looking at Fi/Fe with Ne/Ni. Everything started looking very inter-related and similar.

 

[onemoretime]

Very true. The concept of judging based on feeling in an extroverted manner is that feeling stems from the object, and that feeling is very real. The personal feeling IS what the object asks for in terms of harmony (that object being another person or even just a general people-related goal). Fe is not about the internal state - so how can it be true to it? That's not its realm; it's about recognizing the value of things outside of the internal state.

It's because there is internal satisfaction with maintaining composure, even when there is a coexisting internal conflict. It's not that the person isn't true to their internal state, it's that the internal state has limited relevance to their sense of personal truth. The external is real, and the internal self-delusion.

Fi, being the opposite, has the downside of not adjusting to the object, resisting it even, meaning moodiness can prevail even when circumstances are good. This is because it IS about the internal state, and the internal state only.

It's because truth is not to be found in the external. The external is a false image, and the internal is what is true.

 

[OrangeAppled]

It's hard to understand why someone would value social order and harmony higher than their own internal state, the way I come to see it the persons internal feelings should matter more than what is going on around them externally. When a house is built it is built for the ground up from it's most basic foundation. The Fe user stems their internal feelings through their external affairs.

Yes, but their judgment of those external affairs are rooted in their internal perceptions. How they judge a situation is very much influenced by how they view it, and that view is quite personal.

I agree though.....it's odd to me as a P type too, and as an introvert (all the E functions sound "shallow" to me).

 

[onemoretime]

It's hard to understand why someone would value social order and harmony higher than their own internal state, the way I come to see it the persons internal feelings should matter more than what is going on around them externally. When a house is built it is built for the ground up from it's most basic foundation. The Fe user stems their internal feelings through their external affairs.

To live, one must eat. Nourishment comes from outside. No amount of concentration on one's hunger will leave a person well-fed.

 

[OrangeAppled]

It's because there is internal satisfaction with maintaining composure, even when there is a coexisting internal conflict. It's not that the person isn't true to their internal state, it's that the internal state has limited relevance to their sense of personal truth. The external is real, and the internal self-delusion.

It's because truth is not to be found in the external. The external is a false image, and the internal is what is true.

Yes, and I've read (quoted in my first post here) that Fe types can be unaware even of the incongruence of their internal state & the external, adjusting their feelings to the external, which represents the truth to them, but unknowingly giving off signs of their internal state. I think the internal state does have weight with how they view the external at times though, as even evidenced by how it affects them at times without their even realizing it.

Anyhow, Fi types are said to rarely be unaware of incongruence with the external & internal because their feelings are anchored by the internal world, & as you say, this is because it is viewed to be the "truth".

 

[crack]

I think we're getting too theoretical here and breaking from reality in a bad way here.

For example:
Two people. One an Fe dom and the other who cares. The Fe dom actually dislikes the other. But, when the other passes the Fe dom in a hallway and tries to strike up conversation with the Fe dom, the Fe dom not just politely complies but acts nice and fond of the person. The Fe dom acted this way because they value social harmony more than their own personal feelings, so wanted to keep the peace. How is the explicit expression of an opposite opinion of yours not a false expression? Remember: You are NOT saying "Well, I'd really rather keep the peace with you; can we?", you are espousing all kinds of opinions that run opposite of how you feel internally.

A la: If you tell a woman she is beautiful, but you do not actually think so... this is not being fake?

 

[Rail Tracer]

Yes, but their judgment of those external affairs are rooted in their internal perceptions. How they judge a situation is very much influenced by how they view it, and that view is quite personal.

I agree though.....it's odd to me as a P type too, and as an introvert (all the E functions sound "shallow" to me).

The thing is, fixing the external can heal the internal, just as fixing the internal, can heal the external.

Think of MLK and Malcolm X.

Malcolm X was like the embodiment of what he and "his" people felt over the century. He chose to expose people of who they are. His approach was more aggressive. Kind of like fire with fire. The more aggressive movements ensued that exposed the internal war in which his country created.

MLK was also the embodiment of what he and "his" people felt over the century. He chose to expose people of who they are. His approach was more passive. Kind of like fighting fire with water. The more peaceful movements came about to expose the firestorm in which the country he lived in created.

MLK was like Fe while Malcolm X was like Fi. Both brought a sense of what the country has done to its people.

Gandhi can also be another example, instead of aggressively raging war against Britain, he did it passively. Waging war aggressively would of left a mark in India that would have allowed Britain to aggressively bring order. Because Gandhi and his followers decided to peacefully go through it, any wrong move from Britain would of brought a shock-wave.

At least... that is how I see in relation to internal and external.

[goes on a tangent]

 

[onemoretime]

Yes, and I've read (quoted in my first post here) that Fe types can be unaware even of the incongruence of their internal state & the external, adjusting their feelings to the external, which represents the truth to them, but unknowingly giving off signs of their internal state. I think the internal state does have weight with how they view the external at times though, as even evidenced by how it affects them at times without their even realizing it.

It's not that it "represents" the truth to them; it is the truth to them. The internal state only affects them through how it influences the feeling of the external environment, such as when someone doesn't realize the surly face they present to the world. It's this external manifestation that causes the problem, not the internal state itself. The only reason to even address the internal state is because it is blocking and obscuring that person's true self, and not because any truth arises from it.

Anyhow, Fi types are said to rarely be unaware of incongruence with the external & internal because their feelings are anchored by the internal world, & as you say, this is because it is viewed to be the "truth".

It is the truth, not simply viewed to be.

 

[OrangeAppled]

It's not that it "represents" the truth to them; it is the truth to them. The internal state only affects them through how it influences the feeling of the external environment, such as when someone doesn't realize the surly face they present to the world. It's this external manifestation that causes the problem, not the internal state itself. The only reason to even address the internal state is because it is blocking and obscuring that person's true self, and not because any truth arises from it.



It is the truth, not simply viewed to be.

I used that phrasing to simply avoid implying one type has a monopoly on "truth".

 

[onemoretime]

I think we're getting too theoretical here and breaking from reality in a bad way here.

We're talking about theoretical cognitive functions. We can only piece together what reality is the best that we can from what we say to one another. We cannot know it.

For example:
Two people. One an Fe dom and the other who cares. The Fe dom actually dislikes the other. But, when the other passes the Fe dom in a hallway and tries to strike up conversation with the Fe dom, the Fe dom not just politely complies but acts nice and fond of the person. The Fe dom acted this way because they value social harmony more than their own personal feelings, so wanted to keep the peace. How is the explicit expression of an opposite opinion of yours not a false expression? Remember: You are NOT saying "Well, I'd really rather keep the peace with you; can we?", you are espousing all kinds of opinions that run opposite of how you feel internally.

Because the internal feeling is nothing more than an annoying distraction that gets in the way of what's truly important to you: promoting an atmosphere of peace and happiness.

A la: If you tell a woman she is beautiful, but you do not actually think so... this is not being fake?

Not when your own personal truth is that even the ugliest of women deserves to be told that she is beautiful, because she deserves to feel that joy in her life.

 

[onemoretime]

I used that phrasing to simply avoid implying one type has a monopoly on "truth".

That's part of the problem I think we have in these sorts of discussions. We don't share in portions of the truth. We each have a monopoly on the truth. For each of us, what we individually believe is true is the only truth that matters, or even the only truth that is real. The trick is in understanding that while your own personal truth is perfectly true and valid, someone else's truth is just as valid and true. Function attitudes are a manifestation of what each person's truth is.

 

[crack]

Not when your own personal truth is that even the ugliest of women deserves to be told that she is beautiful, because she deserves to feel that joy in her life.

Regardless of your grander philosophy about life, she is or is not beautiful. You either are or are not telling her a lie by saying yes or no.

 

[onemoretime]

Regardless of your grander philosophy about life, she is or is not beautiful. You either are or are not telling her a lie by saying yes or no.

No, you're not. Truth is beauty, beauty truth.

 

[A window to the soul]

It's hard to understand why someone would value social order and harmony higher than their own internal state, the way I come to see it the persons internal feelings should matter more than what is going on around them externally. When a house is built it is built for the ground up from it's most basic foundation. The Fe user stems their internal feelings through their external affairs.

Fe is emotional intelligence that's not concerned with internal feelings in the way you described, but that doesn't make it a sand castle jix. I'll make a play off of your post by saying, if Fi is a brick house, then Fe is a brick house with curb appeal. Fe has the power to influence others in sure fire ways, which Fi might struggle with due to, as you said, "valuing their own internal state."

Have you ever felt energized when someone walks into a room? I don't mean a statically charged handshake or hug. I'm talking about genuine excitement! By identifying the values that are meaningful to others, an Fe user can begin to energize and even mobilize everyone in the room that's concerned with those values. The perk is that the Fe user is emotionally rewarded by this; what I call, 'authentic', 'high quality' interactions. It's a euphoria that perhaps only the Fe user understands.

 

[Thalassa]

It's hard to understand why someone would value social order and harmony higher than their own internal state

So does this mean you're really ISFP or ISTJ?