[Fe] Is Fe fake or manipulative?

[Ginkgo]

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.

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

Agreed.

Even if you avoid suggesting that any type has a monopoly on truth, you think it's true that you ought to avoid it. Thus it dictates your decisions just as much as your conception of truth would if you didn't believe so.

 

[Thalassa]

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.

Okay, hang on, I think my sister really thinks that humans are beautiful even if they don't meet a certain standard of physical beauty.

Some people really do see beauty in who the person is, or have a much broader spectrum of what they consider "beautiful."

I think love can see beauty where criticism sees flaws.

Of course by "ugliest woman in the world" I'm presuming you mean deformed, but I've seen deformed people in romantic relationships, so...

 

[crack]

Okay, hang on, I think my sister really thinks that humans are beautiful even if they don't meet a certain standard of physical beauty.

Some people really do see beauty in who the person is, or have a much broader spectrum of what they consider "beautiful."

I think love can see beauty where criticism sees flaws.

Of course by "ugliest woman in the world" I'm presuming you mean deformed, but I've seen deformed people in romantic relationships, so...

This would change the meaning of your answer. No matter what you define beautiful as, unless you see everyone as beautiful, *you* are still answering whether or not *you* see someone as "beautiful" (put in quotes to define it as a variable). Your sister, for example, would not be lying when she said yes to anyone asking if she is beautiful, because she believes everyone is "beautiful." The point is there's an objective reality consisting of what you say and what you internally feel - if these two contradict, it's a lie, therefore fakeness.

Answering deceptively to avoid the actual question they're asking to answer positively (or negatively, but that'd be rare for a slew of different reasons) (if it was clear the person was asking about physical beauty, but answering yes when you've twisted their literal ambiguity to mean beauty in a spiritual sense or something) is being fake as well but in a different way, not relevant to the above situation. Just in case you would think of this next.

 

[Thalassa]

This would change the meaning of your answer. No matter what you define beautiful as, unless you see everyone as beautiful, *you* are still answering whether or not *you* see someone as "beautiful" (put in quotes to define it as a variable). Your sister, for example, would not be lying when she said yes to anyone asking if she is beautiful, because she believes everyone is "beautiful." The point is there's an objective reality consisting of what you say and what you internally feel - if these two contradict, it's a lie, therefore fakeness.

Answering deceptively to avoid the actual question they're asking to answer positively (or negatively, but that'd be rare for a slew of different reasons) (if it was clear the person was asking about physical beauty, but answering yes when you've twisted their literal ambiguity to mean beauty in a spiritual sense or something) is being fake as well but in a different way, not relevant to the above situation. Just in case you would think of this next.

It not being fake though, no matter how you slice it. If that's sincerely what you feel is right, then it's genuine.

Fake is like saying "oh yes honey you're beautiful" in a plastic voice and then turning around and rolling your eyes and gagging to the person behind you.

That is fucking fake. Fake is like being two-faced.

 

[A window to the soul]

I just found this on the web. Are these accurate descriptions?
('Fake' is *not* mentioned.)

Extroverted feeling. Friendly, gregarious, kind, empathetic, persuasive, idealistic, tactful, warm, responsible; therapists, ministers, management consultants, homemakers, teachers.

Introverted feeling. Down to earth, practical, not intimate, conformist, persistent. Farmers, pilots, engineers. Often married to social personality type.

 

[EJCC]

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.

What about strategy? If the goal is harmony, you do everything you can to maintain it. If you only keep your current feelings in mind when you're making a decision, you're going to regret it later. Fe-doms are not impulsive creatures -- and they care too much about their goal (i.e. avoiding conflict) to take too many chances. I actually relate to that a lot; if I hate someone but I know for sure that the benefits of being on good terms with them outweigh the benefits of bitching them out and never speaking to them again, then I'll make nice.

Of course, I'm coming at that issue from a Te-dominant angle... but I'm just trying to say that it does make sense, even from the opposite perspective.

 

[Southern Kross]

Holy hell this thread grew 15 pages overnight! After reading through, this seems to be a summary of the majority of what was said:


INFJs and other vaguely sensible people: "Fe is not necessarily manipulative or fake for reasons, a) b) and c)"

Bunch of idiots: "Whatever. I once knew this bitch, and at first she was like, , but then she was like, , and I was like, "Oh no you did not!" . I mean, like, obviously Fe is evil."

 

[Rail Tracer]

Holy hell this thread grew 15 pages overnight! After reading through, this seems to be a summary of the majority of what was said:


INFJs and other vaguely sensible people: "Fe is not necessarily manipulative or fake for reasons, a) b) and c)"

Bunch of idiots: "Whatever. I once knew this bitch, and at first she was like, , but then she was like, , and I was like, "Oh no you did not!" . I mean, like, obviously Fe is evil."

Thank You.

 

[crack]

It not being fake though, no matter how you slice it. If that's sincerely what you feel is right, then it's genuine.

Feel is "right," not feel is "the truth?" I've never heard lie being defined as "what is not morally right." Unless you're equating "right" and "truth," which is the same thing I'm saying.

Regarding your definition of what "fakeness" entails, I could spring a slew of quotes of definitions to prove lie, false, fake are synonymous. Your personal definition of what fakeness seems to regard whether the fakeness is overt or not. But, the action the person is committing (lying to your face when they internally hold another opinion), is it any different whether or not they roll their eyes to someone? I honestly can't see how it is.

 

[21%]

No, I totally get the point. And privacy wasn't even an issue. Here's my point: Why does the Fe-dom tell their neighbors that everything is brilliant when it's not? Why not give a neutral response instead of a "everything is freakin' awesome" - that, to me, is faking the funk. That's all - I didn't miss the point. I get privacy. I never said people need to tell their neighbors everything. that would be silly. What I'm saying is...don't take it to the other extreme and be like, "Oh yeah, my life is an example of perfection" and rant about how everything is just beautiful when it really isn't.

Sorry if I'm back tracking a bit here, but there is something about this that I don't think anyone has directly discussed yet.

First of all, I know exactly what you mean. When I was young, sometimes during a disagreement with my mom, the phone would ring, and she would pick up the phone and be so nice and happy on the phone, and it would make me sooooo mad. I completely understand why she did it that way and I would probably do the same thing, but Fe-user or no, it doesn't make you feel good when you know about the conflict and see the contrast between real feelings and behavior.

Your situation with the neighbors is probably the same. Privacy is one thing, but I don't think the whole 'happy' front is entirely about privacy. Don't forget that Fe is externally-oriented and one thing it does naturally is picking up emotional/social cues. If your neighbor says "Well, we've been through ups and downs" and doesn't look that happy, the Fe-radar will immediately go "Alert! Unhappy person!" and the Fe-user will be compelled to fix the situation by asking how they feel, if they need to vent, if they need any help, etc. Now, if you want privacy, why would you want to go through all that in the first place? It's a lot easier to just say that everything is great to avoid further questions and avoid burdening your neighbor's Fe to care. (Normally, people will assume other people think the same way, so Fe-users will assume that other people are also Fe-users)

Another point that hasn't been said directly is the "Fe team spirit". No matter what is going on inside, once you're a team, you're supposed to put up a happy front for other people if you don't want their help. (Their Fe will be compelled to 'help' if they suspect unhappiness) I agree that this can be taken way too far, but I can share a situation where this doesn't happen. At one party, my INFP bf got mad at me midway through (for reasons I did not know at first) and stopped talking to me, refused to sit next to me on the bus home, etc. Yes, he was being 'true' to his feelings, but it caused a lot of a) gossip b) people asking him if he was feeling all right all night, which annoyed him c) people asking me if there were problems between us d) people judging him to be a unsociable because he was sullen the whole evening -- all of which could have been avoided. (The idea situation for this would have been: him pulling me to the side and saying why he was mad at me, us agreeing to leave early saying that we were tired, going home and fixing things between us without involving other people)

I agree that whole 'sooo happy' thing can be taken way too far, in which case could be a cognitive dissonance strategy (if we say things are okay, maybe things will be okay, etc.), but that's a totally different issue.

I guess what I'm trying to say is what other types see as being "fake" is actually more like "navigation", based on the ideal of social harmony. For Fe-users, the whole world is about the flow of the Fe language, it's like a bowl of water, where every little disturbance causes ripples in all directions. You are a water molecule connected to all other water molecules, and if you're a good person, you don't want to cause a stir. Most Fe behaviors are motivated by just that.

 

[Thalassa]

Feel is "right," not feel is "the truth?" I've never heard lie being defined as "what is not morally right."

What are you, some kind of deontelogical moral absolutist?

Yes, lying can be moral, so can stealing and killing, depending upon context.

Regarding your definition of what "fakeness" entails, I could spring a slew of quotes of definitions to prove lie, false, fake are synonymous. Your personal definition of what fakeness seems to regard whether the fakeness is overt or not. But, the action the person is committing (lying to your face when they internally hold another opinion), is it any different whether or not they roll their eyes to someone? I honestly can't see how it is.

It's totally different to genuinely feel that it's kind and right to tell someone they are beautiful, and to tell someone they're beautiful and not feel it on any level, and just actually feel hateful inside.

Yes, not genuinely "feeling it" is fake.

 

[iwakar]

Clearly I'm open to other peoples opinions, look at how much insight this thread has brought forth. Just because I offer a different opinion or point of view? you have made no contributions towards this discussion troll go play with your 7 year old brother it's probably better for you.

(Weird, never got a quote alert for this.)

Criticizing your approach to this topic, disagreeing with you, and providing my own opinion is not what I consider trolling. If so, I've been doing this foruming thing all wrong for quite some time.

 

[ajblaise]

With Fe doms you'll see more real emotion and more fake, it's a trade off. They've learned that strong emotion gets strong reactions and a lot use that.

 

[crack]

What are you, some kind of deontelogical moral absolutist?

Yes, lying can be moral, so can stealing and killing, depending upon context.

I don't disagree that lying can sometimes be morally right. I never said being fake (meaning "false" or "representing falsely") is always morally bad (I said the opposite in a previous post, to boot). I was saying I don't think what a lie constitutes is contingent on whether or not the action is "morally right or not." Lie = false statement, IMO. Disagree?

It's totally different to genuinely feel that it's kind and right to tell someone they are beautiful, and to tell someone they're beautiful and not feel it on any level, and just actually feel hateful inside.

The feeling of the person is changed, but the action remains the same (lying to your face when they internally hold another opinion). Note I specifically asked if the action was changed.

 

[jixmixfix]

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

huh? no.

 

[jixmixfix]

(Weird, never got a quote alert for this.)

Criticizing your approach to this topic, disagreeing with you, and providing my own opinion is not what I consider trolling. If so, I've been doing this foruming thing all wrong for quite some time.

that's funny since you were the one who criticized me for giving my own opinion.

 

[Ginkgo]

Clearly I'm open to other peoples opinions, look at how much insight this thread has brought forth. Just because I offer a different opinion or point of view? you have made no contributions towards this discussion troll go play with your 7 year old brother it's probably better for you.

 

[iwakar]

that's funny since you were the one who criticized me for giving my own opinion and my approach to the topic.

Fixed. But methinks you're still not grasping that whole critical disagreement vs. trolling "thing".



Does your inferior Fe inform your current opinion to any significant degree or is it mostly based off of your interactions with (evil?) Fe-doms?

 

[Ginkgo]

I've always had a hard time being able to relate to, care about, or articulate the bolded, but even more so when I was younger, because I think as I've gotten older I may have more shadow-y or pseudo-Fe.

The only one of those you listed that I really grasp at all is "are you of esteem to us" and that may be because of being an Extrovert and an Enneagram 6 rather than having Fe.

Yeah, that was just a stream of random thought.

My point was that the Fe attitude is to judge what's ideal for the local group, and not necessarily the individual, though the individual does play a part in the group. It's like ecology, basically. When I think of an ecosystem, I imagine a diverse collection of lifeforms. I prefer Te over Fe; my mindset would be more geared toward strategical ways to manage an ecosystem if I were ever in that position. On the other hand, Fe would have us pay attention to the tastes of the whole. That said, we might find a greater discrepancy between comparing what we really feel with what we ought to feel, while Fi would find it taxing to express what we really feel.

Of course, Fe-ers have real emotions. However, the crux of it all is that they feel for others to such an extent that they may feel more compelled to interact in relation to the expected feelings of others. They may say that a furnished chair is pretty not necessarily in their eyes, but because it ought to be pretty, or because it is in someone else's. On the other hand, they might prod at weak spots. Everyone's a mixed bag; everyone has a face that they present to the world. Recognizing that someone uses such a face to your disgust and reinforcing your prejudices solely because of Fe is a narrow minded and misguided waste of energy.

If you're bothered by someone's behavior, try introspecting to figure out why you're butthurt. And the booboo may be released by a white aura fountainhead ejaculating from your third eye. But probably not. Maybe you should give up hope but try really hard anyway. As an Fi-er, I believe in you, you special, stupid little snowflake. (not directed at you Marm, just to all that apply)

To boot, I think that manipulation isn't always impelled by malicious motivations, and may be in the manipulated's best interest. So, even if all of the Fe-ers under the sun were statistically more manipulative (impossible to quantify), then the idea that Fe-ers are evil two tongued snakes in the grass doesn't have a leg to stand on.

 

[wildcat]

Let us say D (D for demonstration) is an Axiom.
The D of a thing is not the thing then.
It is an agent. The thing is an object.

The agent is Fe.
The object however is Fi.

Look for the lowest common denominator.
Let us say there is more Fe than Fi.
Simple arithmetics. Quantification.
Only as much as Fe is the match of Fi, Fe demonstrates Fi.
What happens to the surplus Fe?