User Tag List

First 7891011 Last

Results 81 to 90 of 165

  1. #81
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainChick View Post
    I get the feeling that you have little understanding about what both Fi as well as empathy truly mean/are.

    Having and using Fi allows a person to observe and, or imagine other people in various traumatic scenarios and imagine what it would be and feel like if such things were to happen to befall them.
    i would say any N and F combination is capable of doing that.

    Fi is more inclined to have internally founded morals and values that they apply to everyone including themselves, i.e. acting in revenge is not okay, the nature of one's intent is far more important than the action one happens to make....

    And through these processes one becomes more empathetic to others and their particular circumstances. Because they assess a person and a person's deeds, by and through imagining how they themselves would be, feel and act if they were that other person, i.e. limited/defined by that person's environmental/genetic conditions and given these perceptual conditions, how "they" would react/respond/feel when subjected to whichever particular circumstance is in question.
    the only point i was trying to make was that Fe and Fi process feelings differently. Fe holds value judgments to an external standard, Fi an internal.

    so when Fe imagines the value judgments others are making, they compare them to what they see, what their current surroundings are, etc.

    when Fi imagines others' value judgments, they compare them to their OWN standard for feeling. Fi can't escape its users value set. this is where N comes in. Ne can try out different ways of interpreting someone's actions until one of those interpretations allows them to empathize. Fi is like a keyhole, Ne has to make the key that fits.

    an Fe user, on the other hand, has changing premises for their values all the time. each change in the environment changes their value set. so when they're in an environment with someone else, the Fe user's values are automatically changed to better fit the average in the room, which means they automatically take on some of the values of the other person. Ni doesn't have as much work to do for Fe as Ne has to do for Fi.

  2. #82
    heart on fire
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    8,457

    Default

    an Fe user, on the other hand, has changing premises for their values all the time. each change in the environment changes their value set. so when they're in an environment with someone else, the Fe user's values are automatically changed to better fit the average in the room, which means they automatically take on some of the values of the other person. Ni doesn't have as much work to do for Fe as Ne has to do for Fi.
    But Fe needs something to keep it from swaying too much in favor of the external emotional mood, so I am not at all sure about this belief that Ni/Ti don't have as much work to do with Fe as Ne/Te has to do with Fi.

  3. #83
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    This is why Fe frightens me.

    Moral bending and basis founded and affected by a "majority rules" mentality.

    Yikes!



    By chance, today, I came by a philosophy that just so happens to reflect my Fi based morals/values perfectly!!!

    Moral universalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    dissonance, out of curiosity, what do you think of this particular philosophy?
    `
    'Cause you can't handle me...

    "A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens

    "That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is."

    Veritatem dies aperit

    Ride si sapis

    Intelligentle sparkles

  4. #84
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by heart View Post
    But Fe needs something to keep it from swaying too much in favor of the external emotional mood, so I am not at all sure about this belief that Ni/Ti don't have as much work to do with Fe as Ne/Te has to do with Fi.
    i agree. i was more talking about it in the context of pure empathy, though.

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainChick View Post
    This is why Fe frightens me.

    Moral bending and basis founded and affected by a "majority rules" mentality.

    Yikes!

    i find it much scarier that someone can have some idealized value set that they attempt to apply to a shades-of-grey reality in an absolute way.

    morals have to bend. and as long as Ni is strong, Fe won't stray too far.

    By chance, today, I came by a philosophy that just so happens to reflect my Fi based morals/values perfectly!!!

    Moral universalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    dissonance, out of curiosity, what do you think of this particular philosophy?
    that philosophy is...ummm.....terrible.

    do you know about cognitive dissonance? that people take the moral stance on any issue that is easiest to take?

    morals are a story we tell about actual events that happen. each person has their own way of telling the story. but there is no objective way to tell a story...

    Moral relativism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    p.s. moral relativism is to moral universalism as Fe is to Fi

    although, my ENFP best friend is much more of a relativist than you are, CC

  5. #85
    Senior Member cafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFj None
    Posts
    9,827

    Default

    Seems to me that universalism can function as a lowest common denominator, but beyond that relativism is necessary. I mean, who gets to define what 'coercive' and 'harm' are?
    “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”
    ~ John Rogers

  6. #86
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    i agree. i was more talking about it in the context of pure empathy, though.

    1)All functions derive from the interior, as this is where the mind is.
    2)Introverted Feeling accesses the mind directly through the path of introversion.
    3)Extroverted Feeling interposes an external object between Feeling and the subject.

    Conclusion:Introverted Feeling is in closer affinity with the essence of Feeling than Extroverted because, the latter has the barrier to overcome that the former does not.

    Lets consider your argument that because Fi holds one to an internal standard and Fe to the external, the latter is somehow more empathetical than the former.

    Why would somebody say this? Because Fi is so self-absorbed that it has no regard for others? Ultimately, since it is all about me, the feelings of others do not matter? I am not sure if this is a plausible criticism, but it is not obviously implausible.

    On the other hand, we have a parallel to this phenomenon on behalf of Fe. Extroverted Feeling can be dominated by the object as much as the introverted Feeling by the ego or the subject.

    In the case of neurosis, Introverted Feeling will be more empathetical than Extroverted Feeling. Because the ego is in closer affinity with the subject than the object. In fact, the ego is the very essence of the subject. Extroverted Feeling will become devoid of Feeling altogether when dominated by the object, as then it will only be concerned with what is externally observable.

    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  7. #87
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    1)All functions derive from the interior, as this is where the mind is.
    2)Introverted Feeling accesses the mind directly through the path of introversion.
    3)Extroverted Feeling interposes an external object between Feeling and the subject.
    i would define empathy as closeness between the "object" (in this case, the other person) and the subject. so given premise 3, Fe is actually more empathetic.

    ego -> Fi -> other
    ego -> other -> Fe

    the feeling itself is filtered through the other person before it gets to the self...what could be more empathetic?

    Conclusion:Introverted Feeling is in closer affinity with the essence of Feeling than Extroverted because, the latter has the barrier to overcome that the former does not.
    agree.

    Lets consider your argument that because Fi holds one to an internal standard and Fe to the external, the latter is somehow more empathetical than the former.

    Why would somebody say this? Because Fi is so self-absorbed that it has no regard for others? Ultimately, since it is all about me, the feelings of others do not matter? I am not sure if this is a plausible criticism, but it is not obviously implausible.

    On the other hand, we have a parallel to this phenomenon on behalf of Fe. Extroverted Feeling can be dominated by the object as much as the introverted Feeling by the ego or the subject.
    my only real defense is the one stated above.

    In the case of neurosis, Introverted Feeling will be more empathetical than Extroverted Feeling. Because the ego is in closer affinity with the subject than the object. In fact, the ego is the very essence of the subject. Extroverted Feeling will become devoid of Feeling altogether when dominated by the object, as then it will only be concerned with what is externally observable.
    it will be concerned with making judgments only based on the external standard. so if the other person is their basis for the external standard, the unhealthy Fe user will make the same value judgments they expect the other to make. i would still consider this empathy.

    unhealthy Fi wouldn't be able to feel any empathy at all since it would be completely stuck on the self.

  8. #88
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    the feeling itself is filtered through the other person before it gets to the self...what could be more empathetic?.
    The object is not the other person. The object is the concrete external world. In order for you to conceive of such a complex idea as the other person, you need to engage the intellect. This requires turning inwards to the mind, that is precisely what Extroverted Feeling shuns. The object overrides the mind.








    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    unhealthy Fi wouldn't be able to feel any empathy at all since it would be completely stuck on the self.
    Empathy is a result of positive emotional affectivity which stems from the internal cognitive process. Fi has direct access to this. All empathy derives from this, which resides within the 'self'. In the case of Fe this is so as well. Focus on one's emotions does not detract from empathy, but is what renders empathy possible in the first place. Feeling to empathy (as you defined it, or positive affectivity towards another person) is analogous to the relation a fuel has to a car.

    Self-love and love of others are not antithetical but inseparable from one another. The more one loves oneself, the more devoid he shall be of negative passions. As a result of this, one will love all things one comes in contact with. The only problem with self-absorbtion is that you wont come in contact with many things. You will not love because you never had a chance to, and not because you don't have the capacity. Think of Emily Dickenson who wrote flabbergasting poetry that not even I could avoid being moved by, yet all who knew her, viewed her as a stern recluse.

    This is a classical tragedy of a forlorn, melancholy Fi.

    As earlier stated, Fi's 'egocentricity' will narrow down the focus. But all things that are relevant to Fi's issues will receive empathy. Could it be that noone receives empathy as everyone is outside of the focus? Possible, but unlikely. As Fi connects us to all that is human. Highly likely, no matter how narrow the focus, Fi shall strike a connection with the few cases it choose to examine, especially if it is involved with Ne that has a habit of connecting unrelated items.




    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    i would define empathy as closeness between the "object" (in this case, the other person) and the subject. so given premise 3, Fe is actually more empathetic..ego -> Fi -> other
    ego -> other -> Fe
    ego-object-Fe-other person.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  9. #89
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    i find it much scarier that someone can have some idealized value set that they attempt to apply to a shades-of-grey reality in an absolute way.
    No, when a person, recognizing herself as such, i.e. that she, like everyone else, is a *human being*, and she employs empathy and compassion towards all human beings as the basis for universal ethics/morality, I'd wager that *everybody* would stand to benefit.

    morals have to bend.
    No, there are times when one acts unethically by going against one's set of morals, but the idea that "morals have to bend" is basically indicative of a *lacking* of morals.

    Though someone with loosely held morals would say/think/believe that (what you assert).


    that philosophy is...ummm.....terrible.
    Why, what's so terrible about it?

    How is it fallacious, and to whom does it potentially harm?

    do you know about cognitive dissonance? that people take the moral stance on any issue that is easiest to take?
    Yeah, I know about cognitive dissonance, and how those lacking a strong self-concept are more vulnerable to *lie to themselves* *ignore logical consistency* *ditch personal integrity* and *shirk accountability* in order to simply feel good about themselves.

    Gross.

    morals are a story we tell about actual events that happen. each person has their own way of telling the story. but there is no objective way to tell a story..
    No, (for most of us), morals are emotionally felt and founded, and hardwired into our neural network, i.e. our biology.

    Have you come across any research on the existence of mirror neurons and their correlation to human empathy. Also, have you come across any research on ToM, Theory of Mind?

    Moral relativism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    p.s. moral relativism is to moral universalism as INFJ is to ENFP
    No need for the post script, from my experience with Fe doms, I was able to infer their moral relativist philosophical inclinations.


    Epiphany:

    Fi= having and utilizing empathy
    `
    'Cause you can't handle me...

    "A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens

    "That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is."

    Veritatem dies aperit

    Ride si sapis

    Intelligentle sparkles

  10. #90
    Senior Member cafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFj None
    Posts
    9,827

    Default

    What bothers me about Fi, the rare times that it does, is that things have to be so blinking emotionally charged. It grates on my nerves like a crying infant.

    Also, those who have not developed a reasonable level of objectivity seem to pull morals out of their rears and insist that those whose beliefs or actions are in conflict with their own are evil. It seems in conflict with the ability to put oneself in the shoes of another.
    “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”
    ~ John Rogers

Similar Threads

  1. Does it drive you crazy to have nothing to do at work?
    By Athenian200 in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 11-11-2013, 05:40 PM
  2. Suffering: Why Does It Entertain You?
    By sprinkles in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 12-11-2012, 04:38 PM
  3. Why Does it Matter to You?
    By bechimo in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-11-2010, 09:16 PM
  4. Curiosity - how does it affect you.
    By TenebrousReflection in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 07-24-2008, 03:53 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