I have the next few days off...

[wolfy]

Explaining Fe more.

For me, I see both Fe and Fi in me, being primarily (imo) Fe and can do both, but with Fi in a more artificial way.

I can't really see Ne at all in me. (Ni)
I can't really see Te at all in me. (Ti)

The exception is Se is for me, because my Si is so weak, I can see the sharp contrasts.

If I was going to do that,

I can't see Si (Se)
I can't see Te (Ti)
I can't see Ne (Ni)
I can see Fe and Fi

lol

 

[wolfy]

My best friend said istp, my kids said esfp

 

[Hawthorne]

I am trying to think of a way to explain the essential differences without falling too far into behavior. To paraphrase a decent post I remember reading from PerC:

Ti focuses on stripping away the superficial side of any given object to find its universal principles. Ti defines and tries to fit information into an streamlined model with the goal of resolving contradiction. This is done unconsciously until a particularly complex bit of information cannot fit in which case both the information and the internal construct are called into question with the goal of locating and purging the faulty piece. This is how Ti can pinpoint inconsistencies from miles away-- when the information received is not the proper shape or not even from the same puzzle as they understand the world to function.

Fi would then be an integration process taking into account value-based interpretations. It focuses less on defining new information and more on understanding its relationship to it before integrating with the framework already in place. While Ti is attuned to logical consistency and resolving contradiction, Fi is more adept at recognizing dissonance and operating in the grey areas where strict rules and systems often fail. In general, Fi can work with small inconsistencies as long as the bigger picture can still function as whole.

I don't know if that's exactly clear. The original was very dense and I tried to fix that in places.

 

[wolfy]

I am trying to think of a way to explain the essential differences without falling too far into behavior. To paraphrase a decent post I remember reading from PerC:

Ti focuses on stripping away the superficial side of any given object to find its universal principles. Ti defines and tries to fit information into an streamlined model with the goal of resolving contradiction. This is done unconsciously until a particularly complex bit of information cannot fit in which case both the information and the internal construct are called into question with the goal of locating and purging the faulty piece. This is how Ti can pinpoint inconsistencies from miles away-- when the information received is not the proper shape or not even from the same puzzle as they understand the world to function.

Fi would then be an integration process taking into account value-based interpretations. It focuses less on defining new information and more on understanding its relationship to it before integrating with the framework already in place. While Ti is attuned to logical consistency and resolving contradiction, Fi is more adept at recognizing dissonance and operating in the grey areas where strict rules and systems often fail. In general, Fi can work with small inconsistencies as long as the bigger picture can still function as whole.

I don't know if that's exactly clear. The original was very dense and I tried to fix that in places.

I think I understand it. And I relate to Fi here. It sounds like a fuzzier type of Ti in a way though

 

[Hawthorne]

I think I understand it. And I relate to Fi here. It sounds like a fuzzier type of Ti in a way though

I would agree with that. Both have their rules but imo Feeling functions have more flexible boundaries. I'd even say they're more likely to see deviations as novel, interesting, and valuable in their own right while Thinking functions might see them as "problems that need to be fixed or made sense of" first.

 

[wolfy]

I would agree with that. Both have their rules but imo Feeling functions have more flexible boundaries. I'd even say they're more likely to see deviations as novel, interesting, and valuable in their own right while Thinking functions might see them as "problems that need to be fixed or made sense of" first.

Interesting. I can see Fi in myself more if you put it that way.

 

[wolfy]

ISFP or ISTP Test - CelebrityTypes.com

 

[wolfy]

I did that test again and got the opposite result. 53% to the isfp side.