Here's one underlying belief I heard yesterday [MENTION=10082]Starry[/MENTION]: the assumption that pain is always bad. That pain is to be avoided. And by extrapolation, that anyone who causes pain to be evoked in another is bad and should be avoided. Avoiding pain negates every positive effect the pain can confer and teach us. Pain is purposeful. Pain is meant to point out areas in our internal selves that need attention. It has every bit as much purpose as the pain from touching a hot stove tells us to move our hand. Does that pain mean the stove is bad? No. Does it mean we shouldn't cook again? No. Of course, that might be the outcome, originating with a fear that one must avoid pain at all costs. If you stubbed your toe, you could say that's pain with no purpose. Yet this has a purpose too, reminding us that our physical self has limitations. Our internal pain is a roadmap to personal growth, but you can't get anywhere if you're not willing to read the directions.
If we engage in dialogue, and this causes you pain, it's about you, just as surely as my pain is about me. Pain is like a ping of radar saying, "Look here, there's something over here". Investigating it is a necessary step to locating the message it is attempting to convey. Pain is painful, but not purposeless. It's something I personally find worth having gratitude about.
------------------------------
Now, last night as I lay in bed it struck me that there's perhaps no definition out there of what an Fi rant is, and that this might have value in the explication. An Fi rant is any broad, overly generalized external statement that attempts to capture a sense of an inner emotion or other feeling. This feeling is not one that's easily expressed, and generally the inability to express it well with words ensures that the words that get attached to it rarely ever convey what someone actually thinks on the matter but the underlying tone is one that brings some type of awareness to the inner state. An Fi rant can be positive or negative, but is usually negative, ergo a rant. It is an expelling of interal energy in order to get to the root of starting to process the why. In putting the pain outside, it has an unfortunate side effect of causing pain for other people in the way. Partly this is because an Fi rant is frequently misunderstood, and partly because most people avoid looking at pain. Fe hears the disproportion in the pain, and seeks to bounce this back on the person radiating it, rather than seeing it for what it is. It's not trying to push other people with discomfort, it's an attempt to find balance.
So, when I heard Rex, I heard inner distress. The rant portion was something that would correct itself rationally with time and clarification, and sputter out without paying it any undue attention (or with a bit of soothing). The rant occured in a logical place, but in a place where it would assuredly get the most amount of negative reaction, and cause collateral damage, when ironically some compassion for the pain place was desired. Then, in causing Fe folks distress, they make themselves the focal point -- the equivalent of saying, "You made an owie with your words, fix my owie!" Annnnd that's why I don't pay as much attention to that either, as the relevant amount of attention to the WHY of why their internal distress exists has not been examined. I have compassion and a bandaid, but that doesn't exempt INFJs from the internal work. And in not doing any inner work, they reduce their effectiveness in detecting real pain and places that could use a healing touch.
At any rate, no sense rehashing it all and I want to get on with my day. Hope that provides some clarity.