[Fe] The Fe wiki description

[Z Buck McFate]

I appreciate all FJ input thus far! Thanks folks.

Based off the above, I think this is very accurate for how Fe works. Fe doms will likely relate to this strongly. Fe-aux would be a little more challening because it will be partially related to, and at times feel a bit difficult or wrong. As would be for any aux function.

I am very curious to hear how much Fe doms relate to it (hence, thread).

But even if all resident Fe doms agree on it, I'm wondering if it's possible to come up with descriptions so accurate that even Fe aux would feel like it applies over the Fi description? I'm not looking for a description that would resonate in Fe aux so deeply that it could easily be their dominant function. I'm just looking for something that resonates over the alternative presented, however slightly? It seems like it should be possible to fine tune the description enough where INFJs actually would relate to it more than they relate to the description of a function that supposedly isn't even in their 'stack'.

I started this thread because I stumbled on another one in which it was suggested a person might be able to figure out if they're INFJ or INTJ based on looking at descriptions for Fe/Fi/Te/Ti- and with the Fe/Fi descriptions being what they typically currently are, I don't think it is. (Key word: think. I started this thread in hopes of getting a handle on others' positions on this.)

I can understand how this^ might trigger an Je dom to be all "GODDAMNIT, THE Fe DESCRIPTION WORKS FOR Fe DOMS SO LEAVE THINGS ALONE." To which I would like to (good-naturedly) counter "GODDAMNIT, I'M FINE TUNING, STOP PAYING ATTENTION NOW IF IT'S PISSING YOU OFF (AND THANK YOU FOR HAVING PAID ATTENTION ENOUGH TO CONTRIBUTE A COUPLE CENTS)." (eta: I'm not saying this is what I'm hearing in your post, but I can feel it waiting around the corner getting ready to pounce on me...)

***

All of this being said, I really hate feeling like I'm opening up another six pack of Ti "Nope!" on [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION]. (I had no idea he wrote that Fe characteristic list.) Lord knows there's little that makes me wish there was some kind of Madeline Kahn "flames..." emoticon* here than having an avalanche of Fi reciprocate fall on me because of something I said- having the content ignored because it wasn't presented the 'right' way. It isn't that I don't think there's value in that Fi contribution, but it gets exhausting to consistently have a big chunk of the content of what I'm saying dismissed because it isn't wrapped in (what feels to me, when I'm frustrated, like) enough semantic bubble wrap and super-careful fluffy decorum.

[MENTION=6336]AphroditeGoneAwry[/MENTION] repped a good idea- maybe I should have asked how FJs would list Fe characteristics, or how they'd phrase that list differently, in addition to simply asking what they might find wrong with it.

*

 

[ZNP-TBA]

I know these questions are directed towards FJs but they look interesting enough for me ( a tertiary Fe user - TP type) to answer

I'm just curious how much other FJs feel the typo c wiki Fe characteristics (and/or, Fe descriptions in general) apply to them.

Fe Characteristics

As compared to those that use Introverted Feeling (Fi), individuals that use the cognitive function of Extraverted Feeling (Fe) tend towards the following:

• seek to understand others behaviors, motivations, desires and beliefs
  Sort of but only after I've established their mental reasoning which would directly effect behaviors, desires, motivations and beliefs.
• are ruled by objective and more broadly accepted values
  Yes so long as those values are internally consistent and non contradictory.
• express emotion with intentionality and forethought for optimal effect
  Not really, lol
• seek to objectively understand the feelings of others
  Only after I've established their logical thinking process and I look to see if that syncs up with their sentiments.
• have a harder time confronting others; are more diplomatic
  I don't have a hard time confronting others and often do so but I am diplomatic about it usually.
• seek harmony with others
  Yes
• are more practical; willing to make compromises
  Yes, no value I adhere to is sacred and can and should be argued for and against.
• focus on understanding how the group works, connects, gets along (or doesn’t) and all of their views, decides what course of action is most amenable to the intended goal while accommodating the most people
  In general I prefer what's correct over what pleases the group even if the truth offends people. I do, however, like it much better when consistency and harmony sync up together.
• assess consistency of behavior of individuals and behavior with social protocols
  Yes and also with their own stated reasoning. Ex: " I think X is wrong" but the person's behavior demonstrates hypocrisy.
• focus on observable patterns of behaviors and motivations that others seem have
  Yes, people watching can be fun
• are focused on the dynamics of how people relate to each other
  Sure
• focus on how decisions, actions, or expressed opinions are going to be reacted to, countered or felt by others and weighing benefits and costs of the course of action
  Of course but just because I'm aware of how something might effect people that doesn't play a major role in my decision making all the time. If something is true and needs to be said I'll say it and then get excited about the different reactions it might create.

Good questions. Answering these was even further illuminating by comparing and contrasting how a lower Fe (TP) would look at things and how a higher Fe (FJ) would.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

I appreciate all FJ input thus far! Thanks folks.



I am very curious to hear how much Fe doms relate to it (hence, thread).

But even if all resident Fe doms agree on it, I'm wondering if it's possible to come up with descriptions so accurate that even Fe aux would feel like it applies over the Fi description? I'm not looking for a description that would resonate in Fe aux so deeply that it could easily be their dominant function. I'm just looking for something that resonates over the alternative presented, however slightly? It seems like it should be possible to fine tune the description enough where INFJs actually would relate to it more than they relate to the description of a function that supposedly isn't even in their 'stack'.

I started this thread because I stumbled on another one in which it was suggested a person might be able to figure out if they're INFJ or INTJ based on looking at descriptions for Fe/Fi/Te/Ti- and with the Fe/Fi descriptions being what they typically currently are, I don't think it is. (Key word: think. I started this thread in hopes of getting a handle on others' positions on this.)

Just registering my continual CF opinion that to wrap up our hypotheses in theories based on proposed tertiary function stacking in human beings is making a LOT of conjecture and unnecessary variables, with concomitant points of failure. In other words, assuming the tert for INFJ is Ti and INTJ is Fi and making theories on the auxiliary function based on that is not sound, imo. People are too complex. Especially on type C! My tert might not likely be your tert, no matter what our underlying MBTI type is.

Let us not overshoot ourselves with matters of the tertiary, trying to use it to prove matters of the auxiliary. Let the tertiary fall where it may, and explore it as such, I say.

I can understand how this^ might trigger an Je dom to be all "GODDAMNIT, THE Fe DESCRIPTION WORKS FOR Fe DOMS SO LEAVE THINGS ALONE." To which I would like to (good-naturedly) counter "GODDAMNIT, I'M FINE TUNING, STOP PAYING ATTENTION NOW IF IT'S PISSING YOU OFF (AND THANK YOU FOR HAVING PAID ATTENTION ENOUGH TO CONTRIBUTE A COUPLE CENTS)." (eta: I'm not saying this is what I'm hearing in your post, but I can feel it waiting around the corner getting ready to pounce on me...)

***

All of this being said, I really hate feeling like I'm opening up another six pack of Ti "Nope!" on [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION]. (I had no idea he wrote that Fe characteristic list.) Lord knows there's little that makes me wish there was some kind of Madeline Kahn "flames..." emoticon* here than having an avalanche of Fi reciprocate fall on me because of something I said- having the content ignored because it wasn't presented the 'right' way. It isn't that I don't think there's value in that Fi contribution, but it gets exhausting to consistently have a big chunk of the content of what I'm saying dismissed because it isn't wrapped in (what feels to me like) enough semantic bubble wrap and super-careful fluffy decorum.

[MENTION=6336]AphroditeGoneAwry[/MENTION] repped a good idea- maybe I should have asked how FJs would list Fe characteristics, or how they'd phrase that list differently, in addition to simply asking what they might find wrong with it.

*

having said all that, I don't know if I'm a good candidate for this as I'm in question as to my F/T status right now. Be that as it is, I guess I can make a stab at Fe, at least in the aux position:

Fe Aux:

Single Person World (sp):

-Don't use it much. I let my dominant function rule, happily.
-Don't like to reach out to others much, selfish with my time. Do a lot of Ni/Ti thinking
-Will return phone calls and texts promptly (unless I am in an unhealthy phase)
-Might contemplate how to make someone happy or do something for one person that day, but not spend my whole day thinking of others


Second Person World (sx):

-When I am with another person, they become the focus. They will have to work hard to overcome my Fe as I direct it at them. It is like a laser beam I hone in on them. lol.
-I will allow my Fi to be touched but only by very, very trusted friends, who I feel have time to listen, and who also care about me. This takes months usually. I use Fe defensively very effectively
-I will do what I can to help someone out who is with me in action, not just with listening. But I won't do anything and everything. I have limits.
-Not good at celebrating events like birthdays or buying gifts. detest wasting money on cards. I have tried harder in the past to do these things, but since they do not come very easily to me, I have left them off for the most part.
-I like to give to others spontaneously, regardless of the 'day'.
-Not too willing to make compromises without a really good reason. Usually people wanting me to compromise means they are trying to manipulate or control me. I am very sensitive to trying to be controlled due to my history. IOW, I have likely used Fe effectively already to the point that compromise as such is not even necessary. However, for those times when humans clash, I will happily compromise if the reasons are legitimate.


Third Person World (sx/so):

-I try to establish harmony in others if possible
-I understand easily (usually) about group dynamics while at the same time hating to work in groups (always have!)
-I will go out of my way to help others get along, but only if I feel the effort with be fruitful. If I feel the people involved are close-minded, I will likely just watch quietly, after having said one or two statements about it.
-Because I am SX dom, I prefer to talk to just one(intense) or two(exciting dynamic!) other people at a time. so in a larger crowd, I will move to the edges and become a bored observer.
-I don't get too avid about saving people, their relationships, or the world. Except as it concerns bringing them to the Lord. Then I will try harder.
-I will wear myself out at parties I host to make sure everyone is having a good time. Consequently, I don't host parties often anymore.

Overarching World (so):

-I have a good handle on what people need and what the world needs, but no one usually agrees with me on that, so I am stifled for the most part; therefore, I use little Fe to effect change in this realm, because I ultimately feel it is futile and I am powerless.

-I rarely vote or get involved in a large scale on community events. I prefer to volunteer in a quiet way.

-I don't usually get involved in causes because I feel most of them are too far removed from who they are usually trying to help anyway (breast cancer, etc).

 

[Tilt]

Perspective based on a couple of ENFJ e3s So last:

• seek to understand others' behaviors, motivations, desires and beliefs

Most definitely true. This is out of genuine interest and willingness to help others (or humanity as a whole, depending how lofty the goal is at hand). Because there is such a huge focus in trying to know others, they tend to look for generalized patterns of human behaviors that they have observed over time (Fe+Se). When unfiltered and/or not carefully thought out, this can come in the form of broad, sweeping judgements such as "Women just want...".

Also, how else can you spread your "altruistic" message to the world if you can't cater it to the specific audience? (Fe+Ni). This is where the manipulation stigma comes in because with the desire for the others to see and share in the vision, the ENFJ can sometimes put way too pressure and expectations on what others are willing to do for the "vision" or "big picture". They can become so consumed with the vision, they can have a hard time seeing or accepting that other people can not conceptualize fully what they, themselves, can so clearly see.

• are ruled by objective and more broadly accepted values
Not really. Objective and more broadly accepted values are definitely a barometer to see how actions may cause certain reactions. They are much more of a guideline as opposed to a set rule book. If there doesn't seem to be any particular value in upsetting the status quo or social norms, then why bother dealing with all the potential drama? But then I guess other types can argue that strong Fe types can fixate too much on this and come off like the "morality police" which can be true. However, if it's deemed warranted by the ENFJ, they will eschew the set norms and values in order to accomplish the mission, namely, out of social pragmatism.


• express emotion with intentionality and forethought for optimal effect
Somewhat. Like [MENTION=16382]Ene[/MENTION] said, I would say it has much more to do with the words and maybe action rather than straight up emotion. We tend to express our emotions in the heat of the moment (such as intense anger, sadness, happiness, excitement) but the actual static emotions are reserved more for those closest to us.


I think all the other characteristics are closely tied to the 3 I expanded upon. I was serious about what I wrote but with some hyperbole thrown in.

 

[thoughtlost]

I do not know how useful my response will be since you already have people providing great responses.

I think it is interesting that some people do not know if they are Fe/Fi dom or aux, so it's great to have both Fe doms and auxes providing their input. I've usually typed myself simply as xxFJ but I confuse others and people think I am Fi, I guess ...maybe it is because it I am IxFJ.

I've come to feel comfortable calling myself an Fe-user because I am hypersensitive to the other person's perspective. However, when I read the description, I feel like it's pretty vague. Of course I can relate ... but at the same time, it tell me nothing about how I function.

Soo... based off this general framework...

seek to understand others behaviors, motivations, desires and beliefs
are ruled by objective and more broadly accepted values
express emotion with intentionality and forethought for optimal effect
seek to objectively understand the feelings of others
have a harder time confronting others; are more diplomatic
seek harmony with others
are more practical; willing to make compromises
focus on understanding how the group works, connects, gets along (or doesn’t) and all of their views, decides what course of action is most amenable to the intended goal while accommodating the most people
assess consistency of behavior of individuals and behavior with social protocols
focus on observable patterns of behaviors and motivations that others seem have
are focused on the dynamics of how people relate to each other
focus on how decisions, actions, or expressed opinions are going to be reacted to, countered or felt by others and weighing benefits and costs of the course of action

Things that I absolutely agree with are: I seek harmony with others, I do make compromises, and I am bad at confrontation.

The others I relate to ...when I put my own spin on it???
I do not really pride myself on understanding others. I realize that it is really impossible, however I can do this annoying thing were the interpret people's actions, especially in negative situations, and can hold on to that interpretation for a llooonnnngg time. I am not known to check in on the situation to get an accurate picture of pepole's motivations, beliefs and behaviors. Same with the "focus on observable patterns of behaviors and motivations that others seem to have". I'll notice patterns and ...put a negative spin on it. However, in terms of patterns in general... I don't notice them.

Fe people (Well, me haha) are ruled by their own values, but they need to find a group or external setting where there values are accepted and championed to center themselves. If they don't ...they can become very critical of the community's values and you see their nagging side.

In terms of understanding other people's feelings, I wouldn't say that I understand them objectively... I just defer to them. If someone has an opinion or perspective ...mine sort of goes out the window until I am alone. Really, I think the thing for me is that I have my own feelings ...but it's kind of fuzzy and I feel more comfortable trying to relate to people's perspectives because it gives shape to my own feelings. ...so that's why we can appear judgy (more so than INFPs) because what we're doing isn't really objective. So there is something I bolded (that xxFJs are diplomatic ...for me it's because I am bat at understanding my own perspective/enforcing it on others ...it's poor use of Fe really).

I am not sure if we are focused on the dynamics occurring between others ...like, why would I care? mmm... I guess I can do this ...but it's not something I just do... I guess I'd do this more if I was jealous or something like that.

...anyway, I'll probably edit my responses later. I think that this list is okay for me, but I'd need to describe the nuances better so you'd understand me as an xxFJ.

Edit:: I realize that I bolded the last statement. It's not like I objectively do this ...I worry more about how people are going to react to my opinions/actions. I am sensitive to how others perceive me more than an objective "is every happy with this course of action??" I don't see myself in that kind of "leader" position where I am monitoring everyone's feelings and picking the best course of action (I guess in that way, I am not practical).

...Goddamit ...Fe is hard stuff =P

...basically, I make everything about me hahaha xDDD

 

[Yama]

Fe Aux:

Single Person World (sp):

-Don't use it much. I let my dominant function rule, happily.
-Don't like to reach out to others much, selfish with my time. Do a lot of Ni/Ti thinking
-Will return phone calls and texts promptly (unless I am in an unhealthy phase)
-Might contemplate how to make someone happy or do something for one person that day, but not spend my whole day thinking of others

Thank you for writing this!!! It's one of the few Fe descriptions I fully relate to, as an Fe aux and sp. It's nice to see a description so personalized. I agree with every single one of those points.

Which makes me think, it would be cool to add these descriptions to the wiki--how Fe is in different positions, how it is with different enneagram variants, etc.

 

[-Beatriz]

Mhm I will say how much I relate to each topic.
[Note: this is how I relate, I'm not saying that all Fe users are exactly like me]

~ seek to understand others behaviors, motivations, desires and beliefs -> True
~ are ruled by objective and more broadly accepted values -> Kind of
~ express emotion with intentionality and forethought for optimal effect -> Kind of
~ seek to objectively understand the feelings of others -> True
~ have a harder time confronting others; are more diplomatic -> F*CKING TRUE
~ seek harmony with others -> True, I feel uncomfortable when there is too much hate in an environment
~ are more practical; willing to make compromises -> True
~focus on understanding how the group works, connects, gets along (or doesn’t) and all of their views, decides what course of action is most amenable to the intended goal while accommodating the most people -> Kind of; I don't always take action to get the environment better, I'd rather just suffer in silence
~assess consistency of behavior of individuals and behavior with social protocols -> Kind of?
~ focus on observable patterns of behaviors and motivations that others seem have -> True
~ are focused on the dynamics of how people relate to each other -> True
~ focus on how decisions, actions, or expressed opinions are going to be reacted to, countered or felt by others and weighing benefits and costs of the course of action -> Absolutely true

I guess I'm a bit of a stereotypical Fe user after all, lol.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

Thanks everyone, again, for you contributions.

I know these questions are directed towards FJs but they look interesting enough for me ( a tertiary Fe user - TP type) to answer

It is helpful to get the TP experience of Fe in the mix.

The reason I emphasized FJ and/or Fe dom is that it's historically very difficult to get Fe doms to weigh in on this. In past discussions, in this forum, it's been mostly INFJs and various TPs representing the Fe point of view. Getting Fe doms to weigh in is like herding cats. I'm inclined to suspect it has something to do with the nature of Fe, not to mention the direction Fe/Fi conversations tend to take (in this forum, in the past). But it has been a while since en masse blatant dumping of hostility towards Fe- or least it's gone down enough that I only catch isolated micro-aggressive dumping here and there- so I thought I'd try raising this again. I'm getting way more responses than the last time I tried getting Fe dom feedback on typical Fe descriptions.

It's especially helpful to get some SFJ take on Fe. ( <3 to the SFJs helping out.)


*****


I'm working on rephrasing the Wiki description. When I (eventually) get closer to finishing, I'll (eventually) post it for other Fe members approval.

It has been VERY helpful to see what rubs others the wrong way about the current description, and/or what they agree with. So thanks for all the feedback (TP included)!

 

[Z Buck McFate]

I do not know how useful my response will be since you already have people providing great responses.

Even if a person feels their position has already been represented by others, it's still very helpful to hear that. It gives an idea of how widely that opinion/position applies to others FJs.

it would be cool to add these descriptions to the wiki--how Fe is in different positions, how it is with different enneagram variants, etc.

This is a pretty good idea.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

There is a way I've noticed that people I find to have strong Fe will care about community projects. They continually think of the larger systems of people and work for positive outcomes whether there is a personal relationship with those individuals or not. I think they find satisfaction in knowing things are improving for everyone.

They are also very good with clear social boundaries. I knew a Fe-dom who used to give me relationship advice, and she was also very clear, direct, spot-on about what is okay and what is not. She was always direct in telling people 'no', but with a smile and in the best way they could accept it. Fe-doms I've observed value harmony, but will call the hard shots as well as the pleasantries to make that happen. They think in large-scale harmony, not just in the moment.

They also enjoy giving advice and feel that people need each other to learn from, to point out our oversights and mistakes. There is an assumption that the individual may not be the best judge in all contexts, but that by sharing and listening to each other we all learn better. They go with the two heads are better than one to solve subjective, personal issues.

I don't want to approach this as how I experience Fe, because I've been having some doubts about it. If I am a Fe-aux, then for me Fe is about being affected emotionally by other people and desiring that everyone gets along. Conflict makes me sick, but I don't think that Fe-dom get sick by it. I think they may be energized to fix it head-on. It gives them an outlet for their skill and contribution.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

[MENTION=7842]Z Buck McFate[/MENTION] [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION]
You may have already referenced Jung, but I wanted to share the link and quote here. I'll confess that I would have difficulty turning this into a wiki listed summary. He focuses a bit much on just the female manifestation of it. I definitely know men who are Fe-doms - they couldn't be anything else.

There is a great link that has his descriptions of all the functions. Classics in the History of Psychology -- Jung (1921/1923) Chapter 10

Carl Jung on Fe
4. The Extraverted Feeling-Type

In so far as feeling is, incontestably, a more obvious peculiarity of feminine psychology than thinking, the most pronounced feeling-types are also to be found among women. When extraverted feeling possesses the priority we speak of an extraverted feeling-type. Examples of this type that I can call to mind are, almost without exception, women. She is a woman who follows the guiding-line of her feeling. As the result of education her feeling has become developed into an adjusted function, subject to conscious control. Except in extreme cases, feeling has a personal character, in spite of the fact that the subjective factor may be already, to a large extent, repressed. The personality appears to be adjusted in relation to objective conditions. Her feelings correspond with objective situations and general values. Nowhere is this more clearly revealed than in the so-called 'love-choice'; the 'suitable' man is loved, not another one; he is suitable not so much because he fully accords with the fundamental character of the woman -- as a rule she is quite uninformed about this -- but because [p. 449] he meticulously corresponds in standing, age, capacity, height, and family respectability with every reasonable requirement. Such a formulation might, of course, be easily rejected as ironical or depreciatory, were I not fully convinced that the love-feeling of this type of woman completely corresponds with her choice. It is genuine, and not merely intelligently manufactured. Such 'reasonable' marriages exist without number, and they are by no means the worst. Such women are good comrades to their husbands and excellent mothers, so long as husbands or children possess the conventional psychic constitution. One can feel 'correctly', however, only when feeling is disturbed by nothing else. But nothing disturbs feeling so much as thinking. It is at once intelligible, therefore, that this type should repress thinking as much as possible. This does not mean to say that such a woman does not think at all; on the contrary, she may even think a great deal and very ably, but her thinking is never sui generis; it is, in fact, an Epimethean appendage to her feeling. What she cannot feel, she cannot consciously think. 'But I can't think what I don't feel', such a type said to me once in indignant tones. As far as feeling permits, she can think very well, but every conclusion, however logical, that might lead to a disturbance of feeling is rejected from the outset. It is simply not thought. And thus everything that corresponds with objective valuations is good: these things are loved or treasured; the rest seems merely to exist in a world apart.

But a change comes over the picture when the importance of the object reaches a still higher level. As already explained above, such an assimilation of subject to object then occurs as almost completely to engulf the subject of feeling. Feeling loses its personal character -- it becomes feeling per se; it almost seems as though the [p. 450] personality were wholly dissolved in the feeling of the moment. Now, since in actual life situations constantly and successively alternate, in which the feeling-tones released are not only different but are actually mutually contrasting, the personality inevitably becomes dissipated in just so many different feelings. Apparently, he is this one moment, and something completely different the next -- apparently, I repeat, for in reality such a manifold personality is altogether impossible. The basis of the ego always remains identical with itself, and, therefore, appears definitely opposed to the changing states of feeling. Accordingly the observer senses the display of feeling not so much as a personal expression of the feeling-subject as an alteration of his ego, a mood, in other words. Corresponding with the degree of dissociation between the ego and the momentary state of feeling, signs of disunion with the self will become more or less evident, i.e. the original compensatory attitude of the unconscious becomes a manifest opposition. This reveals itself, in the first instance, in extravagant demonstrations of feeling, in loud and obtrusive feeling predicates, which leave one, however, somewhat incredulous. They ring hollow; they are not convincing. On the contrary, they at once give one an inkling of a resistance that is being overcompensated, and one begins to wonder whether such a feeling-judgment might not just as well be entirely different. In fact, in a very short time it actually is different. Only a very slight alteration in the situation is needed to provoke forthwith an entirely contrary estimation of the selfsame object. The result of such an experience is that the observer is unable to take either judgment at all seriously. He begins to reserve his own opinion. But since, with this type, it is a matter of the greatest moment to establish an intensive feeling rapport with his environment, redoubled efforts are now required [p. 451] to overcome this reserve. Thus, in the manner of the circulus vitiosus, the situation goes from bad to worse. The more the feeling relation with the object becomes overstressed, the nearer the unconscious opposition approaches the surface.

We have already seen that the extraverted feeling type, as a rule, represses his thinking, just because thinking is the function most liable to disturb feeling. Similarly, when thinking seeks to arrive at pure results of any kind, its first act is to exclude feeling, since nothing is calculated to harass and falsify thinking so much as feeling-values. Thinking, therefore, in so far as it is an independent function, is repressed in the extraverted feeling type. Its repression, as I observed before, is complete only in so far as its inexorable logic forces it to conclusions that are incompatible with feeling. It is suffered to exist as the servant of feeling, or more accurately its slave. Its backbone is broken; it may not operate on its own account, in accordance with its own laws, Now, since a logic exists producing inexorably right conclusions, this must happen somewhere, although beyond the bounds of consciousness, i.e. in the unconscious. Pre-eminently, therefore, the unconscious content of this type is a particular kind of thinking. It is an infantile, archaic, and negative thinking.

So long as conscious feeling preserves the personal character, or, in other words, so long as the personality does not become swallowed up by successive states of feeling, this unconscious thinking remains compensatory. But as soon as the personality is dissociated, becoming dispersed in mutually contradictory states of feeling, the identity of the ego is lost, and the subject becomes unconscious. But, because of the subject's lapse into the unconscious, it becomes associated with the unconscious thinking -- function, therewith assisting the unconscious [p. 452] thought to occasional consciousness. The stronger the conscious feeling relation, and therefore, the more 'depersonalized,' it becomes, the stronger grows the unconscious opposition. This reveals itself in the fact that unconscious ideas centre round just the most valued objects, which are thus pitilessly stripped of their value. That thinking which always thinks in the 'nothing but' style is in its right place here, since it destroys the ascendancy of the feeling that is chained to the object.

Unconscious thought reaches the surface in the form of irruptions, often of an obsessing nature, the general character of which is always negative and depreciatory. Women of this type have moments when the most hideous thoughts fasten upon the very objects most valued by their feelings. This negative thinking avails itself of every infantile prejudice or parallel that is calculated to breed doubt in the feeling-value, and it tows every primitive instinct along with it, in the effort to make 'a nothing but' interpretation of the feeling. At this point, it is perhaps in the nature of a side-remark to observe that the collective unconscious, i.e. the totality of the primordial images, also becomes enlisted in the same manner, and from the elaboration and development of these images there dawns the possibility of a regeneration of the attitude upon another basis.

Hysteria, with the characteristic infantile sexuality of its unconscious world of ideas, is the principal form of neurosis with this type.

 

[highlander]

[MENTION=14857]fia[/MENTION] - excellent thought. This profile description by [MENTION=14179]SolitaryWalker[/MENTION] might be helpful too. I think he did a nice job of making Jung more accessible.

http://www.typologycentral.com/foru...s/5635-enfj-personality-type-descritpion.html

 

[Tilt]

There is a way I've noticed that people I find to have strong Fe will care about community projects. They continually think of the larger systems of people and work for positive outcomes whether there is a personal relationship with those individuals or not. I think they find satisfaction in knowing things are improving for everyone.

They are also very good with clear social boundaries. I knew a Fe-dom who used to give me relationship advice, and she was also very clear, direct, spot-on about what is okay and what is not. She was always direct in telling people 'no', but with a smile and in the best way they could accept it. Fe-doms I've observed value harmony, but will call the hard shots as well as the pleasantries to make that happen. They think in large-scale harmony, not just in the moment.

They also enjoy giving advice and feel that people need each other to learn from, to point out our oversights and mistakes. There is an assumption that the individual may not be the best judge in all contexts, but that by sharing and listening to each other we all learn better. They go with the two heads are better than one to solve subjective, personal issues.

I don't want to approach this as how I experience Fe, because I've been having some doubts about it. If I am a Fe-aux, then for me Fe is about being affected emotionally by other people and desiring that everyone gets along. Conflict makes me sick, but I don't think that Fe-dom get sick by it. I think they may be energized to fix it head-on. It gives them an outlet for their skill and contribution.

i would agree on most of this based on my experiences with myself and other Fe-doms. However, on the "conflict" aspect, I actually freak out on the inside.... when there is too much conflict (The other Fe-doms who I know fairly well also get really frazzled but hide it unless you are in the "inner circle".) So I confront the conflict in order to fix the problem and get rid of the discomfort or straight up disengage if I didn't want to deal with the conflict, don't trust the other party, or see it as a futile exercise.

 

[Eric B]

I wrote both the Wiki entry and the post. The content for the Wiki entry that [MENTION=7842]Z Buck McFate[/MENTION] references above came from the post. After that, EricB added the section on top above Characteristics of Extraverted Feeling (Fe). Again, I was trying to synthesize what a lot of people were saying in that thread.

This is the whole Wiki Entry Extraverted Feeling - Typology Wiki

But we should definitely change it!! It's set up for single sign-on for the members to be able to edit/maintain it.

Yeah; I saw that description list, and I don't usually deal in those, because they can become too overgeneralized, but I didn't feel like removing it, as it does give an idea of the behavior, and it could always be discussed as to how accurate it is.

 

[PeaceBaby]

There is a way I've noticed that people I find to have strong Fe will care about community projects. They continually think of the larger systems of people and work for positive outcomes whether there is a personal relationship with those individuals or not. I think they find satisfaction in knowing things are improving for everyone.

This to me is more indicative of social dominance / enneagram.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

I do think there's a distinct tendency to be aware of and be sensitive to the interpersonal space outside oneself, with Fe. I don't like the "seeks to understand self" vs. "seeks to understand others" dichotomy though, for a few reasons.

One is that I think it infers more conscious intentionality than is really there- it mistakes a mindful awareness on what's actually a barely conscious, inherent direction of attention. People sort of drift through life mostly on autopilot. We don't seek to understand the vast majority of things that catch our attention- it's more like we instinctively believe we already understand it enough and move on to experience the next batch of sensory information. Or something. So I think “seeks to understand” is a misnomer.

That, and I think the conscious intention of seeking to understand self and other is so inexorably tied together that I don't believe it's possible to really do one successfully without doing the other. Anyone who seeks to understand others without having first done the work to understand themselves is bound to end up getting frustrated with aspects 'of other people' which rightfully belong to themselves. And understanding the self without being able to take the 'other' into account presents its own problematics as well.

Honestly, my issue with phrasing it thusly- “seeking to understand others” (with the implication that it isn't as important to simultaneously understand one's own self)- is that it has a pathological ring to me. When people are focused on understanding others' intentions/motivations/values/etc more than their own intentions/motivations/values/etc- the result is almost invariably invasive and parasitic behavior. It's something people do, unawares, in order so sort of flee from (their own) discomfort or shame. And both FJs and FPs do this, ime.

So one of the issues I'm having is with “seeks to understand” others/self. I'm having trouble coming up with a succinct alternative that I think applies- but when I do, I'll post it here for Fe brethren approval.

[Still working on fleshing out my issues with the rest of the description. But I would appreciate any Fe dom/FJ feedback on whether I'm alone in these things rubbing me the wrong way.]

However, on the "conflict" aspect, I actually freak out on the inside.... when there is too much conflict (The other Fe-doms who I know fairly well also get really frazzled but hide it unless you are in the "inner circle".) So I confront the conflict in order to fix the problem and get rid of the discomfort or straight up disengage if I didn't want to deal with the conflict, don't trust the other party, or see it as a futile exercise.

This describes my experience rather well, I think. Outer conflict can quickly escalate into overwhelming inner chaos- because incoming information expands so much for (people-oriented) introverted perception.

 

[Tilt]

I agree with your point. The more I saw how my own actions and words affected other people, the more parallels I saw concerning the people around me. If you don’t have some self-awareness and sense of self, how well can you truly understand other people? Likewise, if you don't have some understanding of human nature, then how well can you truly know yourself (without having at least some frame of reference)? They tend to go hand in hand rather than being diametrically opposed.

 

[thoughtlost]

There is a way I've noticed that people I find to have strong Fe will care about community projects. They continually think of the larger systems of people and work for positive outcomes whether there is a personal relationship with those individuals or not. I think they find satisfaction in knowing things are improving for everyone.

They are also very good with clear social boundaries. I knew a Fe-dom who used to give me relationship advice, and she was also very clear, direct, spot-on about what is okay and what is not. She was always direct in telling people 'no', but with a smile and in the best way they could accept it. Fe-doms I've observed value harmony, but will call the hard shots as well as the pleasantries to make that happen. They think in large-scale harmony, not just in the moment.

They also enjoy giving advice and feel that people need each other to learn from, to point out our oversights and mistakes. There is an assumption that the individual may not be the best judge in all contexts, but that by sharing and listening to each other we all learn better. They go with the two heads are better than one to solve subjective, personal issues.

I don't want to approach this as how I experience Fe, because I've been having some doubts about it. If I am a Fe-aux, then for me Fe is about being affected emotionally by other people and desiring that everyone gets along. Conflict makes me sick, but I don't think that Fe-dom get sick by it. I think they may be energized to fix it head-on. It gives them an outlet for their skill and contribution.

I guess I just want to hit on this point-by-point, from my own perspective. I hope that is okay.

You note that this seems be the experience of Fe with those with strong Fe, so I guess I want to point out how it looks with those with slightly weaker Fe (but doesn't know I am dom or aux).

--I do not mind doing things that help people in anyway, yes. This part will probably hold true for at least half of the feelers in the world. You are right that we are continually thinking of larger systems ...but that also makes it harder to act and actually help people because I am noticing how our systems fail to help people. So I want to work towards positive outcomes (like in my career and stuff) ...but what I really do is sit and think about the system. I'd rather not be put in the position where I think I am working for the greater good, but then find out that I am actually harming people. That would send me crawling back into my hole or at least eat at me.

I am horrible at social boundaries. I really do not know how to say "no with a smile". If I do say no ...I say it with painful guilt. So no, no healthy Fe for me here, lol. I sometimes think that I can be good at giving advice (but that is once in a blue moon), but refer to my statement above. I cannot stand the idea of saying something that would end up hurting them even if I had good intentions... so I'd rather shut up or stumble upon my words because I am trying my hardest to be/say/do what they'd need or at least not say something horrible. But it's a trial and error process. It's very difficult, actually.

And yes, I am affected emotionally by other people very much and want to get along with others. I consider myself to be a very warm person. I generally don't have issues with people who are not close to me ...because of the fact that they are not close to me so I don't really care about what they do all that much and people think I am peaceful, accepting, understanding, tolerant and forgiving.
but when it comes to people close to me ...then my issues with conflict come out more, I am not energized by conflict because solving the issue isn't easy for me at all... a lot of the times things get messy for me which I am quite embarrassed by.

So basically, as long as I keep you at a great distance ...things are okay. It's the only way I know how to deal with conflict.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

I posted this in a Fi thread, but decided to move it here. This isn't an answer to the question of defining Fe, but it does show an organized way to deal with the grey area between Fe and Fi. I post it here as a reference for working out the grey area in the definition of Fe.

This is an idea I had a few years ago that I'm sure could use revision, but it looks at Fi/Fe in higher resolution. It has two axes instead of one for Fi and Fe, and helps to clarify the confusion I personally have about the functions. I would define myself in the middle as likely Extroverted-Intrapersonal being aware of individual systems outside myself, but not relational systems so much.

This approach introversion--extroversion axis as the place where the conscious awareness is focused. Is the data coming from inside or outside of the person? Then there is an axis look at the intra-personal vs. inter-personal defining whether the focus is on self-awareness or relational awareness.

Definition of terms (the italicized portions are from dictionary.com)

Introversion = the state of being concerned primarily with one's own thoughts and feelings rather than with the external environment. The point of reference and conscious awareness is inside self.

Extroversion = the state of being concerned primarily with things outside the self, with the external environment rather than with one's own thoughts and feelings. The point of reference and conscious awareness is outside self.

Intrapersonal = Existing or occurring within the individual self or mind. These are the dynamics within the internal system of an individual, defined as self-awareness.

Interpersonal = pertaining to the relations between persons. These are the dynamics in the external systems of people, defined as relational awareness.
__________________________________________________
Four Quadrants

Introverted Intrapersonal (this is the obvious Fi domain)
An internal point of reference concerned with the dynamics that occur within the self. This focus is on self-awareness.

Introverted Interpersonal (Fi or Fe?)
An internal point of reference concerned with the dynamics that occur between others and self. This focus is on harmony with others.

Extroverted Intrapersonal (Fi or Fe?)
An external point of reference concerned with the dynamics that occur within individuals outside the self. This focus is on individual empathy.

Extroverted Interpersonal (the obvious Fe domain)
An external point of reference concerned with the dynamics that occur between individuals outside of the self. This focus is on hosting, caretaking, and maintaining the community.

 

[thoughtlost]

I posted this in a Fi thread, but decided to move it here. This isn't an answer to the question of defining Fe, but it does show an organized way to deal with the grey area between Fe and Fi. I post it here as a reference for working out the grey area in the definition of Fe.

This is an idea I had a few years ago that I'm sure could use revision, but it looks at Fi/Fe in higher resolution. It has two axes instead of one for Fi and Fe, and helps to clarify the confusion I personally have about the functions. I would define myself in the middle as likely Extroverted-Intrapersonal being aware of individual systems outside myself, but not relational systems so much.

This approach introversion--extroversion axis as the place where the conscious awareness is focused. Is the data coming from inside or outside of the person? Then there is an axis look at the intra-personal vs. inter-personal defining whether the focus is on self-awareness or relational awareness.

Definition of terms (the italicized portions are from dictionary.com)

Introversion = the state of being concerned primarily with one's own thoughts and feelings rather than with the external environment. The point of reference and conscious awareness is inside self.

Extroversion = the state of being concerned primarily with things outside the self, with the external environment rather than with one's own thoughts and feelings. The point of reference and conscious awareness is outside self.

Intrapersonal = Existing or occurring within the individual self or mind. These are the dynamics within the internal system of an individual, defined as self-awareness.

Interpersonal = pertaining to the relations between persons. These are the dynamics in the external systems of people, defined as relational awareness.
__________________________________________________
Four Quadrants

Introverted Intrapersonal (this is the obvious Fi domain)
An internal point of reference concerned with the dynamics that occur within the self. This focus is on self-awareness.

Introverted Interpersonal (Fi or Fe?)
An internal point of reference concerned with the dynamics that occur between others and self. This focus is on harmony with others.

Extroverted Intrapersonal (Fi or Fe?)
An external point of reference concerned with the dynamics that occur within individuals outside the self. This focus is on individual empathy.

Extroverted Interpersonal (the obvious Fe domain)
An external point of reference concerned with the dynamics that occur between individuals outside of the self. This focus is on hosting, caretaking, and maintaining the community.

Interesting!!

I would call myself Introverted Interpersonal. I care about the relational aspects. I care about how my personal perspective on life relates with the other person's individual outlook and experience/perspective. Everything always ties back to mwah, haha.