Distrustful of Fe?

[proteanmix]

Why are people so distrustful of Fe? It is the one function that I see the most consistently criticized (along with Si) as being hypocritical, manipulative, self-righteous, and insincere. What about this function makes people think of it in those terms?

Imagine what the world would be like without Fe. I think it would be a very unwelcoming place. If belonging (cue theme from "Cheers") is important to people then I think Fe is the mechanism through which this occurs. Is Fi able to do this just as well as Fe? Are people wary of Fi also or is this only reserved for Fe?

 

[Natrushka]

Perhaps it's because it is not understood?

 

[Totenkindly]

Why are people so distrustful of Fe? It is the one function that I see the most consistently criticized (along with Si) as being hypocritical, manipulative, self-righteous, and insincere. What about this function makes people think of it in those terms?

Imagine what the world would be like without Fe. I think it would be a very unwelcoming place. If belonging (cue theme from "Cheers") is important to people then I think Fe is the mechanism through which this occurs. Is Fi able to do this just as well as Fe? Are people wary of Fi also or is this only reserved for Fe?

Fi seems very good at connection with people one on one. Basically, Fi uses a personal investment with others in order to convince them of one's motivation.

Meanwhile, Fe uses a socially agreed-upon "language" or context to convey feelings of commitment and goodwill -- or the opposite, I suppose, if one is trying to be very clear publicly of their disdain for someone.

(Example: Someone will purposefully break etiquette -- the accepted rules -- in public in order to show purposefully disdain for someone else. It could be showing up for a dinner party with obviously inappropriate clothing. Or using a particular comment during a public political debate to "call someone out." Etc. The whole point here is to embarrass or snub. But it's still Fe.)

Because Fi is so personal, it's easier to embrace than Fe, which is more impersonal and detached. Fi also "stays the same" -- you can usually tell when someone is very fond of you or cares about you -- but Fe can change as society changes. What is appropriate in one time period sometimes becomes inappropriate as the years pass. Thus, Fe seems more arbitrary (because it actually is) and impersonal and fickle, in some ways.

These are a few of my thoughts on it...

 

[proteanmix]

Fi is subjective and changes at someone's personal whims much quicker than Fe can ever hope to keep up. And I don't see how Fe is any less personally invested in another person than Fi is. The whole point of Fe is to find the threads that connect us all together.

Often with this process, we feel pulled to be responsible and take care of others' feelings, sometimes to the point of not separating our feelings from theirs. We may recognize and adhere to shared values, feelings, and social norms to get along.

 

[Totenkindly]

Fi is subjective and changes at someone's personal whims much quicker than Fe can ever hope to keep up. And I don't see how Fe is any less personally invested in another person than Fi is. The whole point of Fe is to find the threads that connect us all together.

That's all true, but it doesn't seem to be addressing what I am suggesting. Perhaps I just can't articulate it well.

Fe is more analytical than Fi. It is a system. And everyone fits into the system. It does not matter what your personality is, or the person you are relating to. One size fits all. You can actually write etiquette books and articulate the "rules of society" at the time they were written, and if someone follows these rules, they will be practicing good Fe.

Fi is more intuitive or feeling oriented. You aren't following rules of how to treat someone, you are exuding a personal-level (not public-level) warmth. You have to make a direct connection to the other person, based on who you are and who THEY are, specifically. It is NOT one size fits all. The rules are harder to articulate. They are not nearly as clear cut.

Does that make any more sense?

 

[Natrushka]

Fi is more intuitive or feeling oriented. You aren't following rules of how to treat someone, you are exuding a personal-level (not public-level) warmth. You have to make a direct connection to the other person, based on who you are and who THEY are, specifically. It is NOT one size fits all. The rules are harder to articulate. They are not nearly as clear cut.

Does that make any more sense?

Hell, yes. I don't think I've ever understood Fe/Fi quite so well as now.

 

[Ivy]

This is all well and good, but what about Fo and Fum? Those are the ones I don't trust.:steam:

 

[Natrushka]

<sniff> What's that I smell?

 

[proteanmix]

That's all true, but it doesn't seem to be addressing what I am suggesting. Perhaps I just can't articulate it well.

Fe is more analytical than Fi. It is a system. And everyone fits into the system. It does not matter what your personality is, or the person you are relating to. One size fits all. You can actually write etiquette books and articulate the "rules of society" at the time they were written, and if someone follows these rules, they will be practicing good Fe.

Fi is more intuitive or feeling oriented. You aren't following rules of how to treat someone, you are exuding a personal-level (not public-level) warmth. You have to make a direct connection to the other person, based on who you are and who THEY are, specifically. It is NOT one size fits all. The rules are harder to articulate. They are not nearly as clear cut.

Does that make any more sense?

Yes it makes, sense I just disagree about it.

I'm going to refer to Linda Berens about this, because she does a better job at explaining the differences between Fe and Fi than me.

Evaluating Processes
Fe: Who can I connect with or relate to in order to learn better? Who can I help in this learning? How can I use this to improve my relationships?

Fi: What is really important here? What is of value to me, and what do I want out of it? Who is good to learn from?

I see Fe doing exactly what you describe Fi as doing. Fi (to me) is all about recognizing what's important to the individual, it doesn't necessarily require connection to others but does it require connection to oneself. It helps people to connect to what's important to them, whereas Fe is all about the connection. Fe is like the infrastructure that allows Fi to communicate.

And then we have societal Fe and personal Fe. While I agree societal Fe is very structured, what about interpersonal/intrapersonal Fe? For example, why do FJs try to make their homes as comfortable to others as possible, whereas FPs make their homes as comfortable for themselves as possible?

So as Nat says, maybe we don't really understand what Fe is?

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Fi is subjective and changes at someone's personal whims much quicker than Fe can ever hope to keep up. And I don't see how Fe is any less personally invested in another person than Fi is. The whole point of Fe is to find the threads that connect us all together.

Fi doesnt change at whim. Fi traces back to the person's axioms that their values are built on. It usually takes years for those to change..and if they care about you, the reason they do is because it is in tune with their values, and this will only change if you cross them..

With Fe..you only need to cross the values enforced by the community. If the Fe likes you at this point, and the social rules change tomorrow, and now you're not in tune with the rules as you were yesterday the Fe will no longer appreciate you. It doesn't matter how you feel, it only matters how others do.

 

[proteanmix]

Fi doesnt change at whim. Fi traces back to the person's axioms that their values are built on. It usually takes years for those to change..and if they care about you, the reason they do is because it is in tune with their values, and this will only change if you cross them..

With Fe..you only need to cross the values enforced by the community. If the Fe likes you at this point, and the social rules change tomorrow, and now you're not in tune with the rules as you were yesterday the Fe will no longer appreciate you. It doesn't matter how you feel, it only matters how others do.

Is this the gloriousness of Fe speaking?

And I'd also like to add, how quickly does society really change considering that Fe is based on the societal language of feeling?

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Yes it makes, sense I just disagree about it.

I'm going to refer to Linda Berens about this, because she does a better job at explaining the differences between Fe and Fi than me.



I see Fe doing exactly what you describe Fi as doing. Fi (to me) is all about recognizing what's important to the individual, it doesn't necessarily require connection to others but does it require connection to oneself. It helps people to connect to what's important to them, whereas Fe is all about the connection. Fe is like the infrastructure that allows Fi to communicate.

And then we have societal Fe and personal Fe. While I agree societal Fe is very structured, what about interpersonal/intrapersonal Fe? For example, why do FJs try to make their homes as comfortable to others as possible, whereas FPs make their homes as comfortable for themselves as possible?

So as Nat says, maybe we don't really understand what Fe is?

No no, Fis dont need to make their homes comfortable for anyone. They are not concerned with appearance, they are only concerned with making themselves and those few close to them happy. Usually taking care of those few close to them is more important than their personal needs because they know that without them they couldn't be happy.

Fes are concerned with making their public image. They tend to think that looking good is synonymous with feeling good, the more people like you, the better off you will be. With Fi, it only matters how you feel. And in order to feel good, unlike with the Fe, you dont just do good and settle there, you have to think things through and make sure that it was all authentic.

 

[Kaveri]

I suppose that fuller appreciation for Fe would be found in collectivistic people and cultures more likely than us mostly individualistic users of the Internet.

I believe that Jennifer got it right (although her description favours Fi and someone else could put it in a way that favours Fe).

Personally I can see good and bad in both Fi and Fe, although it seems to me that Fi is like a more developped version of Fe. I was going to explain this intuition of me just now, but it's difficult to put into words. Besides, Jennifer and BlueWing have already written things that I agree with.

Often I find fiction that focuses on primitive, unaware and very seriously-taken Fe fascinating. That is to say, fiction that focuses on social games from an insightful viewpoint.

Of course, Fi can also be used in bad, selfish ways (ie "I don't like that person and it doesn't feel right to be nice to him, so I don't have to be nice to him, even if he didn't do anything wrong and is devastated by my rudeness").

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Is this the gloriousness of Fe speaking?

And I'd also like to add, how quickly does society really change considering that Fe is based on the societal language of feeling?

Dont need to go further than that. The Fe will only like you if their friends think highly of you. If they find membership with a new group where they are supposed to be different from the way they were prescribed to be in the previous, they will forget all about you. Its all about how others want you to be and what they want to see, has little to do with your likes or dislikes. Your likes or dislikes can hardly stray away from the popular prejudices of those around you. Generally, your values will change as you identify with one group more than the other. The core of your values wont, though the specifics will in accordance to the company you keep.

Though the classical example of fickle Fe would be the USSR society under the Tsars where they first believed in Christianity, and when the Communists came their gospels were replaced with the Das Kapital and they worshipped Stalin with the same fanatical zeal that they worshipped Christ with before.

 

[proteanmix]

No no, Fis dont need to make their homes comfortable for anyone. They are not concerned with appearance, they are only concerned with making themselves and those few close to them happy. Usually taking care of those few close to them is more important than their personal needs because they know that without them they couldn't be happy.

Fes are concerned with making their public image. They tend to think that looking good is synonymous with feeling good, the more people like you, the better off you will be. With Fi, it only matters how you feel. And in order to feel good, unlike with the Fe, you dont just do good and settle there, you have to think things through and make sure that it was all authentic.

BlueWing, if you want to take this up privately I am completely open to this. I going to be honest and say that I find it difficult to rationally converse with you about this subject because you have made your feelings regarding Fe very clear and I don't want this discussion to devolve into EJ/IP morality mudslinging. It's obvious to me that you have trenchant beliefs about Fe that you're not yet willing to change.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Struggling with Ti recently? This has nothing to do with Feelings. And not everybody is going to feel/see things exactly the way you'd want them to. Anything can change so long as there is a reason for it to. It will change only after it has become clear that change is necessary based on one's private thinking, not because everybody wants you to change.

 

[Mycroft]

Here's my problem with underdeveloped Fe in a nutshell: Fe, in striving for amicable relationships between a broad swath of people, creates unspoken "rules" that can generally be applied to create peace and order. These "rules" become an exclusive club. INTXs in particular have issues with Fe because we are by are very nature individualists. We cannot gain entry into the Club of Fe.

Speaking from the perspective of an INTJ, until only recently I had always considered Fe to be the "bullshit window dressing" that I had to peek behind to find the "true motive".

Edit: By "recently" I mean "as of a few years ago", mind you.

 

[proteanmix]

Struggling with Ti recently? This has nothing to do with Feelings. And not everybody is going to feel/see things exactly the way you'd want them to.

I agree which is why I made a thread about this. If I expected people to see things my way I would have keep my thoughts to myself.

When you enter discussions about Fe you tend to change the tone of the discussions, negatively in my opinion. The atmosphere, for me, becomes not one of discussion but one where I have to defend my Fe-ness, which I why I typically avoid your topics about EJs. Your numerous threads ranting against EJs and EFJs let me know this.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Now try looking at it from a T perspective.

Your question: Why is Fe distrusted

My answer: Because it functions in a way where it changes in accordances to external values. It can change for an Fe person if he/she moves from one group to another where different expectations are imposed on them. Or it can change if the values of society by and large do, as for example, this happened in USSR after the Communists replaced the Christians.

Or to break it down in further detail.

Q:Why is Fe distrusted

A:Because it easily changes after the values of society were changed

Q:How likely is this, lets look through history, very few societies were radically rearranged and for most that were it took years.

A:Society does not need to change, the individual's personal affiliations do. That may be enough to have many of their values changed if there will be a rift between the previous expectations and the recent.


The 'atmosphere' had nothing to do with anything. There is only a question and there is only an answer. You dont have to defend your Fe-ness, you only have to defend the truth.

 

[proteanmix]

Here's my problem with underdeveloped Fe in a nutshell: Fe, in striving for amicable relationships between a broad swath of people, creates unspoken "rules" that can generally be applied to create peace and order. These "rules" become an exclusive club. INTXs in particular have issues with Fe because we are by are very nature individualists. We cannot gain entry into the Club of Fe.

Speaking from the perspective of an INTJ, until only recently I had always considered Fe to be the "bullshit window dressing" that I had to peek behind to find the "true motive".

Edit: By "recently" I mean "as of a few years ago", mind you.

What is the alternative to this? I guess people think of Fe as pop music, if it has broad appeal there's no way it can actually be any good.