What would the world do without Fe?

[Sniffles]

Read again...I said that Ti confounds me

Same thing.

 

[Zarathustra]

I am totally OK with this, but it takes 300+ posts of confusion to even reach this conclusion.

Has a conclusion been reached?

Instead of saying Fi=authentic, Fe=fake, ask how does Fe/Fi manifest it's authenticity?

Instead of saying Fi=trust/Fe=distrust, ask how does it manifest itself these functions?

Instead of saying Fi=empathetic (this one boils my blood!), ask how would it manifest through these functions?

You get the picture. That way, you can accommodate and stretch stretch it further, without putting them at loggerheads and like the freaking Montagues and Capulets. Tupac vs. Biggie. People end up dead like that.

Well, to be honest, I don't buy the trust/distrust dichotomy, and I'm not sure whether I'd buy the empathetic one (what is this? Fe=sympathy, Fi=empathy? ), but I do believe the authentic/inauthentic one, at least based on a certain understanding of authenticity (which, admittedly, could very much just end up being tautological/circular).

Nevertheless, what if there are indeed real dichotomies like these, and, by preventing ourselves from engaging in this type of discussion a priori, we would be preventing ourselves from discovering them at all?

I'd prefer for false dichotomies to be put up, in order to be shot down, then for no dichotomies at all to be put up under the highly questionable assumption that no such dichotomies exist.

But hell, that's just my two cents...

 

[Amargith]

Same thing.

con·found (kn-found, kn-)
tr.v. con·found·ed, con·found·ing, con·founds
1. To cause to become confused or perplexed


....how so?

 

[Sniffles]

Oh nevermind.

 

[Jaguar]

Instead of saying Fi=empathetic (this one boils my blood!)

Building Blocks of Personality Type: Jung's Mental Processes, Page 101:

Unique Strengths of Fe:

EMPATHY

/Thread

 

[Amargith]

Oh nevermind.

...was it meant as a joke?

Coz how you got 'hate' from 'confounded' is a mystery to me.

 

[Zarathustra]

Coz how you got 'hate' from 'confounded' is a mystery to me.

Probably the same way you got "hate" from "pisses off"...

I thought just you said Ti pisses you off, and yet here you are.

In Peguy's defense (am I the only native English speaker among the three of us?): confound does generally have a sense of getting "upset" or "pissed off" over the confusion...

 

[proteanmix]

Building Blocks of Personality Type: Jung's Mental Processes, Page 101:

Unique Strengths of Fe:

EMPATHY

/Thread

This isn't a race; I'm not claiming Fe is more empathetic either.

Above anything else, I believe empathy is a learned skill.

 

[Zarathustra]

This isn't a race; I'm not claiming Fe is more empathetic either.

Above anything else, I believe empathy is a learned skill.

But couldn't you just turn around and say that the skill one is learning is to use a function associated with empathy (Fe, Fi: take your choice)?

See: all of this talk is so groundless... which is why I don't really see why people are in favor of restricting certain types of discussion over others (assuming, of course, they're all aimed at revealing some sort of truth)...

 

[Amargith]

Probably the same way you got "hate" from "pisses off"...





In Peguy's defense (am I the only native English speaker of us 3?): confound does generally have a sense of getting "upset" or "pissed off" over the confusion...

I'll admit to not being a native speaker, but on the definition I looked up, the *first* meaning was 'to be confused'. Also, if you check back a post (or perhaps two), you'll find that he asked me why I hated Fe

 

[Sniffles]

And you said because you don't understand it.

 

[Jaguar]

This isn't a race; I'm not claiming Fe is more empathetic either.

Above anything else, I believe empathy is a learned skill.

No one said it was a race. But it gets old reading a particular type claim license to something any human being is capable of. No one taught me to be empathetic any more than anyone taught me to have brown eyes. So we differ on that one, greatly.

 

[Amargith]

And you said because you don't understand it.

Touché, I was waiting for you to make that point
I was also, in that post, being a smart-ass, and kinda speaking for others. I find that most people hate what they do not comprehend, or grasp, or haven't tried to figure out, things that are new, somehow.

Personally, I hate neither Fe, nor Ti. However, Fe tends to rub me more easily the wrong way, whereas Ti just seriously leaves me coz I'm so blindsighted by it.

 

[Glycerine]

Take with a grain of salt:
Fe: What are the commonalities in the group? What are the similarities that are going to help us connect with others?
Fi: What are the individual differences that make each of us unique and special. How can we integrate the individual differences to get along with others?

Of course, I think we need to incorporate both perspectives to operate in a balanced way in the world. This is just what I have noticed on the boards and in real life that may cause much of the conflict.

 

[proteanmix]

But couldn't you just turn around and say that the skill one is learning is to use a function associated with empathy (Fe, Fi: take your choice)?

See: all of this talk is so groundless... which is why I don't really see why people are in favor of restricting certain types of discussion over others (assuming, of course, they're all aimed at revealing some sort of truth)...

No because empathy is largely based on mirror neurons and neurotransmitters within the brain. Empathetic response is natural. Other babies start crying when one baby starts crying. Think of all the recent tragedies in the world of the last five years: the current flooding in Afghanistan, the Tsunami, the Haitian earthquake, Hurricane Katrina. Humanity as a Whole responds incredibly quickly to other humans in pain.

Now when you break it down to the individual level you can see a more pronounced difference in empathic response, but at that point it's hard to hash it out. Take the Haitian earthquake again. For example, a person to this very day continues to donate money to relief efforts.

Are they doing it because they have familial associations or any other ties to Haiti?
Are they doing it because they're French and feel some kind of former colonial tie?
Are they doing it because they want to run for Haitian president and believe they can run things better?
Are they doing it out of the unbounded goodness of their heart?

All of them may be material manifestations of empathy, but then you move into motivations and why someone is doing what they do and is one motivation more "noble" than the other? How do you begin to weigh?

If you want to make the argument that cognitive functions (Lenore Thomson does this) are linked to the brain then it's even harder to justify and substantiate. Feel free to speculate for a though exercise. If you want to try, go ahead but I think it's pointless.

 

[Zarathustra]

No because empathy is largely based on mirror neurons and neurotransmitters within the brain. Empathetic response is natural. Other babies start crying when one baby starts crying. Think of all the recent tragedies in the world of the last five years: the current flooding in Afghanistan, the Tsunami, the Haitian earthquake, Hurricane Katrina. Humanity as a Whole responds incredibly quickly to other humans in pain.

Now when you break it down to the individual level you can see a more pronounced difference in empathic response, but at that point it's hard to hash it out. Take the Haitian earthquake again. For example, a person to this very day continues to donate money to relief efforts.

Are they doing it because they have familial associations or any other ties to Haiti?
Are they doing it because they're French and feel some kind of former colonial tie?
Are they doing it because they want to run for Haitian president and believe they can run things better?
Are they doing it out of the unbounded goodness of their heart?

All of them may be material manifestations of empathy, but then you move into motivations and why someone is doing what they do and is one motivation more "noble" than the other? How do you begin to weigh?

If you want to make the argument that cognitive functions (Lenore Thomson does this) are linked to the brain then it's even harder to justify and substantiate. Feel free to speculate for a though exercise. If you want to try, go ahead but I think it's pointless.

I don't really see how any of that contradicted my point, but...

hayo!

 

[proteanmix]

I don't really see how any of that contradicted my point, but...

hayo!

I saw a contradiction because if a function motivates you to a certain behavior, then how would you see the function at work if the behavior (empathy) can also be motivated by another function?

If these are motivations:

Are they doing it because they have familial associations or any other ties to Haiti?
Are they doing it because they're French and feel some kind of former colonial tie?
Are they doing it because they want to run for Haitian president and believe they can run things better?
Are they doing it out of the unbounded goodness of their heart?

How would you know Fi (for example) made a person empathize? The other motivations still resulted in empathy. IOW, how do you know the order is function>motivation>behavior vs motivation>function>behavior. That is the pointless part to me.

If I'm not understanding then please restate your question another way so I can get it.

 

[Zarathustra]

I saw a contradiction because if a function motivates you to a certain behavior, then how would you see the function at work if the behavior (empathy) can also be motivated by another function?

If these are motivations:

Are they doing it because they have familial associations or any other ties to Haiti?
Are they doing it because they're French and feel some kind of former colonial tie?
Are they doing it because they want to run for Haitian president and believe they can run things better?
Are they doing it out of the unbounded goodness of their heart?

How would you know Fi (for example) made a person empathize? The other motivations still resulted in empathy. IOW, how do you know the order is function>motivation>behavior vs motivation>function>behavior. That is the pointless part to me.

If I'm not understanding then please restate your question another way so I can get it.

I don't know where the communication gap is coming from, but... well, it certainly exists...

Look at what was said:

Above anything else, I believe empathy is a learned skill.

But couldn't you just turn around and say that the skill one is learning is to use a function associated with empathy (Fe, Fi: take your choice)?

See bolded.

I said "associated with".

Somewhere in there, you came out with "motivated".

At this point, I'm not even sure what you're disagreeing with me about...

*chalks this one up to Fe/Ti, Te/Fi "differences"*

 

[Jaguar]

Take with a grain of salt:
Fe: What are the commonalities in the group? What are the similarities that are going to bind us together?
Fi: What are the individual differences that make each of us unique and special. How can we integrate the individual differences to get along with others?

Of course, I think we need to incorporate both perspectives to operate in a balanced way in the world. This is just what I have noticed on the boards and in real life that may cause much of the conflict.

People incorporate both in the real world, every single day. It's only here, in this forum, that people seem to think otherwise.

When I ran an ad to hire sales reps, I always included:
Must be able to work from home independently, and as part of the team.

I hired independent contractors who worked on straight commission. They were not salaried employees. No one had a problem working in a dual capacity whatsoever. It was as natural for them, as it is for me. On Friday I would take out my entire team to socialize together. On Monday morning I had my sales meeting. I would address team issues, then deal with individual issues one-on-one in my office after the sales meeting.

I always asked people if they played a team sport in school and if they did, what did they learn from it? I played Singles on the Tennis Team. To do it well you have to think of yourself in an individual capacity, but also as a member of the team. I might win my own match, but still lose as a team. So in the end, I lost as well. In business, it can be the same way.

It's all a mindset, and how you see yourself in society. I have no problem maintaining my own personal values while adhering to societal norms.
Now if I was an anarchist, I might have a problem . . .

 

[proteanmix]

At this point, I'm not even sure what you're disagreeing with me about...

*chalks this one up to Fe/Ti, Te/Fi "differences"*

Mostly out of shits and giggles.

Oh, and also cause I thought you said:

Nevertheless, what if there are indeed real dichotomies like these, and, by preventing ourselves from engaging in this type of discussion a priori, we would be preventing ourselves from discovering them at all?

I'd prefer for false dichotomies to be put up, in order to be shot down, then for no dichotomies at all to be put up under the highly questionable assumption that no such dichotomies exist.

I'm trying to shoot one down before I go to bed. All in a day's work.