• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Dear Fe User,

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
I think I understood it in theory but a lot of what's been communicated here has helped to make it real.

So which do you prefer? :)

Well I was saying I identify more with Fi, but not as an Fi dom would.

I also don't think I have this shield of reserve with constant refinement of what I want to say before I say it, either. I'm more likely to talk through things and blather.

Sometimes when I'm on the forum I feel like I'm a kitten pouncing around looking for something to play with, batting a crumpled ball of paper here or chasing a mouse with a bell there, and hiding behind a couch and attacking people feet as they walk by if I get bored and can't find any toys.
 

Synapse

New member
Joined
Dec 29, 2007
Messages
3,359
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4
synapse i read your posts and I adore them-They are so Fi driven that I often have to spend time pondering them though, so I dont reply, but I greatly value them. Your Fi is almost Ni-ish in it's search for universality and there are many pieces I find familiar, but I dont know how to expand upon them very well.

Thanks. When I start talking, its in curious form. Even I look at it go whoah, I just wrote that. Then I read it and realise some of it is convoluted and would do with a breather. However its an interesting way of interpreting.

Ah, sweet inferior function.

But the INJs don't have a judgment e as our primary concern. Security doesn't reside (wholly) in recognising order out of disorder. That, despite what the INFJs have been saying about the comfort of knowing where everyone else stands, is still the EJs. No, to have at the limits of the INJ vision we need an ESP to assert for us what intuition really is compared to the true flow of reality going on around us even now.

But still... "unobtainable perfection"...

I don't see perfect images. If actually called upon to decide something I'll see utilitarian steps.

Steps toward... whatever was required. The vision itself resides in the background. Despite being the dominant concern, it's rendered secondary when one is called upon to speak.

If there is some INJ version of the unobtainable perfection, it's less a perfection and more a simple.... [placeholder for a word]. If the vision is ever completely articulated, it ceases to be "the"vision. It enters the past at that point and counts as grist for the new vision. Perhaps into that placeholder above should go the word "revolution", that word just in the sense of constant movement, but not revolving for that would suggest cycles, which isn't quite what's wanted here. "Movement", perhaps.

Heh. Intuition as unobtainable movement. All possible movements and the point where they all overlap in no movement.

Pffft.

Its interesting you should start with ah, sweet inferior function and end with pffft. As if I said something dismissible and disdainful. Unsure about some aspects, thanks for the clarifications. What is the primary concern for INTJ? Its different for INFJ too that's true to form, there is a distinction somewhere.

I like the utilitarian steps bit. The good part is you discard possibilities without getting bogged in favour of probabilities that work for you and know what your on about since birth, creating the goals you want to shape the future and its natural to work in great time frames for some that others would find incomprehensible. Nah, revolution sounds off somehow, can't place my finger on it.

I don't think it needs to be so perfect. For example - covering 80% of the likely scenarios might easily be deemed good enough.

I wrote the thoughts when I was tired. While we do like to look at personality preferences as a framework, there are subtle differences in the styles of thoughts based on other factors and conditions, those are just a few and the drives are different on an individual to individual basis very much.
 

Synapse

New member
Joined
Dec 29, 2007
Messages
3,359
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4
I think I can see where you are coming but I wanted to make a distinction between phony/bullshitters and Fe. Fe can be about diplomacy but there are TRULY phony people in the world regardless of Fe or Fi My Fe is usually careful about trusting people. If someone seems to be too good to be true (with extreme charisma and social skills)or if the actions don't align with their words, then I wait to see if they are genuine. I have met people who I have had a really bad feeling about from the get go and my first impressions are usually right. That sounds so judgmental but typically when I give these people a chance, I get burned almost every time.

Nods. When you meet those kinds of people your inviting them into your awareness for something, if you do invite them and disregard the intuition that's telling you to disengage, and practically screams hoarse at you with the bad feeling vibe to not go there but you still do. Its to learn something from the experience of the burning that is driven by your subconscious to find the answers in wanting to progress towards that which is more pleasing in your life. Its hard to explain, those sort of energies would continually be drawn to you until you gain some insight why that is happening and find a clear resolve. Once the personal resolve happens then different kinds of situations arise. When that tug remains unresolved like a mirroring of a shadow aspect those kinds of energies find you rather than you finding them.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
I think I can see where you are coming but I wanted to make a distinction between phony/bullshitters and Fe. Fe can be about diplomacy but there are TRULY phony people in the world regardless of Fe or Fi My Fe is usually careful about trusting people. If someone seems to be too good to be true (with extreme charisma and social skills)or if the actions don't align with their words, then I wait to see if they are genuine. I have met people who I have had a really bad feeling about from the get go and my first impressions are usually right. That sounds so judgmental but typically when I give these people a chance, I get burned almost every time.

Yup but I can tell you the difference between a fake ENFJ and a fake ENFP though...a fake ENFP means what they say, but totally flake out on you, and you get this vibe from them...like they say all these things like "oh yeah we should hang out and do this or that" and they're sincere, it's just that they get distracted and end up in Texas next week when they were supposed to hang out with you, instead. They forget about you. They're fake not because they consciously plan to dupe you, but because they don't put any commitment behind their words. ESFPs can be this way too.

A fake ENFJ smiles in your face and talks about you behind your back, and you always get this kind of uneasy feeling like you can't quite trust them even though they technically follow through.

My ENFJ sister gives me a mild version of this feeling sometimes, although I don't think she's "fake"...I think she just tries too hard to please everyone and doesn't like to take sides among family members, so this requires emotional distance and social chess.

I can even elaborate on this and point the finger at my younger self. I remember being about 20 and having friends say things like, "Yeah Marm will be nice but never call you" (and inwardly I loved this person as a good friend!) and had not one but TWO female friends complain that I had "abandoned them" when I moved to Los Angeles and then to Las Vegas, respectively. I didn't mean to abandon them...

When I was with my ex, he called me "the stray cat"...although I never cheated on him, it's just not in me to be that way...I would run off and come back. I get claustrophobic if someone tries to control me too much. More so when I was very young.

I'm more mature now, though. Maybe this is why it's harder to determine my type, I'm older, and maybe show more shadow functions and affected learned skills.
 

Poki

New member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
10,436
MBTI Type
STP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
This thread has been very enlightenting.

I am left a bit confused on a few issues:

I am somewhat saddened by the thought that if attempt to emotionally connect to an Fe user, in my mind to renew an Fi connection during times of stress, it will be taken as a request for them to act. This is very bizarre to me as if I needed them to act I would directly request they act on my behalf.

I also realized I will project my ENFP worldview onto ENFJs. Meaning when they approach me in an emotionally expressive manner, I tune them out as they come across as irrational and overly emotional. I assume they are ranting and once they calm down, we can have a productive rational discussion, so I forgive and ignore the ranting-like I would to an ENFP. In reality it seems they are trying to deliver finalized judgments. Oh dear that's rather funny. oops. Hehehe.

A question-assuming when Fe users approach and express an Fe judgment-What is the best way to say "I am sorry, I disagree. It seems we will need to agree to disagree over this topic as we see it differently" ? Typically I affirm them (Fi), then try and explain my position (Te)-which they describe as rationalization since they have judged it differently.


The only way I can see an ENFJ as seeing a position as "rationalizing" is if you are accepting a lower position. Fe is not good at rationalizing, Ti is. I am really good at accepting rationalization as long as it doesnt affect me, when it affects me then there are areas I will not rationalize, I will not accept a lower position. This is the Fe push to do better then the position you are accepting. IMO this is a projection of there wants onto you as you have "rationalized" your wants down to where you will accept and let go of everything else. Its a sign of giving up. If it affects both Fi and Fe you will just have to agree to disagree and go seperate ways as neither will budge.

Inside, we may be accepting but I think it might come across to Fe users as they are being judged by not meeting this ideal. The ideal is considered as superior. In other words, the practical orientation doesn't feel accepted as "good enough." Then Fe considers Fi as being out of touch with reality. I don't know. Maybe I'm out of my league here :).....

Way out of yor league. I dont see it as idealistic at all. Infact I see Fi in regard to P types as overly accepting, sacrificing of ideals because of those Fi who think its "superior" which is why I think most relationships with 2 Fi users have problems. One thinks that Fi is superior and the other bends and just accepts it to realize how unsuperior it actually is.

I have actually never considered Fi to be out of touch with reality, but out of touch with other methods besides feeling things. Honestly most Fi Js I know feel as much about everything around them as they do about people. Like one big pot of Emo. Sorry, I am not trying to slam or be mean, just honest. I see an Fi guy as a guy who gets hard just thinking about or looking at a car. I go through life with my head in the gutter 85% of the time, but I dont "feel" everyone that walks past me. There are actually very few people I can actually "feel", 4 right now to be precise, one is fading big time.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
The only way I can see an ENFJ as seeing a position as "rationalizing" is if you are accepting a lower position. Fe is not good at rationalizing, Ti is. I am really good at accepting rationalization as long as it doesnt affect me, when it affects me then there are areas I will not rationalize, I will not accept a lower position. This is the Fe push to do better then the position you are accepting. IMO this is a projection of there wants onto you as you have "rationalized" your wants down to where you will accept and let go of everything else. Its a sign of giving up. If it affects both Fi and Fe you will just have to agree to disagree and go seperate ways as neither will budge.



Way out of yor league. I dont see it as idealistic at all. Infact I see Fi in regard to P types as overly accepting, sacrificing of ideals because of those Fi who think its "superior" which is why I think most relationships with 2 Fi users have problems. One thinks that Fi is superior and the other bends and just accepts it to realize how unsuperior it actually is.

I have actually never considered Fi to be out of touch with reality, but out of touch with other methods besides feeling things. Honestly most Fi Js I know feel as much about everything around them as they do about people. Like one big pot of Emo. Sorry, I am not trying to slam or be mean, just honest. I see an Fi guy as a guy who gets hard just thinking about or looking at a car. I go through life with my head in the gutter 85% of the time, but I dont "feel" everyone that walks past me. There are actually very few people I can actually "feel", 4 right now to be precise, one is fading big time.

It's weird to me that you talk about "feeling" things as if it's some character flaw...it's kind of a gift.

"the other bends and just accepts it to realize how unsuperior it actually is"

this just sounds nasty, like you look down on him for using Fi, and you think he should feel bad about himself for having Fi, like he deserves to be in some position where he should submit to you

maybe I'm reading this wrong...
 

Poki

New member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
10,436
MBTI Type
STP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I already knew how it would come across, which is why I made the statement I wasnt slamming him or trying to be mean. I know nothing of the guy. I am basing it off my knowledge of what I see as Fi in IJs when it comes to relationships in general. Please argue with what I explain, not my personal judgement of the situations I have witnessed in regard to P and J relationships. Sorry I see Fi when used to an unhealthy extent cause alot of problems. This is not my personaly experience at all as I am not Fi. you are the one who just pinned it on him, not me. I havent personally typed him, nor did I refer directly to him except to say he was way out of his league for thinking that Fe thinks that Fi is superior.

I dont look down on him for using his Fi, I dont like the extent to which "some" people use Fi. I know nothing of him except for on this forum and I dont see that in him at all. I am basing this off of real life interaction of watching people interact.

I dont need the baton, I am done. I just explained why I dont think of it as superior. *points baton back up to previous post I wrote*

edit: healthy to me is when there is a balance.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Sorry I see Fi when used to an unhealthy extent cause alot of problems. This is not my personaly experience at all as I am not Fi. you are the one who just pinned it on him, not me. I havent personally typed him, nor did I refer directly to him except to say he was way out of his league for thinking that Fe thinks that Fi is superior.

I dont look down on him for using his Fi, I dont like the extent to which "some" people use Fi. I know nothing of him except for on this forum and I dont see that in him at all. I am basing this off of real life interaction of watching people interact.

Interesting. Well, it is not necessary for you to type me as I have performed this task already.

I also did not say that Fe thinks that Fi is superior, nor did I say anything was superior. Perhaps I wasn't clear and maybe you can clearly explain how the two types perceive each other. You seem to indicate that you know something about it - or at least enough to disagree with what I am saying.

Edit: Your type is not provided. I won't attempt to type you, but what would you type yourself as?

I see an Fi guy as a guy who gets hard just thinking about or looking at a car. I go through life with my head in the gutter 85% of the time, but I dont "feel" everyone that walks past me. There are actually very few people I can actually "feel", 4 right now to be precise, one is fading big time.

Umm... Ok. :sadbanana:
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
Its interesting you should start with ah, sweet inferior function and end with pffft. As if I said something dismissible and disdainful.

See, IPs, the world's fixed points. The EJs are the organisers, the IPs the points around which everyone else organises.

The crack about inferior function was, in a backhanded sort of way, pointing out that while having a greater level of conscious control over a function does not guarantee skill at using it, it certainly grants the opportunity to become skilled. So, the perfect organisation the EJs dream of, given that issues of organisation and adequate evaluation of external worlds ARE what they DO invest substantial amounts of their conscious effort in, they might not be getting it wrong so often as to warrant giving up the image.

And the "Pffft"? By default if it's another introvert responding, they're probably responding to their own ideas.

Unsure about some aspects, thanks for the clarifications. What is the primary concern for INTJ?

Given that adequate systematisation of the outer world is the secondary concern, and the vision that serves to provide answers when called upon is primary, then the primary concern is knowledge. (Which coincidentally dovetails really nicely with 5w4 enneagram discussions.) One is secure if one knows enough.

Naturally, one does never know enough, so the ideal security, the perfect knowing, is... pffft, it'll arrive any day now.

Its different for INFJ too that's true to form, there is a distinction somewhere.

I have wondered about this too. I assume that since Fe is their tool that interactions with the world are that much more charged. Possibly it makes for something present in the INFJ type that doesn't have an INTJ analogy. Perhaps just that the vision is more shamanistic.

Nah, revolution sounds off somehow, can't place my finger on it.

Pffft.


The number of times people can, do, and will always underestimate...

The ideologies of extroverted intuition aren't enough to draw the true boundaries on introverted intuition. They're mighty fine for detecting the edges of introverted sensing, though.
 

Poki

New member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
10,436
MBTI Type
STP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Interesting. Well, it is not necessary for you to type me as I have performed this task already.

I also did not say that Fe thinks that Fi is superior, nor did I say anything was superior. Perhaps I wasn't clear and maybe you can clearly explain how the two types perceive each other. You seem to indicate that you know something about it - or at least enough to disagree with what I am saying.

Edit: Your type is not provided. I won't attempt to type you, but what would you type yourself as?



Umm... Ok. :sadbanana:

Inside, we may be accepting but I think it might come across to Fe users as they are being judged by not meeting this ideal. The ideal is considered as superior. In other words, the practical orientation doesn't feel accepted as "good enough."

Then who considered this ideal superior? The ideal that has been defined as Fi. That was a statement, not a question, which means you believe that its superior. Your type is based off of a test and/or personal judgement, I choose to make my own judgements and base things off of those judgements. I can put you in a type based off of how you are typed and it will be exactly as I see above with IJs in relationships. Its really your choice. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt before I assign the negatives I see in a type to you as a person. I choose not to judge what I dont see. I wont extrapolate in that manner and predict who you are as a single person negatively, until I witness it first hand.

I indicate to know something about it, I just explained in summary what I know.

Honestly I may be off base, because of how people will "assign" things to a third party in conversation to see how that other person will respond, sometimes people will choose someone that is actually like that. It is based off a combined knowledge of what I see and what people say and the getting hard off a car is not an INTJ thing, and the "car" was just an example.
 

Siúil a Rúin

when the colors fade
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
14,037
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
496
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I agree that recognizing and confronting differences, and bridging that communication gap, is important and is also the main reason for mbti being useful in providing a framework for those differences.

I think what happens though, when trying to turn it into more than it is (i.e. using it to account for every difference between people), is the misapplication of functions. I think this is the main divide when it comes to these sorts of discussions. There are those who *appear* (note I'm saying 'appear', it might not in fact be what they're doing or proposing) to want to apply functions to every single human behavior as well as use them to explain all of the differences/communication gaps. Then there are those who argue against this - want to remove functions from the explanation of ALL differences, etc, and tend to see functions as somewhat limiting when it comes to explaining differences - at least, in real-world applications. I definitely see myself more in the second group.
Well said. I would agree with this.

What I have noticed that could be organized in terms of Fi and Fe (or any of the functions) is the natural tendency to amass details, information, and connections within certain types of systems. I have seen Fe users who keep track of a myriad details about other people and how they relate. The stronger Fe users on this board ask people a lot of questions, and they actually remember all the answers. They see an entire system at work amongst all the people.

My mother and sister are strongly Fi-dominant and they amass information about the internal workings of each individual, including self. Even if there is a larger system socially that defines behaviors, they can see how an individual would need to deviate. They take things on an individual basis for drawing conclusions.

I don't notice a difference in the presence of values, but perhaps Fe relies on larger, external structures like religious systems or philosophy, whereas Fi will adapt those larger structures in the context of the individual, or perhaps re-weave their own.

What I relate to is the second category I described in that earlier post that creates four quadrants out of two poles related to Fi and Fe. I am only capable of operating on the individual level, but have a need to operate outside myself. I am interested in external individuals, but not adept at understanding how they interact. Social dynamics and games confuse and stress me so much that I avoided working with groups and restructured my entire career in an attempt to work one-on-one. I really like the multiple vantage points and taking my value judgments with a grain of salt. My goal is to have a realistic understanding of all my limitations. I know other people will pigeon hole me with one of the functions, and it's okay because it's outside my control, but it is more difficult to pigeon-hole self and identify with something that is external and absolute. There is also a lot of excess baggage that comes with each function and if you admit to one connection you are responsible for all the rest of the category, and that can be cumbersome.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Then who considered this ideal superior? The ideal that has been defined as Fi. That was a statement, not a question, which means you believe that its superior. Your type is based off of a test and/or personal judgement, I choose to make my own judgements and base things off of those judgements. I can put you in a type based off of how you are typed and it will be exactly as I see above with IJs in relationships. Its really your choice. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt before I assign the negatives I see in a type to you as a person. I choose not to judge what I dont see. I wont extrapolate in that manner and predict who you are as a single person negatively, until I witness it first hand.

OK I see - that's not what I meant at all. I guess you'd have to consider that statement in the broader context of the other things that I communicated. Maybe I am not explaining myself well. What I meant is that the Fi user is idealistic. They aren't satisfied unless reality matches the ideal. If they think this idealistic point of view is superior - that the internal idealistic view (Fi) is better than the more practical outer directed one (Fe) - that could lead to conflict because the Fe user senses this. So if we anthropomorphize the functions to make a point, Fe may feel Fi is in an ivory tower. Fi may feel that Fe doesn't live up to a grand ideal or expectation. Both see this in each other - that the other feels their point of view is somehow better or superior. That can lead to misunderstanding or conflict.

As to the fact that I'm making statements - it's how I communicate. I often do that. It's a hypothesis that I'm throwing out there. If you have a better way of explaining things then please do.

The whole point of thread is to explore how the two functions are different and how those differences can lead to conflict. It isn't to say that one is better than the other. Quite the contrary.
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
So if we anthropomorphize the functions to make a point, Fe may feel Fi is in an ivory tower. Fi may feel that Fe doesn't live up to a grand ideal or expectation. Both see this in each other - that the other feels their point of view is somehow better or superior.

Fe may feel Fi is being a poor sport sitting out the game in unreasonably self imposed isolation, and Fi may feel Fe has been a wickedly poor sport having brought siege engines to every game we tried to play.

But I'm not sure that people have that much of a choice when it comes to trying to understand what's going on with other people. That is, when it comes to deciding which view is or isn't superior, an involved individual doesn't get to make that choice: they have to go by what they go by or abdicate decision.

Who among us actually knew there were at least two seemingly distinct approaches to feeling before we read some Jung? Who among us actually currently believes they can access sufficiently well a decision making style not their own that they don't need a person who more naturally uses that style to give input? And in summary, who among us [something about the future, I ran out of pithy sentences].



It's cool though, right? Before enlightenment, functional preference was just something to make other people bend to. After enlightenment, functional preference is just something to get good at because not everyone can do what you do and sometimes, even though they won't like it or even really understand it, they'll need to hear that other voice.

:solidarity:




Pffft. Never happen.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
My point is questioning the dichotomy created by Fi vs. Fe. I can't see them applied in an isolated manner, although people often identify with one or the other as defining their subjective realm of thought. People say "I am a Fe-user" or "I am a Fi-user". I suppose I read it as "interpersonal" and "intrapersonal" intelligences which are not by nature opposing, but two aspects of how a person interacts with the world. Does one have to be a preference or does it change depending on context?

Edit: I guess the question is, if they are not applied in an isolated way, but are more the result of how the two aspects integrate within a person, is it possible to say "Fe does this", and "Fi does this". Or is Fe completely reinterpreted based on how it interacts with a person's Fi, and vice versa?

I think there are even more poles, and I'm not sure if you can categorize the above two for two with Fi and Fe. The relationship between the point of focus being where identity is viewed from, internal or external; and the understanding of the dynamics that exist within a system, either intrapersonal or interpersonal, can take on many forms. I really think this only scratches the surface and there are many, many more poles that could be deconstructed from a person's sense of identity and relationship. Maybe even systems motivated by harmony or conflict could create another pole, because those are subjective core concepts, and both can produce positive results (it's not a positive and negative, but just contrasting systems).

I had to admit though, that I'm not completely convinced by the whole MBTI system, so I mostly approach it as theory, and I don't identify strongly with functions or type. I can't really be offended by attacks against a function because I haven't internalized it as an identity. In this context other people always place you in a category, which doesn't bother me too much until it confuses communication beyond repair. I find that whatever type I am assumed to be creates mistaken assumptions about what I communicate. I suppose it isn't that different from real life, it just has a different vocabulary. I suppose this is drifting off-topic, but labeling does increase a sense of existential isolation in me. What if people never actually comprehend each other? That's a hard question to look into too deeply because it strikes at the heart of existence. It feels like we are all trees that fell in the forest and were never heard.

MBTI is still interesting to me because I don't know of a particularly better system, and there is also a lot to learn about people based on their relationship to the system in terms of how it defines and shapes their view of self, and the resulting relationships and assumptions that result from those identities.

Well said. I would agree with this.

Sorry if I am dissecting your posts but I always find your perspective to be rather interesting. You and Cascade seem to have a very similar views - that there is is more of a fluid spectrum between two poles than a real dichotomy. I notice also that both of you type as INFJ and yet don't feel the type descriptions really fit.

I'm curious. If you were to say that it doesn't fit you, is it the whole thing that seems too binary or is it that there is not such a dichotomy for Fi/Fe only.

What I have noticed that could be organized in terms of Fi and Fe (or any of the functions) is the natural tendency to amass details, information, and connections within certain types of systems. I have seen Fe users who keep track of a myriad details about other people and how they relate. The stronger Fe users on this board ask people a lot of questions, and they actually remember all the answers. They see an entire system at work amongst all the people.

My mother and sister are strongly Fi-dominant and they amass information about the internal workings of each individual, including self. Even if there is a larger system socially that defines behaviors, they can see how an individual would need to deviate. They take things on an individual basis for drawing conclusions.

This seems like a very astute observation.

I know other people will pigeon hole me with one of the functions, and it's okay because it's outside my control, but it is more difficult to pigeon-hole self and identify with something that is external and absolute. There is also a lot of excess baggage that comes with each function and if you admit to one connection you are responsible for all the rest of the category, and that can be cumbersome.

It's probably a good topic for another thread - or maybe there is one somewhere. How does this pigeon-holing negatively impact understanding and communication? Are the benefits worth the costs? I think it benefits some people more than others. A stereotypical NF may have less use for it than a stereotypical NT for example.
 

Poki

New member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
10,436
MBTI Type
STP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
OK I see - that's not what I meant at all. I guess you'd have to consider that statement in the broader context of the other things that I communicated. Maybe I am not explaining myself well. What I meant is that the Fi user is idealistic. They aren't satisfied unless reality matches the ideal. If they think this idealistic point of view is superior - that the internal idealistic view (Fi) is better than the more practical outer directed one (Fe) - that could lead to conflict because the Fe user senses this. So if we anthropomorphize the functions to make a point, Fe may feel Fi is in an ivory tower. Fi may feel that Fe doesn't live up to a grand ideal or expectation. Both see this in each other - that the other feels their point of view is somehow better or superior. That can lead to misunderstanding or conflict.

As to the fact that I'm making statements - it's how I communicate. I often do that. It's a hypothesis that I'm throwing out there. If you have a better way of explaining things then please do.

The whole point of thread is to explore how the two functions are different and how those differences can lead to conflict. It isn't to say that one is better than the other. Quite the contrary.

Well said. Thanks
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
This may have been posted before, but it seems relevant to the discussion.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7165456003151024181#docid=-8026923601827072974

Some choice comments:

INFJ - To me, this whole values thing is like, "What? I don't get that"

INFP - When we are talking about being at a party. I don't like being around a lot of people. I don't even know them but I am already judging... I don't know if I can trust these people. There is sense of don't get near me unless I know a bit about you... There is a guard up. I can see where the judgmental aspect comes in because i do have that up.
INFJ - How long does it take for you to make your mind up about someone? 3 second, 3 hours, 3 weeks?
INFP - Not long. It's about 20 seconds. It is a feeling right in my gut, in my heart. The words that come to mind is are they authentic, are they real, or are they trying to sell me something or try to manipulate me and I usually say no to that.
 

Poki

New member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
10,436
MBTI Type
STP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
This may have been posted before, but it seems relevant to the discussion.

[YOUTUBE="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7165456003151024181#docid=-8026923601827072974"]INFP and INFJ[/YOUTUBE]

The Fi feeling thats described in that video is much different then Fi being an idealist. Its more about "feeling" whats around you, not about being an idealist. Shooting for a certain feeling is an idealist, but just feeling whats around you is different. One is goal oriented and one experience oriented within Fi function.
 

cascadeco

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
9,083
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
At what point is it definitely a misapplication of functions?

For me personally? Not that it's necessarily being done in this thread, but just generally speaking: When people attribute specific behaviors to one and only one function (basically similar to the concept of going... oh, I'm INFJ because I am x, y, and z... when in reality, x, y, and z can be attributes of other types as well, under certain circumstances), and basically the tendency, which is easy on this forum to fall into, to try to explain every psychological phenomena and interpersonal situation by using function-speak and only function-speak.

This perspective appears to discount the notion of having categories of differences.

What I find interesting is that in spite of individuals each having individual traits that make each one unique, there are certain psychological categories such that an individual is either one or the other. That the individual, having chosen (for lack of a better word) one path over another (e.g., one function over another), becomes inherently different, in a categorical way, from those who chose the other path.

Or more plainly, there wouldn't be an endless generation of "Fe/Fi threads" if the differences were not observably real and categorical.

That said, yes, individuals are unique, and are best understood as individuals with unique traits. But the categorical differences remain useful: it quickly becomes obvious why person A readily understands an idea, and person B does not, or vice versa ... NOT because person A is so smart, or person B is so dumb, but that the thinking of each are in entirely different spaces. And that understanding is what allows one to explain an idea such that both people understand it.

Look, I am not trying to say there aren't observable categories of people. I mean, even without mbti, I think part of human nature is to categorize and observe trends/patterns. This has been going on for millenia. And without mbti, yeah, I could just as easily create my own categories of personality -- 'arrogant people', 'selfless people', 'materialistic people', 'timid people', 'drama-queens', 'stoic people', 'Republicans', 'Hipsters', 'Nascar people', 'Peta fanatics', whatever. And there will be commonalities among these varying groups, too.

So totally - there are general categories. I have fun with mbti and absolutely, the 'Blueprint'/caricature of an ESFJ is quite different from the blueprint of an INTP. Obviously. And yes, those differences in priority and approach to the world are real and noticeable. I really don't have a big problem with the categories when it comes to discussing them - and the functions - theoretically. I just don't think the functions and such allign seamlessly when it comes to the individual level, nor that people necessarily HAVE to fall definitively in one place or the other. The places are real/valid in terms of a framework and 'starting point', if you will - a framework of 16 varying possibilities/trends. And conceptually that's very cut and dry and pretty and nice. And useful for discussing differences in personality - absolutely. And certainly some people fall quite solidly in one place. I just think it's dangerous ground when it comes to *applying* all of this in real life -- applying these nice crisp theoretical differences to everyone in real life. That's all. And I think it's especially easy to forget that, again, there's a myriad of other things that impact human behavior and interaction - various neuroses, individual life experiences, etc. So what people may throw off as 'Fe' when trying to showcase what Fe is, theoretically, may instead be codependency due to various things, and have nothing to do with Fe. You know, stuff like that.

Edit: Explained another way, I DO when I zoom out notice/categorize group trends. And commonalities/definitions of those Group Entities are real/noticeable. That's how the groups differ. But zooming in, you can't necessarily apply the overarching group definitions to the individuals in the same way it defines/applies to the group. I've recently started thinking of mbti more in terms of Bell Curves -- that the majority of any type will fit in that middle section of the curve - and that middle section, if you will, 'defines' the group. But of course there are those on either side of the curve who deviate in some ways from the middle but still can fit into the overarching theme. What this means is that in Practice, applying the theory/cog functions to the Individual isn't a guarantee or even applicable in some cases.

Phew. Sorry. :blush:
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
You know what, it seems INFJ and INTJ tend to have different enneagrams. Why is that?

A quick skim of the data suggests that where types vary according just to Te/Fi and Fe/Ti, the enneagram changes too.

But I know little about enneagram. I shall wildly posit that it's intended to describe a whole person. If we say then that change in enneagram follows just from the change in kind of judgment, there seems to have been ignored some important qualitative difference.

That's to say, I have the impression that there is something extra going on in there, but I don't know what it is. It seems to me the analogies between Te and Fe and between Fi and Ti do hold at some level, but that there is something else to say too.
 
Top