Fe politics versus Fi politics

[SolitaryWalker]

Then the functions need to be redefined because the types do not match the description you are trying to provide. The philosophy is inadequate.

Okay then, you may as well stop talking about all the Fes and Fis out there as these are all Jungian terms you need to re-define. Your whole point is moot until you've achieved the aforementioned.

 

[Haphazard]

I believe this is a hopeless case.

But if it is hopeless, then why am I still here?

 

[Kiddo]

Honestly, I can't give you one offhand. They are not in the mainstream media -- at most, they get a blip on a left-leaning MSNBC show.

But they are out there. Trust me on this.

Nonsense. There are undoubtedly people who work for the media who are left leaning, but the media itself is anything but left leaning. Raw news has to go through several filters before it gets to the American public. First it goes through the filter of removing anything that could lead to trouble for the ownership. Considering that the ownership of over 90% of the media is found within fewer than a dozen conglomerate corporations, you can imagine that there is quite a bit of control in that regard. Then it goes through the advertisement filter. The media is a business and it relies on advertisement in order to make more money than it pays out. Obviously if you report something bad about one of your advertisers or one other associates, it will translate into a loss of revenue. Then it has to go through the flak filter which removes any "offensive" content. And considering that we get most of our news through press releases from the government or corporations, it is already highly filtered.

So if after all that, you would have to be crazy to think the news we get is "left biased" or even anything like the raw news.

Key words. They don't not care about how others feel, they just don't care about how others feel about them. There's a pretty big difference.

I may not care much that a lot of people hate my guts, but I do care when I see someone obviously hurting.

The way Fi is seen by the public is not really important to them -- in fact, they usually find keeping up good appearances as offensive and shallow. But this doesn't mean that they're not sensitive.

I'm happy to hear that an Fi user can have at least that much sensitivity. I've never experienced this Fi sensitivity firsthand, so perhaps I'm simply missing something.

 

[Kiddo]

Okay then, you may as well stop talking about all the Fes and Fis out there as these are all Jungian terms you need to re-define. Your whole point is moot until you've achieved the aforementioned.

The basic idea is still the same, only the attributes are under question. How does one seek truth and knowledge within a philosophy, when it is useless to even question the terms inherent within it? If a philosophy does not function in reality as it is believed it should in conjecture, then is it not wise to look back at the beginning and see if things can be better defined?

Honestly, if I've learned anything on this forum, it is that semantics are unavoidable.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

The basic idea is still the same, only the attributes are under question. How does one seek truth and knowledge within a philosophy, when it is useless to even question the terms inherent within it? If a philosophy does not function in reality as it is believed it should in conjecture, then is it not wise to look back at the beginning and see if things can be better defined?

So you keep the basic idea the same. Yet you say that feeling (in case of Fi) no longer has anything to do with sensitivity. By this you no longer keep the basic idea the same as you discard an axiomatic notion of Jungian philosophy of psychology.

 

[Haphazard]

Nonsense. There are undoubtedly people who work for the media who are left leaning, but the media itself is anything but left leaning. Raw news has to go through several filters before it gets to the American public. First it goes through the filter of removing anything that could lead to trouble for the ownership. Considering that the ownership of over 90% of the media is found within fewer than a dozen conglomerate corporations, you can imagine that there is quite a bit of control in that regard. Then it goes through the advertisement filter. The media is a business and it relies on advertisement in order to make more money than it pays out. Obviously if you report something bad about one of your advertisers or one other associates, it will translate into a loss of revenue. Then it has to go through the flak filter which removes any "offensive" content. And considering that we get most of our news through press releases from the government or corporations, it is already highly filtered.

So if after all that, you would have to be crazy to think the news we get is "left biased" or even anything like the raw news.

There is radiospace that one has to pay for to listen to where these left-wing wackos reside. They do exist. They're merely hidden.

I am not at all saying that the mainstream media is left-wing biased but there are left-wing wackos and some of them do have radiospace. The radiospace just isn't public.

I'm happy to hear that an Fi user can have at least that much sensitivity. I've never experienced this Fi sensitivity firsthand, so perhaps I'm simply missing something.

Fi sensitivity usually comes in the form of actions rather than expressing sentiments. It's likely that you've just overlooked it.

And it may have something to do with the initial meeting of Fe to Fi -- Fi-types feel that their personal space is being violated and Fe-types get angry when Fi-types don't submit to the niceties of the human version of butt-sniffing. They end up seeing each other and immediately not getting along, which then colors all interaction afterwards.

 

[Kiddo]

So you keep the basic idea the same. Yet you say that feeling (in case of Fi) no longer has anything to do with sensitivity. By this you no longer keep the basic idea the same as you discard an axiomatic notion of Jungian philosophy of psychology.

Where does it say in Jungian philosophy that sensitivity is an inherent part of feeling?

 

[SillySapienne]

Lol, at the absolute absurdity of this thread.

Let's just face it, *stupid* people are the primary source of all human problems. And *most* people are stupid.

And that's just my Filosophy!!!

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Where does it say in Jungian philosophy that sensitivity is an inherent part of feeling?

Read the psychological types. Many types there it is stated that Feeling is primarily concerned with processing emotion and human element. This means that feeling is concerned with being attuned with the human element, to be attuned with and to be sensitive to are synonymous.

 

[Haphazard]

Blue, dear, I'm inclined to say that this one's a lost cause.

 

[Kiddo]

There is radiospace that one has to pay for to listen to where these left-wing wackos reside. They do exist. They're merely hidden.

I am not at all saying that the mainstream media is left-wing biased but there are left-wing wackos and some of them do have radiospace. The radiospace just isn't public.

Oh yes, there are lots of left wing wackos out there for sure. I wish a few made it to mainstream to balance out some of the right wing craziness.

Fi sensitivity usually comes in the form of actions rather than expressing sentiments. It's likely that you've just overlooked it.

Perhaps. At least we can agree that Fi sensitivity is definitely not readily noticeable.

And it may have something to do with the initial meeting of Fe to Fi -- Fi-types feel that their personal space is being violated and Fe-types get angry when Fi-types don't submit to the niceties of the human version of butt-sniffing. They end up seeing each other and immediately not getting along, which then colors all interaction afterwards.

It seems your perceptions of Fe are as objective as my perceptions of Fi.

But your explanation just collaborates what I am saying. Fi users only care about their own personal sensitivity. Do Fi users really not see any benefit in using tact or being respectful towards the differences of others? I guess the fact that you called it "the human version of butt sniffing" answers that question.

 

[SillySapienne]

Read the psychological types. Many types there it is stated that Feeling is primarily concerned with processing emotion and human element. This means that feeling is concerned with being attuned with the human element, to be attuned with and to be sensitive to are synonymous.

Oy vey!!!

This is just some convoluted meaninglessness.

"Feeling" and "Thinking" are both massively abstract concepts/constructs.

I cringe at definitions like the one you've stated, absolutely cringe.

 

[Haphazard]

Perhaps. At least we can agree that Fi sensitivity is definitely not readily noticeable.

It seems your perceptions of Fe are as objective as my perceptions of Fi.

But your explanation just collaborates what I am saying. Fi users only care about their own personal sensitivity. Do Fi users really not see any benefit in using tact or being respectful towards the differences of others? I guess the fact that you called it "the human version of butt sniffing" answers that question.

Fi is more 'live and let live,' and therefore the niceties aren't really essential -- I'm not bothering you to use them, so why should you bother me? What we see is that the social niceties are bothering you only because you let them bother you.

Typical IFP/EFJ conversation:

EFJ: Hey! How was your day?
IFP: *sniff*
EFJ: What's wrong?
IFP: n-none of your business...
EFJ: What?
IFP: I said it's none of your business all right? I-I don't want to talk about it.
EFJ: If you tell me what's wrong, you'll feel better.
IFP: No, I won't.
EFJ: Yes you will.
IFP: No I won't.
EFJ: Yes, you will.
IFP: No I wont!
EFJ: YES YOU WILL AND THAT'S FINAL!
IFP: WAAAAAAAAAAAH
EFJ: TELL ME HOW YOUR DAY WAS, GODDAMNIT!
IFP: WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!

 

[Kiddo]

Read the psychological types. Many types there it is stated that Feeling is primarily concerned with processing emotion and human element. This means that feeling is concerned with being attuned with the human element, to be attuned with and to be sensitive to are synonymous.

Well if I am going off Myers-Briggs type descriptions then I'm just going to have to assume that Fi users have sensitivity, but they just don't express it. That would explain why it is not readily noticeable and why it can only be perceived in actions. It doesn't really explain why Fi users are so repulsed by Fe users expressing their sensitivity.

 

[SillySapienne]

Fi users only care about their own personal sensitivity. Do Fi users really not see any benefit in using tact or being respectful towards the differences of others? .

Um, not if the "tact and respect" that you speak of come at the cost of being fair, and by fair, I do mean honest.

Not everybody's feelings are valid, far from, in fact.

When someone is being a spiteful, jealous monster, it is just plain wrong to cater to their feewings.

Everyone stands to gain when everyone respects maintaining integrity to uphold the truth, i.e. the reality of things.

 

[Thursday]

@ Haphazard's EFJvsIFP example-CLASSIC

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Well if I am going off Myers-Briggs type descriptions then I'm just going to have to assume that Fi users have sensitivity, but they just don't express it. That would explain why it is not readily noticeable and why it can only be perceived in actions. It doesn't really explain why Fi users are so repulsed by Fe users expressing their sensitivity.

Fi expresses subtly, in a way that Fe cant see. You know..along the lines of how Fe doesnt smile or say 'nice to see you!'to Fe, Fe will assume the Fi doesnt appreciate them. So, just because you don't see it, doesn't meant it aint there Kiddo.

 

[Haphazard]

Well if I am going off Myers-Briggs type descriptions then I'm just going to have to assume that Fi users have sensitivity, but they just don't express it. That would explain why it is not readily noticeable and why it can only be perceived in actions. It doesn't really explain why Fi users are so repulsed by Fe users expressing their sensitivity.

To an FP, Fe looks fake and shallow, and to a TJ, people only use Fe when they want something from us.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

To an FP, Fe looks fake and shallow, and to a TJ, people only use Fe when they want something from us.

I for one use Fe only when I want to get myself something I want from people, unless of course it be a close relationship where my Fe shall be almost entirely subjugated to my Thinking values concerning fairness and clarity. There Fe will be supressed by Ti to the point where it can express nothing but the most earnest of emotive urges, there it shall be fully sincere. Yet when Fe is given free play in its own element, it is usually used as an instrument to attain practical results.

 

[Kiddo]

Fi is more 'live and let live,' and therefore the niceties aren't really essential -- I'm not bothering you to use them, so why should you bother me? What we see is that the social niceties are bothering you only because you let them bother you.

Typical IFP/EFJ conversation:

EFJ: Hey! How was your day?
IFP: *sniff*
EFJ: What's wrong?
IFP: n-none of your business...
EFJ: What?
IFP: I said it's none of your business all right? I-I don't want to talk about it.
EFJ: If you tell me what's wrong, you'll feel better.
IFP: No, I won't.
EFJ: Yes you will.
IFP: No I won't.
EFJ: Yes, you will.
IFP: No I wont!
EFJ: YES YOU WILL AND THAT'S FINAL!
IFP: WAAAAAAAAAAAH
EFJ: TELL ME HOW YOUR DAY WAS, GODDAMNIT!
IFP: WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!

My feelings are dictated by the external environment. If somebody comes into work in a bad mood, then I'll end up in a bad mood. If I see someone sad, then eventually I will feel sad. If I don't talk about my feelings, then I won't feel better. I don't have a choice in the matter. I don't "let" negative external feelings bother me, they just do. That is why Ti is so promising. It allows for some detachment.

Are you saying that Fi users have a choice of whether or not they let the environment affect their feelings? How is that even possible? Where would your feelings even come from if they weren't spawned from the external environment? Do you just make up feelings based on how you think you should feel?