• 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.

Fe Fakeness

PeaceBaby

reborn
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
5,950
MBTI Type
N/A
Enneagram
N/A
Oh, please. If they were made of colored glass or porcelain, you would probably find them lovely.

[MENTION=9310]uumlau[/MENTION] won the Ne moment; sadly, yours is an Ne "fail".

Don't feel bad, better luck next time!

Still though, as consolation, you have that nomination for "thread killer" so that could come through for you! Chin up!
 

Redbone

Orisha
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
2,882
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
The most annoying complaint I get from real life FJs (SFJs, mostly) is, "I shouldn't have to tell you ..." See, there's this hugely different attitude, where (from my INTJ perspective) FJs are very much focused on others and their emotional states, kind of "all up in their business", which INTJs don't have, at all. So they project this "in your business" attitude onto INTJs, and so when an INTJ doesn't react to all of their hints and nudges and cues, they get all huffy and insulted. If the INTJ "really loved" (or liked, in the case of friendships) them, then of course the INTJ would automatically pick up on these cues and carry them out. I get the impression that FJs really dislike having to explain things in a declarative manner, and consider it to be a communication failure.

Thus the primary thing that bothers me is not just that it's merely different values or expectations, but that they believe that there is something intrinsically wrong with me because my worldview is so totally different (NiTe vs SiFe). This came up a lot in my marriage counseling (ESFJ ex-wife, ESFJ counselor). My ex and I had very very similar values and expectations. The problems arose from the finer points, that she expected me to read her Fe signals on the fly and that I was expected to respond (not that she or the counselor phrased it that way, but it is what they both advocated). My inability to meet that particular meta-expectation is what led her to believe that I "didn't really love" her.

As someone with inferior Fe, I got this a lot from my ex ESFJ. I didn't respond to things how he thought I should, I didn't think in ways he thought I should. He was even offended if I had a different opinion or POV. He literally thought there was something wrong with me since I was different.

It added up to "You don't love/need/want me because you don't _________." The unfortunate thing is that he kept all of this inside while smiling in my face until it all exploded in the worst way. He didn't want to rock the boat or lose the benefits of being married so he pretended everything was fine. So yes, Fe can be used in a horribly fake manner and cause a whole lot of damage because it can block honest and open communication. Granted, this is extreme and I am talking about someone that is emotionally immature.

Fe often feels like pressure, manipulation, and encroachment on my autonomy. It often triggers feelings of rage (well...after I've been poked enough to lose detachment) and an urge to protect myself.

I recently started seeing an INFP and it is very different and very nice. Fi can be very difficult to understand but since it parallels Ti, it makes things easier to understand.
 

PeaceBaby

reborn
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
5,950
MBTI Type
N/A
Enneagram
N/A
^ no self-respecting farmer will say a COW has balls.

A cow is the mature female of the bovine world, despite the usage so many of us casually defer to when referring to cattle.

cow
noun, plural cows, ( Archaic ) kine.
1. the mature female of a bovine animal, especially of the genus Bos.
2. the female of various other large animals, as the elephant or whale.
3. Informal . a domestic bovine of either sex and any age.​

JUST BECAUSE #3 informally recognizes that SO MANY people are ignorant of the proper use of the word does not make it correct or accurate.

Edit: It's kinda right up there with "Only bulls have horns".

Calf: baby male or female
Weaner: after weaning from cow up to about a year old
Yearling: up to about age 2
Heifer: young female not yet bred
Cow: female anytime after first calving (sometimes second calf if you use the term ...)
First-calf heifer
Steer: castrated male to be fattened up for the destination of your freezer OR
Ox: if you keep him around to pull stuff
Bull: mature male, purpose breeding
Cattle: collective term for the collective

There's more but ... that'll do.

Double Edit: Nico, if English isn't your mother tongue, my apologies and consider this a learning experience.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Yes, it appears that NFPs hear the signals, but the Fe signals don't map to the Fi signals. Fi sees those hints and nudges, but the communication breaks down due to "emotional crosstalk". For NTJs, we generally don't hear the signals unless they're enunciated clearly (i.e., using words instead of hints or nudges), at which point we interpret them as Te-style directives. Those directives often end up sounding like, "We need to do this my way or I'll get upset." (I'm not intending this to be disparaging, this is a description of translation failure.) The intended message is more along the lines of, "Wait, you haven't accounted for these human factors that will mess you up if you ignore them." The compromise ends up being a Te-style following of general social rules, which if adept enough, becomes what others have called "faux Fe." We don't understand the underlying motivations for the social rules (since we don't read Fe well), but we do understand that it's easier to deal with people who aren't upset with us, and it's good to accommodate others in this regard (within reason, of course :dry:).

I think it's more that the full translation from Fe to Te is rarely ever made.

I think this is a very good explanation.

The most annoying complaint I get from real life FJs (SFJs, mostly) is, "I shouldn't have to tell you ..." See, there's this hugely different attitude, where (from my INTJ perspective) FJs are very much focused on others and their emotional states, kind of "all up in their business", which INTJs don't have, at all. So they project this "in your business" attitude onto INTJs, and so when an INTJ doesn't react to all of their hints and nudges and cues, they get all huffy and insulted. .... I get the impression that FJs really dislike having to explain things in a declarative manner, and consider it to be a communication failure.

Thus the primary thing that bothers me is not just that it's merely different values or expectations, but that they believe that there is something intrinsically wrong with me because my worldview is so totally different (NiTe vs SiFe).

Interesting. I have experienced the exact same things. It can be pretty frustrating. I don't know that it is just FJs that really dislike having to explain things in a declarative manner. I can think of one ISFP that I used to know and she was unable to do that as well.

I didn't respond to things how he thought I should, I didn't think in ways he thought I should. He was even offended if I had a different opinion or POV. He literally thought there was something wrong with me since I was different.

The unfortunate thing is that he kept all of this inside while smiling in my face until it all exploded in the worst way.

Yep.
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Regarding "faux Fe" - is there a corollary for Fe users having to engage or utilize "faux Te" ???

Yes, I believe there is also a "faux Te", where it looks and sounds like Te, and you can't tell it isn't until you discover that the underlying reasoning is "off."

Not to pick on my ESFJ ex, but her example is apt. She was actually pretty good with money. She'd keep track of every penny, meticulously keep her checkbook balanced, write out budgets and stick to them. She is a master of Excel. Looks and sounds really Te, right? Great money management skills, etc.

Except:
 

onemoretime

Dreaming the life
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
4,455
MBTI Type
3h50
I don't disagree with your generalizations, but I do with your conclusions. In part, it's because the context/universal is an Ne/Si vs Ni/Se conflict, not an Fi/Fe conflict. You aptly describe the NFP problems with NFJs, but not Fe vs Fi in general.

I disagree. As I understand it, perception differences manifest mainly between preferring to understand a bit of data as the totality of what it appears to be, or as suggestive of something else. I don't think the NeTi preference, for example, believes that every conclusion is a universal one, if only because of painful awareness of how much we do not know, individually. This shows up in the constant desire to tinker or test one's theories or thoughts, and modify those, rather than rejecting the circumstances in favor of matching the logic. A Ti preference favors improvisation, while a Te preference favors preparation and planning so that one does not need to improvise. The perceiving function preference is between abstraction and concreteness, and I think we do ourselves a disservice by trying to extend it past that.

The problem Fi has with Fe is that Fe violates the realm of the personal for Fi, just as Te violates the realm of the personal for Ti, that there is something deeply offensive about the Fe approach to matters, irrespective of the particular values. I see Ti types just as offended by my Te approach. Where Fi sees Fe as "fake", Ti sees Te as "condescending". Where Fi sees Fe as shallow or superficial, Ti sees Te as stupid or simplistic.

I see how it may appear this way, but this is not how I understand it. Instead, one who prefers Fi cannot understand why someone who prefers Fe can have multiple reactions to the same thing, or the same reaction to seemingly opposing actions, depending on the social context. The latter person seems "fake" or inauthentic because of the shifts in behavior that arise from a preference to follow the contextual logic, rather than the maintenance of a universal principle.

In the case of the person who prefers Ti, the one who prefers Te may seem condescending, but this is because of the dismissal of context that a strong preference for Te often tends toward. What that person may prefer to see as superfluous or irrelevant within the greater harmony, the other person might prefer to see as the critical contextual shift that demands a new logical approach.

With respect to Te, the problem with Fe is not that it rejects relationships and subjective concepts, so much as it prioritizes logistical cooperation about objectively measurable things over the subjective concepts, which it regards as the realm of Fi. That is to say, no, you don't go needlessly stepping on others' feelings and values and rubbing their noses in their faults, but at the same time, you don't let those considerations stop you from enunciating the truth just because others place negative-value-connotations on the truth as you see it.

"Preference" is the important term here. The one who prefers Te prefers the maintenance and defense of a universal truth over a social context. The one who prefers Fe prefers the opposite. It's not that the other is bad, it's just that it doesn't motivate the person.

I reject the subjective/objective distinction, because every function preference is subjective. They all attempt to describe how a person, a subject, perceives and relates to the world. To me, the distinction in preference is between unity and universality (Te/Fi) on the one hand, relativity and context (Fe/Ti) on the other. At the same time, these factors are preferences, and not uniquely determinative of the final product of cognition.

For Te, the priority is that an arrangement "works". For Fe, the priority is that an arrangement is "fair." To Fe, "fair" is equivalent to "what works", since developing a common definition of fairness is how one gets people to work together. To Te, it isn't enough that people work together or believe that a system is fair, but it also actually has to "work" in a practical sense. The truth is likely somewhere in the middle, where there is both a requirement that a system work both in a practical sense and that the participants believe that it is a fair system. If it isn't fair in the eyes of the participants, it won't work because the participants won't let it work. If it can't work in a practical sense, it doesn't matter how fair everyone regards it, because it won't work (either it won't work at all from the get-go or it will necessarily fail in the long run as it depletes the resources necessary for its continuation).

Functionality, in and of itself, is a universal standard. Those preferring Fe don't necessarily care about fairness as much as they do not rocking the boat, whereby disrupting the cohesion that the group has. A lack of functionality, after all, can perpetuate group stability and cohesion, and even enhance prosperity, while the actual production of results can obliterate that.
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I disagree. As I understand it, perception differences manifest mainly between preferring to understand a bit of data as the totality of what it appears to be, or as suggestive of something else. I don't think the NeTi preference, for example, believes that every conclusion is a universal one, if only because of painful awareness of how much we do not know, individually. ...
This is because Ni/Se doesn't care whether a conclusion is universal, but Ne/Si does.

I see how it may appear this way, but this is not how I understand it. Instead, one who prefers Fi cannot understand why someone who prefers Fe can have multiple reactions to the same thing, or the same reaction to seemingly opposing actions, depending on the social context. The latter person seems "fake" or inauthentic because of the shifts in behavior that arise from a preference to follow the contextual logic, rather than the maintenance of a universal principle.
xSFJs will classify an NFP as being weird, and put them in the weird box. Interestingly, NFPs don't seem to mind this.

xNFJs will tend to imply that the NFP is "feeling wrong," which actually annoys NFPs a lot.

In the case of the person who prefers Ti, the one who prefers Te may seem condescending, but this is because of the dismissal of context that a strong preference for Te often tends toward. What that person may prefer to see as superfluous or irrelevant within the greater harmony, the other person might prefer to see as the critical contextual shift that demands a new logical approach.
Context is Ni/Se. You're conflating Te with NTJs, just as you're conflating Fe with NFJs. It plays out differently for STJs and SFJs.

"Preference" is the important term here. The one who prefers Te prefers the maintenance and defense of a universal truth over a social context.
As a Te-aux, I must disagree. There is no "universal truth." You're talking about Te in Ne/Ti terms, here.

The one who prefers Fe prefers the opposite. It's not that the other is bad, it's just that it doesn't motivate the person.
More conflations. This is getting confusing.

I reject the subjective/objective distinction, because every function preference is subjective. ...
This is a nihilistic viewpoint that removes any common ground for discussion. Jung was very clear about his definitions of objective and subjective. They are orientations or attitudes, not Platonic ideals.

Functionality, in and of itself, is a universal standard.
No, it isn't. People have different ideas of what is functional. Different use cases, if you will.

Those preferring Fe don't necessarily care about fairness as much as they do not rocking the boat, whereby disrupting the cohesion that the group has. A lack of functionality, after all, can perpetuate group stability and cohesion, and even enhance prosperity, while the actual production of results can obliterate that.
I'm not sure what you're getting at, and certainly not how this follows from functionality somehow being a universal standard.
 

Nicodemus

New member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
9,756
The funniest part of all is that ... cows don't have balls, only bulls do. An utter fail, on so many levels.
Bells, not balls. Cow bells, as all men know in this kingdom by the sea, are naturally bull balls. How utterly embarrassing for you.
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Bells, not balls. Cow bells, as all men know in this kingdom by the sea, are naturally bull balls. How utterly embarrassing for you.

If Wiki doesn't cover the disambiguation, I'm not buying it.

 

PeaceBaby

reborn
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
5,950
MBTI Type
N/A
Enneagram
N/A
Bells, not balls. Cow bells, as all men know in this kingdom by the sea, are naturally bull balls. How utterly embarrassing for you.

For you:

Serving up some Rocky Mountain oysters ...

rocky%20mtn.%20oysters.jpg
 
G

Glycerine

Guest
Fried balls.... how delish! [MENTION=5999]PeaceBaby[/MENTION] winz!
 

Nicodemus

New member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
9,756
If Wiki doesn't cover the disambiguation, I'm not buying it.

That is fine by me. My world is content with this new, yet-to-be-wiki'd concept of cow bells, though obviously I was not familiar with the 'Saturday Night Live' usage of the term.
 

sculpting

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
4,148
PB...that cowbell was AWESOME. No kidding, like totally awesome. It is both ridiculously odd, yet beautiful and adorably unique. It strikes my Ne heartstrongs as being amazingl

Nico, your cowbells were both horrifying, hysterical and sort of pretty all at the same time...cognitive dissonance strikes again!

Onemoretime, I showed my ENTP friend your post-she said it was like reading poetry, it flowed and that it was beautifully exact and correct. She has been my Ti/Fe debating sidekick for three years and she especially found your mention of "contextual" to be relavent.

Am I the only person who, when he reads these things, is like, "Yeah, I totally know what you mean about interacting with that type!", but, despite coming to a better understanding of the intertype relation, still gets extremely flustered and annoyed by it?

Sometimes it feels like, even though I gain new knowledge, it doesn't actually lessen the frustration (at least not that much).

I suppose, when the situation is important enough, I will still be able to use the understanding to make things better than I otherwise would. But, for the day to day shit, recognizing that other people (of my type, usually) share the same frustrations with dealing with other types doesn't necessarily make that frustration decrease. Hearing the same frustration recognized by others (once again, usually of my type) often seems to affirm what I'm feeling, and that affirmation is able to give me a concept to explain the phenomenon, cuz now I know it's not just an isolated incident with me and this type, but likely a more general phenomenon between this type and my type, or this type and certain other types, but, still, just having that conceptual understanding does not seem enough to necessarily mitigate my frustration, or give me an easy answer to fix the situation.

Those people are who they are, and I'm not gunna be able to explain typology and the typological reasons for our disconnect/misunderstanding to every single frickin person I interact with, let alone people who I interact with regularly but who are not well disposed to this kind of thinking.

Being as such, sometimes a new frustration forms whereby, now I'm not just frustrated because of the primary interaction itself, but now I'm frustrated cuz I see what's happening but explaining it to that person is really not a viable option.

I dunno, just needed to get that out there.

:)

I think this sort of sums up the forum rather well. Unless we have some intrinsic motivation to do so, we dont step out of our innate patterns of behavior and understanding and willing embrace someone elses. Additionally, we may not even be willing to grant them the legitimacy of having a different, but acceptable worldview, as it seems to deny our own worldview legitimacy.

I think this may be exacerbated with Fe, more so than Te, as how can one alternate anomolous person having a discrepant worldview really be enough evidence to counter the abundant Fe evidence that permeates a society? As Fi users, I suspect we each were mortified the first time we say a thread that said we were "self-centered and selfish", we dont feel that way, how could we be that way??? In the same light I suspect it is hard to be an Fe user, feel that you are caring for others out of self-lessness, being polite out of kindess, only to hear your affection is unwanted or your attempts are considered fake.

So what to do? well, haha, U's and I's disagreements are phrased in the language of typology. I use it help my enfp son understand his ISFJ step mom. My entp uses it to try and understand her ISTJ husband... In each case the burden of communication always falls upon the person who has the stake in making sure the message is delivered properly. So while it is god damned annoying, even hurtful, that the world doesnt accept me as i would like to be naturally, I also recognize that for those i love or for those I have a stake in clearly communicating with, I need to be the one that bends and adapts to their needs. Oddly, i find that nce I understand HOW to do so, it is easy...

So I come here, raise a bit of hell, dissect out interactions, rant about frustration, then walk back into the real world with tools and knowledge about how to care best for those I care for-even if they differ from me...

That's my take anyways. :)
 

sculpting

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
4,148
I wonder if it has something to do with wanting to be appreciated for who you are and rejecting the values or expectations to be different that someone else is imposing on you - regardless as to whether or not that imposition is subtle in its manifestation.

I dunno. Perhaps in myself, because my values are both extroverted and very close to the surface, it hurts more. Why are our values so integral to our core? Why does Fi seem almost self defining for me?

Oh I agree it is. As an Fi dom, I certainly know how troublesome it can be to others. Fi must be organized in every way to be effective in the world.

For example, as an agent of change - if I decide to enter the fray, I will have all my data ready to convince the Te types, and all the social benefits / people logistical information ready for the Fe types - for other types, I will have already mentally designated areas needing detail oriented task work or imaginative creative brainstorming and will be ready to engage those people as well. In order to deploy an Fi agenda, it is not enough to say "This is wrong, change needs to happen." One must carefully navigate all the players to a successful conclusion. Lots of work. Took me time to learn this.

well, I have to disagree on this point. ENFP Fi will not be displayed this way for the most part. Sometimes all it takes is a simple statement of "did you realize how this will effect these people if you do X?" to shift the dynamic when interacting with a TJ during a decision making process. As long as it is reasonable, and you arent playing a blame game or being overly dramatic, it just comes as another perspective and it is extremely effective. If I felt I was being carefully navigated (manipulated), I would not be keen on it. I dont mind direct requests, but indirect manuvering would bug me.

LOL, if I am an agent of change, I end up going in full force, full of passion and drive, lots of ideas and, most important, sincerity and authenticity that would I feel is correct, really is correct and in the best interest of those involved.
 
G

Glycerine

Guest
^I understand the differences between the hypothetical Fe and Fi but why is it usually framed as polar opposites, mutually exclusive?
 

Giggly

No moss growing on me
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
9,661
MBTI Type
iSFj
Enneagram
2
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I wonder if the schmoozing that's done in the business world (e.g. business networking and stuff) is Fe fakeness?
You know like coworkers or associates acting pleased to see each or talk to each other, but in reality they don't care.
Or someone acting interested in what the boss is saying even though they'd rather be doing something else.
Or a hiring manager giving hope to new grads by saying "Send me your resume" even though they have no intention of hiring them.

Is that Fe?
 
Top