When Feeling is violated, what does it look like? Fi vs. Fe

[EJCC]

I think there's truth in this.

Interesting. I identify with Fe much more, but also with EJCC's post. I could talk about my feelings, it would just be rambling I wouldn't want to burden others with. And it takes me awhile to completely figure them out. So Fe probably. But I do a lot of Te stuff, almost obsessively (or is that Fe?). What would the Ti response be then? I can see in/justice as the feeling response from Ti-Fe, but how would they go about solving problems? I think an Fi dom/aux would focus on making the feelings right along with taking steps to solve the problem; Te-Fi would put priority the other way around, Fe-Ti would focus on wrongdoing and analyzing the wrongdoer, but I don't really know how Ti fits in otherwise. Maybe Ti doesn't solve people problems. haha Or they just try to find out what is logical in a situation? But that would depend on circumstances, Fe stuff, and then they would have to find out how to transfer this idealized logical response to the real world.

A bit off topic maybe, but it's the natural progression.

You may be overcomplicating a little. If your feeling is violated, you're going to react with feeling, regardless of whether you're Te/Fi or Fi/Te, for example. It's why I relate 100% perfectly with the NFPs who have posted here; even if NFPs are more likely to rely on their Fi, on a daily basis, when you're presented with a situation that can't be resolved with logic, then feeling is what you have to rely on.

I legitimately don't know what the problem-solving process would be like for Fe users. I know that I was talking to [MENTION=7111]fidelia[/MENTION] a bit ago about how some NFJs will go through a similar "make this emotion go away" process with anger, as opposed to with sadness, but she didn't go into details.

Also [MENTION=5418]Lady X[/MENTION] is right -- I hear a lot more of that sort of talk from my Fe family members and friends.
e.g. if you asked an Fe person I know about a traumatic event in their childhood, they'd be quick to attribute the blame. It would be all about who the blame went to. That would be how they coped with the event, would be attributing blame. Whereas if you asked me, or one of my Fi friends, it would be less about whose fault it was, and more about the fallout from the event -- how it made me feel, why it made me feel that way, how I looked within myself to see why it made me upset (and here might be where I attribute blame, but I wouldn't be considering blame to be the most important thing). There would be a deeper conclusion at the end, than "It was this event or this person, end of story"; more like "I couldn't tolerate that event because I reacted a particular way; some of it was because of the person or the event, but if the same thing had happened to me now, I may have reacted differently."

If I'm right, then I suppose you could phrase it like this: Lack of who/what/where/when/why information -- replaced by irrational Fe judgments and assumptions -- makes Ti stressed out, so Ti will try to create order out of chaos by contributing that information and providing closure that way. Whereas overwhelming, animalistic, value-based feeling, overwhelming your senses and your reason, is what stresses Te out, so Te will try to create order out of chaos by calming the feelings down, validating them so that they stay content and won't try to rise up again.

Everyone, let me know if I'm leading [MENTION=15773]greenfairy[/MENTION] in the wrong direction here.

 

[ms.behaving]

I don't agree with any of this and I don't feel like explaining myself. :/

 

[greenfairy]

You may be overcomplicating a little. If your feeling is violated, you're going to react with feeling, regardless of whether you're Te/Fi or Fi/Te, for example. It's why I relate 100% perfectly with the NFPs who have posted here; even if NFPs are more likely to rely on their Fi, on a daily basis, when you're presented with a situation that can't be resolved with logic, then feeling is what you have to rely on.

I legitimately don't know what the problem-solving process would be like for Fe users. I know that I was talking to [MENTION=7111]fidelia[/MENTION] a bit ago about how some NFJs will go through a similar "make this emotion go away" process with anger, as opposed to with sadness, but she didn't go into details.

Also [MENTION=5418]Lady X[/MENTION] is right -- I hear a lot more of that sort of talk from my Fe family members and friends.
e.g. if you asked an Fe person I know about a traumatic event in their childhood, they'd be quick to attribute the blame. It would be all about who the blame went to. That would be how they coped with the event, would be attributing blame. Whereas if you asked me, or one of my Fi friends, it would be less about whose fault it was, and more about the fallout from the event -- how it made me feel, why it made me feel that way, how I looked within myself to see why it made me upset (and here might be where I attribute blame, but I wouldn't be considering blame to be the most important thing). There would be a deeper conclusion at the end, than "It was this event or this person, end of story"; more like "I couldn't tolerate that event because I reacted a particular way; some of it was because of the person or the event, but if the same thing had happened to me now, I may have reacted differently."

If I'm right, then I suppose you could phrase it like this: Lack of who/what/where/when/why information -- replaced by irrational Fe judgments and assumptions -- makes Ti stressed out, so Ti will try to create order out of chaos by contributing that information and providing closure that way. Whereas overwhelming, animalistic, value-based feeling, overwhelming your senses and your reason, is what stresses Te out, so Te will try to create order out of chaos by calming the feelings down, validating them so that they stay content and won't try to rise up again.

Everyone, let me know if I'm leading [MENTION=15773]greenfairy[/MENTION] in the wrong direction here.

I see what you mean.

Although, one could argue that attributing blame is to some extent just immature behavior and doesn't solve problems. I used to do that all the time, but then I adopted a more Fi (as you explain it) approach as I got older and became more mature. It certainly wasn't my natural response. And if the functions are to some extent constant throughout life, that wouldn't make sense.

 

[ms.behaving]

Although, one could argue that attributing blame is to some extent just immature behavior and doesn't solve problems.

This.

 

[EJCC]

Well maybe I didn't use the right word. Replace the word "blame" with "responsibility"?
All I meant was, everything happens for a reason, or because of a set of actions. Knowing what those actions were can be calming.

Ah, nevermind. I'll just be sitting here and waiting for the Fe explanation from an Fe-user's mouth.

 

[greenfairy]

Well maybe I didn't use the right word. Replace the word "blame" with "responsibility"?
All I meant was, everything happens for a reason, or because of a set of actions. Knowing what those actions were can be calming.

Ah, nevermind. I'll just be sitting here and waiting for the Fe explanation from an Fe-user's mouth.

Oh that makes perfect sense! I'm all the time talking about responsibility. To me it's just the way things are: actions have consequences. Feelings are part of those consequences, but to me are just tools to assess the situation.

 

[Fidelia]

EJCC - I think that some of what you are talking about is true. Usually if Fe users talk bring up something that is bothering them, it is with the intent of either gathering information to give more context or else with the intent to change the situation in some way. The emphasis isn't really on one's own personal feelings, because those are only indicators of how everything is going, but not significant in and of themselves. The thought of expressing something without the intention of actually changing the situation was an extremely strange and incomprehensible one to me when I joined the site. I really had no idea that other people didn't all just use feelings as a barometer of a situation and nothing more.

In general terms, I believe Fe users feel a responsibility to do all the adjusting of their own that they can before requesting someone else to. By that point, they may feel very frustrated that the other person seemingly is oblivious to all the adjusting they have already done to try to make it a workable outcome for both parties involved. Really the reasons why the person is acting as they are (other than helping to make more sense of the situation) or their feelings receive less emphasis than the outcome of their actions. This is one difference I have sometimes noticed between Fe and Fi users during conflict. The Fi explanation of their good intentions can seem like justifying something that resulted in badness when an apology and acknowledgement of the negative result would cut more ice.

Fe users have a tendancy towards two downfalls. One is expecting that other people are thinking about balancing the feelings/inconvenience of all involved. They may feel there is one self-evident way that this should be accomplished, and also expect others to go to the same lengths that they do to take the feelings and wishes of others into account. Instead of voicing their concerns as they go, or making a direct request, they sometimes wait until they are frustrated and resentful already (often because of overaccommodating, sometimes even in ways that can be irritating or not appreciated by the other party!), which then can be perceived as them acting like a martyr when they don't need to.

They also have a tendency (as with Te to Ti ears) to state their perceptions of the situation in terms that seem very definite and irrevocable to Fi ears, when in fact they are not. The fact is, like with Te ways of piecing together knowledge, they are more trying things on for size to see what sticks and what doesn't. New information may result in reconfiguring the information they are working with. To other Fe users, I think this is tacitly understood, and so doesn't come off as nearly so harsh and judgemental. Similarly, I often assume that Te statements are meant as a final conclusion, when in reality they are only meant as a working hypothesis and that seems so obvious to the Te user that they would feel strange about stating that out loud.

Hence, in some ways, EJCC, I don't necessarily agree with your perceptions about what Fe behaviour may mean (eg martyr complex etc) because I think you are missing some of the mindset and other information that gives it context. However, I think that you are right about some of your observations of differences between Fe and Fi behaviour. Does that make sense?

I identify with a lot of what fia said in her first paragraph.

 

[Fidelia]

I guess the reason I am more likely to try to get anger to go away quickly is because I feel like it clouds my judgement. It makes enough emotional noise for me that I find it distracting and I don't trust my perception at all then. Sadness on the other hand is something that maybe I am more familiar with and can channel into something more useful and productive. For example, sorrow can produce a sort of empathy with others' pain and a better insight into their situation in a way that anger doesn't for me.

 

[Fidelia]

Oh yeah - and as far as assessing blame - I also prefer the word responsibility. If the intent is to bring about change, and the Fe user feels they have done whatever they possibly can to do so and more still needs to be done, they will try to get the other person to understand their responsibility in the situation (blame doesn't change the outcome, but taking responsibility does) so that the end goal can be reached! Of course that assumes that the other person will see the situation somewhat similarly through discussion, which of course is not always the case, and it can feel that the Fe user is somewhat self-righteous to act so prescriptively towards someone else. Fi in particular seems to be a pretty live and let live kind of function, while Fe tends to attach a label of good or bad to most actions (rather than just neutral).

In theory, I understand why this is a problem, but it is still difficult to stifle the most natural way of going about solving problems that I can see! Of course, I am not very vocal about that sort of thing generally. Only with people I am very close to, or if I have been given the authority to make certain judgement calls about what will work best (eg establishing routines in a classroom as a teacher, etc). Mostly I don't like to speak up about my feelings unless I really can't continue interacting with the person unless it gets addressed.

 

[highlander]

It would probably depend on how well developed the function was. So, if you are inferior Fe or Fi, it would manifest itself in a far less productive way than if you were an Fe or Fi dom. As Fi tertiary, if my values are violated, I may respond in a strong way emotionally - indignation, frustration, hurt, etc. depending on the severity of the thing of course. It is pretty hard for me not to express what I am feeling - either directly with that person or with someone else. I try to channel the thing for productive purposes but it isn't always entirely possible.

 

[EJCC]

I don't agree with any of this and I don't feel like explaining myself. :/

Um... good to know? Thanks for your input?

EJCC - I think that some of what you are talking about is true. Usually if Fe users talk bring up something that is bothering them, it is with the intent of either gathering information to give more context or else with the intent to change the situation in some way. In general terms, I believe Fe users feel a responsibility to do all the adjusting of their own that they can before requesting someone else to. By that point, they may feel very frustrated that the other person seemingly is oblivious to all the adjusting they have already done to try to make it a workable outcome for both parties involved. Really the reasons why the person is acting as they are (other than helping to make more sense of the situation) or their feelings receive less emphasis than the outcome of their actions. This is one difference I have sometimes noticed between Fe and Fi users during conflict. The Fi explanation of their good intentions can seem like justifying something that resulted in badness when an apology and acknowledgement of the negative result would cut more ice.

This led to a lot of communication breakdown when I was a kid. Whenever I'd do something wrong, I'd explain it, and I'd get the "no one cares, just fix it" from both of my Fe-user parents. Struck me as incredibly unfair, at the time, in ways that I had difficulty verbalizing.

Is it an Fi-user thing to cut people slack for, say, doing something wrong with good intentions?

Fe users have a tendancy towards two downfalls. One is expecting that other people are thinking about balancing the feelings/inconvenience of all involved. They may feel there is one self-evident way that this should be accomplished, and also expect others to go to the same lengths that they do to take the feelings and wishes of others into account. Instead of voicing their concerns as they go, or making a direct request, they sometimes wait until they are frustrated and resentful already (often because of overaccommodating, sometimes even in ways that can be irritating or not appreciated by the other party!), which then can be perceived as them acting like a martyr when they don't need to.

I see this so much from FJs. Although I've definitely seen something kind of similar in my INTP dad? He'll try and deal with an interpersonal conflict at work, then come home and summarize the whole emotional roller-coaster in a few sentences -- but as if he had no agency in the matter. That's part of why I ended up using the word "martyr" -- it ends up sounding, to outsiders, like you've already given up, like everything is beyond your control and the world sucks but there's nothing you can do about it. I've heard this exact style of thing from both my INTP dad and my INFJ mom and the only differences are 1) frequency of delivery (i.e. my mom talks about that sort of thing way more often), and 2) style of delivery (my dad gives it in the dry Ti monotone).

They also have a tendency (as with Te to Ti ears) to state their perceptions of the situation in terms that seem very definite and irrevocable to Fi ears, when in fact they are not. The fact is, like with Te ways of piecing together knowledge, they are more trying things on for size to see what sticks and what doesn't. New information may result in reconfiguring the information they are working with. To other Fe users, I think this is tacitly understood, and so doesn't come off as nearly so harsh and judgemental. Similarly, I often assume that Te statements are meant as a final conclusion, when in reality they are only meant as a working hypothesis and that seems so obvious to the Te user that they would feel strange about stating that out loud.

Interesting. So essentially, Fe users do with personal analyses and judgments, what Te users do with facts and impersonal opinions?

Hence, in some ways, EJCC, I don't necessarily agree with your perceptions about what Fe behaviour may mean (eg martyr complex etc) because I think you are missing some of the mindset and other information that gives it context. However, I think that you are right about some of your observations of differences between Fe and Fi behaviour. Does that make sense?

It makes perfect sense. I think it was what I was expecting; I knew what I'd been seeing for most of my life, but didn't necessarily know what the motivations were behind it.

 

[EJCC]

Oh yeah - and as far as assessing blame - I also prefer the word responsibility. If the intent is to bring about change, and the Fe user feels they have done whatever they possibly can to do so and more still needs to be done, they will try to get the other person to understand their responsibility in the situation (blame doesn't change the outcome, but taking responsibility does) so that the end goal can be reached!

That makes a lot of sense. Part of why I used the word "blame" is because I tend to think of that behavior in conjunction with the "martyr" stuff I mentioned before -- e.g. the Fe-user parent lecturing the Fi-user kid after the fact, so that they won't do it again. Yes I recognize that that also helps with a goal (i.e. them not doing it again), but it doesn't feel that way in context when you're young.

Fi in particular seems to be a pretty live and let live kind of function, while Fe tends to attach a label of good or bad to most actions (rather than just neutral).

This is a very, very interesting thought. I'd love to hear more about this.

 

[Fidelia]

I'm going to say as a disclaimer that I am most familiar with FJ flavoured Fe. Also that Fe is highly tempered by the other functions used. Also that I am aware that when I make blanket statements about Fi, they are only from my own crude perceptions and are likely offensively stated, as I don't have access to all the information that would put it into better perspective and give it context. I realize there are other flavours of Fi as well. However, to address some of your remarks, EJCC....

Keep in mind too that Fe users use trusted people close to them as a mirror. It's not that they are just looking for someone to tell them what to think, but like with Te, they are looking to see if it makes sense as they verbalize it and as they watch the other person react to their statements. It's like having a pretty good idea of how you look before you go out, but recognizing that your hair could have gotten out of place, you might have toothpaste on your shirt that you didn't notice or you have something between your teeth that needs attending to before you leave the house.

For me, I have a huge need to verbalize my thoughts or emotions to get more clarity. It's the process of explaining it to someone else that helps me to figure out what to give the most weight to. It also bleeds off the excess emotion that I am feeling so that I can see things more objectively. Therefore, some of the martyr stuff you feel you are hearing from your parents could be them venting. I would hate for anyone to ever read my journal because it is usually only written at times of extreme emotion and really wouldn't give an accurate picture of who I am as a person. Like if you only took pictures of yourself in one or two environments, it might lead people to believe that you were a much different sort of person than you actually are. Maybe sometimes you are seeing snapshots of your folks in a particular emotional state that is not really where they are all the time. It's just the state that needs expressing most urgently.

What you said about your mother struck home for me too. I think ENFJs have a higher tendancy in this direction, although I am not sure. I know that my mother is more likely to point out what should have been done, even though it is clearly not a situation that can be amended at that point and it seems to me that she is dwelling on a moot point. I don't think it is her intention to berate or embarrass anyone, but more to avoid problems in the future, but even as a Fe user I sometimes have difficulty hearing her doing it without commenting.

As far as Fi being live and let live - well, I think Fi users tend to ask less questions about why someone behaves as they do. There is less curiosity to understand what makes a person ticks in a technical sense or how they perceive others, and more in accepting and validating whatever they choose to reveal, even if they sense more going on under the surface. Fi is more independent and also more sensitive. If someone decides they don't want to do something, it's more likely to be taken at face value. Fe users don't do this as much, partly because there is a lot of subtext in their style of expression (more likely to state feelings, but less likely to state wishes, if that makes any sense) and so if they don't delve a bit, they are afraid that they may be missing something that is important.

If a Fi person doesn't want to do something that matters greatly to the Fe user, it could be interpreted as there being something wrong in the relationship, or as a form of selfishness, (we all look at situations through the lens of what it would mean if we were doing it, which is often inaccurate!) because that is one primary way that Fe shows love - through trying to get the best outcome for everyone possible, even if it means doing what isn't your favourite some of the time. Fe expresses interest in others through asking questions (usually so that they can act in the most informed and sensitive way possible), even though to Fi users this may seem kind of intrusive (Fe users would welcome that kind of intrusion as it expresses a desire to understand and they would feel comfortable curtailing conversation that they didn't want to delve into). It also tries to anticipate wants or needs of others. Therefore, if someone doesn't naturally do that for them, it can be felt as dislike, discord or immaturity/selfishness.

Similarly, Fi users are more likely to see inaction as putting something on hold while they are deciding on a course of action, or as a neutral decision. Fe users are more likely to perceive it as a conscious choice or else as carelessness/unawareness of consequences if ignored. Therefore they are inclined to point out what the consequences will be and if that fails, assume that it is a decision the other person has made about the decision, relationship etc. I think because Fi sees the intricacies of feeling and shades that Fe does not, it also assigns more meaning to feelings than Fe does.

It was really a big revelation for me to start seeing the connections between how Te and Fe work (and their impact on the people who are wired opposite from them!) and how Ti and Fi work similarly as well. It truly is not that Fe users are trying to be unkind in their judgements. I think the difference is in how Fe and Te are felt by the opposite users. Te puts me on the spot and can make me feel stupid like no one's business, while the Te user may be baffled by this response because they wouldn't feel it to be harsh at all. However, Fe is uncomfortable for Te users in a way that is truly surprising to Fe users, simply because they would not react to it in the same way either! The unspoken assumptions that seemingly strong statements are actually open to change is surprising to both parties, even though they do it themselves with the opposite extraverted function! Some of the things on here that I've seen Fi/Te users say to each other would seem intrusive and harsh to me, while some of the things Fe/Ti users say seem inoccuous to me, but are not perceived that way by Fi/Te. It's been extremely eye opening for me and shed a lot of light on the issue, even if I am not always sure how to navigate around it.

 

[21%]

I can't agree more with what [MENTION=7111]fidelia[/MENTION] said.

 

[pinkgraffiti]

I'm sorry, but I have to completely disagree with this. I'm an ENFP, therefore use Ne and Fi, and the sentence you wrote basically describes one of my favorite activities in life.
Understanding why someone behaves as they do is IMO Fi. Fe would see past motives for feelings and just look at the surface, right?

What I did like about your post was the last paragraph on Te/Fe, as I'd read just yesterday someone else verbalize it in the same way, and I think it's a pretty logical (and useful) theory.

As far as Fi being live and let live - well, I think Fi users tend to ask less questions about why someone behaves as they do. There is less curiosity to understand what makes a person tick
.

 

[pinkgraffiti]

OK, interesting.
I'm also pretty ruthless if violated, but unlike you, I'm quite impulsive (has got better with age). I don't agree with you about that description of Fi, or at least that's not how I feel it personally, and this is interesting because we are both ENFP 7w8.
For me Fi comes as a deep feeling, like a barometer that tells me if I'm comfortable or not, if there's something wrong or not. But it's quite instantaneous. Then I might spend some time understanding why I'm feeling in a particular way, but I don't think that function is Fi (maybe that's Ne)?
OK, so in the particular case the Fi feeling is violation of self/unfairness to self, then I feel it pretty fast and will react with a major Te slap (of which I will later feel sorry/guilty for). In fact, Te is that function that is so useful for my job, but so horrible when dealing with people, and I hope I could learn to use it better. It gives me incredible shame (but hey, I digress).

This is an interesting topic.

I'd say that if I'm hurt by others I use my Fi to look at the situation. I have to think about it a bit and weigh all the values involved, but once I come to a conclusion.... shazaam. I can be ruthless in then displaying my moral judgment in front of others others... social norms be damned.

The things that stand out to me in what I just said is that

#1) I don't usually make snap decisions. There is a period of weighing the options and culling out extraneous things before I reach a judgment.
#2) Once my judgment is reached I am very firm in it. I don't care what the social consequences are. Right is right.

I'd love to see if any other Fi users identify with what I wrote... and how Fe users differ. I'm guessing that an Fe user would reach an Fe judgment much quicker than I would reach an Fi judgment. I'd also expect that an Fe user would not place being right in such a superior position to potential social fallout. In other words, what would seem right to an Fe-user would by definition take into account social consequences.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

This led to a lot of communication breakdown when I was a kid. Whenever I'd do something wrong, I'd explain it, and I'd get the "no one cares, just fix it" from both of my Fe-user parents. Struck me as incredibly unfair, at the time, in ways that I had difficulty verbalizing.

This is interesting. I know that something that stymies me is when I can’t work through the details of why something is a problem for me, and it gets met with a quick “okay, I’ve heard enough.” I don’t really feel a need to explain why I did something, but if I can’t explain why I need something fixed (OR get an explanation from someone for why they want me to do something differently) then it makes me kinda nuts- and even if the person stops doing the issue I brought up, if they cut me off and I can’t explain why I need the conflict resolved then I’ll still feel unheard and I’ll need to distance the person. I think the main reason for needing to explain why I need something done differently is so that I can get feedback about whether or not it’s reasonable, to gather information like fid described. When someone says ‘fine, I heard you, drop it’ then I feel like I have no way of knowing if I’m imposing something unreasonable and I really can’t stand that feeling. I think that expressing how something makes me feel/why I did something to start out with feels superfluous- my imperative is to get the other person’s experience to compare it to, then I might delve into the nuances of how something makes me feel for the sake of clarifying to the other person. I don’t need to iron out those nuances for the sake of exploring them though, which seems to be a Fi thing (and which I can understand because I do the same thing with Ti).

And the reason this kinda stood out to me is because I can distinctly remember my own biggest childhood frustration was with not getting a satisfactory explanation for why I shouldn’t do something. Nothing was more frustrating than “Do it because I said so!” and not having it followed up with any explanation to make it make sense to me. My INFJ son has always been the same way- he never particularly felt the need to explain why he did something, the problem came from hearing that he shouldn’t do it again and not being able to work through the details of why (and hearing that it had a negative affect on someone else was usually enough motivation)- but if he couldn’t get an explanation for why he shouldn’t do it then I’d notice him withdraw in frustration and sorta get trapped in his head for hours afterward. His eNTJ dad frustrated the bejeezus out of him with this (and truth be told, he frustrated me with it as well).

 

[pinkgraffiti]

yes!

I think the main difference is that Fe will have this need to make you understand what you did wrong and change your behavior. To me, Fi seems to seek to express itself without so much focus on getting you to change.

Fe: I am mad at you because you did X and Y and Z and these are bad things.
Fi: I am mad at you because you did X and Y and Z and these are bad things.

 

[21%]

I don’t really feel a need to explain why I did something, but if I can’t explain why I need something fixed (OR get an explanation from someone for why they want me to do something differently) then it makes me kinda nuts- and even if the person stops doing the issue I brought up, if they cut me off and I can’t explain why I need the conflict resolved then I’ll still feel unheard and I’ll need to distance the person. I think the main reason for needing to explain why I need something done differently is so that I can get feedback about whether or not it’s reasonable, to gather information like fid described. When someone says ‘fine, I heard you, drop it’ then I feel like I have no way of knowing if I’m imposing something unreasonable and I really can’t stand that feeling. I think that expressing how something makes me feel/why I did something to start out with feels superfluous- my imperative is to get the other person’s experience to compare it to, then I might delve into the nuances of how something makes me feel for the sake of clarifying to the other person.

I identify a lot with this! If I feel like the conflict is 'swept under the rug' it just drives me completely insane. If someone refuses to 'work through' the conflict with me and leaves it unresolved, the whole thing feels like a gaping wound and I really need to shut the person out to stop the bleeding. I will try and try to get resolution, but if I don't get it I will slowly feel an emotional disconnection. I don't know why I have such a strong reaction. Perhaps this violates the ultimate Fe ideal of "we are working for our ultimate happiness" and a refusal to work through an issue can be seen as a rejection of the relationship itself (?)

What perplexes me is how, at least to me, Fi doesn't seem to really want resolution. With Fe it is pretty obvious, where Fe-users will lay out what the situation is and ask all parties (including themselves) to work together to get to a solution. Sometimes when an Fi-user expresses their feelings, I feel myself waiting for the second half of why and what they want me to do (so we can then discuss it and reach a solution about what to do with it), which never comes.

 

[Amargith]

^You are already doing it at that point. You are listening. Acknowledging. That is all an Fi-user needs. If there is a logistical problem (Te) to be solved (like how to avoid this in the future, since you'll be ending up in this situation again and again), that is another matter... but usually, all you need is to be heard, to know the other is acknowledging your right to feel this way in order for the Fi-user to come to terms with the situation and consider it resolved; the rest of the work happens internally, where (at least for me as an Ne-user) I'll evaluate what I will do differently should I run into this situation again with someone else and if I should feel the way that I felt this time, whether it is congruent with what I believe in, whether or not I should reevaluate and finetune that value-system within in order to respond more..efficiently, effectively and more appropriately next time this situation with whomever arises.

Wrt you, the situation, as long as we understand each other and have figured out where we stand, is resolved, imo. I know why you did what you did, you know where I was coming from, which means that in the future, we'll understand each other better if such a thing should arise again, and we will be able to adjust to one another's position and perhaps even come to a compromise from both ends more easily since we have full understanding of what is going on. The logistics however might just be different, while the F-response will be triggered all the same (and since that is an authentic response, one does not tinker with it, one acknowledges its existence and works *with* it, as to give each person their own personal space), so there is no point in working out a concrete solution for the future.


Not sure if that made sense...