Interpretations of Feeling Functions

[Musiqientist]

Any particular ways to differentiate them up to boot out there? Where do you draw the line between Fe and Fi besides the basic external traits associated with them. Like how users look. What is the major difference in interaction. Fe supposedly uses its values by defending the groups it feels attached to but what if those 'groups' just happen to agree with Fi? I've heard difference things, for example an INTJ told me that conversation with an Fe user drains him more. I wonder if that is related. Hope this makes sense.

Any ideas are welcome.

 

[Eric B]

It's not really "external traits"; it's the standard the ego judges based on: either the external world (such as the group), or the subject's own sense of good. The group doesn't "agree with Fi", the group (which consists of people with different preference) will have a particular ethic, and a person can go along with it because they simply want to merge with the group, or they can go along because the group's values happen to match their own. The person can also disengage, because the group's values may not go along with their sense of ethics, or because it may not go along with values the person learned from a larger or more significant group.

 

[Musiqientist]

It's not really "external traits"; it's the standard the ego judges based on: either the external world (such as the group), or the subject's own sense of good. The group doesn't "agree with Fi", the group (which consists of people with different preference) will have a particular ethic, and a person can go along with it because they simply want to merge with the group, or they can go along because the group's values happen to match their own. The person can also disengage, because the group's values may not go along with their sense of ethics, or because it may not go along with values the person learned from a larger or more significant group.

Right that is far better explained. My explanations tend to be poor. But again, how would you tell if the Fi decided to merge with besides them acting and trying blend in, I'd think that the approach was different somehow. Perhaps I'm not thinking in a very effective method and there isn't a way to tell... Can Fi never truly agree with Fe?

 

[Cellmold]

I have noticed that a lot of ills are attributed to Fe.

Although my opinion on this is neither one way nor t'other.

 

[Chiharu]

Fe users smile more easily and look more natural doing it. Fi users are moody bitches 24/7, but I would argue that an Fe user in a bad mood is the most troublesome person you could possibly meet. Fe cares more about reciprocity, and often like to link their feelings with larger values (Charity, Mercy, etc.). They're often more polite than Fi-users.

 

[Musiqientist]

I have noticed that a lot of ills are attributed to Fe.

Although my opinion on this is neither one way nor t'other.

What do you mean?

 

[Musiqientist]

Fe users smile more easily and look more natural doing it. Fi users are moody bitches 24/7, but I would argue that an Fe user in a bad mood is the most troublesome person you could possibly meet. Fe cares more about reciprocity, and often like to link their feelings with larger values (Charity, Mercy, etc.). They're often more polite than Fi-users.

These are those surface characteristics I was trying to avoid. Though isn't Fi supposedly more natural? I wonder why these are the tendencies... I'm madly scared of unhealthy Fe users.

 

[Standuble]

These are those surface characteristics I was trying to avoid. Though isn't Fi supposedly more natural? I wonder why these are the tendencies... I'm madly scared of unhealthy Fe users.

I'm an Fi-dom and smiling and expressing emotion is perhaps more forced because it's less relevant. You understand your emotions, mood, feelings and what you value very easily and quickly, they are understood long before they reach the surface (I imagine it like me having a sonar which sees and determines what's coming up from the ocean floor when its still in the dark depths.) There isn't a natural need to express them as surface characteristics. However it should be noted that it is possible for Fi users to express emotion though perhaps due to the influence of the extroverted function. I for one can find myself smiling with no effort due to internal activity e.g. Fi making humourous judgments of connections Ne makes or reflecting upon Si experiences. In both cases though the Fi smile is much less emotional, not animating the face so much as Fe does (especially the eyes which remain neutral.)

To answer your previous questions: Fi users don't side with the group so much as having common ground. It's less "I'm on your side" and more "We have similar goals." Fi users can easily agree with Fe users (sheer probability dictates that sooner or later the Fi user will encounter an Fe user who have similar views) but it won't be in sync. More like a rough fit, with the Fi user agreeing with some points but not others. I've experienced many occasions on being in agreement with both parties (though I risked reprisal for doing so!)

Also I don't think Fe is any less natural. How do you define natural exactly? I have often considered Fe primitive but only because it presents itself ignorant of nuances and ethical subtleties which Fi takes for granted. Also don't look for Fi users, they aren't guaranteed to express their viewpoint if it differs from the group. Just wait passively for them to do something which they seem to value and care about but which everyone else finds bizarre or out of touch is probably a better bet.

 

[WALMART]

Fe is like, "Get out of the cold, you'll get sick."

Fi is like, "Fuck you, I do what I want."

 

[Standuble]

Fe is like, "Get out of the cold, you'll get sick."

Fi is like, "Fuck you, I do what I want."

Fi is also "Fuck you, I don't want you to fall ill. Get out of the cold now!"

 

[WALMART]

Fi is also "Fuck you, I don't want you to fall ill. Get out of the cold now!"

I am a function literalist, I find that to be Fe.


Your posts inspires me to create my thread on shadow functions. Thank you.

 

[Standuble]

I am a function literalist, I find that to be Fe.


Your posts inspires me to create my thread on shadow functions. Thank you.

You're welcome. My example was from how it would manifest itself more in a TJ type, used in a more directive manner. Also my example isn't Fe. Fi does care about others, the example I used was in the context of a loved one. If the Fi user values the health of said loved one, they would show enough concern to try and protect it. To not do so would cause harm to the Fi user's personal values.

 

[WALMART]

You're welcome. My example was from how it would manifest itself more in a TJ type, used in a more directive manner. Also my example isn't Fe. Fi does care about others, the example I used was in the context of a loved one. If the Fi user values the health of said loved one, they would show enough concern to try and protect it. To not do so would cause harm to the Fi user's personal values.

Ah, I see. I suppose I have a habit of building systems based off how I perceive them, not how a textbook sees them. I was once an ENTP, you know

 

[Standuble]

Ah, I see. I suppose I have a habit of building systems based off how I perceive them, not how a textbook sees them. I was once an ENTP, you know

I was once an egg in an SFJ's ovary and a sperm in an SFP's ballsack.

It's alright. My example in retrospect was a poor one to use.

 

[Evo]

I'm an Fi-dom and smiling and expressing emotion is perhaps more forced because it's less relevant. You understand your emotions, mood, feelings and what you value very easily and quickly, they are understood long before they reach the surface (I imagine it like me having a sonar which sees and determines what's coming up from the ocean floor when its still in the dark depths.) There isn't a natural need to express them as surface characteristics. However it should be noted that it is possible for Fi users to express emotion though perhaps due to the influence of the extroverted function. I for one can find myself smiling with no effort due to internal activity e.g. Fi making humourous judgments of connections Ne makes or reflecting upon Si experiences. In both cases though the Fi smile is much less emotional, not animating the face so much as Fe does (especially the eyes which remain neutral.)

To answer your previous questions: Fi users don't side with the group so much as having common ground. It's less "I'm on your side" and more "We have similar goals." Fi users can easily agree with Fe users (sheer probability dictates that sooner or later the Fi user will encounter an Fe user who have similar views) but it won't be in sync. More like a rough fit, with the Fi user agreeing with some points but not others. I've experienced many occasions on being in agreement with both parties (though I risked reprisal for doing so!)

Also I don't think Fe is any less natural. How do you define natural exactly? I have often considered Fe primitive but only because it presents itself ignorant of nuances and ethical subtleties which Fi takes for granted. Also don't look for Fi users, they aren't guaranteed to express their viewpoint if it differs from the group. Just wait passively for them to do something which they seem to value and care about but which everyone else finds bizarre or out of touch is probably a better bet.

Fe is like, "Get out of the cold, you'll get sick."

Fi is like, "Fuck you, I do what I want."

Fi is also "Fuck you, I don't want you to fall ill. Get out of the cold now!"

You're welcome. My example was from how it would manifest itself more in a TJ type, used in a more directive manner. Also my example isn't Fe. Fi does care about others, the example I used was in the context of a loved one. If the Fi user values the health of said loved one, they would show enough concern to try and protect it. To not do so would cause harm to the Fi user's personal values.

True dat!

I think that Fe from an FJ vs TP are significantly different. Same for TJ vs FP.

 

[Nicki]

Fe cares more about harmony and the group while Fi cares more about being true to their inner values.

 

[Musiqientist]

You're welcome. My example was from how it would manifest itself more in a TJ type, used in a more directive manner. Also my example isn't Fe. Fi does care about others, the example I used was in the context of a loved one. If the Fi user values the health of said loved one, they would show enough concern to try and protect it. To not do so would cause harm to the Fi user's personal values.

Yeah I had been wondering whether Fi was a function that cared for people. I don't really know how to explain why I thought not so much. Much more indirectly than Fe. I always somehow thought of Fi being the function that could be used as to adequately justify criminal behavior. I don't say this means more Fi users are criminals, just that it could function that way ideally. I'm not sure how to explain, it's dark and would fit. They seem to care a lot if someone is hurt very much or something.

 

[Musiqientist]

Would Fe users generally share the same/similar values then? Or they would just have a similar way of processing values. I thought MBTI was one's way of processing things, not really so much determining their person.

 

[Standuble]

Yeah I had been wondering whether Fi was a function that cared for people. I don't really know how to explain why I thought not so much. Much more indirectly than Fe. I always somehow thought of Fi being the function that could be used as to adequately justify criminal behavior. I don't say this means more Fi users are criminals, just that it could function that way ideally. I'm not sure how to explain, it's dark and would fit. They seem to care a lot if someone is hurt very much or something.

Would Fe users generally share the same/similar values then? Or they would just have a similar way of processing values. I thought MBTI was one's way of processing things, not really so much determining their person.

Fi neither cares about people nor doesn't care about people. It's a tool to use. What the Fi user fills it up with is up to the individual, simply put the Fi helps the user craft a system of values to live by (it has many nuances and is a very refined system, the specification of the values are extremely, extremely precise) and whilst it is inflexible with value violation it is flexible about what those values are. Fi users can change what they find of value, if something goes through the Fi (I picture it as something resembling a factory assembly line & quality control system myself ) and the Fi determines it is "right" at the end a new value is adopted or a new point of view is accepted and valued (become true to the individual's beliefs.) Previous values can become redundant in the same manner (and completely dismissed without a second thought) if the Fi determines the held value is no longer "right" or true to the person. Fi users are resistant to social beliefs because Fi insists an external moral or ethical value go through it first and be approved rather than accepted immediately without any scrutiny. I wouldn't know how else to explain it. I guess its the same as Fe - just a tool which is then filled up by environmental ethics the Fe user is exposed to. Fe users would adopt same/similar values as their environment and the Fe would process and judge as "right" or "wrong" based on this criteria.

Fi can be used to justify criminal behaviour if the Fi cannot determine the actions of the individual to be "wrong" however it works both ways. Fe can adopt a moral position which could be considered immoral or even criminal whilst an Fi user can stand against it, accusing the Fe users of justifying criminal behaviour simply because its the social norm. As for the "dark side" then yes I admit that exists. My Fi has made me want to get revenge or punish people in the past sometimes for purely sadistic reasons because the Fi says that is what I truly desire to do. But then again can't Fe users manipulate and backstab too?

 

[Cellmold]

I think I made a post a while back on Fe and Fi and why both are necessary in a society of values.