[Fi] You must obey MY rules

[Mal12345]

Do Fi doms and auxes believe that their rules must be obeyed, but that others' rules can be broken at will?

 

[Jaguar]

Do Ti doms and auxes believe that their rules must be obeyed, but that others' rules can be broken at will?

 

[Lexicon]

That more describes someone with low empathy, poor boundaries, & general emotional underdevelopment than it does an Fi-dom, or any other personality type/function stacking, I think.

(I didn't vote on the poll since "N/A" wasn't an available option)

 

[Population: 1]

Yeah we totally suck and are completely inflexible. We also write checks that bounce often.

 

[Dreamer]

Do Fi doms and auxes believe that their rules must be obeyed, but that others' rules can be broken at will?

Perhaps if someone is young and developing their Fi? Seeing how the world works around them, figuring out what is determined right and wrong externally and comparing that to how it sits internally for you and how it makes sense. Do those external values carry any legitimacy? That's what I suspect is what you see occurring, is that sort of personal value "exploration". It's not that others' values are ok to break, but that you're seeing how those values align with your own. But, not in a way that you are attempting to assimilate those values as your own, but that you are comparing values (internal and external) as a means to finding value in them.

Ok well...this is my process, perhaps Fi doms have a different internal experience and understanding of how their values are formed, but yes, I suspect that is what you're seeing, the development of values, but it isn't limited to Fi doms/auxs I don't think. With me though, I'm constantly "playing" with my values and poking them from different angles, but then, I lead with Ne so there's that.

The way I often think and explain what the value "play" feels like for me is akin to a kelp forest. It sways and flexes with the current, it shapeshifts but in subtle movements and gradually, but is anchored down to the bed below. They're both flexible and unmoving at the same time.

 

[Red Memories]

Do Fi doms and auxes believe that their rules must be obeyed, but that others' rules can be broken at will?

I am confused what you mean by the second statement.

Do I think some thingss would be better if people followed what I feel is ideal? sure. Is it obligated? mmm no.

 

[chickpea]

what rules? nobody has to do anything! and i don’t have to like them either!

 

[1487610420]

what rules? nobody has to do anything! and i don’t have to like them either!

 

[Mal12345]

Perhaps if someone is young and developing their Fi? Seeing how the world works around them, figuring out what is determined right and wrong externally and comparing that to how it sits internally for you and how it makes sense. Do those external values carry any legitimacy? That's what I suspect is what you see occurring, is that sort of personal value "exploration". It's not that others' values are ok to break, but that you're seeing how those values align with your own. But, not in a way that you are attempting to assimilate those values as your own, but that you are comparing values (internal and external) as a means to finding value in them.

Ok well...this is my process, perhaps Fi doms have a different internal experience and understanding of how their values are formed, but yes, I suspect that is what you're seeing, the development of values, but it isn't limited to Fi doms/auxs I don't think. With me though, I'm constantly "playing" with my values and poking them from different angles, but then, I lead with Ne so there's that.

The way I often think and explain what the value "play" feels like for me is akin to a kelp forest. It sways and flexes with the current, it shapeshifts but in subtle movements and gradually, but is anchored down to the bed below. They're both flexible and unmoving at the same time.

I'm not sure how to address this since I referenced rules not values. I know how Fi values work, the point at which values become rules is where my question starts.

And yes, to someone else, I was talking about an immature psyche that does not recognize self-contradictions and personal inconsistencies. Fi rules, without the flexibility you mentioned, are authoritarian. Immature values and rules are black-and-white, and so they lack flexibility.

The self-contradiction and personal inconsistency I'm referring to is requiring others to obey my inflexible rules while recusing myself from following the rules of others. I imagine there are three levels of maturation here:
1. My rules aren't inflexible, and I am willing to compromise my rules with those of others.
2. My rules are inflexible; your rules are questionable and subsumed by my rules until and unless you've walked a mile in my shoes.
3. My rules, my way. There are no other rules, and I can't understand why there should be.

 

[Mal12345]

Perhaps if someone is young and developing their Fi? Seeing how the world works around them, figuring out what is determined right and wrong externally and comparing that to how it sits internally for you and how it makes sense. Do those external values carry any legitimacy? That's what I suspect is what you see occurring, is that sort of personal value "exploration". It's not that others' values are ok to break, but that you're seeing how those values align with your own. But, not in a way that you are attempting to assimilate those values as your own, but that you are comparing values (internal and external) as a means to finding value in them.

Ok well...this is my process, perhaps Fi doms have a different internal experience and understanding of how their values are formed, but yes, I suspect that is what you're seeing, the development of values, but it isn't limited to Fi doms/auxs I don't think. With me though, I'm constantly "playing" with my values and poking them from different angles, but then, I lead with Ne so there's that.

The way I often think and explain what the value "play" feels like for me is akin to a kelp forest. It sways and flexes with the current, it shapeshifts but in subtle movements and gradually, but is anchored down to the bed below. They're both flexible and unmoving at the same time.

Now to address your last paragraph, that's a great metaphor. I see that as an NFP or SFP trait which I have termed emotional chameleonism. But there is the undergirding of stability, of values that can never be questioned as if to say your values were formed by an omniscient intellect.

 

[Mal12345]

I am confused what you mean by the second statement.

Do I think some thingss would be better if people followed what I feel is ideal? sure. Is it obligated? mmm no.

It could be that, or it could be an obstinate refusal to see things another way. Yes there is strong Fi empathy, but only when someone gets hurt or is dealing with a hardship, sometimes even if that someone is loathed, e.g., "I hate him and yet I feel sorry for him at the same time". The contradiction is in hating that person (and with the Fi dom the reasons for that hatred will never be forgotten), and yet feeling sorry for that person. The hatred could be from past or present dealings with that person, or noticing how badly that person treats his/her family, or for many other similar reasons that often involve how someone treats someone else (unfairly, unkindly, etc.), or how someone treated a defenseless creature (e.g., how the guy down the street kicks his dog).

So with regard to your last question, "Is it obligated?" I would say that at some point your rules become obligations when someone crosses a certain line with you, that is, with regard to your value system and the rules that are generated from it.

 

[Yuurei]

No, obvioisly not.

The problem with unhealthy and extreme Fi is that they obay only what they feel at the moment.

Therefore they have no concrete rules. Their only rule is to obey whatever thier emotions tell them.

I know one of .these people it is honestly, fairly abusive behavior; if they are angry, they scream, they result to insults. They do not use reason. They know only that they are feeling hurt and they are going to hurt everyone around them.

There is no rhyme, reason, or consistancy yet everyone around them must adhere to thier emotions, whatever they may be at any given moment.

That is the danger of uncontrolled Fi.

 

[Mal12345]

No, obvioisly not.

The problem with unhealthy and extreme Fi is that they obay only what they feel at the moment.

Therefore they have no concrete rules. Their only rule is to obey whatever thier emotions tell them.

I know one of .these people it is honestly, fairly abusive behavior; if they are angry, they scream, they result to insults. They do not use reason. They know only that they are feeling hurt and they are going to hurt everyone around them.

There is no rhyme, reason, or consistancy yet everyone around them must adhere to thier emotions, whatever they may be at any given moment.

That is the danger of uncontrolled Fi.

It's probably Borderline Personality Disorder.

 

[Red Memories]

It could be that, or it could be an obstinate refusal to see things another way. Yes there is strong Fi empathy, but only when someone gets hurt or is dealing with a hardship, sometimes even if that someone is loathed, e.g., "I hate him and yet I feel sorry for him at the same time". The contradiction is in hating that person (and with the Fi dom the reasons for that hatred will never be forgotten), and yet feeling sorry for that person. The hatred could be from past or present dealings with that person, or noticing how badly that person treats his/her family, or for many other similar reasons that often involve how someone treats someone else (unfairly, unkindly, etc.), or how someone treated a defenseless creature (e.g., how the guy down the street kicks his dog).

So with regard to your last question, "Is it obligated?" I would say that at some point your rules become obligations when someone crosses a certain line with you, that is, with regard to your value system and the rules that are generated from it.

Yes and no.

I do think Fi empathizes more when they've experienced something themselves, even if they dislike the person. This I resonate with.
I feel a friend described Fi in a way which I resonated with strongly, that may apply here. Fi believes their views are subjective, but their subjective view is their ideal so they appear/do attempt to make their subjective world an objective rule.
I cannot speak for every Fi user, but I do have values which I do not compromise. Can I associate with those who do not share them exactly? depends what that value is. I am a strong-willed Christian who associates with people who are staunch atheists. But I will not associate with someone who, say, feels religion should be abolished. Will I hear what they say? Absolutely, I think it is important to be open-minded and hear a perspective besides your own. I have a lot of views where I have learned a lot about the opposition to mine, and though I did not change my own, I respect their point of view.

Just my take.

 

[Dreamer]

I'm not sure how to address this since I referenced rules not values. I know how Fi values work, the point at which values become rules is where my question starts.

And yes, to someone else, I was talking about an immature psyche that does not recognize self-contradictions and personal inconsistencies. Fi rules, without the flexibility you mentioned, are authoritarian. Immature values and rules are black-and-white, and so they lack flexibility.

The self-contradiction and personal inconsistency I'm referring to is requiring others to obey my inflexible rules while recusing myself from following the rules of others. I imagine there are three levels of maturation here:
1. My rules aren't inflexible, and I am willing to compromise my rules with those of others.
2. My rules are inflexible; your rules are questionable and subsumed by my rules until and unless you've walked a mile in my shoes.
3. My rules, my way. There are no other rules, and I can't understand why there should be.

Ahh I see. My inexplanation is at fault here. When I read your question regarding rules, I literally read that to mean “values”, and thus, a question asking how values can be unshakeable on one hand, and played with on the other, as the two are essentially the same to me. What I mean is, rules are essentially the outward expression of one’s internal value system, IF the person has met a particular point of understanding of their personal values. If there are inconsistencies and there is a weak link between their values and rules outwardly expressed, others may pick up on those inconsistencies and fail to see the worth, or need to uphold those outward rules.


To me, mature Fi is about mutual respect and understanding of others’ emotional boundaries and space. Immature Fi may come across those inconsistencies in others, not seeing that link between values and rules, then break those rules because there is no damage being dealt to the emotional boundaries of that person. In a contorted way, the immature Fi is still maintaining their Fi value system in this reframing. If that immature Fi is, in addition, under any stress or in an unhealthy place, they may poke at those rules further because it then becomes like a game to them. Like, here is this trigger point of a person that has no real attachment to these arbitrary rules they’ve put out, and they probably aren’t aware of this blindness towards their own internal misunderstanding, all I would have to do, is pluck these strings to reverberate and create these silly emotional responses out of that person. The immature Fi may view someone’s rules as really just misguided and projections, rather than genuine links to the inner foundational cores of that person and poke fun. It’s sick, twisted, and a form of emotional manipulation. At that point, the rules are rather useless and held in such regard by the Fi user not following those rules.


But! If an Fi user is mature, I would think they would not only see these inconsistencies, but allow those inconsistencies to exist because they take it a step further in knowing not everyone met will have the same level of internal understanding of their values and understand the process people must go through on their own, in their own time, to come to these realizations. It’s all a process that must not be tampered with nor played with, and that’s what mature Fi would understand, IMO.

 

[Mal12345]

Yes and no.

I do think Fi empathizes more when they've experienced something themselves, even if they dislike the person. This I resonate with.
I feel a friend described Fi in a way which I resonated with strongly, that may apply here. Fi believes their views are subjective, but their subjective view is their ideal so they appear/do attempt to make their subjective world an objective rule.
I cannot speak for every Fi user, but I do have values which I do not compromise. Can I associate with those who do not share them exactly? depends what that value is. I am a strong-willed Christian who associates with people who are staunch atheists. But I will not associate with someone who, say, feels religion should be abolished. Will I hear what they say? Absolutely, I think it is important to be open-minded and hear a perspective besides your own. I have a lot of views where I have learned a lot about the opposition to mine, and though I did not change my own, I respect their point of view.

Just my take.

But it's still only values talk, which is different from beliefs that can't generate a rule, e.g., "I believe in alien abduction." Or values talk that is generated from an object ("I value the taste of chocolate") rather than from the subject ("I value peace and harmony"). This latter can form the basis of political values, e.g., "Israelis and the Palestinians should learn to live in peaceful co-existence." But it is contradicted when that person focuses entirely on large political matters and forgets about the small things in life, e.g., co-existing peacefully with roommates in the same house, neighbors, and perfect strangers, to the extent that everyday life is damaged due to neglect.

 

[Red Memories]

But it's still only values talk, which is different from beliefs that can't generate a rule, e.g., "I believe in alien abduction." Or values talk that is generated from an object ("I value the taste of chocolate") rather than from the subject ("I value peace and harmony"). This latter can form the basis of political values, e.g., "Israelis and the Palestinians should learn to live in peaceful co-existence." But it is contradicted when that person focuses entirely on large political matters and forgets about the small things in life, e.g., co-existing peacefully with roommates in the same house, neighbors, and perfect strangers, to the extent that everyday life is damaged due to neglect.

I am still not sure I understand, as to me political views usually involve values as well. But what I am getting from this is a suggestion that an Fi user refuses to hear another side, and in their refusal to do so damages peace and relationships. This almost sounds more like unhealthy Fe, but I suppose it can relate to any unhealthy feeler type. Personally, I don't let politics divide my friendships, or conversations with other people. I think these people who sincerely let this come between them are kind of crazy. XD

 

[Mal12345]

I am still not sure I understand, as to me political views usually involve values as well. But what I am getting from this is a suggestion that an Fi user refuses to hear another side, and in their refusal to do so damages peace and relationships. This almost sounds more like unhealthy Fe, but I suppose it can relate to any unhealthy feeler type. Personally, I don't let politics divide my friendships, or conversations with other people. I think these people who sincerely let this come between them are kind of crazy. XD

As I said, "This latter can form the basis of political values." And yes there are cases of people so involved with political demonstration that they allow their personal lives to disintegrate.

 

[LucieCat]

No. As long as no one is hurting others or is hurting themselves, live and let live. That's my philosophy.

 

[á´…eparted]

Well, I am Fe and I LOVE it when people listen to my rules!