[Fe] Fe fail in INFJs

[Giggly]

She probably puts up her professional facade when at work and dealing with work-related things, but not in her home. At home maybe she's more relaxed and natural. But then you, someone from her professional life, entered into her home and she didn't know how to act. You being stoic did not give her anything to cling onto to help bridge the gap either. Perhaps she will become more comfortable after more visits and she gets used to seeing you there.

 

[cascadeco]

Thank you for this perspective. I am very familiar with Fi and channel it when I need to help someone emotionally. Fe is a different animal, and I shouldn't expect the same kind of interactions from Fe users.

Oh, I'm happy you got something out of what I wrote.

I definitely agree, Fe and Fi are very different, and it falls on users of both parties to recognize the types of interactions will be different, as well as the motivations behind the interactions.

Also, I was thinking last night, I don't know if it'll help, but in terms of INFJ/INFP and any differences you're noticing, it might be helpful to remind yourself that INFJ is more similar to INTJ than to INFP. I think it's easy to forget that Ni dom will have quite a different outlook/approach/priority-system/motivation to things, as an Fi dom might.....I think people too-often focus on the shared NF piece and forget the dominant function. And you throw in the FeTiSe, compared to the NeSiTe...really, there aren't any four functions that are shared! (but of course everyone of every type can utilize every function to a degree...I'm just speaking according to theory)

this is something that is helpful to know. Those Si-based descriptions probably color the way I percieve Fe when I'm interacting with people I suspect are INFJs. I need to be more sensitive to the nuances. That said, I didn't mean to imply that the motives for politeness are superficial for the INFJs I know (their senses of moral responsibility to others are very strong indeed), only that the ways they approach it reflect measured benevolence more than warm empathy. It just doesn't sync as well with Fi 'caring'. Of course, Fe is more universal and less self-centered, so that's not necessarily a bad thing.

Oh, and I didn't mean to imply that you thought the motives for politeness were superficial.

I will say I relate to the bolded phrase, and at least for myself, I'd say I probably do approach interactions with more 'measured benevolence' - probably more detachment and again, really just wanting to listen and understand what's going on and maybe help if that is desired, rather than diving straight into that pure emotional connection and experiencing the emotions myself.

And yeah, I wouldn't say I'm a terribly warm and open person with those I've just met. Friendly, certainly, and wanting to get to know them, but not showing a whole lot at all on my end; I imagine I come across kind of detached/distanced despite my Fe and demonstrating that I want to get to know the other. But with those I ultimately end up being close to, it's almost impossible for me to be detached, and it's a challenge if I would have to detach myself again at some point. Funny how that works.

--------------

Usehername - I didn't see anything super atypical about the newest list of things you added, but I'd be curious on LA's thoughts.

Oh, this made me smile though: I think she takes more interpersonal emotional risks not because it's any less risky for her to be vulnerable but because she craves the deep connections more..

That's so something I would do, and have done. I'll willingly step outside my comfort zone and take risks and potentially stress myself out if I believe the step of doing so will bring me closer to my desired aim/'goal' of creating more deep connections. I've even used the very word 'crave' when describing this.

 

[Usehername]

Usehername - I didn't see anything super atypical about the newest list of things you added, but I'd be curious on LA's thoughts.

Oh, this made me smile though: I think she takes more interpersonal emotional risks not because it's any less risky for her to be vulnerable but because she craves the deep connections more..

That's so something I would do, and have done. I'll willingly step outside my comfort zone and take risks and potentially stress myself out if I believe the step of doing so will bring me closer to my desired aim/'goal' of creating more deep connections. I've even used the very word 'crave' when describing this.

Interesting.

What do you mean when you talk about "deep connections"? This is sort of what I meant when I talked about the "emotional connection," which I thought you weren't as interested in.

I am definitely not speaking for other INFJ's, as I think this will vary.

I can understand Fe reading like politeness and sympathy, because frankly I AM much of the time just trying and wanting to be respectful of others. My own needs are more fluid/less important sometimes, and especially in social interactions, I'll adjust my method of communication depending on who I'm interacting with - just because my method of communication isn't a defining element for me to begin with; if anything, it's the tendency to adjust that IS the defining element. As for awkwardness, yeah, I can be totally socially awkward/inept; it's tied to introversion as well as the Ni I think. And tied to what I wrote in my first post on here, the fluidity/confidence I have is hugely dependent on the other person, and how the dynamic itself operates. If the other person is more withdrawn, I have a harder time engaging. If the other person is more animated and confident, I play off that really well. Etc. Also, I've written elsewhere on here that just because I don't personally feel I'll ever connect deeply with someone else, doesn't mean I don't think the person deserves to be treated well and it's not like I don't still want to try to understand them better or lack the curiosity, or at least desire to appreciate them/connect with them on whatever level I can appreciate them on.

Emotional distance for me could be explained in two ways - 1. I am only really vulnerable/open with those I really want to be open with, trust, want to invest in, and see a deep relationship potential with, and 2. Connecting with people emotionally isn't my natural language anyway. This is probably an Ni/Fi difference. My prime mode isn't necessarily connecting on this level, and I'm not necessarily aiming for that kind of interaction anyway. I'm more interested in topics, issues, philosophy, and the like...more intellectual stuff, not necessarily deeply personal...so yeah, for me I would say I'm not naturally attuned/proficient in honing in on an emotional wavelength. I think I can be really good at making people feel appreciated and liked, but that doesn't necessarily translate into a deep emotional bond in the sense that I think dom-Fi's appreciate and naturally go towards. I like *understanding* people and why they do things, but that doesn't necessarily mean I'm going to need or want to let down my emotional walls with everyone as a means of connecting, or I even want to go there.

(edit: good lord, I used my quota of 'necessarily's' for the rest of the week. )





Yeah, for myself, I tend to be more engaged/animated when talking about the larger context, culture, society, and the like. Not so much on the individual level, although with people I'm really close to the emotional engagement applies to those individuals as well.

 

[the state i am in]

with infjs they can just be off-centered. especially if she's an sx which goes up and down and spikes more. e5 creates more Fe stress, bc our way of being is set up to avoid Se improvisation and Fe responsiveness. we don't feel comfortable adjusting in the moment.

i get off-balanced some times. i had lunch with an entp friend the other day, and there was an errand that i didn't run for him that i was supposed to, i'm really fucking stressed with finals, huge life changes, etc. i was just off. with intjs, this doesn't go away very quickly, it takes longer to thaw out, start to play, warm up, banter, etc. w enps it takes about 5 minutes before you forgot about everything you were worried about. their Ne is like a form of insurance. a huge part of this is just that they're easy to read for us. we get it, we get them, they put our minds at ease immediately bc we know what this interaction is about, we understand each other right away. intjs are generally more of a fatiguing interaction bc it's really easy for us to project, if we're all fulla noise we can't get the signal cleanly. and we get noise all the time, whether it's tired, stress, negative interactions, inflexible attitudes, etc.

infjs feel way more pressure to make things look a certain way for them. they can imagine the situation externally from a number of different perspectives, and if it's not going well, or naturally, or seems off, it can be extra extra frustrating. my intj will just get over it, and i'll be stuck in it for a longer period of time. this happens in many things. a bad meal affects my mood. silly but true.

 

[cascadeco]

What do you mean when you talk about "deep connections"? This is sort of what I meant when I talked about the "emotional connection," which I thought you weren't as interested in.

I think ultimately it boils down to being understood, and finding people I can share & discuss my viewpoints with and feel safe and accepted in doing so, have these intellectual conversations with, talk about life, philosophize, etc. It's not so much immersing in emotions or the like, it's very idea-and-concept based. Actually it's difficult for me to talk about my emotions, I can be quite uncomfortable doing it. But beyond the discomfort, another reason I don't like talking about my emotions is because they're transitory anyway, and I don't want to subject others needlessly to what might only be a passing state.

This sort of came up in an INFJ thread not too long ago; an Fi-dom mentioned he didn't understand why his INFJ gf was rejecting him and why she didn't think there was a deep enough connection in general, when the Fi-dom was in fact really able to empathize with her emotions themselves, even though he didn't understand the reasons the INFJ felt the way she did or thought what she thought. I, and a few other INFJ's, commented that it wasn't nearly so important that others relate to our emotions, if they can't relate or can't understand the why's behind why we're feeling a certain way. If they don't understand the why's, we're not going to feel connected whatsoever. So I think that's an example, and what I mean by emotions themselves not being my primary 'currency'..it's finding commonalities, meeting people who think/approach things similarly, having these deep conversations. And for me, connecting on this deep level ends up being an 'emotional connection' for me, even though we're not focusing really on emotions themselves.

Blah, sorry, I feel like I'm being really confusing, and again, I don't want to slant this towards 'All INFJ's are this way', because I doubt that they are, especially factoring in enneagrams. There will be variability.

 

[Usehername]

I think ultimately it boils down to being understood, and finding people I can share & discuss my viewpoints with and feel safe and accepted in doing so, have these intellectual conversations with, talk about life, philosophize, etc. It's not so much immersing in emotions or the like, it's very idea-and-concept based. Actually it's difficult for me to talk about my emotions, I can be quite uncomfortable doing it. But beyond the discomfort, another reason I don't like talking about my emotions is because they're transitory anyway, and I don't want to subject others needlessly to what might only be a passing state.

This sort of came up in an INFJ thread not too long ago; an Fi-dom mentioned he didn't understand why his INFJ gf was rejecting him and why she didn't think there was a deep enough connection in general, when the Fi-dom was in fact really able to empathize with her emotions themselves, even though he didn't understand the reasons the INFJ felt the way she did or thought what she thought. I, and a few other INFJ's, commented that it wasn't nearly so important that others relate to our emotions, if they can't relate or can't understand the why's behind why we're feeling a certain way. If they don't understand the why's, we're not going to feel connected whatsoever. So I think that's an example, and what I mean by emotions themselves not being my primary 'currency'..it's finding commonalities, meeting people who think/approach things similarly, having these deep conversations. And for me, connecting on this deep level ends up being an 'emotional connection' for me, even though we're not focusing really on emotions themselves.

Blah, sorry, I feel like I'm being really confusing, and again, I don't want to slant this towards 'All INFJ's are this way', because I doubt that they are, especially factoring in enneagrams. There will be variability.

hmmm.

I relate far more to needing to dissect the why than needing emotional reassurance. I also dislike sharing emotions when I know how ephemeral they're going to be--it almost feels like a lie because it doesn't represent "me," just a passing moment happening to me.

What about dissecting the feeling in the abstract sense? Do you like to do this? I like to pick apart the why behind my feelings, though IDK if most people can as easily detach from the emotion itself to analyze it in conversation.

 

[cascadeco]

What about dissecting the feeling in the abstract sense? Do you like to do this? I like to pick apart the why behind my feelings, though IDK if most people can as easily detach from the emotion itself to analyze it in conversation.

I always want to figure out why I'm feeling what I'm feeling!! That's like second-nature to me, analyzing my psychae; it's incredibly annoying at times..the tendency to over-analyze and all of that, but yeah, totally relate. For one thing, with the more negative emotions, since I don't desire to remain in that state, I want to figure out the 'root cause' of what's going on so that I can hopefully address the problem/issue. I don't enjoy sitting in the more unpleasant emotions, so I'm always wanting to find a 'solution'. I think it's why in interactions with others, even when I'm really down and opening up to close friends and showing my pain/hurt/sadness/whatever, while I of course appreciate and prefer being handled delicately (ties to Fe/being understood), at the same time since I'm wanting out of the feelings, I also embrace advice, feedback, or the like, and appreciate people offering other perspectives that I might be overlooking. That's what I mean when I say I don't really need people to dive in with me. I am ultimately more solution/closure driven, which I always assumed was more of the J thing.

It wasn't until my mid to late 20's that I really realized the value, and the necessity, sometimes, in just accepting even the more negative feelings..the act of acceptance and allowing yourself to fully feel/experience them being the act of healing/moving on itself. Embracing them equating to acknowledging myself as an emotional being. But that's more of a new notion for me...historically I would tend to label the more negative ones as 'bad' - something to 'fix' as soon as possible.

 

[BlueSprout]

Oh, I'm happy you got something out of what I wrote.

I definitely agree, Fe and Fi are very different, and it falls on users of both parties to recognize the types of interactions will be different, as well as the motivations behind the interactions.

Also, I was thinking last night, I don't know if it'll help, but in terms of INFJ/INFP and any differences you're noticing, it might be helpful to remind yourself that INFJ is more similar to INTJ than to INFP. I think it's easy to forget that Ni dom will have quite a different outlook/approach/priority-system/motivation to things, as an Fi dom might.....I think people too-often focus on the shared NF piece and forget the dominant function. And you throw in the FeTiSe, compared to the NeSiTe...really, there aren't any four functions that are shared! (but of course everyone of every type can utilize every function to a degree...I'm just speaking according to theory)



Oh, and I didn't mean to imply that you thought the motives for politeness were superficial.

I will say I relate to the bolded phrase, and at least for myself, I'd say I probably do approach interactions with more 'measured benevolence' - probably more detachment and again, really just wanting to listen and understand what's going on and maybe help if that is desired, rather than diving straight into that pure emotional connection and experiencing the emotions myself.

And yeah, I wouldn't say I'm a terribly warm and open person with those I've just met. Friendly, certainly, and wanting to get to know them, but not showing a whole lot at all on my end; I imagine I come across kind of detached/distanced despite my Fe and demonstrating that I want to get to know the other. But with those I ultimately end up being close to, it's almost impossible for me to be detached, and it's a challenge if I would have to detach myself again at some point. Funny how that works.

I think the INTJ analogy helps a lot since I've known more INTJs on a more intimate basis. It's too easy for me to forget the Ni-Fe-Ti-Se vs. Fi-Ne-Si-Te disconnect when I'm thinking to myself "YAY AN NF who is passionate about PEOPLE! They can understand me and I can understand them!" (Oh, INFPs like me are awfully childlike in thought sometimes). But maybe when Fe is doing its job feeling out the situation and getting acquainted with me, I get confused as to whether this person really likes me or even what they want from me. I guess I just have to ride out this part of getting to know them (or, rather, them getting to know me).

I think ultimately it boils down to being understood, and finding people I can share & discuss my viewpoints with and feel safe and accepted in doing so, have these intellectual conversations with, talk about life, philosophize, etc. It's not so much immersing in emotions or the like, it's very idea-and-concept based. Actually it's difficult for me to talk about my emotions, I can be quite uncomfortable doing it. But beyond the discomfort, another reason I don't like talking about my emotions is because they're transitory anyway, and I don't want to subject others needlessly to what might only be a passing state.

This sort of came up in an INFJ thread not too long ago; an Fi-dom mentioned he didn't understand why his INFJ gf was rejecting him and why she didn't think there was a deep enough connection in general, when the Fi-dom was in fact really able to empathize with her emotions themselves, even though he didn't understand the reasons the INFJ felt the way she did or thought what she thought. I, and a few other INFJ's, commented that it wasn't nearly so important that others relate to our emotions, if they can't relate or can't understand the why's behind why we're feeling a certain way. If they don't understand the why's, we're not going to feel connected whatsoever. So I think that's an example, and what I mean by emotions themselves not being my primary 'currency'..it's finding commonalities, meeting people who think/approach things similarly, having these deep conversations. And for me, connecting on this deep level ends up being an 'emotional connection' for me, even though we're not focusing really on emotions themselves.

Blah, sorry, I feel like I'm being really confusing, and again, I don't want to slant this towards 'All INFJ's are this way', because I doubt that they are, especially factoring in enneagrams. There will be variability.

This isn't confusing to me and I think it's understood that none of us are 'experts' about our respective types. If we had to be, none of these threads would ever get off the ground.

Now that you mention it, the need to connect through sharing ideals/philosophies/intellectual matters makes sense when it comes to the INFJs I know. They make many of their perspectives (encompassing philosophies, ways of thinking, causes and sympathies) central to their conversations and (if they can) their careers. These are such crucial parts of their identities. One would really have to connect with them on that level to ever truly know them. Intimacy would have to be achieved through understanding, not empathy. Is this an accurate summary?

I keep my personal philosophies, to the extent that I have any, to myself. They are also simple and Fi based rather than cerebral and carefully thought out. They are nearly unsuitable for discussion and I become uncomfortable quickly when discussing philosophy outside of an academic context. I think I would have to address these issues if I ever wanted to get close to an INFJ.