• 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.

[NF] When Fe & Fi Go Awry: The Definitive NF guide to F-ness (Let the Antics Ensue)

PeaceBaby

reborn
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
5,950
MBTI Type
N/A
Enneagram
N/A
^ I know what the trends are too fidelia. Thanks for pointing that out. But this goes beyond that, you see?

Please try to not dismiss it so quickly. I have been a part of parishes that reduced the number of lay readers and flattened out other ministry-specific areas without creating a schism in the whole parish, in this way.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Someone said something to me about how Fi users feel very dishonest discussing negative feelings about group dynamics in private. It reminded me of a teacher from Quebec who taught at the first school I worked at. A few of them had come to this Alberta school all in one year. Several left, because they were frustrated with the differences in cultural communication. They felt that in Quebec, if you were upset with someone or disagreed with them, you let them know right away (even if you were in a group). Here, people would wait till they left the room and then discuss it. What seemed polite in Alberta was seen as passive-aggressive in Quebec. What seemed overly blunt and embarrassing people publicly to Albertans was seen as being open and honest and doing the person the respect of knowing your opinion and responding to it. Would you say that there is some parallel between Fe and Fi in that regard? He said that over time, he adjusted to it and no longer saw it as rude, but that he still had a tendancy to be much blunter than would be the norm here.

It really depends on the specifics for me. Honestly, I don't find myself in situations like this a lot. I don't gravitate towards groups, and I've always worked in small offices where I was often alone or dealing one-on-one with someone. I'm admittedly even unaware of these things when they do go down - I manage to not be involved. I stay on the fringes a lot.

I suppose, generally, if it's a group issue, then I'd prefer to handle it with the group, as everyone should get a chance to give input. I've seen in some groups where a group leader is approached privately about a group concern, and then the issue is addressed with the group if necessary.

However, if it's between you and someone else, or just a few people, and not truly a group issue, then I'd prefer to handle it in private. I don't like embarrassing displays of emotion in front of a group or dragging people into it who do not need to be involved. Also, if there's any correction needed, I think people respond better if they don't feel humiliated publicly.

From my personal view, wherever possible, I like to keep things private, but that may be because I am easily embarrassed.

I think the point is, you can't set rules like this regarding Fi. As I've mentioned before, context can change how a value is manifested in the Fi-dom's judgment. I don't think you'll find a clear consensus among Fi-ers regarding how they prefer these things....it's just not, well, Fe ;).
 

Fidelia

Iron Maiden
Staff member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
14,497
MBTI Type
INFJ
I'm not sure what to say about that. I know my mum saw the same thing happening in our church that I grew up in and a good man was being pushed out of the ministry by someone pretty shady and the board was mindlessly going along with it. She spoke out (she's an ENFJ). My dad also didn't agree, but said nothing, just resigned from the board (he's an ISTJ). In the end, we ended up having to leave the church and my mum's reputation as a "trouble-maker" (which she wasn't - she was very tactful) followed her to our new church.

Was that a case of Fe pushing another Fe user out because they did not follow the main consensus?
 

Fidelia

Iron Maiden
Staff member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
14,497
MBTI Type
INFJ
OA, so what you're saying is that because each Fi user is individual, they will also choose to resolve matters in an individual way?

I've also found it frustrating in the past when I have stepped on a Fi value inadvertently to have no clear route to go back and try to clean it up. If I bring it up to apologize or get information, I usually am received coldly. It almost seems like "least said, soonest mended". In an ideal world, that is most definitely not the case with Fe! You cannot just jump over the problem. It has to be addressed in some way before the relationship can move on. I may be misreading or missing something important, so if any of you have advice, I'm all ears.
 

PeaceBaby

reborn
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
5,950
MBTI Type
N/A
Enneagram
N/A
You know, you (generic you) want examples, but without real reflection, tell me "that's not Fe." I know that the way this was done felt wrong to me, and it was engineered to take place in a way that did not include everyone or care about everyone's feelings or hear everyone's voice. To me, tools of Fe were used to elicit compliance and complacency. Now granted, not everyone has my POV. But my POV is all I have.

So that's what I'm offering. Take what you can from it.

-----

They felt that in Quebec, if you were upset with someone or disagreed with them, you let them know right away (even if you were in a group).

It can lead to very animated discussions that appear even hostile on occasion. But, in those scenarios, it's kind of cool that the disharmony is not feared so much, it's almost a relief to clear the elephant in the room. I've only experienced this Quebecois dynamic in a isolated instances through my work. But I have no reference for the Albertan dynamic.

Would you say that there is some parallel between Fe and Fi in that regard? He said that over time, he adjusted to it and no longer saw it as rude, but that he still had a tendancy to be much blunter than would be the norm here.

I feel more comfortable, as I pointed out below, when I know I can say what I think even if it's not harmonious. BUT, sometimes the atmosphere of confrontation ensures that not everyone says their stuff either. I guess I can't say whether it's more Fe vs Fi ... disagreeing with someone is different than thinking they are doing something immoral.
 
Last edited:

Tallulah

Emerging
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
6,009
MBTI Type
INTP
Thanks for the example, PeaceBaby! I think you're right that Fi can seem like nagging voices of dissention to Fe if Fe feels like it's the right thing for the group or if it feels like people's personal emotions are impeding what they see as progress. I'm not sure if Ted felt like he was making progress that would necessarily bring with it some growing pains, or if he was leaning entirely on Bob, afraid or unwilling to make his own choices. He also might be totally clueless about the people aspect of things, preferring instead to let others handle that so he can focus on giving sermons and the like.

I do think this was also a case of Fe fail on the new minister's part, as well as out of control, megalomania-type Fe on Bob's part. It's almost always a recipe for disaster when a new minister comes in and starts changing things in a church, especially if they haven't hung back for a while to observe the social dynamics and to talk to the members about how things have worked in the past and what's important to them. They're almost always flying blind, and then they fall prey to the first person that befriends them (who often has an agenda).

Bob sounds a bit like someone who is used to working people to get his way, which he probably believes is best for everyone because he's convinced himself of that fact so it won't seem selfish. I do think Fe can be very dangerous when used in this way--it becomes a case of knowing you can finesse people easily, so you rationalize that you're helping others get what they want. When really, you just want what you want. And then you try and convince others it really is what they want. I am very, very uncomfortable with that sort of Fe use. Fe really does need something to keep it in check.

I found your description of picking up on the dissatisfaction of the congregation early on interesting...you are probably picking up on the seeds of discontent before a Fe user ever would, so bringing it up might seem to a Fe user like overreacting or being paranoid, maybe? Because we wouldn't see it until it manifested in a tangible way. I definitely see the potential for major frustration here. Hmm.
 

Fidelia

Iron Maiden
Staff member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
14,497
MBTI Type
INFJ
Peacebaby, I wasn't negating your example. I just am trying to better understand it, as I've often had the same feelings as you expressed and I'm not a Fi user. I agree that especially in those types of settings it's easy for the majority to rule and the minority to be silenced. Is that what Fe is? I can see how Bob used Ted's compliance and the influence of certain members to push his agenda without a doubt. As a Fe user though, I would call that manipulative too. Does Fe only conform to the setting it finds itself in, or does it conform to a set of universal rules? While Fe may be Bob's most natural expression, the presence of someone coming before to advise suggests to me that someone else is also aware of how the congregation can best be manipulated. (Which I guess would be using the "rules" of Fe to ensure an outcome). The fact that Bob's daughter was soon after implemented though does sound like he had an agenda as well...

I guess my objection is that it seems to me sometimes that Fi users see Fe as always blindly following the majority, which I feel simply isn't the case. They are reluctant to create conflict, but if they've determined that they must for conscience' sake or because the benefits outweigh the drawbacks they do. It just seems to me sometimes like Fi users see themselves as always standing up for the side of truth and justice, while Fe users mindlessly going along with whatever the most forceful leader wants or what the norm is.

Taking the example of Te, I think Te sometimes misses stuff that Ti considers in depth and has put a lot of thought into. If Te users have a working model already, they are unlikely to consider something new, but unsure, even if it could have the potential to be much better. That doesn't mean that they would never consider doing something that breaks that pattern, but it's true that they would be more inclined to go with what's been proven.

I think maybe Fe is the same. They are less likely to consider a new way of going about handling people if they've found something that works for now. It's possible that Fi has a better way, but it's also possible that it won't be practical or that it may fail, so usually they go with what they know. They might occasionally seek out Fi perceptions, but it is true that they would be more inclined to habitually operate by the rules that have already been put in place. Does that seem analogous or no?
 

PeaceBaby

reborn
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
5,950
MBTI Type
N/A
Enneagram
N/A
Was that a case of Fe pushing another Fe user out because they did not follow the main consensus?

Without more info, and an opportunity to sense the environment, it's very hard for me to speculate.

I think Fe agendas can clash for sure! Then may the best man (or woman) win! :laugh:
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
OA, so what you're saying is that because each Fi user is individual, they will also choose to resolve matters in an individual way?

Pretty much....it depends on what the individual Fi-dom has decided is important in the specific situation. There can be a hierarchy of values involved. As I mentioned before, sometimes something has to be compromised, because real life is not ideal. So in a situation, a Fi-dom may compromise external harmony or whatever in favor of what they feel is more important. That tends to be "last resort" as it can be confrontational.

I've also found it frustrating in the past when I have stepped on a Fi value inadvertently to have no clear route to go back and try to clean it up. If I bring it up to apologize or get information, I usually am received coldly. It almost seems like "least said, soonest mended". In an ideal world, that is most definitely not the case with Fe! You cannot just jump over the problem. It has to be addressed in some way before the relationship can move on. I may be misreading or missing something important, so if any of you have advice, I'm all ears.

I can imagine a few possibilities, just based on myself...

-They're not ready to talk to you about it, because they haven't gotten over it emotionally. Until they resolve their emotions, they don't feel clear-headed enough to deal with the situation head-on. INFPs may prefer to withhold judgment until they feel the best decision can be made - sometimes this means taking in as much info as possible and considering all the possibilities; other times it means processing emotion so as not to act on it.
If you prod them, then they may act on it. The cold shoulder can mean: "back off - I'm not ready to talk". This is where my emotions get me in trouble and Fi goes awry in the sense that its lost control or perspective of the emotions. You see this really with anyone - they may need some time to steam.

In any case, the time delay involves getting perspective. Sometimes, when they're over it emotionally, they decide it's not such a big deal after all. I KNOW I can be hyper-sensitive emotionally; which means once I'm in a rational frame of mind again, I'm not so offended. FiNe says it's no biggie in the grand scheme of life; it tells the emotions who's boss. Which can lead to the next possibility....

-They're avoiding confrontation. After evaluating everything, they've decided it's not worth the hassle and are cutting off your efforts to drag up what they see as a buried issue or just a non-issue. Don't beat the dead horse, basically. They may avoid you a bit until it seems you're sufficiently over it also. It might even be that they realize they overreacted and are embarrassed about it now. Or they didn't realize their reaction was outside of Fe protocol and feel bad they assumed you should have known. Admittedly, we may sometimes solve problems in our heads....

So, I understand how you can feel invalidated when the Fi-dom decides it's not a big deal and wants to sweep it under the rug, and you still need some closure or whatever. This is probably even truer when it seems to be a re-occurring violation on your part, and you want to know how to avoid it again.

I'm not sure exactly what you're looking for from them, and they probably don't either. I think it's best to be direct and state how you feel and what you want to know, because I know I don't pick up on hints, or I'll avoid them if they just seem like ploys to drag me into drama. If it is a genuine effort to understand my feelings, then I'm usually open to explaining the larger, underlying reason why something seemingly small registered as a value violation.
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
"My Fi was very, very, very, hurt." That is not useful insight.
It is nothing more than someone talking about their emotions and substituting Fi for the word, feelings.
The Feeling function itself -regardless of attitude- is not to be confused with "feelings" or "emotions" as we commonly know them.
That is why I made the comment earlier, that threads like these are pointless.
The reason they're pointless is they're not really discussing Fi and Fe as function attitudes, at all.
They're discussing hurt feelings.

You have repeatedly expressed your dissatisfaction with how Fi is defined and discussed in this forum.
If I were an Fi Dom, the last thing on earth I would want to see is someone saying their Fi was "hurt."
It sounds like someone fell on their ass, rather than what Fi really is - a mental process used to evaluate worth.

not to interrupt in something i was not involved in, but i just want to point out that while emotion =/= Feeling, emotion can be the barometer for Feeling, and for Fi types is inextricably tied up in it.

because emotions are read by Feeling functions, they become a part of the schema of value for a person with dom or aux Fi. things that i highly value make me feel emotionally good. things that do not make me feel emotionally bad.

so to say that my Fi was hurt, is very much the same as saying, "i am aware that i am dealing with something that goes against my value system". for us, it is a useful insight, and it's really the same thing, though i also understand that, worded as it is, it comes off whiny and self-absorbed.

but then, we have Te, not Ti, which says that getting to the point efficiently is more important than how specifically we word it.

I'm understanding that they feel that anything less would be sweeping something public under the carpet instead of being transparent about it. I also suspect that the act of airing those thoughts and emotions and sticking up for someone is more important to them than the resulting outcome. The purpose of starting that kind of thread maybe has nothing to do with what happens in the end?

[...]

I think I understand the reasoning that a Fi person may use initially. What I'm fuzzy on is what is the outcome that you would foresee in ideal Fi world when you operate in this way? That everyone had a chance to say their say? That the public is aware that an offense happened? That you feel better having expressed your sentiments and now your conscience is clear?

If you have done this and it hasn't turned out well for you (in a workplace setting, etc), does that affect what you do the next time? How would you see a person in charge ideally responding to that kind of outpouring? How would you see co-workers ideally responding?

well, i think in my mind, everyone messes up and has tensions with others and... it's not a big deal! when you talk about "losing face", i question why anyone should be so concerned about that. ideally, no one will hold social grudges, nor ostracize one another, nor be afraid of conflict - after all, it's not wonderful, but it's not always so terrible either.

to always minimize conflict is to overlook actions which often derive from a hurt that someone is experiencing. when a child is mean, it is usually because they feel threatened. instead of ostracizing them from a group - understandable because they are disrupting the group, but - why not address why they are acting that way? yes, perhaps harsh words will be exchanged. but then everyone's intentions become clear. and at the very deepest level, most intentions are quite harmless. upon discussion, i understand that the other child hit me because he was feeling frustrated that i was saying things that hurt him and he did not know how to make me stop otherwise.

and yes, some of it is moral obligation as well. to phrase it as one's "conscience being clear" makes it sound like a very childish dropping of baggage (not your intention, i'm sure). it is not about expressing sentiment so much as needing to fix something that is hurting people and always living in harmony with your internal standards. if i do not act in harmony with them, why have them at all? and this action cannot be postponed, because every moment of postponement is continuing to hurt others and is a moment during which you are living out of accordance with your values. thus Fi is not so concerned about what comes afterwards. that can be dealt with later. what is important is now.

ideally, if everyone acted this way, we would all live in a harmony achieved through openness and respect of one another, rather than through covering up and group alignment. we can each be different yet in harmony because we appreciate and allow difference. sticking up for someone returns balance to a situation that is out of balance, even though that return entails conflict. it also does so in a way that involves everyone, rather than dealing with a single person; rarely is an issue the problem of a single person and rarely does dealing with a single person resolve an issue. it is not so much about making people aware of the offense - i imagine most already are - but about clarifying to everyone why it needs to be different.

i have reacted this way in a public setting before - in a very Fe dominated setting, in fact - in a situation in which i felt like someone was offering herself for a position that was much too advanced and difficult for her, and which had high potential for isolating her when she was already experiencing social issues. having taken on that position myself and struggling enough with it - and being much older and much more experienced in the group - i voiced my concerns (the girl in question was out of the room during this, as policy dictates), and then left the room too, instead of voting her in, which was a very blatant sign of disapproval. afterwards, a Fe dom manager came out and talked to me individually, voicing that she, too, shared my concerns, but she believed it to be best for the group and saw few other options. i saw many other options, but she said none of them were acceptable given our current policies. afterwards, i was treated coldly by some group members but also was approached by some who were concerned for me and many who thanked me for voicing their own concerns. i did not understand, though did appreciate, those who were concerned about me, lol. in analysis, i probably was considered less a part of the in-group after that stunt; however, the girl in the position has had much support and help, and i believe that is in part thanks to me speaking up. i also believe it has helped younger group members see that sometimes it is not bad to speak up - you may find many others sharing the same unexpressed sentiment.

to answer your questions, ideally the person in charge would respond to my concerns in a logical manner. if it is not a fair position, then i don't mind hearing why. perhaps there is something i have not thought of or accounted for. i don't mind my opinion being questioned or disproven, but i hate it being dismissed. it did affect how i spoke up later - i think after this incident i have made more of an effort to channel more logic and less emotion. heated emotion makes people take you less seriously, even though i'm really quite logical in the midst of such an outpouring. coworkers would ideally react in the same way - simply to address my opinions. i want to be heard, not my instructions followed. and ideally we can work through the problem to come to a Fe-Fi synergystic solution - one that is more than the sum of our parts. Fe seeks to streamline but may do so unevenly; Fi seeks to account for everyone but that requires much more time and energy. i believe that there can be real-life Fe-Fi solutions that help everyone by some people giving more in some areas and some giving more in others, as it suits them. streamlining evenly, but differently, from each person.
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
And who do you think I learned that phrase from? Some ENFPs. ;)

:rofl1: admittedly, i think it's hilarious. even if it means you can use it against us, lol.

I guess my objection is that it seems to me sometimes that Fi users see Fe as always blindly following the majority, which I feel simply isn't the case. They are reluctant to create conflict, but if they've determined that they must for conscience' sake or because the benefits outweigh the drawbacks they do. It just seems to me sometimes like Fi users see themselves as always standing up for the side of truth and justice, while Fe users mindlessly going along with whatever the most forceful leader wants or what the norm is.

of course, but then, those are stereotypes. we also have the stereotype of Fi being butt-hurt, so to speak, and Fe being warm lovey dovey sweet kind and taking care of everyone.

i think the point here is not blindly following the majority at all, but rather the quiet usage of the majority. in the example of Bob i do not see any blind following. rather, i see a Ni vision and Fe interaction with the congregation to move them to a place they didn't necessarily either know about or want to go, with people gradually realizing it was somewhere they didn't want to go. even accepting those rules as a parish is rather Fe - for the sake of harmony to stay with the greater church. Fi would be more likely to have the congregation discuss whether it wants an overhaul and how it should go about doing that, rather than quietly and subtlety changing things.

so that you are aware, you did seem very quick to dismiss it in this situation. it was like PeaceBaby took the time to write this enormous post and commentary and you were like, oh, no, that's just church rules. i understand now that you were still in the process of assessment, but it wasn't very clear, so that you understand why there was/is some frustration directed towards you. perhaps that has happened with other Fe examples too. Ti requires a more stringent analysis than Fi does, and it's easy for Ne to see through a lens of something being a "Fi problem", whereas a Fe/Ti user might seek greater confirmation of accuracy before being willing to use that lens.

Taking the example of Te, I think Te sometimes misses stuff that Ti considers in depth and has put a lot of thought into. If Te users have a working model already, they are unlikely to consider something new, but unsure, even if it could have the potential to be much better. That doesn't mean that they would never consider doing something that breaks that pattern, but it's true that they would be more inclined to go with what's been proven.

I think maybe Fe is the same. They are less likely to consider a new way of going about handling people if they've found something that works for now. It's possible that Fi has a better way, but it's also possible that it won't be practical or that it may fail, so usually they go with what they know. They might occasionally seek out Fi perceptions, but it is true that they would be more inclined to habitually operate by the rules that have already been put in place. Does that seem analogous or no?

i agree with you completely here. :yes:
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
but then, we have Te, not Ti, which says that getting to the point efficiently is more important than how specifically we word it.

Getting to the point and how something is worded, both matter to me.
Considering the walls of text that some ENFPs unload in this forum, I find it odd you brought up "getting to the point efficiently." ;)
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Getting to the point and how something is worded, both matter to me.
Considering the walls of text that some ENFPs unload in this forum, I find it odd you brought up "getting to the point efficiently." ;)

HAH. fair point.

obviously both matter to me too, you troll. ;)

but seriously, it's hard to talk about the introverted subjective functions (Ti/Fi). hence the walls of text, i think.
 

CrystalViolet

lab rat extraordinaire
Joined
Oct 24, 2008
Messages
2,152
MBTI Type
XNFP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
My boss just told me today, if you can't say in it ten words or less, do I really want to know?

He was teasing me about my very wordy and round about way of addressing an uncomfortable situation. I could have said it in three words, but no, if I can say it with more words I will.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
HAH. fair point.

obviously both matter to me too, you troll. ;)

but seriously, it's hard to talk about the introverted subjective functions (Ti/Fi). hence the walls of text, i think.

I've noticed that ENFPs "block post" more though...we divide things into lines or paragraphs, even when we do the proverbial wall of text it's still more chopped up

I sometimes find certain NTP and INFJ posts difficult to pay attention to. Like I seriously don't want to read the entire thing and would rather just skim over it and skip around.
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I especially liked the bolded comment here. That helps make more sense to me. It's always seemed to me like Fi never is happy. I guess it's that it only shows itself (in group issues that we're talking about) when there's a problem, not when things are going swimmingly. Is that accurate?
It shows itself frequently in concern for others. But that will be a private expression, rather than a public display.
So if consensus is not a goal for you guys, would you say that it's a matter of allowing everyone to be understood before the head person/people make the final decision?
Not necessarily, no. "Being understood" isn't a priority for me. Nor is even being heard most of the time. One would hope that the person in charge would want to be notified of anything significant that they may have overlooked, (although that's not always the case). Ideally, the decision made is the "best" one - one which takes account of all the significant variables. This requires that people set aside their ego to some extent and are open to discussion without feeling threatened by the spectre of "disharmony" - that's often the biggest obstacle for Fi-users.
I've noticed on here that Fi users (ENFPs especially) tend to want to discuss problems in public without going to the offending person first. My first reaction to that is that it creates a massive mess to clean up, rarely ends up resolving anything and usually spawns several more issues.
I think I understand the reasoning that a Fi person may use initially. What I'm fuzzy on is what is the outcome that you would foresee in ideal Fi world when you operate in this way? That everyone had a chance to say their say? That the public is aware that an offense happened? That you feel better having expressed your sentiments and now your conscience is clear?

If you have done this and it hasn't turned out well for you (in a workplace setting, etc), does that affect what you do the next time? How would you see a person in charge ideally responding to that kind of outpouring? How would you see co-workers ideally responding?
Do you realize how leading your questions are? ;)

This post is more like an attempt to persuade, rather than to understand - that's how it comes across to me.

Anyway, what I think you might be overlooking once more is that you don't necessarily see all those occasions when the Fi-user is dealing with the problem privately - you are only exposed to those situations where they are forced into the position of last resort. Perhaps more extroverted types will act first, think later (you're maybe thinking about Wonka here?) but in general introverted judgers will not be interested in making a scene unless there is no other way. Speaking personally - I give people the benefit of the doubt repeatedly and try to deal with things privately, unless to do so would mean covering something up that needs to be exposed for the public good, or, they have behaved contemptibly and I no longer afford them the privilege of private interaction.

One thing that really galls me is the whole notion of "saving face". Fe is interested in hierarchy - constructing it and sustaining it. Fi has no such interest. It sees such things as superficial and irrelevant. It does not value or respect a person's position but their individuality. It is a leveler. This is perhaps what Fe distrusts about it most.

I don't care if you're a mod or not, do you make sense, are you trustworthy, are you consistent? These are the things that matter to me. There have been occasions on this board where mods have been forced to step down because they have acted inappropriately and yet they have announced their "resignation". I HATE that. It's a lie. It's cowardly. It's about saving face. This happens in every political arena: whitewashes designed to preserve the appearance of integrity when the whole thing is corrupt. This focus on appearances, and particularly the (false) appearance of harmony is what makes Fe so susceptible to corruption, IMO. Fi is the conscience that steps in and makes things uncomfortable. It's the thorn in your side. It's the reminder that there are more important things than preserving order.

At this point (before the kneejerk backlash), I'd like to point out that EVERYONE has Fe and Fi in them. And that whenever you say "well, hold on, I do that too" you are probably referring to your own Fi use. Fe users don't use Fe exclusively (that would make them impossibly shallow - like "infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming."*) ; Fi users don't use Fi exclusively (that would make them impossibly obstinate, oblivious and incapable of effective communication; we need norms and harmonious interpretations - what else is Language, after all?)

/statement of the obvious

To help delineate what we are talking about, here are the Activities for Developing functions from Functions of Type (Hartzler & Hartzler):

Fe

  1. Look for and identify group norms or acceptable behaviours
  2. Read cultural values and operate according to them
  3. Build relationships
  4. Practice self-disclosure
  5. Meet other people's needs
  6. Organize and operate to create group harmony
  7. Identify other people's needs and emotional states from their behaviour
  8. Do whatever is necessary to maintain relationships
  9. Judge behaviours according to group values
  10. Objectively educate other people about appropriate behaviour

Fi


  1. Use your emotions to identify what is important, your deeply held values
  2. Examine what is important to you
  3. Examine universal values [from a perspective of personal significance]
  4. Maintain integrity
  5. Use your values to guide your decisions
  6. Support other people in maintaining their personal integrity
  7. Subjectively sense other people's emotional state
  8. Judge ideas, attitudes and behaviors against [your] values
  9. Crusade for what is right


The person who starts a thread can set the tone. The thread began with butt-hurt feelings. I get it, I get it. Fi= butt-hurt feelings. Great! Super! Wunderbar!
The tone of this thread only deteriorated once you appeared. This is a pattern that you seem oblivious to. That's the generous interpretation. The less generous one is that you are a belligerent troll who is determined to undermine and antagonise any and all discussion of the Feeling functions. Perhaps you should talk to someone about this unhealthy fixation/habit. PRIVATELY.

I once claimed, and it's simplistic but perhaps begins to express the differing priorities, that there are people in this world requiring that we have good relationships before we can work together well, and there are people requiring that we work together well before we can have a good relationship. The claim is an attempt to encapsulate Fe/Ti vs Te/Fi approaches to group harmony.
Brilliant.

Of course, at some point, pragmatism has to come into play. And that's why Te rules Western capitalism and Fe rules Western social interaction. But, and this is a significant but, there are cultures where Ti rules and Fi rules. Which means it's not Te and Fe's god-given place to be the standard. It means that one group's priorities are given more value than the other.
Can you expand on this with examples, please? What does that look like? If Fi is the "standard", doesn't it then become Fe almost by definition? What is an example of a Ti-dom culture? (and when can I move there? ;))

(*Ephesians 4:14)
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
One thing that really galls me is the whole notion of "saving face". Fe is interested in hierarchy - constructing it and sustaining it. Fi has no such interest. It sees such things as superficial and irrelevant. It does not value or respect a person's position but their individuality. It is a leveler. This is perhaps what Fe distrusts about it most.

I don't care if you're a mod or not, do you make sense, are you trustworthy, are you consistent? These are the things that matter to me. There have been occasions on this board where mods have been forced to step down because they have acted inappropriately and yet they have announced their "resignation". I HATE that. It's a lie. It's cowardly. It's about saving face. This happens in every political arena: whitewashes designed to preserve the appearance of integrity when the whole thing is corrupt. This focus on appearances, and particularly the (false) appearance of harmony is what makes Fe so susceptible to corruption, IMO. Fi is the conscience that steps in and makes things uncomfortable. It's the thorn in your side. It's the reminder that there are more important things than preserving order.

:yes:

At this point (before the kneejerk backlash), I'd like to point out that EVERYONE has Fe and Fi in them. And that whenever you say "well, hold on, I do that too" you are probably referring to your own Fi use. Fe users don't use Fe exclusively (that would make them impossibly shallow - like "infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming.") ; Fi users don't user Fi exclusively (that would make them impossibly obstinate, oblivious and incapable of effective communication; we need norms and harmonious interpretations - what else is Language, after all?)
/statement of the obvious

To help delineate what we are talking about, here are the Activities for Developing functions from Functions of Type (Hartzler & Hartzler):

Fe

  1. Look for and identify group norms or acceptable behaviours
  2. Read cultural values and operate according to them
  3. Build relationships
  4. Practice self-disclosure
  5. Meet other people's needs
  6. Organize and operate to create group harmony
  7. Identify other people's needs and emotional states from their behaviour
  8. Do whatever is necessary to maintain relationships
  9. Judge behaviours according to group values
  10. Objectively educate other people about appropriate behaviour

Fi


  1. Use your emotions to identify what is important, your deeply held values
  2. Examine what is important to you
  3. Examine universal values [from a perspective of personal significance]
  4. Maintain integrity
  5. Use your values to guide your decisions
  6. Support other people in maintaining their personal integrity
  7. Subjectively sense other people's emotional state
  8. Judge ideas, attitudes and behaviors against [your] values
  9. Crusade for what is right

I agree that everyone has a little Fi and Fe in them. The shadow functions and all of that.

But sometimes Fi can look like Fe (and vice versa). For example, just a few minutes ago in another thread I called something "inappropriate" and that looks like Fe.

However, what I really meant is that I empathize with the person who was the "victim" in the situation, and that that particular behavior is extremely offensive TO ME and I would be very upset if it happened to me. So that's Fi, really, at heart. It's not Fe even if it looks like it.
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
But sometimes Fi can look like Fe (and vice versa). For example, just a few minutes ago in another thread I called something "inappropriate" and that looks like Fe.

However, what I really meant is that I empathize with the person who was the "victim" in the situation, and that that particular behavior is extremely offensive TO ME and I would be very upset if it happened to me. So that's Fi, really, at heart. It's not Fe even if it looks like it.

I guess it comes down to motivation rather than the sentiment expressed or the use of specific terms, like "inappropriate" - which can be overlaid with many different meanings.

If your motivation is to suggest that something is inappropriate in this context, it's Fe. If you are suggesting that it's universally inappropriate to behave in that way, it's Fi. (Fi's values are context independent).
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I don't care if you're a mod or not, do you make sense, are you trustworthy, are you consistent? These are the things that matter to me. There have been occasions on this board where mods have been forced to step down because they have acted inappropriately and yet they have announced their "resignation". I HATE that. It's a lie. It's cowardly. It's about saving face.

Well, I think there was only ever one resignation (the other was an outright firing, for inappropriate behavior); and if we're thinking about the same "incident," I would agree with you on that one. Most of us got stuck holding the bag with no time to process; later on, for me personally, once I had time to think, I was kinda pissed off because it was all exactly what you said it was here, I felt used, and it damaged/killed my relationship with said person. If there had been more time to process, I think things would have been presented differently regardless of what "type" each staffer happened to be.

The tie-in to the topic in question is that I don't think Fe/Fi are exclusive, as you say later, and since people are a mix of all perspectives and individual in nature, often both perspectives will show up in varying degrees in the same person. Few people are just one or the other, and I see uses for both.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
I guess it comes down to motivation rather than the sentiment expressed or the use of specific terms, like "inappropriate" - which can be overlaid with many different meanings.

If your motivation is to suggest that something is inappropriate in this context, it's Fe. If you are suggesting that it's universally inappropriate to behave in that way, it's Fi. (Fi's values are context independent).

I have plenty of context independent values (it's only natural, right?). I don't necessarily speak them in a manner that is context independent though. If that makes sense. I might vocalize them in a way where I try to hone in on the issues that bear the most relevance or could be personalized for someone. There are times where I'm more Fi like and y'know.. I've had it and I don't really need to be tactful. But I don't have it in me to behave like Fi fulltime, I guess. I thought I did, but no. OTOH, I think I'll bring things up more than IFPs (I could be wrong, but it seems that they have a higher level of reserve, whether they disapprove or not).
 
Top