• 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)

William K

Uniqueorn
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
986
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
So, would you say it's more about being heard than about the action ultimately taken, then? This is what I'm trying to understand--I guess because Fe is kind of an action thing, and I'm trying to get the distinction of what Fi looks like, ideally, in a group setting, if it's as unfettered as an Fi user would like.

When I'm chairing or moderating a meeting at work, these are some of the things I try to achieve (in addition to reaching the meeting's objective) :
- Everyone has an equal opportunity to give his/her views on the matter being discussed
- If there is a decision that needs to be made, each person should be able to come to his/her own decision without being pressured to
'toe the company/majority line'
- When the vote is said and done, anyone who spoke against or voted against the final decision shouldn't be ridiculed, castigated or otherwise marginalized.

Disclaimer : I'm not saying that this is all Fi or that all these behaviours are exclusive only to Fi-users...
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
^That also makes sense in terms of Socionics Delta quadra values, I believe. Not sure if you've ever looked into that. You're an INFP, and possibly INFj there - but other non-NF's are Delta as well (ISTp and ESTj, in addition to ENFp).

I'm kind of unsure where I fall now. Delta sounds cozy :cool: Beta (ENFj and INFp) are more hierarchical.
 

Fidelia

Iron Maiden
Staff member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
14,497
MBTI Type
INFJ
Thanks all of you for taking time to respond to that. The intended outcome is beginning to make a little more sense, although I probably have more questions.

Also, PB, I'm sorry if you felt dismissed. That wasn't my intention and I shouldn't have been so hasty. I think probably the situation striking pretty close to home had something to do with it. That was kind of a big turning point in my folks' marriage and the whole thing had a pretty deep impact on my own spiritual life.
 

MacGuffin

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
10,710
MBTI Type
xkcd
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I think I've figured it out.

This is Fe:

the-angry-mob.png


This is Fi:

carrying-the-cross.jpg
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
So you're saying Fe killed Jesus? Yay!
 

PeaceBaby

reborn
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
5,950
MBTI Type
N/A
Enneagram
N/A
Thanks all of you for taking time to respond to that. The intended outcome is beginning to make a little more sense, although I probably have more questions.

Also, PB, I'm sorry if you felt dismissed. That wasn't my intention and I shouldn't have been so hasty. I think probably the situation striking pretty close to home had something to do with it. That was kind of a big turning point in my folks' marriage and the whole thing had a pretty deep impact on my own spiritual life.

fidelia, I appreciate your response. It took me hours to try to write that and be concise enough to post whilst preserving at least some of the narrative so someone could get a sense of the Fe / Fi dynamic, and how I felt all voices in the situation where unheard, and not only unheard, but actively suppressed.

So yes, I felt like you took a glance and made a 3 minute assessment on something that was hard for me to expose and articulate. I know what I know. I don't need to prove anything. I just wanted to try and show you.

Fi to me is the canary in the coal mine. (Only I'd rather not croak for the cause, but I feel like I sense the problems way before other people feel concerned).

Understand too I have been in many other groups and work environments where I don't get those Fi alarm bells. I mean, thank heavens it doesn't happen every day. I know lots of Fe'ers are mature and mean well, but sometimes that doesn't happen. And I know lots of Fi'ers who don't have enough savvy to work the Fe world, and piss lots of people off in the expression of their righteousness.

At any rate, I hope the post is helpful to some.

Again, your comment above is meaningful to me.
 

PeaceBaby

reborn
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
5,950
MBTI Type
N/A
Enneagram
N/A
And another thought on your Mom, fidelia, in that situation: I think an Fe dom knows who's inherently more "dangerous" shall we say, more of an impediment to getting their own agenda realized. So yes, if your Mom is someone who would be vocal in opposition, it would be expedient to neutralize the threat immediately. The other Fe dom no doubt knew that, and took action.
 

PeaceBaby

reborn
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
5,950
MBTI Type
N/A
Enneagram
N/A
You know fidelia, there's something about the way you pepper questions in a post that makes me glaze over. Like, I can't look at all those questions in a long string. It's why I guess sometimes I don't address them all. But for you, I am going to dissect this, k?

Someone said something to me about how Fi users feel very dishonest discussing negative feelings about group dynamics in private.

Yes, we do. We process it all internally, so in order to be objective, such things needs as much external input as possible. If the offense occurred in a group, the group is part of the dynamic, and thus to "clear the air" the issue is best broached in the same environs.

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'm focussed on the end result it has. 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?

It has everything to do with the endpoint. Fi in these scenarios believes that public disclosure offers the best potential to ensure that even justice is dispensed. Public scrutiny is the only tool that Fi often has to try to be heard or effect change.

Quiet approaches generally make little or no difference in my experience. I mean really, even look at my example above. I would have had to make a huge Fi display if I were to have changed the course of those events. Me raising alarm bells privately only ensured that the agenda could continue, and alerted those who had the agenda that I was wise to it. So I was shut-out further.

Fi users don't surround ourselves with an Fi posse that comes to our aid no matter what we say; we say what we feel as individuals and then other Fi users will sweep in to weigh in too on the matter.

From a Fe standpoint, it seems like just as much damage as the initial offense is incurred by not allowing the person a chance to respond or remedy the situation in anyway by making them aware of it. It is possible to me (maybe this is Ni-Fe?) that there may be many reasons they acted as they did and perhaps not all of them were spawned with bad motivation or in an attempt to hurt someone or squash them. To me it seems unfair that instead of talking to the person in a way that isn't going to cause them to lose face (or face untrue accusations, especially when you may not have all the information), it jumps right away to public berating and generalizations. While an issue may have happened publicly, it may even be that a person may not be able to defend themselves without revealing information that would expose the other person or hurt them by having everyone know.

There have been some raw Fi outpourings recently. I'm not saying they are right, and they sure aren't often effective here. But OMG, can't someone try to diffuse them at least instead of performing the equivalent of a public stoning?

Active listening works on Fi and Fe. No one said, "Hey W, it looks to me like you're feeling frustrated and that lots of people are misinterpreting your motivations here. Is that right?" Heck, I didn't participate in those threads but I could see those threads devolving. I could have been a help there and I regret not jumping in to help temper both the Fi expression and the resultant backlash. IRL, it's so natural for me to help people understand each other's POV. Here on the forum, not so easy.

The best approach would have been for W to have his vent, and just help him get it out of his system. That means hearing without judging or coaching him on how to "better" get his message across. The fire would have burnt out much faster and he would have felt better and the forum wouldn't have had so much drama around them.

Active listening. I've said it before, and it's one of the best takeaways interacting here that I have realized - it's the only tool I have used that addresses both Fe and Fi. Whoever laid the foundations of it for fostering communication is a genius in my eyes.

Saving face is often a euphemism for simply maintaining fraudulent facades.

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?

Let's envision a scenario: your kid is bullied on the bus, constantly. Every day going to school is like a torture. You as the parent, are unaware. You know your kid is hurting about something, but you haven't found out why yet, you haven't found the right question to open that silence. Then one day, your child decides they aren't going to be bullied anymore, so they punch the bully kid in the face on the bus. Your kid is reported to the school office, and the bully kid appears to be innocent. Your kid is now the one in trouble!

That's why Fi goes public. To ensure the provocateur is duly recognized, rightly disciplined. Very few people pop their Fi cork for something to do. They do it because all of the data is vital to ensure a fair verdict. The bully kid should not be permitted to remain anonymous or appear innocent.

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?

It's a recurring theme in my life. I am required to do what I must do. I don't mean that in some holier than thou martyr way.

A person in charge could best address this via active listening, making sure the Fi person feels heard. Co-workers the same - the problem is many people shy away from outpourings of emotional expression, finding them somehow distasteful. But we all have emotions! Why not just honor them for what they are, without judging. It makes it far more likely they'll have less and less impact over time, because they have been heard.

To ignore Fi for me would be like knowing someone cut the brakes in your car but I let you go for a drive anyway. I see the problem, and will try to interact with you to ensure we're all going to be OK.
 

Fidelia

Iron Maiden
Staff member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
14,497
MBTI Type
INFJ
Thanks so much for taking the time to go through all that. That helps give me a better overall picture.

Regarding Quebec vs Alberta, Alberta would be like North Dakota or Montana or something for communication style.

With W, the reason we tend to respond that way is that wild accusations get made when the person is feeling frustrated at the time. Then within two or three posts they calm down and it turns out that much of what was going on was more based around a fuzzier underlying feeling (which may be valid, but is hard to address if we don't know what it is) rather than any specific issue that can be dealt with and righted.

Meanwhile, the mods as a group are routinely told that they are inconsistent, unfair and abuse their authority. I take those kind of charges seriously as fairness and listening to other people is a very important value to me and if there's wrongdoing, I would like to change that. When I contact any of those people separately, they just say, "Well, you're cool. I forgot you were a mod". If I ask what happened, there are no specific people or examples of what happened so that we can fix anything.

Meanwhile, other members of the forum are left thinking that perhaps there is stuff going on that they have not been aware of and our names are sullied. Those people are people with their own stressors and issues too! We are not free to respond in kind and it ends up using up huge amount of emotional resources and time, when sometimes it is just a thoughtless spur of the moment decision to post a public thread. The outburst has calmed down, but left several small fires smoldering that now need to be addressed which use up further time and emotional resources. Something that was urgent enough to spend a whole evening on, now suddenly is "Oops, okay then. I was just feeling a little edgy". That seems very disrespectful and capricious towards the people who were being engaged in the discussion and against whom accusations were made.

I realize that may be an example of how Fi can be displayed under stress or if it's immature, and I realize my reaction isn't helping. I understand that active listening is usually more productive, and in my real life interactions and much of my communication here, I do that. When it is public though, I feel that sometimes it validates something that is just someone else unfairly dumping on other people. It actually ends up creating a bigger problem than if you refuse to engage and give it validity. When I don't actively listen in those types of threads, it is a conscious choice, based on my past experience observing the person's interactions with others and the mods in the past.

At the same time, I just don't understand if they want something changed, why they can't see if it can be addressed on a small scale first before dragging people in who aren't even connected to the original problem. Would you say this is a way of having witnesses, much like the bus example you used?
 

Fidelia

Iron Maiden
Staff member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
14,497
MBTI Type
INFJ
I agree with you though that active listening in general does diffuse a lot of situations and most people just want to feel heard and like their problems are valid and worthy of consideration.
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
At the same time, I just don't understand if they want something changed, why they can't see if it can be addressed on a small scale first before dragging people in who aren't even connected to the original problem. Would you say this is a way of having witnesses, much like the bus example you used?

the way i see this, is that it is everyone's problem. to also take the example of the kid on the bus, those other kids saw him being bullied and did nothing about it. to stand by and watch someone be treated unfairly is to give implicit approval.

having a witness has never even occurred to me... i suppose Fi just doesn't operate in terms of considering wanting something to show others. the truth should be independent of who chooses believe it. (of course i recognize that this is a fallacy, but i believe this is how the Fi train of thought runs.)

it seems to me that Fi and Fe are in fact quite strong in childhood, and that we more readily fall prey to their individual pitfalls. it's what middle school nightmares are made of: the well-loved and fun Fe cheerleader who nevertheless will not speak out when people treat herself or others poorly, pitted against the fiery and genuine Fi protester who nevertheless is intensely disliked and disruptive. what are one's morals worth if you pit yourself against the society that you are trying to help? and what is one's bond with society worth if one does not use it to ensure that society continues to be a good thing? it would seem that the key would be to live at the edge of either, the venn overlap of both. the place where you are aligned with society well enough to say, hey guys, maybe we should reconsider what we're doing here. is it really the best for everyone?
 

Tallulah

Emerging
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
6,009
MBTI Type
INTP
With W, the reason we tend to respond that way is that wild accusations get made when the person is feeling frustrated at the time. Then within two or three posts they calm down and it turns out that much of what was going on was more based around a fuzzier underlying feeling (which may be valid, but is hard to address if we don't know what it is) rather than any specific issue that can be dealt with and righted.

Meanwhile, the mods as a group are routinely told that they are inconsistent, unfair and abuse their authority. I take those kind of charges seriously as fairness and listening to other people is a very important value to me and if there's wrongdoing, I would like to change that. When I contact any of those people separately, they just say, "Well, you're cool. I forgot you were a mod". If I ask what happened, there are no specific people or examples of what happened so that we can fix anything.

Meanwhile, other members of the forum are left thinking that perhaps there is stuff going on that they have not been aware of and our names are sullied. Those people are people with their own stressors and issues too! We are not free to respond in kind and it ends up using up huge amount of emotional resources and time, when sometimes it is just a thoughtless spur of the moment decision to post a public thread. The outburst has calmed down, but left several small fires smoldering that now need to be addressed which use up further time and emotional resources. Something that was urgent enough to spend a whole evening on, now suddenly is "Oops, okay then. I was just feeling a little edgy". That seems very disrespectful and capricious towards the people who were being engaged in the discussion and against whom accusations were made.

I realize that may be an example of how Fi can be displayed under stress or if it's immature, and I realize my reaction isn't helping. I understand that active listening is usually more productive, and in my real life interactions and much of my communication here, I do that. When it is public though, I feel that sometimes it validates something that is just someone else unfairly dumping on other people. It actually ends up creating a bigger problem than if you refuse to engage and give it validity. When I don't actively listen in those types of threads, it is a conscious choice, based on my past experience observing the person's interactions with others and the mods in the past.

At the same time, I just don't understand if they want something changed, why they can't see if it can be addressed on a small scale first before dragging people in who aren't even connected to the original problem. Would you say this is a way of having witnesses, much like the bus example you used?


This. There do seem to be certain members who seem to have a habit of kicking stuff up. Multiple threads are started and battle lines are drawn, and often for them it blows over later, but the residue is there in people's minds. There's now an overall feeling of "maybe the mods really are corrupt," or "maybe this person goes around talking crap about people in vent," or whatever. Meanwhile, maybe it was just a feeling of discontent with that one person, and they're over it now. I am all for individuality, but don't individuals also kinda have a responsibility to deal with some of their own stuff without bringing everyone in the world into their emotional world?

With W, I was just confused. I was trying to understand him in his ENFP thread, and then halfway through, he was like, "no one gets it, you're all wrong, I'm out of here." Alrighty then. I mean, when it seems like someone's having some sort of breakdown, I kind of think it might be best if they go deal with that elsewhere and come back later when they have some emotional distance from their frustrations.

I think this is where it's kind of hard for Fe to understand Fi. I guess this is where it's obvious to me that they really are preferences. It's so hard not to default to what makes the most sense to me personally. :smile:

There are definitely times when I go all Fi on people, though--and the bully situation you described would be one of them. I do have a sense of justice, but I don't feel like all situations require strict justice. In fact, the word "justice" makes me twitch a little bit in an everyday situation. Just like the word "consensus" made some Fi users twitch. :smile: I just kinda go, well, obviously, in a perfect world everything would be perfectly fair all the time. But I don't need someone eternally crusading for justice on my behalf. Sometimes I just want to get on with it and I accept that things aren't always fair, and I'm not going to be heard all the time. The idealism thing might be where things really break down for Fe/Fi.

I will say, PB, that I do stick up for people who aren't being heard, or who are being misrepresented, or who I feel are being unfairly targeted fairly often in threads--especially when they're being piled on by a buncha INTPs. :D I just do it in Fe type language, so it's not emotion-based, but more, "hey, I don't think that's really what they were saying."
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
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.

Personally attacking me by calling me a "belligerent troll" when you have a long history of viciously attacking people in this forum, is nothing short of bizarre and ironic.

Proteanmix and I tried to get it through your head that Fe can balance out Ti. But you wanted to complain that you had to live in a Fe world. Now you claim I want to "undermine discussion" of the Feeling function? Is this your idea of a joke? It was you who was undermining the understanding of Fe in a thread you started, which suggested that Ti was "truth" and Fe was "lying." Anyone is free to read that ridiculous thread if they really want to see someone undermining Fe.

Furthermore, you claimed:
Fe is not about looking at external situations. That doesn't mean anything. In fact, it's perceiving, not judging. Fe is about valuing external standards.

And I responded with this:

"Fe is a decision-making process. It focuses on the objective, external world."

Key features:

  • Is an objective decision-making process that seeks to create or maintain harmony in the environment.
  • Has an outer focus that is primarily about people and their relationships.
  • Views people, events, situations, and objects in terms of their effects on people.
  • Is actively concerned for others' needs, desires, and values.
  • Prefers to avoid outward conflict, but can become unyielding in situations involving a threat to another person.
  • Establishes and maintains social conventions.
  • Is driven to interact with people.

( p.94 Building Blocks of Personality Type, Haas.)



Fe does indeed focus on the external situation and it takes into account how the decision will impact others. Anyone who runs a company or is in any type of management position has to make decisions like this, on a daily basis. Without considering the needs of the client, a company may as well just close its doors since it won't be in business very long. Fe is crucial to establishing and maintaining business relationships as well as building a successful team and creating rapport among team members. As a matter of fact, one of my questions I never failed to ask people when I interviewed them to work for me was, did they play team sports in school. It wasn't the physical aspect I was after, it was the teamwork aspect I was after. That is Fe.

Do not tell me I have an interest in "undermining" a discussion on the Feeling function when the opposite is true. In my case it wouldn't even make sense for me to undermine a discussion of the function, considering how crucial it is when making decisions in business.

If you can't carry on a civil discussion without making personal attacks on members by telling them to "fuck off," or calling people "belligerent trolls," perhaps you might ask yourself why you even come here. Members don't have to tolerate your incessant personal attacks.
 

PeaceBaby

reborn
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
5,950
MBTI Type
N/A
Enneagram
N/A
Meanwhile, the mods as a group are routinely told that they are inconsistent, unfair and abuse their authority. I take those kind of charges seriously as fairness and listening to other people is a very important value to me and if there's wrongdoing, I would like to change that.

The difficulty of course is that what you do needs to be done behind the scenes. There's no visibility. Speculation can run rampant.

It's why in the legal arena, court trials are open to the public. Everything is done in plain sight. Ideally, justice prevails. But the philosophy of the public trial is very symbolic.

Meanwhile, other members of the forum are left thinking that perhaps there is stuff going on that they have not been aware of and our names are sullied.

I guess I'm not privy to the sullying ... I think you all have a tough and thankless job. Personally, I have no beef with anyone on the mod squad. I've been here long enough to feel you all are a pretty balanced team, so I feel the forum is in the hands of the "good guys".

But, the nature of what you do does leave you open to censure, I'll grant you that. And I'm sure you all show remarkable restraint to not just stand up for yourselves too sometimes.

when sometimes it is just a thoughtless spur of the moment decision to post a public thread.

Exactly. That's why it's best to just ignore those ones ... let themselves emo out ... or do some active listening ... but the people who respond negatively to the emo burst do as much damage as the OP or more.

When it is public though, I feel that sometimes it validates something that is just someone else unfairly dumping on other people. It actually ends up creating a bigger problem than if you refuse to engage and give it validity.

Active listening isn't validating, it's just hearing. And it's reflecting - information, emotion, tone, intent, that's all it is.

At the same time, I just don't understand if they want something changed, why they can't see if it can be addressed on a small scale first before dragging people in who aren't even connected to the original problem. Would you say this is a way of having witnesses, much like the bus example you used?

It's not about having witnesses, no. The truth is independent of that.

the way i see this, is that it is everyone's problem. to also take the example of the kid on the bus, those other kids saw him being bullied and did nothing about it. to stand by and watch someone be treated unfairly is to give implicit approval.

having a witness has never even occurred to me... i suppose Fi just doesn't operate in terms of considering wanting something to show others. the truth should be independent of who chooses believe it. (of course i recognize that this is a fallacy, but i believe this is how the Fi train of thought runs.)

@bold: it's exactly that.

I am all for individuality, but don't individuals also kinda have a responsibility to deal with some of their own stuff without bringing everyone in the world into their emotional world?

@bold: they sure do, and it's a great point. Sometimes people do lose perspective and self-control.

With W, I was just confused. I was trying to understand him in his ENFP thread, and then halfway through, he was like, "no one gets it, you're all wrong, I'm out of here." Alrighty then. I mean, when it seems like someone's having some sort of breakdown, I kind of think it might be best if they go deal with that elsewhere and come back later when they have some emotional distance from their frustrations.

W was so far out there at first, I felt it best to let it flame out. But, the fire kept on a'burning, for a variety of reasons.

I'm not saying W was right, and I do believe a few folks tried to address him in a balanced way.

I think this is where it's kind of hard for Fe to understand Fi. I guess this is where it's obvious to me that they really are preferences. It's so hard not to default to what makes the most sense to me personally. :smile:

W's situation is not maybe the best example either, but I find it easier to forgive his excess than to stifle his expression. Without feeding the flame, it can only burn for so long, eh?

I will say, PB, that I do stick up for people who aren't being heard, or who are being misrepresented, or who I feel are being unfairly targeted fairly often in threads--especially when they're being piled on by a buncha INTPs. :D I just do it in Fe type language, so it's not emotion-based, but more, "hey, I don't think that's really what they were saying."

Absolutely; I'm not trying to suggest otherwise at all. :)
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I realize that may be an example of how Fi can be displayed under stress or if it's immature, and I realize my reaction isn't helping.

At the same time, I just don't understand if they want something changed, why they can't see if it can be addressed on a small scale first before dragging people in who aren't even connected to the original problem. Would you say this is a way of having witnesses, much like the bus example you used?

I don't see what this has to do with Fi as a function.... I've seen far too many Fe emo meltdowns on this board, other boards, and in real life, to assign that approach to the Fi mindset. Forget Fi & Fe - people of any type can have outbursts like this for whatever reason.
 

Fidelia

Iron Maiden
Staff member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
14,497
MBTI Type
INFJ
I agree that we have Fe meltdowns too. I think the reason I inquired specifically as to Fi was because the majority of those kinds of threads are ENFP with the occasional bit of INTJ involvement.

I also agree that it is indeed everyone's responsibility (onlookers just as much as the bully and the bullied in that case) to take action when there is something wrong occurring, preferably in a proactive way rather than a reactive one.

Thanks all of you for your responses!
 

Heart&Brain

New member
Joined
Mar 29, 2009
Messages
217
MBTI Type
ENFP
I have a couple of very good friends with strong Fe (2 ENFJs and 2 INFJs). We share values of fairness and we tend to judge people's level of ethics similarly. The only trend could be that the ENFJs are a bit more tolerant to people I'd loose patience with sooner. They can be very understanding of 'both sides' where I will have closed my heart once I have detected a violation.

So I find the "shape" of our ethical judgements different. I am often more principled and my outrage over unfairness isn't fueled primarily by empathy with the concrete person that's hurt while the Fe'ers are very observant about the feelings of the involved and concerned to set things right. I can imagine and then empathise with those feelings, yes, but my untamed fury is much more about the violation of basic ethical principles. Almost as if the ethical requirements themselves were 'hurt' and I empathise with that.

Weird when I write it like that. But I can be much more blind to how people are feeling in the situation while the Fe-people have a perfect picture of everyone involved.

When that's the case I am indeed not open to negotiations. It would feel like negotiating the law of gravity: unthinkably absurd. Negotiating basic ethical priciples seems to me bound to end in a compromised, inconsistent result and thus - eventually - be supportive of further cruelty.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Active listening isn't validating, it's just hearing. And it's reflecting - information, emotion, tone, intent, that's all it is.

I appreciate all you've said from the Fi perspective up above, PB. It has hit me in a way that most of the dialog has not, and I am still thinking about it.

But in this particular area of the discussion, I think this is where Fe considers Fi to be naive... just like people who enter the field of politics thinking "All they have to do is tell the truth, and then everything will be fine." It doesn't work that way. Hate it or not, people are swayed by public persona ... even you. You only see what you see. This is why smear campaigns are so effective -- and they become even more effective if the person doing the smearing is believing they're just "telling the truth" and feel passion for their cause.

And if falsehoods are entertained or given more credibility than they deserve, it creates disruptions and fosters untruth. Rumors smear; and the tone of your comments left me feeling like it's the people who are being smeared who have to now expend the energy to deal with the mess that others have created, even if the people creating the mess a few hours later suddenly say, "Oh, well, it wasn't that big a deal after all." That's horrifically unfair and exhausting; I think responsibility comes in at both ends, not just one.

Active listening is effective and an important tool, but sometimes it seems like it can be taken advantage of or just enables people to not take responsibility for their own choices. It also can feel like coddling sometimes. It's confusing to know when to use it and when not to.


W's situation is not maybe the best example either, but I find it easier to forgive his excess than to stifle his expression. Without feeding the flame, it can only burn for so long, eh?

No, it's like a forest fire... you let it burn TOO long, and it'll start more little fires all around the forest and the whole thing will eventually go up, even if the original fire subsides. "The tongue is a raging fire," isn't it? Things people say, even carelessly / just to "vent," can start fires that can burn down reputations and communities. The feelings linger for some people long after the event in question, while the people who spoke carelessly or even just "impassionated in the moment" might sleep soundly without realizing how they've really torn someone else up. I've got three kids, and one of them is really good at "telling his truth in the heat of the moment," then ten minutes later moving on... leaving the other two kids to deal with the crap he dumped on them, sometimes very unfairly, while often they coddle him too much at their own expense because they're trying to be fair and polite. Trying to find a balance in that mess is hard.


There's still stuff that people have said here a year or two ago that was never resolved, never will be resolved, and still eats at me no matter how hard I've tried to lay it aside, and undermines my self-confidence; I just try to block it out and continue forward regardless, shutting out emotions and relying on what rationality I have to keep me on track.
 
Top