[Jungian Cognitive Functions] An Fe-Fi negative convo

[Randomnity]

The issue here is not between Fe/Fi, but rather Ti and Fi. Ti needs to identify patterns existing outside the person's control. Therefore, when talking about the woman, she is being judgmental, but not in the sense that perhaps you understand it. Rather than judging her as a person, she's judging her as an object within the classes "human," "woman," and "mother."

My Ti does nothing of the sort.

Unless you're just saying that she's judging behaviours rather than the woman personally, in which case I agree.

 

[Poki]

In regards to toxic people, I have been told a bit of advice recently that people allow themselves to be victims. So where is the toxicity, within the toxic person, or within yourself for allowing them to be toxic?

 

[Z Buck McFate]

If we were all born with some innate ability to become impervious to the harm another person can cause, then no one would reach devastating lows as a result of someone else's criticism/bullying/harsh words/unkindness in the first place. Eleanor Roosevelt said something along the lines of "No one can make us feel inferior without our permission." I think there's truth in it, but a certain resistance needs to be learned first. It's not something people are born knowing, they need to be taught- and then that teaching needs to be practiced over and over (which is usually a process of being reminded by others, ideally parents) before a person actually becomes resistant to 'toxicity'.

So my answer is: it exists in the toxic person- though I don't think being able to blame them means you shouldn't work on becoming impervious to it.

 

[Orangey]

You know, it seems like no matter what position anyone in this thread has taken, the assumption has always been that the ISTP (ISTJ!!!) was failing to take into account the feelings of the ISFP.

The interpretations so far have included the following: the ISTP was a judgmental bitch that didn't really want to help the ISFP but wanted to maintain the facade of Christian compassion; the ISTP woman was frustrated with the ISFP and her frustration caused her to act passive-aggressively; or the ISTP woman did want to help the ISFP originally but then changed her mind after ungenerously observing the ISFP's habits and behaviors. The one thing all of these have in common is the assumption that the ISTP was thinking and acting completely without regard for what the ISFP might be feeling at the time, and the ISFP was merely reacting to the thoughtless actions of the ISTP.

Perhaps, however, the reason that the ISTP acted passive-aggressively (i.e., didn't specify what she wanted from the ISFP but still acted bitchy about it) was because she didn't want to offend the ISFP? I've seen people go to impractical (and even pathological) lengths to cater to other's feelings (or at least what they believe their feelings might be), especially when they know other people are watching the situation. No one wants to appear to be an asshole, especially when they're supposed to be doing an act of service and compassion to a fellow community member. What if the ISTP was hyper-aware of this, and was afraid, especially given the disposition of the ISFP, that she might look like a jerk if she went around telling the ISFP to do basic things, like one would do with a small child? Most people would think that's offensive and condescending behavior, and the ISTP might have assumed that the ISFP would take it as such. Or perhaps the ISFP DID take it as such in spite of her need to be instructed.

And then with all the effort the ISTP feels she's gone through to tip-toe around the ISFP's feelings (however truly dysfunctional this might ultimately be, and however wrong she might have gone about it), that might be why she feels resentful that the ISFP is acting hurt? She might feel like she can't win.

 

[Southern Kross]

You know, it seems like no matter what position anyone in this thread has taken, the assumption has always been that the ISTP (ISTJ!!!) was failing to take into account the feelings of the ISFP.

The interpretations so far have included the following: the ISTP was a judgmental bitch that didn't really want to help the ISFP but wanted to maintain the facade of Christian compassion; the ISTP woman was frustrated with the ISFP and her frustration caused her to act passive-aggressively; or the ISTP woman did want to help the ISFP originally but then changed her mind after observing the ISFP's habits and behaviors. The one thing all of these have in common is the assumption that the ISTP was thinking and acting completely without regard for what the ISFP might be feeling at the time.

Perhaps, however, the reason that the ISTP acted passive-aggressively (i.e., didn't specify what she wanted from the ISFP but still acted bitchy about it) was because she didn't want to offend the ISFP? I've seen people go to impractical (and even pathological) lengths to cater to other's feelings (or at least what they believe their feelings might be), especially when they know other people are watching the situation. No one wants to appear to be an asshole, especially when they're supposed to be doing an act of service and compassion to a fellow community member. What if the ISTP was hyper-aware of this, and was afraid, especially given the disposition of the ISFP, that she might look like a jerk if she went around telling the ISFP to do basic things, like one would do with a small child? And then with all the effort she's gone through to tip-toe around the ISFP's feelings (however truly dysfunctional this might ultimately be, and however wrong she might have gone about it), that might be why she feels resentful that the ISFP is acting hurt? She might feel like she can't win.

No one is saying that she doesn't genuinely care. Its very likely that she does. Regardless she is doing something to try and help someone which is certainly to be valued. I also don't believe that anyone thinks she should go to huge lengths to appease the ISFP in every possible way or that she doesn't have the right to be annoyed when the ISFP is difficult. Criticizing the ISTP's behaviour doesn't mean I think her a bad person. In all likelihood she is a good human being who is merely displaying a few flaws among many virtues. Also, I personally consider the ISFPs feelings to be somewhat irrelevant to the matter being discussed - the ISFP can't hear what is being said (and therefore cannot be hurt by it) and we can only speculate as to whether she has picked up on the fact that the ISTP doesn't seem to like her.

However, the point is the ISTP doesn't appear to have proper justification for most of her complaints, therefore she sounds unreasonably critical. In fact, it seems more like she simply doesn't like the woman and is grasping at straws to think up concrete reasons to demonize her, in order to better draw sympathy from Orobas. I don't expect this is consciously done and it is likely that she is just exaggerating out of frustration, but it is rather mean and judgmental all the same. Within her comments about the ISFP, I do see valid reasons for her to be annoyed (eg. her being messy, not coming to church after all the help given to her etc) or slightly concerned but many of the other problems seem like she has invented them in her head or just plain exaggerated the inconveniences she has 'endured'. Unequivocally calling a mother 'neglectful', is a rather serious accusation to make, and shouldn't be done lightly - especially when all she really means to say is 'I don't like her parenting style'.

I've often experienced these sorts of conversations and with decent people. I have several family members and close family friends who do the same thing. They are awesome, kind and generous people that I love, and I still think well of them even though they do it - but it does annoy the shit out of me.

 

[citizen cane]

I think so, but church environmets are often Fe heavier.

*shudders* I'm "actively involved" in my church, if you want to call it that. I sing in the church choir and am part of the birdwatching group. I don't really care for a good part of the church's teachings or the congregations general stance on a variety of issues. It doesn't so much seem to be an issue in my church, but my cousins' Baptist church in North Carolina...
Oddly enough, I liked the pastor of that church for the little bit I met him.

I think my Fe might be a bit better developed than it used to be, but I'm not going to ramble about that here.

 

[Orangey]

No one is saying that she doesn't genuinely care. Its very likely that she does. Regardless she is doing something to try and help someone which is certainly to be valued. I also don't believe that anyone thinks she should go to huge lengths to appease the ISFP in every possible way or that she doesn't have the right to be annoyed when the ISFP is difficult. Criticizing the ISTP's behaviour doesn't mean I think her a bad person. In all likelihood she is a good human being who is merely displaying a few flaws among many virtues. Also, I personally consider the ISFPs feelings to be somewhat irrelevant to the matter being discussed - the ISFP can't hear what is being said (and therefore cannot be hurt by it) and we can only speculate as to whether she has picked up on the fact that the ISTP doesn't seem to like her.

I am not concerned about whether the ISTP genuinely cared or not, nor am I convinced that her rant in the OP points to any sort of "flaw."

However, the point is the ISTP doesn't appear to have proper justification for most of her complaints, therefore she sounds unreasonably critical. In fact, it seems more like she simply doesn't like the woman and is grasping at straws to think up concrete reasons to demonize her, in order to better draw sympathy from Orobas. I don't expect this is consciously done and it is likely that she is just exaggerating out of frustration, but it is rather mean and judgmental all the same. Within her comments about the ISFP, I do see reasons for her to be annoyed (eg. her being messy, not coming to church after all the help given to her etc) but many of the other problems almost seem like she has invented them in her head or just plain exaggerated the inconveniences she has 'endured'. Unequivocally calling a mother 'neglectful', is a rather serious accusation to make, and shouldn't be done lightly - especially when all she really means to say is 'I don't like her parenting style'.

Right, all of this was covered here:

the ISTP woman did want to help the ISFP originally but then changed her mind after ungenerously observing the ISFP's habits and behaviors.

I was giving another interpretation. I don't know why, but I just don't find it interesting enough to simply conclude that "she said mean things." Although, it seems like you're trying to suggest that her actions (her rant to Orobas) were as a result of some "flaw," but you have yet to say exactly what it is. What failure of character would result in (what you view as) such an outburst of cruel and predatory words?

It's exactly this assignment of behavior to a personal flaw that's been at issue during most of this discussion. Some people are trying to say that it was some (apparently non-specific) moral failing of the ISTP's that would cause her to say those things (and yes, we know it doesn't mean she's an overall bad person, or that she never cared in the first place), and some are saying that no, there are circumstantial factors to take into account before we can safely come to that conclusion.

 

[OrangeAppled]

Well, I'm late to the party, and there's too much for me to know whether all of this has been said or not, but I thought I'd toss my 2 cents into the mix.......

I really don't think this is clearly a Fe/Fi issue. If the ISTP is indeed ISTP, and based upon the info in the OP and whatever else I happened to read following it, it seems the problem is one of poor Feeling judgment, period.

Let's remember what Feeling is - a rational reasoning that determines value. People with inferior use of Feeling generally assign value poorly, and it is often because they've allowed their emotions to taint their evaluations. People who use Feeling well, regardless of it being Fe or Fi, do not allow emotions to steer the wheel, but simply use them as signals to be analyzed.

People with poor Feeling, especially in situations they are right in the middle of, tend to regard insignificant things as much more important than they are and fail to note what is truly significant. In this situation, when I compare what seems to actually be the verifiable details with the descriptive words/phrasing used and accusations made by the ISTP, then I see someone who has painted a distorted picture of the truth because they've failed to measure the significance of the details of the matter properly, in proportion to the context and to each other.

The most significant points are brushed over, barely acknowledged, and degraded to a lesser importance than smaller points as they don't back the emotions of the ISTP. The ISTP feels (as in emotionally) a certain way, and that is dictating her Feeling-judgment. This is an extremely biased and unfair way to evaluate. It results in a person picking & choosing facts to emphasis or de-emphasis according to what suits their agenda, which is being run by emotion. This is what I see the ISTP doing in the OP - blowing certain things out of proportion & ignoring major positive developments within the family to justify her complaining & negative (emotional) feelings towards them.

Many of the negative comments are value judgments made without any clear facts to back them up, and sometimes in direct contradiction of other statements. Over and over the ISFP is called "filthy", but then there is a brief admission that she has improved in her cleanliness once given some instruction. That is then glossed over with an unfounded remark that it will not last....

ENFP-what I said: Um, yeah I remember you mentioning she did that back when she first moved in. Once you gave her a list of what needed to be done has she been better about cleaning?

ISTP: Well, yes, I guess, but it is only a matter of time before she slacks and let’s everything get messy again.

Significant points about the ISFP mom that have been conveniently ignored or downgraded by both the ISTP (& many in this thread):
1. Whenever the ISFP has been given direct advice or offered help directly, she has taken it & made the necessary changes. A neglectful, selfish, ungracious person does not act that way.
2. She has humbled herself to a humiliating state of accepting charity from people who resent her & her children, and yet, she has still put the welfare of her family over her pride in all these situations (except canceling the doctor's appointments).
3. The husband was responsive to the suggestions made by the INTJ. Any person may be defensive at first; that is a natural reaction. Real ingratitude is ignoring it all together. Again, the point seems brushed over that he has taken some of this advice to heart, as demonstrated by his actions.

The parents actually were fairly responsive to the INTJ-he talked quite a bit to the husband about financial responsibility and being responsible for taking care of a wife and his children. He said the response was defensive but it seemed to sink in some.

Are these the actions & attitudes of people who do not care, who are ungrateful, and/or who neglect their children?

After witnessing these changes, to then accuse (albeit, indirectly) the family of those "crimes" is distorted. The evidence shows otherwise, and it is nearly slanderous to imply those things. It is unfair to not recognize these improvements at their proper value, which is quite significant. These are all important indicators that the family is on the right track. To expect 100% perfection, immediate change overnight, etc, is unfair. Instead, they need to be gauged within the big picture, which shows more improvements than mere stagnation or even backsliding.

The accusations left are all questionable, as they have no solid evidence and mostly amount to speculation... The kids don't talk yet - or do they? The kids don't eat solid meals yet - or do they? We only know they don't do these things around the ISTP. Some of the accusations are too subjective in nature to take at face value - the ISTP thinks the kids run around like dogs, well, some people think its natural and acceptable for kids to be rambunctious as toddlers. Others expect children to be quiet and inconspicuous. Whose standards are being used? Is either morally incorrect or grounds for implying a parent does not care about her own children?

The problem with the ISTP's judgments is poor use of Feeling in general, not Fe vs. Fi, IMO.

 

[uumlau]

Let's remember what Feeling is - a rational reasoning that determines value. People with inferior use of Feeling generally assign value poorly, and it is often because they've allowed their emotions to taint their evaluations. People who use Feeling well, regardless of it being Fe or Fi, do not allow emotions to steer the wheel, but simply use them as signals to be analyzed.

Can I borrow this? This is a really good summation of what Feeling is and isn't!

 

[onemoretime]

My Ti does nothing of the sort.

Unless you're just saying that she's judging behaviours rather than the woman personally, in which case I agree.

Everyone experiences it differently.

 

[onemoretime]

Think you have confused NeTi with just Ti.

Nope. If anything, that's a more Ni-laden statement than Ne.

 

[skylights]

Perhaps, however, the reason that the ISTP acted passive-aggressively (i.e., didn't specify what she wanted from the ISFP but still acted bitchy about it) was because she didn't want to offend the ISFP? I've seen people go to impractical (and even pathological) lengths to cater to other's feelings (or at least what they believe their feelings might be), especially when they know other people are watching the situation. No one wants to appear to be an asshole, especially when they're supposed to be doing an act of service and compassion to a fellow community member. What if the ISTP was hyper-aware of this, and was afraid, especially given the disposition of the ISFP, that she might look like a jerk if she went around telling the ISFP to do basic things, like one would do with a small child? Most people would think that's offensive and condescending behavior, and the ISTP might have assumed that the ISFP would take it as such. Or perhaps the ISFP DID take it as such in spite of her need to be instructed.

And then with all the effort the ISTP feels she's gone through to tip-toe around the ISFP's feelings (however truly dysfunctional this might ultimately be, and however wrong she might have gone about it), that might be why she feels resentful that the ISFP is acting hurt? She might feel like she can't win.

yeah, actually, this is an excellent point. the ISTP (or whatever) may have been feeling sort of trapped herself. she tries to help even though she's ambivalent about it from the start - does it on good faith anyway - then suddenly she realizes that this is more than she really signed up for, and even though she cares and is trying to help guide the family, she's concerned about how the kids are being treated and if the environment is safe, and then there's stuff like the diapers, which is a problem for the whole church. the 1 week notice still gets me, but.

[that whole post]

awesome

 

[Orangey]

the 1 week notice still gets me, but.

Yeah, there really is no excuse for that kind of behavior on the part of the ISTP, but I get the feeling that what she said was more out of anger than any real intention. The reason I say this is NOT because I have any particular faith in the ISTP lady, but rather because it's probably going to make her look REAL bad if she goes through with it. This goes doubly if Christian vanity had anything at all to do with her original motivations to generosity.

 

[Esoteric Wench]

I have diligently read every post in this thread, and I have discovered that my head hurts more with the reading of each subsequent post. Nonetheless, this headache is not a sufficient deterrent to me throwing in my own 10 cents. I found the interesting questions raised by this thread are:

• When is it OK to complain about another person to a third party?
• What does the act of complaining say about the complainer?
• What can we learn about the third party from the complaint?

The Fi/Te users and Fe/Ti users on this thread seemed to have very different answers to these questions... which is about what I would have expected... 16 pages ago.

This Fi/Te User's Perspective

I noticed that many of the Fi/Te users were offended by the ISTP's (the "complainer" in the OP) overall approach. OK, this I understand. I found the ISTP's ranting to be offensive, too. But then again, I'm an Fi/Te user. Perhaps if I listed why I think Fi/Te users reacted in the way that many of them did, this would help shed some light on how Fe/Ti and Fi/Te clashed on this occasion.

Complainer's Behavior Lacked Congruity with Her Feelings:
Fi Likes Authenticity and Truthiness
If my Fi/Te driven opinion is at all representative of other Fi/Te users, I found it DEEPLY offensive that the complainer would act one way around the subject of her complaints and another way in her absence. This incongruity in her behavior felt disingenuous at best and backstabbing and unnecessarily cruel at worst.

Not All Fi Values are Created Equal:
What Is the Most Important Value in this Situation?
It didn't really matter to me whether or not the person being complained about was guilty of all the things of which she had been accused. <- That is a separate question, and for this Fi/Te user was not my first concern. In fact, I was quite bored as I read post after post debating whether or not the subject of the complaints had really done the things of which she was accused. It felt to me like these arguments were missing the most pressing point. What seemed of primary importance to me was that the complainer was morally in the wrong to publicly talk about the object of her complaints to Orobas. Only after this point is agreed upon, then would I begin to sort through the veracity of the complainer's statements.

Taking Her Word for It (Fe Objective Truth)
vs. Figuring the Truth Out on My Own (Fi Subjective Truth)
With a Pinch of Te Logic Thrown In
Secondly, I found it DEEPLY offensive that the complainer's conclusions were so one-dimensional and that their accuracy was presented as self-evident. There seemed to be an implicit assumption that the listener (in this case Orobas) would automatically agree with and support the complainer. And I do think that it sounded like this sort of blind support was what the complainer was seeking. <- Yuck!

Even if the complainer needed to vent to a member of her innermost circle (which might include Orobas), there can be no more fundamental way to show respect to another person than to judge them not based on another person's opinion, but based upon my own interactions with that person. This really rubbed my Fi the wrong way.

Do I know the Truth (with a capital T) about the subject of her complaints? Absolutely not. Did she neglect the children? Was she ungrateful about the help she received? Maybe yes. Maybe no. But, I felt deeply resentful that the complainer would assume that I would just take her word for it. My judgment of right and wrong is a deeply personal experience for me that I take very seriously. Would the complainer have me just take her word for it? The answer is probably yes, but here again we see the differences between Fi/Te and Fe/Ti.

And, my Te was also bothered by the fact that the conclusions didn't seem to jive with all the facts. There was obviously more going on here than as things were first presented. It seemed to me that the complainer had some sort of agenda that was causing her to emphasize certain facts and overlook others. These "logical fallacies" were quite bothersome to me.

How Would I Have Preferred The Complainer to Vent to Me?
My Fi would far have preferred a dialogue with the complainer in which she gave me the facts in an as objective manner as possible. This would have been our starting point of figuring out what was right and wrong together. My Fi would have loved the chance to explore all the subtle moral issues at play. And, my Te would have loved the opportunity to build a solid logical conclusion based on the facts and a complete picture of the situation.​

Fe/Ti User Perspective

This post is already too long, so let me just say that a lot of the controversy on this thread seems to have to do with Fe/Ti versus Fi/Te differences in deciding what to focus one's attention on and stylistic differences in how to deliver/receive criticism.

For example, I observed that many of the Fe/Ti users were deeply concerned about whether or not the complaints were representative of the problem at hand. A lot of these posts talked about things like what exactly was child neglect?

Is either way right or wrong? No. But each approach has different strengths and weaknesses. Remembering this, my take away from this thread has been to choose to see these differences as complementary rather than adversarial. In other words, I'm trying to work past my initial distaste and see the strengths of the differing Fe/Ti approach.

Orobas, I hope this helps!

 

[Orangey]

Complainer's Behavior Lacked Congruity with Her Feelings:
Fi Likes Authenticity and Truthiness
If my Fi/Te driven opinion is at all representative of other Fi/Te users, I found it DEEPLY offensive that the complainer would act one way around the subject of her complaints and another way in her absence. This incongruity in her behavior felt disingenuous at best and backstabbing and unnecessarily cruel at worst.

So you don't believe in maintaining civility around people you dislike?

Not All Fi Values are Created Equal:
What Is the Most Important Value in this Situation?
It didn't really matter to me whether or not the person being complained about was guilty of all the things of which she had been accused. <- That is a separate question, and for this Fi/Te user was not my first concern. In fact, I was quite bored as I read post after post debating whether or not the subject of the complaints had really done the things of which she was accused. What seemed of primary importance to me was that the complainer was morally in the wrong to publicly talk about the object of her complaints to Orobas. Only after this point is agreed upon, then would I begin to sort through the veracity of the complainer's statements.

So you're saying that your moral judgment of the ISTP lady's words are fundamentally more important than her moral judgments of the ISFP lady's deeds?

Taking Her Word for It (Fe Objective Truth)
vs. Figuring the Truth Out on My Own (Fi Subjective Truth)
With a Pinch of Te Logic Thrown In
Secondly, I found it DEEPLY offensive that the complainer's conclusions were so one-dimensional and that their accuracy was presented as self-evident. There seemed to be an implicit assumption that the listener (in this case Orobas) would automatically agree with and support the complainer. And I do think that it sounded like this sort of blind support was what the complainer was seeking. <- Yuck!

Even if the complainer needed to vent to a member of her innermost circle (which might include Orobas), there can be no more fundamental way to show respect to another person than to judge them not based on another person's opinion, but based upon my own interactions with that person. This really rubbed my Fi the wrong way.

Do I know the Truth (with a capital T) about the subject of her complaints? Absolutely not. Did she neglect the children? Was she ungrateful about the help she received? Maybe yes. Maybe no. But, I felt deeply resentful that the complainer would assume that I would just take her word for it. My judgment of right and wrong is a deeply personal experience for me that I take very seriously. Would the complainer have me just take her word for it? The answer is probably yes, but here again we see the differences between Fi/Te and Fe/Ti.

So you're saying that you never lend an ear to a friend when he/she's ranting in a state of distress, if you don't already agree with their conclusions? That you never suspend your own judgment in the service of someone else? As has been mentioned before in this thread, the ISTP likely wouldn't have said anything the way she did if she didn't think she'd have a sympathetic ear in Orobas.

How Would I Have Preferred The Complainer to Vent to Me?
My Fi would far have preferred a dialogue with the complainer in which she gave me the facts in an as objective manner as possible. This would have been our starting point of figuring out what was right and wrong together. My Fi would have loved the chance to explore all the subtle moral issues at play. And, my Te would have loved the opportunity to build a solid logical conclusion based on the facts and a complete picture of the situation.[/INDENT]

In other words, you wouldn't have preferred the complainer to vent at all, as venting is the unrestrained (usually forceful) release of opinions and emotions. You'd instead want some sort of objective argument or dialogue, with restrained judgment and emotion. That's not venting.

 

[Tallulah]

What Orangey said.

I know some of the above is Fi venting, but multiple Fi users took the ISTP's venting session as "deeply offensive" and "unnecessarily cruel" (third time that word's been used by a different Fi user). If this is an Fe/Fi issue, the ISTP, playing more by Fe rules than Fi rules, obviously didn't mean it to be either of those two things. SHE wasn't trying to be "cruel." So why does she get judged as if she had killed the family's dog in front of them? I really do think it's probably best to vent to someone who speaks your language, so to speak. I'd be furious on top of frustrated if I had an Fi-er telling me how to vent so as to please their Fi/Te. If you don't want me to vent to you, tell me, and I assure you, I will find someone else.

 

[Randomnity]

What Orangey said.

I know some of the above is Fi venting, but multiple Fi users took the ISTP's venting session as "deeply offensive" and "unnecessarily cruel" (third time that word's been used by a different Fi user). If this is an Fe/Fi issue, the ISTP, playing more by Fe rules than Fi rules, obviously didn't mean it to be either of those two things. SHE wasn't trying to be "cruel." So why does she get judged as if she had killed the family's dog in front of them? I really do think it's probably best to vent to someone who speaks your language, so to speak. I'd be furious on top of frustrated if I had an Fi-er telling me how to vent so as to please their Fi/Te. If you don't want me to vent to you, tell me, and I assure you, I will find someone else.

+1.

....I still find it hard to reconcile Fi's "saying negative things about someone (regardless of whether they are true) is unconditionally bad - nauseating, horribly cruel and extremely offensive, to be precise" with all the negative things that Fi users are saying about this woman whom they've never met.

 

[PeaceBaby]

Perspective is being rapidly lost here. EW's post isn't meant to be extrapolated in the direction that Orangey is taking. If you want the ISTP's venting to be taken at face value, then so too must an Fi user's POV upon hearing it. All that means is about 50% of people will hear the ISTP venting as being morally incongruent and somewhat harsh towards a person as opposed to their behaviour. The other 50% will see it as dispensing with negative emotions in order to clarify thoughts, try to sway opinion to a POV, change behaviour or call people to action.

And we all are aware the ISFP mom is likely no paragon of perfection here - this has already been said many times too. But the thread is about the conversation that took place, not the veracity of the claims against her.

Let's not be too judgey in this thread ... let's have a conversation. Relax...

 

[Fidelia]

I think to Fe-Ti, the veracity of the claims (or lack thereof, depending) is very relevant to the conversation that took place. To determine whether the ISTP was being overly harsh or not, it seems important to know whether the claims were valid.

I think in Fi-Te terms that perhaps is a separate issue. For me, it is one and the same issue, and that is maybe why there seems to be a disconnect.

 

[PeaceBaby]

^ I agree that we do likely see it as two distinct issues. The problem is that we don't have the benefit of all the information in order to make a judgement. We're extrapolating without sufficient data or verifying data, about both people really. It makes the discussion speculative at best. We're getting stuck in the weeds now.

I think to Fi / Te, even if the ISFP mom was doing all the things the ISTP said (since the ISTP was speaking in a lot of absolutes and using dramatic prose, it is hard to imagine there's not some exaggeration, and if she really felt the children were being neglected it seems inconceivable that she wouldn't have already contacted children's services), the ISFP mom still deserves to be treated with a core of respect. That's about the best way I can sum it up.