• 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.

[Fe] Is Fe fake or manipulative?

jixmixfix

Permabanned
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
4,278
Checkmate. Why didn't you just tell me you were afraid of jumping off the bridge?

Are your hiding behind your "toughness" just to preserve your Ti sense of "integrity."

Yeah jumping off a bridge shows alot of Ti integrity ill give you that one.:fpalm:
 
G

Ginkgo

Guest
But to call it 'manipulation' kind of misses the point, don't you think? The purpose of Fe isn't to change anything, it's to achieve interpersonal attunement.

How far must you change a person to achieve interpersonal attunement?

Or is it about changing yourself so you can have correspondence?
 

Resonance

Energizer Bunny
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
740
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
6w5
How far must you change a person to achieve interpersonal attunement?

Or is it about changing yourself so you can have correspondence?
Neither, you're changing the interactions between the subjects (relationship-object), not the subjects.
 

cascadeco

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
9,083
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
But to call it 'manipulation' kind of misses the point, don't you think? The purpose of Fe isn't to change anything, it's to achieve interpersonal attunement.

IF manipulation = effecting a certain outcome (does it?), I think it's pretty evident that people can manipulate (effect an outcome) in different ways, unique to their own strengths/abilities, if they have a specific outcome they're trying to reach and if they'll go all out to make that outcome happen, whether by outright dishonesty or by withholding, or purposefully targeting or belittling peoples' weak spots, or any number of other things. But if none of those negative things are done -- if the person is utterly honest, and open, and all of that, but still has a desired outcome, is that too deemed manipulation?

Whether or not this can be pinpointed to specific, isolated functions is another thing though.

While the purpose of Fe might be interpersonal attunement (is that universally true?), it's obvious that Fe-ers, like anyone, could try to achieve a certain outcome by making use of interpersonal skills to weave that outcome. Is that negative? Is that positive? Does it depend? Is it neutral? Is it only labelled manipulative if in retrospect people look back and are pissed off that the situation actually occurred or they allowed themselves to be 'manipulated'?

Or, as I said earlier, is it simply that half the time people label things manipulation if it would be utterly untrue to who they are if they did the act in question, even though if the person actually doing it has completely different motivations? Do we always label as 'manipulation' if it offends who we are, even if in reality the other person isn't doing anything of the kind and has no hidden agenda?
 

Rail Tracer

Freaking Ratchet
Joined
Jun 29, 2010
Messages
3,031
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
G

Ginkgo

Guest
Neither, you're changing the interactions between the subjects (relationship-object), not the subjects.

If you change the interactions between the subjects, and all interactions are essential to the relationships between the subjects, then the relationships are changed as well.

If people are essential to relationships, and people change, then the relationships change.

So, interactions are objective phenomena. Gotcha.
 

crack

New member
Joined
Feb 12, 2011
Messages
50
...

I've only read up to page 5 1/2, so this post may be redundant. :tongue10:

Edit: Redundant.
 

Resonance

Energizer Bunny
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
740
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
6w5
If you change the interactions between the subjects, and all interactions are essential to the relationships between the subjects, then the relationships are changed as well.

If people are essential to relationships, and people change, then the relationships change.

So, interactions are objective phenomena. Gotcha.

I uhh.... I'm having trouble grokking this.
 

onemoretime

Dreaming the life
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
4,455
MBTI Type
3h50
I define manipulation in the bad sense (meaning: literally affecting something is literal "manipulation," but not the kind that Fe gets flack for) as "acting in a way that is not true to how you actually feel, with a purpose behind acting this way in mind." My definition is intertwined with the definition of fakeness ("acting in a way that is not true to how you actually feel").

In this definition, yes, Fe is notorious for being fake often. But the issue is the amount an Fe-er acts fake comes down to personal maturity, I think. Fe cares a lot about connecting and fitting in, and immature people can be so desperate to fit in so as to not care about subjugating the real person they are in the name of being accepted socially. I don't know any nor could imagine a person regarded as "mature" caring so little about themselves and their personal integrity, and being so desperate for acceptance on a social level, which is why I say I think it's an issue of maturity.

Additionally, Fe can be manipulative as well. Having a goal in mind is not a crime, but Fe, as opposed to like Te, has a compulsion to work in a deceitful (ta da - fake), underhanded, sly, way. The tendency to behave this way probably is logical, as sometimes people will reject suggestions if you tell them what to do but end up accepting your idea in the end if you trick them into thinking it was their own idea or however that's said to go (stated before in this thread, to boot)... but this is still manipulation in my book - "the deliberate action of being fake to achieve an end." This comes down to maturity too, though, for almost the same reason above: I just see this far less often and can't imagine this being a common trait in one who is regarded as "mature" - so, issue of maturity of the person.

I've only read up to page 5 1/2, so this post may be redundant. :tongue10:

1. You've got examples?

2. You've got proof that Fe was the motivation?
 

Sizzling Berry

New member
Joined
Apr 5, 2009
Messages
185
MBTI Type
INFP
I'm not exactly sure what you mean by what's in parentheses, but if I'm in a shady location and am distrustful of the vibes/person I'm around, then I'll act accordingly and might be more brusque/assertive.

What's going on in my head? I dunno? That I generally want to treat people well? I don't know that there's anything deeper than that. The opposite would be for me to approach everyone with a scowl, disrespect, condescension, rudeness, what have you. I don't see how that would be a benefit to anyone, nor do I think the other person deserves my being rude and mean to them, so I'm pleasant because I want to treat people well. If I quickly learn they're an asshole or if they're rude to me, I'll be colder or will disengage. :shrug: Like I said though, I'm not one to strike up conversations with strangers. This is hypothetical chit-chat situations -- my sitting on a bus and someone asks me something, or my interacting with a store clerk, or meeting someone at a party, or what have you.

This is precisely what I meant in the bit in parentheses.

So basically you value your kindness and politeness towards others :).
 

Rail Tracer

Freaking Ratchet
Joined
Jun 29, 2010
Messages
3,031
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
doesn't get much clearer that that.

Yep, looks like you didn't read the post before the one you just quoted.

Thank you for lying to yourself. In your own words, you're being fake.

Your toughness to call a person a degenerative word was just a mask.

Thank you.
 

uumlau

Happy Dancer
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
5,517
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
953
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Forget the Fe function. I think those people who use the cosecant function are fake and manipulative. I mean, why can't they just take the reciprocal of sine, like any normal person would?!

As Marm mentioned, Fe both affects and is affected by others' emotional states. That's just how it is, a state of being. It will seem fake when it is affected by others, and seem manipulative when it affects others. This is different from being deliberately deceptive, disingenuous, or scheming, though it can certainly overlap. This is entirely analogous to Te affecting and being affected by the logistics of the world. In the normal course of setting a goal and striving to achieve it, the interactions necessarily alter the world as they alter oneself (however temporarily).
 

1487610420

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
6,431
Forget the Fe function. I think those people who use the cosecant function are fake and manipulative. I mean, why can't they just take the reciprocal of sine, like any normal person would?!

As Marm mentioned, Fe both affects and is affected by others' emotional states. That's just how it is, a state of being. It will seem fake when it is affected by others, and seem manipulative when it affects others. This is different from being deliberately deceptive, disingenuous, or scheming, though it can certainly overlap. This is entirely analogous to Te affecting and being affected by the logistics of the world. In the normal course of setting a goal and striving to achieve it, the interactions necessarily alter the world as they alter oneself (however temporarily).

Sinc is clearly superior, but alas, beyond the grasp of mere mortals.
 
G

Ginkgo

Guest
I uhh.... I'm having trouble grokking this.

Ok, that was my shitty attempt at being blow-by-blow logical.

Just forget I said that.

Functions are cognitive mechanics, not behavior. While they do correspond and correlate with behavior, there are is no viable way in which we can observe behavior and explain through functions with any certitude. We can make guesses. We can even be correct, but we will never know. It is a practice of conjecture and theorizing. Matters are made even more complicated in that multiple functions may become conscious within the span of a short span of time. Let's say microseconds. Even if only one function is is possession of consciousness at any point in time, all 8 may bear the fruit of a single behavior lasting only seconds. Order of preference has nothing to do with the line of reasoning that leads one from function->behavior; however, I'm sure there are demonstrable correlations between type and behavior.

That said, if we are to discuss functions with any sense of certainty, we must analyze motivations, hidden, unconscious, or otherwise.

Fe-ers tend to have a sense of what's collectively "ideal". Speaking as an Fi dom, idealism is somewhat of a bad addiction for me, though I quietly scrutinize everything according to my own standards, which are often not even particularly defined. It seems that I have difficulty defining those ideals or even coming forth with them to others because they are so tightly woven to my own body of thought - my own giant web of what different shit makes an impression on me. Laying it all out would be as time consuming as dissecting a blue whale.

So I'm going to assume that it's easier for Fe-ers to vocalize those impressions because they are more relative to the world. So demonstrable. Do you dress nice? Are you of esteem to us? Is the show popular? Should a program be "good"? Are you a crack whore? Etc. etc.

So Fe-ers are more aware of those interpersonal doodads. It doesn't necessarily mean that they're taking advantage of them, being underhanded, or even coddling them.

Wight?

elmer1.gif
 

Resonance

Energizer Bunny
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
740
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
6w5
Ok, that was my shitty attempt at being blow-by-blow logical.

Just forget I said that.

Functions are cognitive mechanics, not behavior. While they do correspond and correlate with behavior, there are is no viable way in which we can observe behavior and explain through functions with any certitude. We can make guesses. We can even be correct, but we will never know. It is a practice of conjecture and theorizing. Matters are made even more complicated in that multiple functions may become conscious within the span of a short span of time. Let's say microseconds. Even if only one function is is possession of consciousness at any point in time, all 8 may bear the fruit of a single behavior lasting only seconds. Order of preference has nothing to do with the line of reasoning that leads one from function->behavior; however, I'm sure there are demonstrable correlations between type and behavior.

That said, if we are to discuss functions with any sense of certainty, we must analyze motivations, hidden, unconscious, or otherwise.

Fe-ers tend to have a sense of what's collectively "ideal". Speaking as an Fi dom, idealism is somewhat of a bad addiction for me, though I quietly scrutinize everything according to my own standards, which are often not even particularly defined. It seems that I have difficulty defining those ideals or even coming forth with them to others because they are so tightly woven to my own body of thought - my own giant web of what different shit makes an impression on me. Laying it all out would be as time consuming as dissecting a blue whale.

So I'm going to assume that it's easier for Fe-ers to vocalize those impressions because they are more relative to the world. So demonstrable. Do you dress nice? Are you of esteem to us? Is the show popular? Should a program be "good"? Are you a crack whore? Etc. etc.

So Fe-ers are more aware of those interpersonal doodads. It doesn't necessarily mean that they're taking advantage of them, being underhanded, or even coddling them.

Wight?

elmer1.gif
Dunno. I think my N fell out. I'd better go find it.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
Ok, that was my shitty attempt at being blow-by-blow logical.

Just forget I said that.

Functions are cognitive mechanics, not behavior. While they do correspond and correlate with behavior, there are is no viable way in which we can observe behavior and explain through functions with any certitude. We can make guesses. We can even be correct, but we will never know. It is a practice of conjecture and theorizing. Matters are made even more complicated in that multiple functions may become conscious within the span of a short span of time. Let's say microseconds. Even if only one function is is possession of consciousness at any point in time, all 8 may bear the fruit of a single behavior lasting only seconds. Order of preference has nothing to do with the line of reasoning that leads one from function->behavior; however, I'm sure there are demonstrable correlations between type and behavior.

That said, if we are to discuss functions with any sense of certainty, we must analyze motivations, hidden, unconscious, or otherwise.

Fe-ers tend to have a sense of what's collectively "ideal". Speaking as an Fi dom, idealism is somewhat of a bad addiction for me, though I quietly scrutinize everything according to my own standards, which are often not even particularly defined. It seems that I have difficulty defining those ideals or even coming forth with them to others because they are so tightly woven to my own body of thought - my own giant web of what different shit makes an impression on me. Laying it all out would be as time consuming as dissecting a blue whale.

So I'm going to assume that it's easier for Fe-ers to vocalize those impressions because they are more relative to the world. So demonstrable. Do you dress nice? Are you of esteem to us? Is the show popular? Should a program be "good"? Are you a crack whore? Etc. etc.

So Fe-ers are more aware of those interpersonal doodads. It doesn't necessarily mean that they're taking advantage of them, being underhanded, or even coddling them.

Wight?

elmer1.gif

:yes:

I've always had a hard time being able to relate to, care about, or articulate the bolded, but even more so when I was younger, because I think as I've gotten older I may have more shadow-y or pseudo-Fe.

The only one of those you listed that I really grasp at all is "are you of esteem to us" and that may be because of being an Extrovert and an Enneagram 6 rather than having Fe.
 

jixmixfix

Permabanned
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
4,278
Yep, looks like you didn't read the post before the one you just quoted.

Thank you for lying to yourself. In your own words, you're being fake.

Your toughness to call a person a degenerative word was just a mask.

Thank you.

LOL no kidding, you actually me seriously in me telling you to jump off a bridge? wow... learn to lighten up or stop being such a pussy!.
 

Rail Tracer

Freaking Ratchet
Joined
Jun 29, 2010
Messages
3,031
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Fe-ers tend to have a sense of what's collectively "ideal". Speaking as an Fi dom, idealism is somewhat of a bad addiction for me, though I quietly scrutinize everything according to my own standards, which are often not even particularly defined. It seems that I have difficulty defining those ideals or even coming forth with them to others because they are so tightly woven to my own body of thought - my own giant web of what different shit makes an impression on me. Laying it all out would be as time consuming as dissecting a blue whale.

So I'm going to assume that it's easier for Fe-ers to vocalize those impressions because they are more relative to the world. So demonstrable. Do you dress nice? Are you of esteem to us? Is the show popular? Should a program be "good"? Are you a crack whore? Etc. etc.

So Fe-ers are more aware of those interpersonal doodads. It doesn't necessarily mean that they're taking advantage of them, being underhanded, or even coddling them.

Wight?

I consider Fe sort of like how you described it (with a slight mix of Ne and Ni.) Fe is something macro while Fi would be micro.

We can take the "American Dream" as an example, everyone has a sense of what the American Dream embodies, but each one of us also have slight variations in what we think the American Dream is. Those slight variations make up the American Dream as a whole, just as there wouldn't be an American Dream without those variations. We decided to build one idea through all those values and variations so that that one idea encompasses those variations.

For some, their American Dream can include getting rich, having freedom, having a better life, owning a home, living without feeling threatened by their old country, living equally with his/her peers, or etc. But all these are still part of the American Dream (or not part of the original American Dream if you are a Si addict that doesn't want it changed :D.)

Thus, we call it the "American Dream". It is under one banner, but it has many variations.
 
Top