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

[Z Buck McFate]

I've thought a little about this after coming to the realization that the form of my question might not register with Introverted thinking very well. Perhaps it might be easier for NF Ti users to tap into their Se.

For those who may not know, ENFJs and INFJs are Ti users. (While ENFPs and INFPs are Te users.)

• INFJ - Ni > Fe > Ti > Se
• ENFJ - Fe > Ni > Se > Ti​

I think the format of this exercise more readily speaks to Fi and Te. The way this format was oriented to the strengths of Fi and Te had never occurred to me until PeaceBaby's and Z Buck McFate's recent responses.

But this doesn't mean this isn't a valuable exercise for you ENFJs and INFJs. In fact, it might make it all the more valuable.

I'm sort of brainstorming here... so take this into consideration... but maybe ENFJs and INFJs could tap into their Se.

I think there’s a language fail going on here. The actual Naikan questions you posted don’t pose anywhere near as much a problem as the way you re-phrased them, and I think Ti’s need for accuracy may be at the core. If we can’t even agree on a definition for the difference between Fe and Fi (as Jennifer already pointed out), then how can we begin to describe how Fe went awry?

The original:

• What have I received from __________ ?
• What have I given to __________ ?
• What troubles and difficulties have I caused __________ ?

Your changes:

• When [Fe/Fi] Went Awry: Explain situation you personally experienced when Fe or Fi caused problems. It can be your F function, or someone else’s.
• Why Did [Fe/Fi] Do That?: What was [Fe/Fi]’s justification for doing what it did?
• How Were Others Inconvenienced? : How did this display of [Fe/Fi] affect the other parties involved? It’s easy to explain why we felt motivated to use our Fe/Fi in a certain way. It’s much more difficult to articulate how your actions inconvenienced others.

I suggested scraping off the vagueness by changing it to ‘Feeling function’, because I thought it would be more conducive to accuracy (in the sense of being able to use an agreed upon definition), but- as I also said- it’s still kind of vague. I’m really not sure how to phrase the original questions in a way which would bring forth answers that would shed light specifically on the topic at hand.

The original questions though, I don’t particularly see as being a problem for Fe users.

But just because it might stir up discomfort doesn't mean it might not be a valuable exercise. Perhaps you can recall the expressions and mannerisms of the other people involved in your Fe gone awry story. Perhaps you can remember if they physically removed themselves from your presence. Or if they quit interacting with you by ceasing correspondence. These all seem like observable behaviors that would be picked up by Se.

And once you recounted the behaviors your observed, perhaps you could use your Ni to extrapolate how someone who displayed these concrete, observable behaviors might feel.

I think you’d be truly surprised at the extent to which this isn’t about discomfort: it’s about trying to understand what you’re asking for. If you’d asked, “When is the last time you hurt someone’s feelings?”, your chance at getting a response is going to be a lot better than “When is the last time your Fe hurt someone’s feelings?” Throwing Fe (or Se, or Ni, etc) into the mix sends us scurrying for a common baseline definition off of which to work with: because there’s little point in communication until common definitions have been established (at least for me, and I know it’s probably true about a couple of other people here). This seriously isn’t about figuring out which function we should tap into in order to answer your question, it’s about changing the question so that it’s becomes possible to answer with reasonable accuracy.

Sure, you could suggest- in response to this- that we not use Ti and try to override our need for accuracy. But you won’t get any responses again (I’m assuming) because what’s the point?


Also: thanks for the heads up about the Ma Pao Tofu.

 

[Esoteric Wench]

To Esoteric -

The reason I can't provide any input in the requested format/exercise is because for the life of me I can't think of any situation/conflict irl that was due to Fe/Fi alone. Maybe I'm totally un-self-aware, or something, but these things are so individualized, not to mention that I think most conflicts are a combo of functions and I, at least, don't feel terribly comfortable, or able to, break down into just Fe vs. Fi, because I tend not to see it as solely resting on that... (and also, admittedly, these days don't put a whole lot of focus on mbti exclusively in looking at personality/behavior). I would say that in most of my misunderstandings with another, it wasn't at all due to my Fe or their Fi -- it was due to some other element of my personality.

Also, perhaps it's because irl I don't really experience gaping Fe/Fi differences, at least *behaviorally*. However, I also don't have any dom or aux Fi's that are in my close circle of friends (well, there's one that might be infp but I really have no idea what his type is), so there is that as well - I simply don't have any firsthand experience in any major Fe/Fi conflict, or else I'm just not phased all that much by some of the Fi stuff that's talked about in here. I dunno. I mean, yes, I recognize I operate pretty differently from Fi-er's, but it's never caused major real-life conflict for me; That I'm aware of, at least. Edit: If anything, Fe is the precise thing that prevents conflict for me in the first place - it's the tool I use to communicate such that conflict/misunderstanding typically doesn't occur.

*End totally unhelpful response*

Actually, this was a very helpful answer Cadesco.

My significant other is an ISTP, who interestingly enough, has all the top four functions that INFJ's do... just in a different order.

• ISTP - Ti > Se > Ni > Fe
• INFJ - Ni > Fe > Ti > Se
​

What you wrote here reminds me of what in our house we call his DLLD (Dreaded Logical Loop of Doom*).

When it comes to emotions, my ISTP has a tendency to get into the DLLD. In other words, he tries to apply his Ti to "understanding" and "defining" his feelings and this overloads his processor (because you can't understand emotions using traditional ISTP Ti tactics) and thus he gets stuck in the DLLD zone. I think of a robot who is trying to process some sort of logical problem that doesn't have any solution so it gets stuck and can only repeat over and over, "Processing... processing..." It tends to completely blow out his operating systems... so to speak.

Said in another way, sometimes I notice my ISTP is so concerned about finding the RIGHT answer that he never puts forward any answer. He gets stuck sorting out the permutations and since no clear answer is forthcoming he will not proceed.

So what I'm hearing from you is that because you can't sort out a scenario that you think matches my request, you can't give me an answer. Very interesting. Let me tell you what I tell my ISTP when he's going into the DLLD:

"Don't focus so much on being correct. Sometimes you can get overly focused on trying to find the right answer.... to the point that you don't act at all.

"Sometimes the only way to get to the right answer is to close your eyes, say your prayers, and jump. You might jump to a place with no foothold. This means you'll have to scramble a little bit to catch your balance, but at least you'll have a new place from which to re-evaluate things. And perhaps from this new vantage point, the answer will become apparent."​

*This is a fabulous term I picked up on the SP forum.

 

[cascadeco]

Not to be too repetitive, but it's the perceiving function that allows both a Fe & Fi person to "see" beyond their preferred judging system. This is why a real Fe-er is not wholly about norms. And this is why a real Fi-er is not an individual conscience that goes wholly unaffected by norms.

Anyway, my main point was I agree with you on these pure definitions of Fe & Fi, but the reason they are not representative of real people is because we're all more than one function. One function shows an imbalance, which is never pretty.

Agree 100% on functions not being used in isolation. It's why I tend not to like to attribute stuff to one and only function - because it's not really the case irl. But in order to attempt to answer Morgan's question, I ended up having to try to whittle Fi and Fe down to extremes. Thanks for letting me know that I wasn't totally off base (at least in your opinion) with regards to Fi and Fe.

As Seymour said, it has more to do with misunderstanding than one side being right or wrong. To resolve it, though, can require both sides to adjust a bit and meet in the middle. Both need to perceive what the real meaning is behind the other's actions/words, so they don't make assumptions based on their own manner of gauging value.

Honestly, this is why I feel that Fi is more often misunderstood - being introverted and not based directly on a consensus, it is less apparent to other people why a Fi-dom feels a certain way. Fe is "out there" & having consensus behind it, is accepted by more people, so there is less invalidating happening to it. I think when it feels invalidated, it may be by a Fi-er, who is really just trying to assert the validity of their own feelings. Most of the time, the Fe-er does not need to adopt the Fi-ers feelings to validate them (which they may think is the case, as Fe works more by adjusting to the external - it needs to "mirror" or whatever), but just allow them to feel that way without judging it. Allow more than one way of right to exist, as often things fall into grey areas anyway. Fe-ers with good perception do this a lot - that's pretty much what empathizing is. It validates a feeling you do not have, without necessarily saying it is the most correct feeling. If correction in behavior is needed even after understanding the core feeling, it's best to try and do so without invalidating that feeling.

Good points. Agree that Fi is less understood and it's less apparent what is going on within an Fi-dom or with regards to Fi.

As to Fe, I'll have to take your word on it as a non-Fe-user and your impressions of it. Reading Fi descriptions of Fe sometimes make me scratch my head, as I don't really know what many are referring to when they speak of consensus or norms or whatnot, but I'll just have to assume it's because I see all of it and it comes second-nature to me - the recognition of all of it (even if I don't adhere to all of it or agree with it), such that I can at least navigate pretty seamlessly. (A lot of this too might just be the fact that I'm Ni-dom, NOT Fe-dom. haha.)

 

[Fidelia]

EW - I think Z Buck is onto something. It's the definitions that screw me up. I would do much better just saying where something went wrong between me and another person and what I thought was at the heart of the issue from my perspective.

I know that you would really like us to do this exercise. I would really like to help you out. However, I find it constricting and I kind of am not even certain of where to start. I have found the kind of conversation that we've all been having pretty helpful in its present format. If it creates a bit of friction, that maybe isn't all bad sometimes. I might be overlooking why it matters to you though or what you see we could gain by doing it that way, that we can't as it is. I want to be of help and not to be frustrating you.

 

[uumlau]

None of those things are her obligation. Her only obligation was to report the incident, which she did, at great cost to herself. Her employer's (ethical and LEGAL) obligation is to provide a safe environment for their employees. Which they clearly failed to do. It's open and shut to me. I don't see why PB needs to go massage someone else's ego - she is the injured party and to do so would violate Fi's sense of integrity. (That's what you guys don't seem to appreciate.) In any event, the fact that they acted unethically and illegally suggests that no approach, other than a deceitful one, perhaps, would have worked. They were not open to reason.

In the end, it doesn't matter what the outcome is - she did the right thing. If everyone at the firm had supported her and also done the right thing, the employer would have been forced to make concessions (Trade Unions are so Fi!) But they were too cowardly and short-sighted to make a stand. So why should she care what happens to them now?

I'm slowly processing through this thread, mostly giving rep comments, at least until I'm done. THIS is the first post where I feel a need to post a public reply.

I fully understand your POV here, and very much feel as you feel. There is injustice, and it seems as if some people don't fully appreciate it.

But let me, as a Te/Fi user, suggest a more benevolent aspect of the Fe-style inquiry.

Like Te, Fe is a problem-solving attitude. Fe solves people problems. In particular, Ni/Fe is VERY good at solving people problems.

I would suggest that it is not so much lack of appreciation for PB's experience, but rather the problem-solving Ni/Fe attitude that rubs one the wrong way. Having had similar resentment expressed toward my own Ni/Te problem-solving (solving a problem where a solution was unwanted/unmerited/moot), I understand the Fe predicament, here.

When given a situation, the initial perspective of Ni/Fe -is- to "solve the people problem." Just as INTJs always look for better solutions to more technical issues (even those already solved), so do INFJs look for the best people-problem solutions.

I do not fault INFJs for looking for such solutions: this is precisely what makes them very good diplomats, even in Fi or Te terms. The problem here is acknowledging, just as a mature INTJ would acknowledge, sometimes it is inappropriate to offer a solution to a problem. Sometimes people just want to be heard. This isn't an Fi-only thing: my ESFJ ex-wife very much wanted to share her detailed experiences without my offering solutions ... and I have long known as "a guy" that one generally doesn't try to "offer solutions" to the problems a woman shares.

The problem-solving attitude is 100% well-intentioned, but ...

Sometimes people just need to be be heard and affirmed, without any problem-solving commentary. I must admit, even INTJs need this kind of affirmation sometimes.

 

[Fidelia]

So is that what the issue is? Kind of like we feel when we vent and a Te user wants us to immediately implement their solution before they've even heard everything? That makes a little more sense to me.

 

[uumlau]

So is that what the issue is? Kind of like we feel when we vent and a Te user wants us to immediately implement their solution before they've even heard everything? That makes a little more sense to me.

Yep, exactly.

I could TOTALLY feel your desire to help PB. And from my Te experience, I understood exactly why it wasn't appreciated as intended.

This cartoon is relevant:

It's the Te version, but just imagine the "Fe version" of the same thing. (I'm sure this is an INTJ physicist.)

 

[Fidelia]

I was aware it probably wouldn't be appreciated. I just needed to understand why what seemed like a win-win solution would be so universally rejected by Fi users that I've encountered. It's not like PB was the only Fi user who might approach things in that manner.

I couldn't understand why if you wanted a certain outcome, you would approach it in that way, because it seemed doomed to fail and the problem would continue without being fixed. I realized later that the outcome wasn't her objective nearly as much as expressing her strong feelings about the issue to the right person. It was about whether it was Right or Wrong.

I only pieced that together after a few other Fi users expressed their sentiments. It was like after saying her piece, they saw it as a done deal. What her employer chose to do was not the point.

Therefore, I think the issue in a lot of these disagreements is that we have entirely different goals or reasons for communicating something, yet assume the other person has the same. That's why a Fe user says, "That makes no sense! Why are you doing it that way. Try it this way instead". A Te user feels the same sense of bewilderment about Ti, not understanding that Ti is not starting with trying to come up with a workable solution first.

 

[Usehername]

I was aware it probably wouldn't be appreciated. I just needed to understand why what seemed like a win-win solution would be so universally rejected by Fi users that I've encountered. It's not like PB was the only Fi user who might approach things in that manner.

I think it's simply that once in a while, it's sacrilege to want a certain outcome at the expense of what it cost to get you there. And Fi people would be drawing a tighter line of where that boundary is.

If she put her job security on the line and a target on her chest for the sake of the group's safety, and then the group sucks out from backing her up despite the fact that she would have been willing to take the brunt of it and lead . . . and then her employer screws her over instead of doing the right thing that he was legally obligated to do. . .

It's like finding a bunch of expired, bacteria-filled ingredients in the fridge and trying to make a healthy meal out of it. Sometimes you just gotta throw it out and find some fresh food.

 

[uumlau]

I was aware it probably wouldn't be appreciated. I just needed to understand why what seemed like a win-win solution would be so universally rejected by Fi users that I've encountered. It's not like PB was the only Fi user who might approach things in that manner. I couldn't understand why if you wanted a certain outcome, you would approach it in that way because it seemed doomed to fail and the problem would continue without being fixed. I realized later that the outcome wasn't her objective nearly as much as expressing her strong feelings about the issue to the right person. It was about whether it was Right or Wrong. I only pieced that together after a few other Fi users expressed their sentiments. It was like after saying her piece, they saw it as a done deal. What her employer chose to do was not the point.

There is a mild arrogance here, not unlike the INTJ arrogance. You presume that she didn't look for a win-win solution; rather you assume that since it didn't work out optimally, that there must have been a better solution. PB is a very skilled diplomat, though perhaps not as skilled back when this happened.

Think about it:

• It was 20 years ago.
• There is nothing to be done now.
• There is, in all likelihood, nothing to be learned now that she hadn't already learned in the intervening 20 years.
• Her objective really was to fix the problem, not merely "make a statement." Note her satisfaction that it was eventually addressed, after she left.
• There was likely no way to address the problem without losing her job. Making waves usually has this kind of price.

It isn't just about right and wrong, Fi doesn't completely lack diplomacy. The "right and wrong" appears in terms of not backing down to fight another day. Even as it became clear that communicating about the issue wouldn't solve the problem, she didn't go for "CYA". Rather, it was important enough to her that she not give up. It was important enough that she do the right thing, even if it cost her, personally. This is quintessential Fi. (Not that Fe doesn't try to do the right thing, it merely follows a different path that does weigh the cost, and is willing to be patient and bide one's time for a more optimal moment. E.g., as Fe, one might have been better able to enlist the support of coworkers. Both approaches work; both approaches are valuable.)

Thus, there is really nothing you could possibly say to "solve the problem" that would not offend on some level or another. It's someone else's experience, on their own terms. It is puzzling perhaps, and you wonder might what have been done better. The proper way to address it is to listen, express sympathy, and perhaps express outrage at the real culprits (those who wouldn't implement simple safety measures). Then, maybe, after the experience has been fully shared, discuss better ways to address difficult issues with one's employer, in the form of asking questions.

This is totally analogous to how I shift gears when dealing with Ti with my Te. I stop and listen. I ask questions. I encourage self-expression. And only then do I humbly inquire as to how one might more optimally deal with the problem. It rubs against my normal INTJ grain, but it gets me much further in terms of mutual understanding.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

What you wrote here reminds me of what in our house we call his DLLD (Dreaded Logical Loop of Doom*).

*This is a fabulous term I picked up on the SP forum.

I wholeheartedly approve of this name.

When it comes to emotions, my ISTP has a tendency to get into the DLLD. In other words, he tries to apply his Ti to "understanding" and "defining" his feelings and this overloads his processor (because you can't understand emotions using traditional ISTP Ti tactics) and thus he gets stuck in the DLLD zone. I think of a robot who is trying to process some sort of logical problem that doesn't have any solution so it gets stuck and can only repeat over and over, "Processing... processing..." It tends to completely blow out his operating systems... so to speak.

Said in another way, sometimes I notice my ISTP is so concerned about finding the RIGHT answer that he never puts forward any answer. He gets stuck sorting out the permutations and since no clear answer is forthcoming he will not proceed.

There absolutely are times when it's counterproductive to get lost in the DDLD. There are times when just getting something done is more important than getting it done as well as I'd like- especially where work or school are concerned, where there are deadlines that effect me even more than a thing's RIGHTNESS effects me. It's definitely hard to put aside the desire to get it RIGHT for the sake of just getting it DONE.

So what I'm hearing from you is that because you can't sort out a scenario that you think matches my request, you can't give me an answer. Very interesting. Let me tell you what I tell my ISTP when he's going into the DLLD:

"Don't focus so much on being correct. Sometimes you can get overly focused on trying to find the right answer.... to the point that you don't act at all.

"Sometimes the only way to get to the right answer is to close your eyes, say your prayers, and jump. You might jump to a place with no foothold. This means you'll have to scramble a little bit to catch your balance, but at least you'll have a new place from which to re-evaluate things. And perhaps from this new vantage point, the answer will become apparent."​

While I believe, esoteric, you are coming from a place of trying to be helpful: I'm not sure this is one of those places where many of us will be willing to let go of accuracy for the sake of getting something done. It's hard enough to be willing to put forth (what feel like) half-ass ideas in venues where our grades depend on it just getting done, or where we're actually paid to just get it done (i.e. where our livelihood depends on it). Just like there's a heavy Fe bias in our culture, there's a heavy Te bias as well- breathing down our necks to let go of accuracy for the sake of just getting it done.

When I wrote earlier, "what's the point?"- of trying to suppress Ti for the sake of getting it done- it’s because participating in this forum is a leisure activity. The advice you gave above is helpful- if it were in our interest to just get it done. I just don’t think it’s going to appeal to many Fe types participating in this thread- if only because the Fe types participating happen to be the ones heavy with Ti. The opportunity to find accuracy is what makes questions worthwhile- and where it doesn't look like there's much hope of it, there's little incentive to "close your eyes, say your prayers, and jump."

And sadly, the Fe types without a lot of Ti don’t seem to be interested in participating in the first place.

edit: I did try offering suggestions on how to make the questions seem more worthwhile, because it does seem important to you to get these answers from us.

 

[Thalassa]

This is where any discussion gets muddy because some of my Fi values ARE about group harmony, caring about other people, helping others etc. Those are not the exclusive environs of Fe. And my values aren't carbon copies of the Fe ones, but their derivation is from Fe values and taking them to a personal level, an idealistic level, that over my formative years led to the creation of a personal code of conduct. Which is, I might add, still being refined and tested and maturing.

(Like a mighty oak tree, wide and broad and strong. Maybe Fe is the willow tree, flexing with the changes of weather, accommodating and bending. Both have their strengths.)

Yeah I was raised in a very Fe culture and also in a very SJ household, so some of my Fi values may seem group oriented, Fe-like, or traditional on the surface. But when it comes down to if something doesn't fit my internal checklist, I completely disregard it. IRL I may disregard it more politely or more quietly than I would on-line or otherwise in writing, but it's still blatantly disregarded and even rebelled against in certain cases.

What I went through as a teenager also seems like either typical Fi dom or Fi aux "nobody understands me, I am so unique, I want to push all social boundaries, what would happen if I sang into the drive-thru speaker at Taco Bell after work or instigated with my friends hiding under the table when the waitress came at Denny's or fuck it I'm going to skip school today...alone" kind of identity stuff. I also did worse things than that... Stuff that sounds really silly, even stupid and hurtful, to me now as adult, but seemed HUGE in the extremely SFJ culture I was surrounded by.

I think as a 4 (aren't you a 9?) I am less focused on social harmony or being an official "peace maker" and yet I don't really want to hurt other people either, and IRL I actually avoid drawing unnecessary attention to myself in most places. Like, I know how to "behave myself" at work, or around elderly people. Of course I'm also a different person than I was ten years ago, and sometimes I have to remind myself of that...when I think of who I was as a VERY young person I can't think that I could possibly be any other type than ENFP.

Ne moment:

[YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHo43B6nu60&ob=av2e"]J. Geils Band - Freeze Frame[/YOUTUBE]

ha ha..I match your Ne moment with one of my own

[YOUTUBE="RNc45FTenhg"]speaking of teenagers[/YOUTUBE]

 

[cafe]

I think it's simply that once in a while, it's sacrilege to want a certain outcome at the expense of what it cost to get you there. And Fi people would be drawing a tighter line of where that boundary is.

If she put her job security on the line and a target on her chest for the sake of the group's safety, and then the group sucks out from backing her up despite the fact that she would have been willing to take the brunt of it and lead . . . and then her employer screws her over instead of doing the right thing that he was legally obligated to do. . .

It's like finding a bunch of expired, bacteria-filled ingredients in the fridge and trying to make a healthy meal out of it. Sometimes you just gotta throw it out and find some fresh food.

But if the way you do it doesn't work, you aren't throwing out the bacteria-filled ingredients, you're leaving them in the fridge for someone else to eat, possibly unknowingly or possibly someone that has no choice and might even have a weakened immune system. If you're going to put yourself through hell, why wouldn't you want to go to the trouble to actually get some results for your actions?

Or is it more of an emotional, knee-jerk reaction? I've certainly done those before myself because the injustice of a situation made me *so* angry that I couldn't force myself to be more calm and constructive.

 

[Synapse]

OK, I’ll go first.

1. When Fi Went Awry:
   
2. Why Did Fi Do That?:
   
3. How Were Others Inconvenienced?:
   
4. Comments:

Yeah I do have to say its in the language, for instance while I understand the terminology I seem to be circumspect. And while needing to be emotionally at ease or vested in a conversation helps too my vocabulary tends to ignore the Fe Fi nuances in favour of feelings and emotions and what they portend for me so I probably didn't want to specifically talk about my experiences in this matter for coming off as slightly ignorant, or at least selective ignorance based from a source of attention deficit in that respect now that it is clearing up this is less of an issue for me. But hehe it was such a bigge before where my attention span wavered like the back of a ute that broke down and you couldn't even put the clutch in reverse to get it started or something. So then I started reading everything back to front like a Japanese book instead of reading from start to finish. And I know people are going to skimp out on this most intricate thread and its very interesting exploration into the emotional psyche and depths of NF design just because of its length and unfamiliarity of this landscape, its pretty damn awesome. Mental stimulation, the most satisfying kind.

1. When your Feeling judgment Went Awry: Explain situation you personally experienced when your Feeling judgment caused problems. It can be your F function, or someone else’s.
2. Why Did you Do That?: What was your justification for doing what it did?
3. How Were Others Inconvenienced?
4. Feedback

Oh and as read mention for introverts it isn't so much that we have conflicts that we can draw back on that are easily definable in the moment per say as it would be for extroverts. Since our modality in expression tends to have a more internal basis and hence the reasoning behind this conflict expression is more along the lines of subtle than defined.

Even so I'll explore the one where I was in a shadow manifestation and in this shadow manifestation caused quite a stir. When I was unhealthy and I had a paranoid flavour of expression and this exaggerated greatly my emotional state and anxieties. Which in turn magnified and fed into my fears at the time. And funnily enough I tested as a enneagram 6 personality which I believe is a bogus personality characteristic that many people get stuck in for health reasons personally. And so I played the devils advocate. As a happy 4w5 I can totally say that 6 is a contradictory state of unrest for many people and they assume its their person, when I am certain there is an underlining theme that is hardly personality based and more health related, I mean it is but its a falsified expression.

When I spun my words in such a way that it fed into other peoples insecurities as well as my own. In doing so I created a negative situation which was more about my loneliness and reaching out rather than anything, to learn to be social, experience and down to earth. Of course my thinking was so warped that I confused intimacy with emotions and feelings and expressed them as a natural extension in that respect when I started to explore my loneliness it was taken the wrong way. As if I was falling in love, but this was untrue, I was however expressing my frustrations and in doing so people mistook that frustration as something else. Especially the kind of writing I managed to create, which was a deeper exploration behind the reasoning and emotional triggers why relationships happen to begin with. And of course I let my depression get in the way and this resounded negatively.

Once it was deep enough I did something strange in my paranoia. I lied, I said such and such a thing on purpose so that the person would form a negative association of me and eventually dislike me enough thinking that I was manipulative. Which I was bordering on after it all blew out of proportion.

How did this affect others well they were reading the volatility of my emotional self destruction and paranoia at the time which I had no idea was untreated hypothyroidism until years later. I was shocked to see that I was influencing peoples thoughts subtly in a negative way and formed the opinion that words can be like black magic when engulfed in the wrong emotionality of thoughts. Where I tried to convince myself and others that what I said wasn't really wrong, but it was a betrayal of trust. Which it was but it was also wrong because my emotions were in what I call an emotional disconnect. And in that respect I played the devils advocate where I almost wanted to show people why they were wrong as much as me. And indeed I did say that I felt that suggesting a cult like organization to solve my problems was a poor reflection on their judgment. After all why suggest a disruptive modality to stabilize a disruptive modality that would in every sense of the word escalate and indeed deepen the severity and fracture of the emotional disparity between the mind and the world. And it was a disparity in their judgment. As I was to later learn funnily enough subconsciously each and everyone of them were in some form or another unhealthy and their own emotions were clouded by the very same issues I had, a poorly function thyroid, which helped. You live and learn

Anyway years later upon review of that particular episode I sounded very much like a drama queen and projected and or absorbed my fathers drama for a time and was expressing his destruct as much as my own, being as sensitive as I was I knew what was going on and others did not and were surprised that my behaviour changed, one from unrestrained emotional expression to insincere and distant. Because I lost something crucial there, I was using my depression as a confidence crutch, when that was gone part of my sup personality for the last 10+ years left and until I restored myself back to me I wasn't much good to anyone. It was a strange and sometimes bumpy ride, but never dull as I lead people to believe. And of course when you lose that kind of self belief, that you were indeed living on a false premise after all then you do tend to reinterpret the world around you as I have and gratefully I am now in a positive state more and more.

And this inconvenienced others because they absorbed the drama, subconsciously learned unhealthy sets of values and beliefs that I held that'll probably manifest later in their lives without them understanding where its from. For there were people that looked up to me in my extravagance, as unhealthy as it was, and took some of the distorted expressions that I did have as true because I was so convincing and uncanny in my reasoning.

As to comments, hehe I shouldn't have listened to the people who encouraged me to start a blog when I was in that frame of mind. Dunno if that really helped any for this thread but oh well.

 

[Salomé]

Now I'm confused: isn't a direct negating or challenging exactly what I did?

No. You did that PLUS got "irritated". It was the irritation that seemed out of place.

Some others just got irritated and/or made snarky remarks rather than try to readjust my understanding.

I don’t think it’s so much about Fe’s fear of breaking tradition so much as it is Pi. When perception is turned primarily inwards (especially in P doms- where Pe is their least function), there’s less malleability with the external world. I suppose you could still call it fear in a way, but essentially it’s because we aren’t set up to adapt to change in the external world as readily as other types. It’s our default to re-shape our perception of someone, rather than get rid of the person or start to avoid them or whatever. This can be incredibly toxic with the wrong people, so we’re more careful than most about whom we let in to begin with.

Where Fe (and therefore Pi) are in the dom/aux positions, this is probably why we’re less inclined to open up to people right away- not because we’re adhering to tradition out of fear.

Thank you for this. So it wasn't calling it fear that was the problem, just misunderstanding the source of that fear. Also, you seem to confirm what I said here:

Of course most Fi users commenting here are Ps and most Fe users, Js...
How much is right-brain (all-at-once) vs left-brain (one step at a time) thinking...?

I like how you built on this with the idea of inflexibility as far as the outside world goes. This seems like a contradiction at first glance: isn't Fe all about adapting to the external world? But of course, it isn't. It's about divining a fairly static, rigid standard based on external principles, and adhering to that. *lots more thoughts*

But if the way you do it doesn't work, you aren't throwing out the bacteria-filled ingredients, you're leaving them in the fridge for someone else to eat, possibly unknowingly or possibly someone that has no choice and might even have a weakened immune system. If you're going to put yourself through hell, why wouldn't you want to go to the trouble to actually get some results for your actions?

Or is it more of an emotional, knee-jerk reaction? I've certainly done those before myself because the injustice of a situation made me *so* angry that I couldn't force myself to be more calm and constructive.

This thread is exhausting. This is how it reads to me:

Fi user: [provides illustration]
Fe user: UR DOING IT RONG!
Fi : Why are you focusing on the irrelevant stuff and missing the point?
Fe : Don't tell me my feelings are irrelevant! Yours are!
Fi :

Fe : [provides example]
Fi : [Reads subtext, digs deeper] So, is it right to say you were feeling this?
Fe : Don't label my feelings! That hurts my feelings!
Fi :
Fe : I don't know why, it just does. Also, you suck at asking questions.
Fi :

 

[PeaceBaby]

I was aware it probably wouldn't be appreciated. I just needed to understand why what seemed like a win-win solution would be so universally rejected by Fi users that I've encountered. It's not like PB was the only Fi user who might approach things in that manner.

I couldn't understand why if you wanted a certain outcome, you would approach it in that way, because it seemed doomed to fail and the problem would continue without being fixed. I realized later that the outcome wasn't her objective nearly as much as expressing her strong feelings about the issue to the right person. It was about whether it was Right or Wrong.

I only pieced that together after a few other Fi users expressed their sentiments. It was like after saying her piece, they saw it as a done deal. What her employer chose to do was not the point.

Therefore, I think the issue in a lot of these disagreements is that we have entirely different goals or reasons for communicating something, yet assume the other person has the same. That's why a Fe user says, "That makes no sense! Why are you doing it that way. Try it this way instead". A Te user feels the same sense of bewilderment about Ti, not understanding that Ti is not starting with trying to come up with a workable solution first.

@bold especially, and the whole post generally: this interpretation is totally, utterly and completely incorrect.

I know you're trying, and I appreciate that, but this is so far off the mark I cannot stress it enough.

There is a mild arrogance here, not unlike the INTJ arrogance. You presume that she didn't look for a win-win solution; rather you assume that since it didn't work out optimally, that there must have been a better solution. PB is a very skilled diplomat, though perhaps not as skilled back when this happened.

Think about it:

• It was 20 years ago.
• There is nothing to be done now.
• There is, in all likelihood, nothing to be learned now that she hadn't already learned in the intervening 20 years.
• Her objective really was to fix the problem, not merely "make a statement." Note her satisfaction that it was eventually addressed, after she left.
• There was likely no way to address the problem without losing her job. Making waves usually has this kind of price.

It isn't just about right and wrong, Fi doesn't completely lack diplomacy. The "right and wrong" appears in terms of not backing down to fight another day. Even as it became clear that communicating about the issue wouldn't solve the problem, she didn't go for "CYA". Rather, it was important enough to her that she not give up. It was important enough that she do the right thing, even if it cost her, personally. This is quintessential Fi. (Not that Fe doesn't try to do the right thing, it merely follows a different path that does weigh the cost, and is willing to be patient and bide one's time for a more optimal moment. E.g., as Fe, one might have been better able to enlist the support of coworkers. Both approaches work; both approaches are valuable.)

Thus, there is really nothing you could possibly say to "solve the problem" that would not offend on some level or another. It's someone else's experience, on their own terms. It is puzzling perhaps, and you wonder might what have been done better. The proper way to address it is to listen, express sympathy, and perhaps express outrage at the real culprits (those who wouldn't implement simple safety measures). Then, maybe, after the experience has been fully shared, discuss better ways to address difficult issues with one's employer, in the form of asking questions.

This is totally analogous to how I shift gears when dealing with Ti with my Te. I stop and listen. I ask questions. I encourage self-expression. And only then do I humbly inquire as to how one might more optimally deal with the problem. It rubs against my normal INTJ grain, but it gets me much further in terms of mutual understanding.

This is totally, utterly and completely correct.

But as has already been discussed, questions that are posed without reflecting and acknowledging what's been divulged so far tend to come across as incomprehension ... and now that I think about it, I guess that's truly what they reflect. Absolute puzzlement.

 

[Fidelia]

Yeah, I think that's true Morgan. I'm more rigid about my external world because it lends structure to my inner world which is quite flexible in comparison to many of the Ps I know. The P types I've been around tend to appear pretty go with the flow about their external world, but can be more rigid in terms of their inner world.

PB, I'm sorry. I can understand how irritating that is when someone completely misreads you. I'm really trying to understand better. The questions are truly a matter of puzzlement, not judgement. It's just that your world looks very different than mine, so if I'm not extrapolating from mine, I'm just going on bits and pieces that I've gotten from asking about yours. Without enough information to fill in the gaps, those pieces can be put together in a way that creates a completely wrong picture. That's why I need descriptions of what you guys do see and the thought process that goes into it to come to a more accurate understanding. I'm glad that umlauu took the time to do that and that you also said something. I do not mean to be insulting and in piecing things together, I realize that it sounded more like a statement rather than the picture that had emerged for me thus far whose accuracy I was checking on.

 

[PeaceBaby]

PB, I'm sorry. I can understand how irritating that is when someone completely misreads you. I'm really trying to understand better. The questions are truly a matter of puzzlement, not judgement. It's just that your world looks very different than mine, so if I'm not extrapolating from mine, I'm just going on bits and pieces that I've gotten from asking about yours. Without enough information to fill in the gaps, those pieces can be put together in a way that creates a completely wrong picture. That's why I need descriptions of what you guys do see and the thought process that goes into it to come to a more accurate understanding. I'm glad that umlauu took the time to do that and that you also said something. I do not mean to be insulting and in piecing things together, I realize that it sounded more like a statement rather than the picture that had emerged for me thus far whose accuracy I was checking on.

fidelia, thanks for that and for sharing how you try to piece together the details to form a whole picture. The more data you have, the better picture you can make, right?

As far as "getting" Fi though, it's OK, I've had a lot more exposure to the Fe world than you have had to the Fi one. Many, many years to watch and observe how Fe manifests, uniquely, in different situations and groups and people, and not just because I'm older, but because it IS the more socially accepted version of F expression in our society. I can remember being 7 years old and pondering on such questions.

So since I haven't got Fe down pat yet (because, as you say, our worlds look very different to each other) I sure don't expect you to "get" Fi right off the hop either.

I am glad you are open to trying!

And I am trying to always do better with my Fe-skills as well, because it's important to me that we can find that common ground.

 

[Totenkindly]

This is totally analogous to how I shift gears when dealing with Ti with my Te. I stop and listen. I ask questions. I encourage self-expression. And only then do I humbly inquire as to how one might more optimally deal with the problem. It rubs against my normal INTJ grain, but it gets me much further in terms of mutual understanding.

Hmm. I noticed this about you -- in fact, in my head, I think, I have you classified as "one of the reasonable INTJs" just in that I feel like I can have an actual discussion with you. So your efforts do help a lot.

 

[Salomé]

Yeah, I think that's true Morgan. I'm more rigid about my external world because it lends structure to my inner world which is quite flexible in comparison to many of the Ps I know. The P types I've been around tend to appear pretty go with the flow about their external world, but can be more rigid in terms of their inner world.

This is interesting to me. How do you experience the "inner rigidity" of Ps?