My new MBTI test (Beta)

[Little Linguist]

Do you take decisions based on societal norms?

Who, me?

 

[Speed Gavroche]

This is the Aleksei's theory, not the mine. (see the previous posts)

 

[Little Linguist]

This is the Aleksei's theory, not the mine. (see the previous posts)

I didn't ask whose theory it was. I wanted to know if you were addressing me, and if you were - what do you mean by 'societal norms'?

 

[Aleksei]

Just ask to Fe users.

What they think is irrelevant, because in order to be an Fe user one must conform to what was defined as Fe, given that Fe is a psychometric symbol and not an actual neurological phenomenon. Jung did not define Fe as acting assertively in accordance to feelings, because Jung did not define the Feeling function as even having anything to do with feelings themselves. Feeling functions are ethical functions.

 

[Little Linguist]

Alright, I'm going to be really blunt here.

Quite frankly, I don't think any of these theorists in the past accurately discussed what these functions were. And I think it is foolish to call something 'feeling' and 'thinking' and then complain that other people misinterpret it. In addition, I think it is quite interesting that so many people want to be a 'thinker' in a society where a 'thoughtful,' 'rational' person is considered optimal. Of course you're going to have a bunch of people saying, "Ewwww, no, I'm not a feeler...grossssssssssssss!"

 

[Speed Gavroche]

I didn't ask whose theory it was. I wanted to know if you were addressing me, and if you were - what do you mean by 'societal norms'?

Yes, I was addressing to you, because Aleksei said Fe users take decisions based on "societal norms". So, being apparently an Fe-dom, I asked to you if you took decisions like this. "Societal norms" don't mean many things to me, and apparently not many things to you anymore.

 

[Little Linguist]

Yes, I was addressing to you, because Aleksei said Fe users take decisions based on "societal norms". So, being apparently an Fe-dom, I asked to you if you took decisions like this. "Societal norms" don't mean many things to me, and apparently not many things to you anymore.

Well, before I answer a question, I like to understand it. Otherwise, foolish/senseless misunderstandings result.

Therefore, please tell me what some examples of societal norms are, I would be happy to tell you whether or not I conform to them.

 

[Aleksei]

Quite frankly, I don't think any of these theorists in the past accurately discussed what these functions were.

The problem with this statement is the proposition that "this functions are." The functions are nothing but descriptions of how the human mind works, and really don't exist except as abstract symbols. They can't be described accurately or inaccurately, because they are arbitrary.

And I think it is foolish to call something 'feeling' and 'thinking' and then complain that other people misinterpret it.

And thus I wouldn't really pick a fight with an MBTI initiate over it -- just clarify. I would expect someone who has thousands of posts on the subject, who has made huge threads devoted to typing people, to know this, however.

In addition, I think it is quite interesting that so many people want to be a 'thinker' in a society where a 'thoughtful,' 'rational' person is considered optimal. Of course you're going to have a bunch of people saying, "Ewwww, no, I'm not a feeler...grossssssssssssss!"

I agree, but what does that have to do with anything?

 

[Little Linguist]

Okay getting back to the point: What are societal norms?

 

[Aleksei]

Yes, I was addressing to you, because Aleksei said Fe users take decisions based on "societal norms". So, being apparently an Fe-dom, I asked to you if you took decisions like this. "Societal norms" don't mean many things to me, and apparently not many things to you anymore.

Basically, the difference between Fe and Fi is where you derive your moral compass from -- your sense of right and wrong. Fe users are Fe because their sense of ethics is outwardly derived; based on what people they feel emotionally close to feel is right. Fi users on the other hand draw their sense of ethics from within themselves -- what in their gut they feel is right or wrong. Your description has nothing to do with what Jung intended the F function to mean, and frankly it's insulting to F types. Feeling =/= emotional.

Okay getting back to the point: What are societal norms?

Values that society holds to be true. I thought that was pretty simple...

I misworded a little though. In this case "society" is shorthand for what one feels is their community. Fe users, as mentioned above, think in terms of "our values" rather than "my values."

 

[Craft]

Okay getting back to the point: What are societal norms?

Good question. I define norms as overall similarity of a group. Empiricism is an example of collective thinking. "Social niceties" is an example of collective feeling.

 

[Speed Gavroche]

What they think is irrelevant,

Ok...

because in order to be an Fe user one must conform to what was defined as Fe,

So, peoples must conform to what is defined by you in your book in accordance with the box wich they are. Interesting.

given that Fe is a psychometric symbol and not an actual neurological phenomenon Jung did not define Fe as acting assertively in accordance to feelings, because Jung did not define the Feeling function as even having anything to do with feelings themselves.

Feeler: peoples who are more at ease to take decisions based on feelings and subjective judgements.

Thinker: peoples who are more at ease to take decisions based on impersonal logic and a seeking for objectivity.

That's all.

Feeling functions are ethical functions.

So what? And what's this shit with "societal norms"?

 

[Craft]

Fe users, as mentioned above, think in terms of "our values" rather than "my values."

I'd go a little step further. Fe users think in terms of "the values"---confident of its belief in its own supposed objective judgement.

 

[Aleksei]

Feeler: peoples who are more at ease to take decisions based on feelings and subjective judgements.

Thinker: peoples who are more at ease to take decisions based on impersonal logic and a seeking for objectivity.

That's all.

No, that's not all, because that's not all Jung defined Feeling and Thinking as.

 

[Little Linguist]

Basically, the difference between Fe and Fi is where you derive your moral compass from -- your sense of right and wrong. Fe users are Fe because their sense of ethics is outwardly derived; based on what people they feel emotionally close to feel is right. Fi users on the other hand draw their sense of ethics from within themselves -- what in their gut they feel is right or wrong. Your description has nothing to do with what Jung intended the F function to mean, and frankly it's insulting to F types. Feeling =/= emotional.


Values that society holds to be true. I thought that was pretty simple...

I misworded a little though. In this case "society" is shorthand for what one feels is their community. Fe users, as mentioned above, think in terms of "our values" rather than "my values."

Your definition of societal values is too broad. Every group has different values. For example, I approve of German values more than American values, even though I have to ask myself what American values are, and I notice that German values are evaporating.

However, my husband said something interesting to me.

: It surprises me that the Germans seem to like me. I was never really accepted in the U.S. And I'm a lot different from many Germans: why do you think they like me more than you in a lot of ways? I'd think they'd like you better and NOT like me.
: Well, you represent the values that most Germans have forgotten or ignored.
: Like what?
: For example, you are punctual, have a great deal of moral fiber, are hard-working, ambitious, you are a perfectionist who tries the best in everything you do; you are honest and trustworthy; you are dependable.
: Hmm...interesting.
: Of course, you are that only until the point when you realize it is not appreciated or reciprocated. Then after a while, you turn into the complete opposite and don't give a damn and move on to something else. You are a person who needs people to reflect your moral standards. If they don't you cast them off. Not your clients. But your business partners. Or you only keep them around while they are useful. In that way, you are rather ruthless.
: Ruthless?
: Yes, you can be cold and rational if you get pushed too far.
: Hmm, I guess that's true.
: But you are different. Most people who are like that are very rigid and inflexible. You are not. You cater to others' needs. You notice what others need, and know very creative ways of going about meeting those needs. You also take your job to heart and much more seriously than most people. You do not follow the rules at any price; and you do not stick to your ideal way of doing things at the expense of others. You have a foundation that is solid, but the rest can change at will to cater to a particular situation.
: Would you say I'm creative?
: Yes, in some ways. In what you are good at, you're very creative. When you are not good at something, you aren't. But in your speciality, you are extremely creative.
: Would you say I follow what other people tell me?
: Hmm, not if it goes against your values. Not if it goes against what you think is right. But otherwise, yes.
: Do you think I conform to social values?
: You have a gift of adapting. So if you go into a new culture, you easily find out what is expected and necessary and conform to that, as long as it fits in with your values, but if they didn't, I'd expect that you wouldn't go there. You find it easy to go to other places and fit in. You don't stick out like a sore thumb. You learn foreign languages, you imbibe the culture, you do other things so that you assimilate into other cultures.

 

[Aleksei]

Your definition of societal values is too broad. Every group has different values.

So? Fe's definition of "values" isn't an objective judgment, nor universal -- it depends on the individual. Fe values don't have to be the values of your own society, or even the values of all of society. They just have to be the values of whomever the Fe user feels connected to. If you feel something is right or wrong because your community (whomsoever that community might be), your parents or your friends or your counselor or somebody else feels it's right or wrong, then that's Fe.

If the concept feels foreign to you, then you're probably an Fi user.

 

[Little Linguist]

Argh...no idea.

What are my values based on...umm....I don't think about it that much.

I'm heavily influenced by my environment, if that helps. I change according to my environment; whereas, my husband seems to have a strong inner center that never changes. SO....what's that?

But I don't just do whatever the hell XYZ tells me without thinking about it: that's just retarded.

However I'm interested in this topic because I wanted to post a thread on Fe v. Fi AGAIN - because I still don't get it...and I really, really, really am confused by it.

So I'm hoping this will clarify once and for all because I'm sick of being in the dark.

 

[himynameisdead]

INFJ

Your Analysis (Vertical line = Average)

You scored 0% on Te, higher than 37% of your peers.
You scored 100% on Ti, higher than 63% of your peers.
You scored 0% on Fe, higher than 30% of your peers.
You scored 100% on Fi, higher than 71% of your peers.
You scored 0% on Se, higher than 30% of your peers.
You scored 100% on Si, higher than 71% of your peers.
You scored 0% on Ne, higher than 31% of your peers.
You scored 100% on Ni, higher than 69% of your peers.
You scored 100% on Thinking, higher than 80% of your peers.
You scored 0% on Feeling, higher than 21% of your peers.
You scored 0% on Sensing, higher than 41% of your peers.
You scored 100% on Intuitive, higher than 60% of your peers.
You scored 0% on Judging, higher than 22% of your peers.
You scored 100% on Perceiving, higher than 78% of your peers.

...sighs.....
I don't even.

I'm actually iNtj/iNfj, I do believe, simply because my dom. intuition has always been a constant, no matter what test I take, but it seems like..
Okay, Ni, Ti, Fi, Si... being a perceiver. huh. lol. There's not a very great sense of direction as to which type it would amount to.. I really don't understand how it labeled me iNfj. Usually I'm good at understanding patterns.. but.. iNfj = Ni Fe Ti Se, iNtj = Ni Te Fi Se...

 

[Little Linguist]

Don't feel bad - you're not the only one with screwed up cognitive functions.

I have Ne=Te>Fi = Si > Fe....and whateverrrrrrrrrr

Besides a lot of questions can be cognitive function combos...e.g. I've heard Ne+Fi looks like Fe but does it differently or whatever.

 

[Speed Gavroche]

Basically, the difference between Fe and Fi is where you derive your moral compass from -- your sense of right and wrong. Fe users are Fe because their sense of ethics is outwardly derived; based on what people they feel emotionally close to feel is right. Fi users on the other hand draw their sense of ethics from within themselves --

No. And this is a current mistake. It like if you said that Se is for external sensations, and Si is for body caring. This is an over simplification, and actually abstract categories wich dos'nt fit with reality.

Jung did not include the J/P dichotomy in his system, at the contrary of MBTI. In the MBTI system, that dichotomy tell if you prefer Perception or Judgement in the external world. Fe-dom; ESFJ and ENFJ, prefer judgement in the external world, and their judgement are based on feelings. So this is external, and feeling: Fe. They are extrovert, so, that function is their dominant function. Fi-dom, them, ISFP and INFP, prefer to use Perception in the external world, and their perception function is Se or Ne. But being introvert, theses extrovert functionx are auxillary and their dominant function is Fi. So, that mean that Fi-dom don't want to take decisions too much quickly and still aloof, prefer to take informations before making decisions. But they take theses information in the external world and so take care of opinions of others. And ultimately, Fi users are concernes with harmony, caring, consensus, etc, just like Fe users.

what in their gut they feel is right or wrong.

"guts" about what is right and wrong are F things, not necessarly Fe or Fi.

Your description has nothing to do with what Jung intended the F function to mean, and frankly it's insulting to F types. Feeling =/= emotional.

As I explained, Jung functions alone were inferiors to MBTI, which improve and rationalize the initial theory.

Values that society holds to be true. I thought that was pretty simple...

This is too much simple to be true. Actually, what define Fe users, if we whatch it well, is their ability to influence their society with their opinions as much as they are influenced by others's opinions.

I misworded a little though. In this case "society" is shorthand for what one feels is their community. Fe users, as mentioned above, think in terms of "our values" rather than "my values."

The "our values"/"my values" is pretty cliché, considering than the Fe users can't be an individual person with a personal opinion. The problem in my opinion is that you forget that Fe users want above all to take personal decisions despite they can lose themselve in the crowd.