Dear Fe User,

[Forever_Jung]

I found it interesting whne you said that you find it much easier to spontaneously create within an existing structure. I'm very much the same and find that narrowing down some of the possibilities makes it possible for me to much more effectively perform my role.

Yes, when there are a thousand paths in front of you that look suitable to walk down, it`s hard to choose which one to walk down.

 

[Fidelia]

Yeah, it's not just a matter of choosing that path, but I think Ni keeps making you aware of all of the many branches that can also diverge from each of the given possible courses. It becomes too overwhelming and you become paralyzed.

 

[highlander]

Sometimes I feel shortsighted compared to a Ne-dom though, because they see everything, all at once. It`s like a bird`s eye view. I can only see the big picture once I internalize all the details, I can`t just quickly overview something. When I collaborate with an ENFP friend of mine on stories, she usually creates the stories backbone, and thinks about it holistically. Sometimes, she doesn`t even write the words to the story, she writes what the characters are basically saying and doing. Then she gives it to me to do a lot of the fine brushstrokes. I zoom so far in, that often I lose sight of the big picture, but she reminds me. That being said, just by inserting thousands of little details, the story can be changed a lot, much to my ENFP friend`s surprise. She doesn`t mind though. She creates an unusual and clever story structure, and I work within it. I find it much easier to spontaneously create within an existing structure. She finds it hard to be creative when she has to work within a structure I impose on her.

I do think Ne doms do think about the big picture in a different way. It's quite complimentary to Ni and frequently the perspectives are compelling to me. They open up options or possibilities that I haven't considered.

I don't really understand your definition of Ni, Orobas, because in my view, Ni is one of the mostly likely functions to explore every possibility that could happen and try to account for what the result would be. It may take what is and extrapolate all of the possibilities from there, but I think if anything, Ni's probably is not narrowing things down enough. Ni very much tends to want to consider the effects of a course of action long down the road and most Ni users I've talked to seem surprised that others do not instinctively see what effect a particular course of action is likely to have in the future.

I see it kind of like doing a puzzle. Ne is willing to consider all sorts of possibilities, even unlikely looking ones. This can lead to novel but effective ways of doing things. Unexpected solutions to difficult problems. It would try pieces that no one else would consider. Ni on the other hand looks at the puzzle piece, then at the hole and compares whether it would fit or if it would be way off base before even trying the piece in the hole. It looks for markers of what is going to be the most likely solution or what could work if that solution does not exist.

That's my perception of it anyway. Perhaps I am mistaken. Sometimes having something as a dominant function means that you see it so close up that you are not even completely aware of how you use it or how it affects your perspective.

Yes - I very much agree with these things.

 

[Thalassa]

Highlander I think your lists of Fi/Fe are awesome ... you could have been describing the basic differences between me and my ENFJ sister and how we interact with others.

 

[Poki]

Yeah, it's not just a matter of choosing that path, but I think Ni keeps making you aware of all of the many branches that can also diverge from each of the given possible courses. It becomes too overwhelming and you become paralyzed.

Ni really sucks in this manner.

 

[highlander]

Yeah, it's not just a matter of choosing that path, but I think Ni keeps making you aware of all of the many branches that can also diverge from each of the given possible courses. It becomes too overwhelming and you become paralyzed.

Wow, I've had that happen too - sometimes on important things. It can be pretty frustrating. My theory on it is the judging function can help balance it out though. That is, when this happens, you need to exercise more Te or Fe to get out of it.

 

[uumlau]

Highlander, you wrote

This is what I think some of the differences are:

Ne

Objective, reality oriented
Possibilities
Dispersed
Short term

Ni
Subjective, meaning oriented
Answers
Focused
Long term

To which Oro replied

Ni is amazingly short sighted to me-as it focuses only on one problem at a time.....unless it can translate the particular Se instance to a set of universal Ni truths. In which case I await them eagarly with delight as they fix flaws in my underlying structure.

Thus evoking your response

I don't think "short sighted" is a very good term to describe it because it implies lacking foresight which I can't imagine would be characteristic of Ni. It's drawing from a very large number of data points to converge on a perspective. That's different from being short sighted or myopic.

Ne and Ni will see each other as myopic. If you don't think so, you need to go debate an INTP long enough until you both believe the other completely clueless.

Ne goes for breadth, Ni goes for depth. Ne goes for everything possible in the now, Ni goes for everything possible in the future. Each will see the other as ignoring huge sets of possibility.

One thing Oro points out is the overlap. Oftentimes, Ni can delve in and find a "universal truth" that is universal enough for Ne + Ti/Fi to accept as really true, and then that truth becomes a foundation point for other pattern searches in the here and now. But most of the time, Ni comes up with an insight that is really only useful in a specific case at a specific time, and isn't easily used as an object lesson to teach others patterns/truths.

I don't really understand your definition of Ni, Orobas, because in my view, Ni is one of the mostly likely functions to explore every possibility that could happen and try to account for what the result would be. It may take what is and extrapolate all of the possibilities from there, but I think if anything, Ni's probably is not narrowing things down enough. Ni very much tends to want to consider the effects of a course of action long down the road and most Ni users I've talked to seem surprised that others do not instinctively see what effect a particular course of action is likely to have in the future.

I see it kind of like doing a puzzle. Ne is willing to consider all sorts of possibilities, even unlikely looking ones. This can lead to novel but effective ways of doing things. Unexpected solutions to difficult problems. It would try pieces that no one else would consider. Ni on the other hand looks at the puzzle piece, then at the hole and compares whether it would fit or if it would be way off base before even trying the piece in the hole. It looks for markers of what is going to be the most likely solution or what could work if that solution does not exist.

That's my perception of it anyway. Perhaps I am mistaken. Sometimes having something as a dominant function means that you see it so close up that you are not even completely aware of how you use it or how it affects your perspective.

You're not far off, Fidelia. It took me a while to realize that "introverted intuition" meant "how I think," because I never regarded it as particularly mystical or magical - after all, I was coming up with objectively true conclusions, and couldn't see from outside myself that other people found that rather amazing. After figuring out how it might seem magical, I managed to come up with some more concrete explanations of Ni. Fitting puzzle pieces together is a good analogy: it's as if I first try to understand the puzzle pieces in and of themselves, then I let them juggle in my head, automatically bonding together as if atoms in a chemical reaction, and then when its done, I let others know what molecule resulted.

Oro is seeing it as short-sighted, because Ne sees this huge landscape that Ni very often misses. Similarly, Ni sees possibilities and options that Ne often misses, because Ne is thinking "space-like" while Ni is thinking "time-like".

Here's what I think of Ne and Ni:

Ne: weaving together the common underlying thread in divergent situations/cultures/subjects, clarifying the ultimate underlying pattern, brainstorming random possibilities, making wacky humorous connections and silly imaginative nonsense

Ni: tenacious vision for long-term goals or the definitive future/end of a situation etc., examining a single situation or subject or behavior from every possible angle, grasping underlying meanings similar to Ne but rather picking out motive or "why" instead of "how they're all connected," conspiracies about Russian spies and space aliens

This is a very good description, Marm.

A similar one that I recently come up with is that Ne sounds out the resonances between widely divergent ideas. The resonances are treated as clues to similarities, then Fi or Ti does further inner analysis to figure out if they really are the same. Typologies fit very well with this kind of approach.

Ni, I think works almost backwards from this. It is so interested in "meaning" that it writes meaning. Usually, this is used as error correction in communication, where someone misspells or misspeaks, one writes in and otherwise corrects the message. Most of the time this works really well, though it tends to fall flat in some aspects of the Fi/Fe dialog, since the added meaning is often not the originally intended meaning.

Moreover, Ni can take this talent for writing meaning, and creatively invoke meaning, by playing with words, creating associations, forging connections that others appreciate. It is "backwards" from the Ne approach, because in this mode, Ni can create resonances in meaning that Ne in turn can appreciate, instantly perceiving the connection between two ideas.

E.g., at the hotel Oro and I checked into today, there was a calendar with a picture of some cute seals being affectionate with each other on the counter. I remarked, "You know, there should be more social opportunities for seals, especially the young ones. Perhaps a Club for Baby Seals?" Oro instantly made the connection and chided me even as she chuckled.

 

[Poki]

haha, I dunno..I could be said to be Te lazy. I use it like a club and then dont really follow up with the details like a REAL Te user would. The less differentiated the function, the more clumsy our use of it will be. I think the interesting part is that folks who can tag team that tert function can have really interesting perspectives-NiTi, NeTe, NiFi, TiNi...so there is room for error if not cross checked by the aux function, but the perspective and analysis put forth can still be quite interesting. In U's example...it would be like peeking into an extra dimension that most folks cant see into...It is an unusual perspective but not invalid-just different.

Do you become Te lazy IRL? Just wondering since on here our(I's) inner world comes out which is our dominant direction. Do you think that in actual interactions tertiary becomes lazy with Es? Like an ENFJs Se becomes lazy and they stop really picking up on things. They fall back more on Fe. Or Te becomes lazy with ENFP in actual real life interactions?

I am gonna have to find a way around this lazy Te function because I do see it IRL a couple times with ENFPs. It has caught me on this board one time in particular. I wont generally put up with lazy Te. The way it comes out is you believe what you want to believe about me. Very few people can get me to try to get them to believe something else, eventually I give up though because I am not gonna force people to believe anything. Over my life as I become quieter and quieter it has turned into a huge huge key I use to determine if someone knows me or not. I will let them run off in there own direction and it helps me understand who they are. That should change now that I am changing my life to get past what has lead up to me being this introverted.

 

[Poki]

You're not far off, Fidelia. It took me a while to realize that "introverted intuition" meant "how I think," because I never regarded it as particularly mystical or magical - after all, I was coming up with objectively true conclusions, and couldn't see from outside myself that other people found that rather amazing. After figuring out how it might seem magical, I managed to come up with some more concrete explanations of Ni. Fitting puzzle pieces together is a good analogy: it's as if I first try to understand the puzzle pieces in and of themselves, then I let them juggle in my head, automatically bonding together as if atoms in a chemical reaction, and then when its done, I let others know what molecule resulted.

I think this is what really throws people off with what Ti is. So people who "think alot" get pinned as dominant Ti, this is the reason I think that ISTP is the dumping ground for introverted men. Because they "think" internally.

 

[sculpting]

I don't think "short sighted" is a very good term to describe it because it implies lacking foresight which I can't imagine would be characteristic of Ni. It's drawing from a very large number of data points to converge on a perspective. That's different from being short sighted or myopic.]

My apologies-I was typing quickly. Let me correct and say "for a very long time I perceived Ni doms-in particular INTJs-to be seemingly single point focused-thus somewhat short sited as to the broad range a particular insight could be applied to" Once on the forum, I kept hitting this and it wasnt until a thread over at INTJf where context shifting was discussed that i really got what was going on.

My original point is more-just as you may perceive Ne to be "short-sighted" from how you would approach a problem, I might see Ni to be short sighted. Once again-simply our own worldview coloring how we judge an external process exhibited by another. Wanted to focus of the Perception of shortsightedness-not factually state it as short sighted-my bad.

Actually, that's really interesting. Are there some statistics on these tests? I always thought DISC was more reliable than that

Edit: Here is a report on DISC validity. A little complicated to understand though.

http://www.discprofile.com/downloads/2005/2005DiSCValidationResearchReport.pdf

Let me read these in depth and get back to you. My initial statemtn of 1/3 was based upon the group of people I was working with-about 1/3 were EXTPs. It seems from a priliminary survey....D=Te, I=Fi, S=Fe and problematically SiTe and Ti and even Fe all contaminate C. So DISC worked very well for enfps-amazingly well actually, well with Fe doms, well with the few STJs. But the EXTPs were really unhappy with the results...Will look in more detail though...

I don't really understand your definition of Ni, Orobas, because in my view, Ni is one of the mostly likely functions to explore every possibility that could happen and try to account for what the result would be. It may take what is and extrapolate all of the possibilities from there, but I think if anything, Ni's probably is not narrowing things down enough. Ni very much tends to want to consider the effects of a course of action long down the road and most Ni users I've talked to seem surprised that others do not instinctively see what effect a particular course of action is likely to have in the future.

.

My apologies Fidelia-see my reply above to highlander regarding what I intended the message to be. Ni is complex and crazy awesome amazing and can generate really cool answers.. One real risk may be that because it feels so very natural to ni users-there may not be an awareness how how destablizing an Ni generated idea or lack of trust can be to an Si user. In NFPs, this is ...particularly painful...as we may have a valued based idea that we are discussing-only to have the Ni dom context shift and tell us that the way we percieve the issue-with our Si is flawed-as it would lock the ni dom into one context. It isnt our idea on a particular issue that is wrong-but our entire FiSi approach-thus our soul more or less, our entire sense of self definition, our values. Yup. Ouch. Totally due to a different need for flexibility in perception.

Sometimes I feel shortsighted compared to a Ne-dom though, because they see everything, all at once. It`s like a bird`s eye view. I can only see the big picture once I internalize all the details, I can`t just quickly overview something. When I collaborate with an ENFP friend of mine on stories, she usually creates the stories backbone, and thinks about it holistically. Sometimes, she doesn`t even write the words to the story, she writes what the characters are basically saying and doing. Then she gives it to me to do a lot of the fine brushstrokes. I zoom so far in, that often I lose sight of the big picture, but she reminds me. That being said, just by inserting thousands of little details, the story can be changed a lot, much to my ENFP friend`s surprise. She doesn`t mind though. She creates an unusual and clever story structure, and I work within it. I find it much easier to spontaneously create within an existing structure. She finds it hard to be creative when she has to work within a structure I impose on her.

^^ This so sounds like my brain-the application of huge roughly sketched meta structures to every problems, yet I am totally willing to negotiate or take input on the majority of details.

Do you become Te lazy IRL? Just wondering since on here our(I's) inner world comes out which is our dominant direction. Do you think that in actual interactions tertiary becomes lazy with Es? Like an ENFJs Se becomes lazy and they stop really picking up on things. They fall back more on Fe. Or Te becomes lazy with ENFP in actual real life interactions?

I am gonna have to find a way around this lazy Te function because I do see it IRL a couple times with ENFPs. It has caught me on this board one time in particular. I wont generally put up with lazy Te. The way it comes out is you believe what you want to believe about me. Very few people can get me to try to get them to believe something else, eventually I give up though because I am not gonna force people to believe anything. Over my life as I become quieter and quieter it has turned into a huge huge key I use to determine if someone knows me or not. I will let them run off in there own direction and it helps me understand who they are. That should change now that I am changing my life to get past what has lead up to me being this introverted.

So first-the ENTP who said "lazy ti"-she was incorrect. What she is seeing is Ni working with Ti. Since her default would be to use Ti and embed in a solid Si foundation-she was confused as to why the INFJs seemed reluctant to keep expanding the TiSi-so she just read the Ti as not being complete. In reality to lock the Ti down into a specific form would prevent Ni context shifting-thus removing a primary strength of an ni dom in analysis. Again my apologies for the value judgment implied.

Lazy Te? Likely more "sloppy Te". Forever Jungs description above describes a beautiful overview of how we use Te. We build frameworks and lattices, structures to layer the NeFi stuff onto. Once the structure is roughly laid out we can then sloppily paint in the details and remold on the fly. But without that meat structure-we are just floating in a ocean of fludidity with nothing...here let me pull out your post and answer each point...

 

[Poki]

So first-the ENTP who said "lazy ti"-she was incorrect. What she is seeing is Ni working with Ti. Since her default would be to use Ti and embed in a solid Si foundation-she was confused as to why the INFJs seemed reluctant to keep expanding the TiSi-so she just read the Ti as not being complete. In reality to lock the Ti down into a specific form would prevent Ni context shifting-thus removing a primary strength of an ni dom in analysis. Again my apologies for the value judgment implied.

Lazy Te? Likely more "sloppy Te". Forever Jungs description above describes a beautiful overview of how we use Te. We build frameworks and lattices, structures to layer the NeFi stuff onto. Once the structure is roughly laid out we can then sloppily paint in the details and remold on the fly. But without that meat structure-we are just floating in a ocean of fludidity with nothing...here let me pull out your post and answer each point...

Could it not be a reluctance, but more of a not being Ne. With me, half truths I tend to agree with in regard to myself. Kinda like a reluctance(lazy) to dig any deeper by following the path. It takes alot for me to seperate half truths into full truths or work out the details. I have to follow the path and figure out the seperation, possibly short sighted Ti. I do follow paths at times, though sometimes I do get lazy and just follow others. I dont really think about expanding in a Ne way though, its not reluctance, its just not even close to the normal paths I take. This is why I mentioned being quieter and letting people believe what they want, because I lose follow up with a convo or sometimes dont want to follow up with clarification. May be a good thing or a bad thing, I dont know. I dont always want people to know who I really am, especially the things I consider a good quality. One of the co-workers I IM with alot we tend to revisit things alot and this causes us to dig deeper or possibly expand into other areas in relation to areas we have already explored. It may be her building her framework and lattice. In IM and being Ti I tend to just follow and play with thoughts, contexts, shifting, etc. I dont do this quite as much in person though. The shifts can be pretty entertaining sometimes and go in directions that lead to OMGOSH. To me this is playing(alot of it turns into things that are generally inappropriate, stupid context shifting always ends up in the gutter). I build my frameworks after the fact.

Ni is more about the concept as opposed to the detail. So expanding on the concept will be much different then expanding on the detail. I work with an ENTP and he really likes to dig into the detail, while I enjoy digging into the concept. He made a comment one time about me basically rewriting a framework because I dissected it, figured out the concept and shifted that concept over to what we were doing. He would find the details of the framework and bring it into our project as a whole. For him our project is designed of patterns and frameworks, to me I build the framework off of understanding the concepts of other frameworks. We work completely different. I will understand what we are doing and create the concept and piece together the details as I work in a very sloppy approach that I streamline and rewrite as I go. Alot of rewriting, debugging, logging, etc. Kinda like you sloppily painting the details and restructuring on the fly. I lose pretty much everyone if they watch me work as I bounce around. My code ends up with alot of fail overs where I seperate paths at key points and I kinda create switches to move between the paths, eventually killing off the old path and using the new improved path. Is this what NFPs do with NeFiTe? Like an internal rewiring, that affects things externally as well.

This is different then what I was thinking of when I said lazy Te. I was referring to just accepting "groupings" as truth. More like a static framework as justification. Maybe this is just a part of sloppy. I dont know.

Completely lost yet?

 

[Thalassa]

I am gonna have to find a way around this lazy Te function because I do see it IRL a couple times with ENFPs. It has caught me on this board one time in particular. I wont generally put up with lazy Te. The way it comes out is you believe what you want to believe about me. Very few people can get me to try to get them to believe something else, eventually I give up though because I am not gonna force people to believe anything. Over my life as I become quieter and quieter it has turned into a huge huge key I use to determine if someone knows me or not. I will let them run off in there own direction and it helps me understand who they are. That should change now that I am changing my life to get past what has lead up to me being this introverted.

I find it truly puzzling that you're calling this "lazy Te." What it looks like to me is Te coupled with an immature Fi that just has big, bossy, self-absorbed opinions and goes around blasting them at others. My ISTJ grandfather came across this way at times, although his command of Te wasn't at all lazy but was quite superb in terms of planning and maintaining structure. The man was like the backbone of our family, and a responsible member of his community, though he could be a highly unpleasant individual to deal with at times. He was incredibly hard-working, smart, but ridiculously stubborn and I think the pepetual immaturity of his Fi had less to do with him being a normal ISTJ, but maybe actually suffering from a bit of asperger's syndrome and being truly clueless about people - especially adolescent and adult people, since he was actually wonderful with children and animals. Go figure.

Anyway, I was like this too when I was in my very early 20's...I was like this thunder storm of strong opinions, and I used to say things like "I am Karma" only half-jokingly. This particular shape of my immature Fi/Te was certainly influenced by being raised by my ISTJ grandfather for my whole life.

So yeah...that's not what I'd call "lazy Te."

 

[skylights]

first point, i REALLY liked highlander's summary of Fi and Fe points.

oh, and i also would identify myself intrapersonal/external like annwn. i think this correlates well with my Fi values often seeming to align with Fe users' values.

Yup but I can tell you the difference between a fake ENFJ and a fake ENFP though...a fake ENFP means what they say, but totally flake out on you, and you get this vibe from them...like they say all these things like "oh yeah we should hang out and do this or that" and they're sincere, it's just that they get distracted and end up in Texas next week when they were supposed to hang out with you, instead. They forget about you. They're fake not because they consciously plan to dupe you, but because they don't put any commitment behind their words. ESFPs can be this way too.

i dunno, i don't agree that's an ENFP being fake - that's just an ENFP being an airhead, or judging something else more important than hanging out with you. a fake ENFP is more likely to just kind of glaze over inside while remaining enthusiastic externally, and roll their eyes and sigh with relief once they're finally done with the conversation and alone again. the whole key to fake is that there's no sincerity...

incidentally - i find preserving external harmony when i'm not aligned really taxing. it's akin to hearing a fire alarm blaring and not doing anything about it... it makes me fidgety and uncomfortable and guilty-feeling and eventually exhausted. if other ENFPs feel anything like that too, i'm inclined to say it's way more likely to find a flakey but sincere ENFP than a fake one. being fake is just a pain in the ass. flaking out is much easier, lol...

A fake ENFJ smiles in your face and talks about you behind your back, and you always get this kind of uneasy feeling like you can't quite trust them even though they technically follow through.

hah true.

There is a concept known as the "Fourier" transform, which can rewrite a set of equations in an entirely new "space." It is especially useful for any set of equations that results in "wave functions." [...] I can use this understanding of real vs Fourier spaces to provide perspective on these endless Fe/Fi threads. [...]
I suspect that part of the problem is that the Fe-Fi transformation is drastically limited by text communication. Body language, tone of voice, awareness of other contexts only visible to those present in person, all contribute to one's ability to do this transformation. One needs to learn new, text-based, cues to properly transform the understandings, e.g., "if someone is speaking in terms of how-I-feel, then one should read the words in Fi-space, not in Fe-space."

i love the parallel, it's very insightful, and i agree with you.

though the question becomes, what's key in translating to each space?

that's why i think all this Fe-Fi breakdown is so important - to those of you who are questioning why we need these Fi and Fe threads at all. because we need to know the spaces we're dealing with before we can hope to properly translate.

But what this says Poki is that if you are not up to Fe standards-experience age degree, your information will not be accepted.

If you are already outside of the Fe circle trying to work your way inwards with new information to expand the circle...well it just wont happen...unless you play by Fe rules and mannerisms and sneak in. But since NFPs dont use much Fe, how long can we sneak under the radar, especially with an Fe user as astute as an Fe dom. Eventually we will do something silly and set the fe alarm bells ringing, thus be discredited as an valid information source.

yeah. i feel like it takes a long time for NFPs to gain sufficient credibility with Fe dom/aux. though, once you do, you're in. it's interesting how different that is from constant Te scrutiny of idea-usefulness paired with Fi person-acceptance.

so-it isnt Fi-you are actually seeing NeTe seeking generalized rules to apply to people systems. (just to rescue the other Fi users)

additionally-I am not only interested in simply this thread or this forum-but interactions that expand outwards. It may be that individuals make a great deal of progress as certain ways-but generalizations about type can be useful to capture areas which will end up being roadbumps over and over again. If it has taken this many back of ofrth convos to make even moderate progress, it makes sense that in the same convos in other places-the same roadbumps will be encountered. [...]
In particular I get endlessly picked on, to the point of being told I have mental issues and need to seek consouling because I tend to dissect people interactions in terms of jungian functions. I dont mean to create angst...but I have been hearing these opinions for several months and I am interested in trying to understand why the way I see the world is so incomprehinsible to Fe, when it works so well. I listed a few examples earlier in the thread of how I interact with people and how i apply jungian functions, so i hope those cast more light and context on how I see the world and cut up the people pie, so to speak.

O's responses felt to me that she did not take into account the fact that Fe users are all separate individuals, whith different function orders, different experiences, and different levels of interest in bridging that gap. I believe understanding functions explains people's instinctive impulses, but does not conclusively define them. I see Fi users time and time again insisting that Fe users force them into an unfair one size fits all mold when I feel that that's what is being done right back.

hm.

something i want to point out, that i think might be helpful, is that i suspect most people with Fi dom/aux tend to start from a place of assuming that everyone is different and that there are myriad individual reasons for anything, because Fi is a highly subjective function. the most subjective function.

so it really feels a bit ridiculous ("ridiculous" not meant to carry a connotation of offense - the word just captures the feeling of... well, silliness) to have people keep pointing out that maybe everything can't be attributed to cognitive functions. that's a given in the Fi paradigm (at least as i know it and have seen in others thus far). it's almost insulting, to keep getting told that we're overapplying. i work so hard to deconstruct boxes people put around one another ALL THE TIME irl that it's awful to have the accusation thrown at me online that i would do such a thing. and it seems illogical, too, to be told that it's overanalysis. since when has expounding upon and refining ideas become bad? this confrontation/warning that's been raised a few times by Fe users - i've seen similar posts from proteanmix, cascadeco, jaguar, and fidelia - all seem so counterintuitive to a Fi/Te approach.

and maybe that explains, a bit, why it's so frustrating to some when others point out that it sounds like we're overapplying, or accusing anyone specifically of being a certain way because of the way we tend to make large-scale grouping characteristics. i think it's a communication gap because the Fi users are leaving out the "assumed" information that we do acknowledge that there will always be exceptions to any trend and that we don't mean to blanket others, just to group for better understanding.

for example, i have seen a few times in this thread when i have read a Fi user's post that i assumed was a "public broadcast" post - speaking to everyone in an explanatory manner, as myself and many Fi users seem to do. and then a single Fe user has assumed the post was about them, and responded personally, being somewhat upset because they did not align with the personal experience of the Fi user. the miscommunications seem to be that (a) the post is about the Fi user / everyone, not [the Fi user + someone else], so it's an error in the Fi paradigm to interpret it as if it's about someone's relationship with someone else, and (b) that the post is about the Fi user, so it's an error in the Fi paradigm to try to match one's own experience or feelings up with those of the poster.

i'm curious how it looks from the other side? as if a Fi person is targeting a specific individual or a few, and blanketing them with statements that might not apply to them or to everyone, and assuming those statements are universally true?

But you mean FPs are random, yeah? But that's the whole point! They're not random over time. There's a consistency that can (eventually) be relied on. [...] There's a consistency of thought over time that can be relied on for...

i agree with this, and i think highlander pointed it out too. FPs seem behaviorally a bit random but the reasoning is very consistent. you have to look at the Fi or Ti principles that lie beneath the situational context and you will find the consistency.

Its like an talking to an ENFP co-worker at one point where they used more of a joking comedy style to talk about work screw ups, then seeing her talk on the phone to another co-worker display a different feeling. To me that is fake, but it kinda isnt. Its not fake because that how she moves past things, she is being real. But fixing up things that are external to self to me doesnt properly display feelings.

this is a good example actually behaviorally inconsistent... but it's not necessarily inconsistent at all, because you can feel two ways about the same issue. work screw ups are funny, annoying, and frustrating all in one. if one coworker wants to joke about them, then you can joke too, but if the other is really upset, you can understand that feeling of upset too and sympathize with them. two different behaviors but no inconsistency. just different facets of feeling.

the underlying threads are the desire to empathize with coworkers and the desire to discuss work screwups, even though the "modes" are different.

Fi in evaluating things might ask, 'Does it line up with who I am?', whereas I might go, 'Does it make sense? Does it make sense to do this in this given situation? Or does it make absolutely no sense at all? Is there a Point/purpose in this in the grand scheme of things as per my goals, relationships, what I want out of them, etc.'

to me, "does it line up with who i am" and "does it make sense" are essentially the same question.

with Fi, i am always involved in the context, so my evaluation always must involve a lining up with who i am. but if we're talking about another person, then a different course of action or belief else could make sense, because that involves lining up the answer with who they are instead.

Fi would appear to be person-contingent where Fe is situation-contingent.

 

[Poki]

I find it truly puzzling that you're calling this "lazy Te." What it looks like to me is Te coupled with an immature Fi that just has big, bossy, self-absorbed opinions and goes around blasting them at others. My ISTJ grandfather came across this way at times, although his command of Te wasn't at all lazy but was quite superb in terms of planning and maintaining structure. The man was like the backbone of our family, and a responsible member of his community, though he could be a highly unpleasant individual to deal with at times. He was incredibly hard-working, smart, but ridiculously stubborn and I think the pepetual immaturity of his Fi had less to do with him being a normal ISTJ, but maybe actually suffering from a bit of asperger's syndrome and being truly clueless about people - especially adolescent and adult people, since he was actually wonderful with children and animals. Go figure.

Anyway, I was like this too when I was in my very early 20's...I was like this thunder storm of strong opinions, and I used to say things like "I am Karma" only half-jokingly. This particular shape of my immature Fi/Te was certainly influenced by being raised by my ISTJ grandfather for my whole life.

So yeah...that's not what I'd call "lazy Te."

With ENFP its not the extreme like you say with your ISTJ grandfather. It came across as lazy because it seemed more a stubbornness at the time, then opinionated and who they were.

 

[Poki]

this is a good example actually behaviorally inconsistent... but it's not necessarily inconsistent at all, because you can feel two ways about the same issue. work screw ups are funny, annoying, and frustrating all in one. if one coworker wants to joke about them, then you can joke too, but if the other is really upset, you can understand that feeling of upset too and sympathize with them. two different behaviors but no inconsistency. just different facets of feeling.

The ENFP was the one who was completely inconsistant within the same issue that she was having. With me she was joking/frustrated with the other more seeking sympathy/empathy. The facets you explain I can actually flip between the 2 with ease somehow by picking up almost instantly how the other is responding. I dont have a clue if this is fake or not, it is like shifting facets. This is actually confusing to me in regard to what I am doing when I do this, how I feel, etc. as it comes extremely natural which I think is strange for a guy. I pin this to SeFe. Its like SeFe can pick this up without even fully diving into it. Its really confusing to me when the other person is really struggling to keep a joking style, but cant help but let the struggle through. I cant just pick one way to sympathize as I pick up both.

 

[Kalach]

Could it not be a reluctance, but more of a not being Ne. With me, half truths I tend to agree with in regard to myself. Kinda like a reluctance(lazy) to dig any deeper by following the path. It takes alot for me to seperate half truths into full truths or work out the details. I have to follow the path and figure out the seperation, possibly short sighted Ti. I do follow paths at times, though sometimes I do get lazy and just follow others. I dont really think about expanding in a Ne way though, its not reluctance, its just not even close to the normal paths I take. This is why I mentioned being quieter and letting people believe what they want, because I lose follow up with a convo or sometimes dont want to follow up with clarification. May be a good thing or a bad thing, I dont know. I dont always want people to know who I really am, especially the things I consider a good quality. One of the co-workers I IM with alot we tend to revisit things alot and this causes us to dig deeper or possibly expand into other areas in relation to areas we have already explored. It may be her building her framework and lattice. In IM and being Ti I tend to just follow and play with thoughts, contexts, shifting, etc. I dont do this quite as much in person though. The shifts can be pretty entertaining sometimes and go in directions that lead to OMGOSH. To me this is playing(alot of it turns into things that are generally inappropriate, stupid context shifting always ends up in the gutter). I build my frameworks after the fact.

When I hang out with ISFP buddy, same thing happens. Playing, expanding the meaning of some small thing to absurdity for fun, making serious claims based on absurd premises for the entertainment value of having a big double meaning present. It ends up in the gutter or in outrageous conspiracy theories involving the worst of ethnic slurs.

 

[Thalassa]

With ENFP its not the extreme like you say with your ISTJ grandfather. It came across as lazy because it seemed more a stubbornness at the time, then opinionated and who they were.

Yeah, and I was just saying I think this has more to do with immature Fi combined with either strong or weaker tertiary Te. I think this is more about Fi immaturity (not knowing when to pick your battles, confusing feelings with ethics, feeling such a strong internal certainty of being right and dammit to hell with anybody else) than Te being "lazy."

Lazy Te is more like an FP whining about their situation but doing nothing to change it, or playing victim instead of standing up for themself. Te cares about efficiency and "what works" and externally measurable logic, so I don't know how being stubborn or opinionated is lazy Te, unless you mean that the ENFP was being stubborn by doing nothing, and that's not what it seemed like because you said it comes across as them thinking they know who you are and being wrong about it. That's why I brought up my ISTJ grandfather - he liked to think he had people all figured out, and while sometimes he did, usually he was just being a self-congratulatory, pompous asshole with very little skill in being able to understand the complexities of human beings over the age of 12.

 

[Thalassa]

incidentally - i find preserving external harmony when i'm not aligned really taxing. it's akin to hearing a fire alarm blaring and not doing anything about it... it makes me fidgety and uncomfortable and guilty-feeling and eventually exhausted.

Yeah, it gives me a sick internal feeling but only if it's something important. That's the thing - I am quite adaptable unless it's something that truly seems wrong or unethical to me, and then I totally relate to feeling fidgety and uncomfortable and instead of guilty-feeling I'm more likely to have anger as a reaction. I used to be quite bad about this, like I could not shut up in the face of what I saw as stupidity or ethically unsound behavior to the point of being overly opinionated and not knowing when to pick my battles. You're right, in some situations the only alternatives are to be either fake or flaky, and it does feel better to just wander away or quit the situation than sit there and grit your teeth and mutter to yourself and secretly be planning the deaths of your enemies.

 

[Kalach]

People keep talking like their tertiary functions are readily accessible. Tertiary functions work well in environments that support their functioning. Like for example when you are cooperating with someone who's interested in you and what you're trying to express. At other times, you're putting on makeup in the dark.

 

[Thalassa]

People keep talking like their tertiary functions are readily accessible. Tertiary functions work well in environments that support their functioning. Like for example when you are cooperating with someone who's interested in you and what you're trying to express. At other times, you're putting on makeup in the dark.

Elaborate. Examples?