[Jungian Cognitive Functions] An Fe-Fi negative convo

[sculpting]

. Oddly enough, the more I care about the relationship, the more likely it is I will talk to someone else about my feelings first. But anyway, no, it's never just about feeling. It's about doing something, Peacebaby, c'mon now, get with me, will ya? Feelings mean Do Something.
I cannot choose to be angry or not to be angry. My body releases chemicals instantaneously whether I even like it or not. I have zero choice.
Oh yes indeedy, if I can't work it out, there will be blowup.

Oh dear, if I acted every time I felt intensely well then I’d be an ENFP. Oh wait, I am an ENFP-. Part of growing up with Fi is learning that it is internally calibrated for me-thus I must act judiciously. I may feel strongly, but it is really important to put a lot of thought into those feelings-or I may act out about things that don’t matter, thus not be taken seriously when things do matter. Feeling does not equal immediate action-unless another person is in a great deal of immediate pain-which results in the greatest amount of feeling. Interestingly-in contract to what you mention-I do have the choice to suppress feelings with Te. I quell them. This could be unhealthy, but allows a more measured, reasoned response. If uncertain in a situation I withdraw, retreat.

 

[Southern Kross]

Doesn't it strike you as "incongruous," though, that you would give the ISFP lady the benefit of the doubt and not the ISTP lady? I mean, it's sort of the same as mediating between two kids fighting; you take them aside one at a time, starting with little Billy, and you ask him why he's fighting with little Bob. Little Billy replies angrily, "because Bob is so stupid. He has a stupid face." Without finding out anything else about the situation, and without talking to the other kid, would you assume that little Billy was just being a bully to little Bob, simply because (1) he's your first and only source of information, and (2) his "evidence" for little Bob's stupidity is not convincing?

orangey, i think perhaps why some Fi users have seemed to side more with the ISFP is because it looks like the ISTP is more the one who has launched the "attack".

coming from a neutral standpoint, to our knowledge, the ISFP has not done anything with the intention of negativity towards the ISTP, whereas the ISTP has made statements specifically assigning negativity towards the actions of the ISFP and her family.

the way i see it, is a bit like a balance. right now the ISTP has the upper hand because she is attacking, so it makes sense to see if she has messed up as well, and to consider how valid her claims are, before looking at the interaction of both parties - especially because we are really going off the information the ISTP has provided us. we don't treat them both equally because the ISTP is the one who has made the first claims - perhaps it is somewhat a Te thing, but we need to check her claims first. are they reasonable? are they internally consistent? (in this case, they do not seem to be, which throws us off.)

so that is not to say the ISFP has not made poor decisions or been negative herself, nor is it to say the ISTP is not a good person or has not done good things, but reviewing the ISTP's claims is simply a first step in a rebalancing to bring things back into harmony and equality where both parties are responsible for their contributions to the issue.

^ I agree with this assessment. I don't naturally sympathise with people who are (or I perceive to be) on the attack - I need to be persuaded that they have a good reason to be. I've seen too many people being hated on just for the fun of it and it has created an instinct in me to defend them. This probably does make me biased toward the ISFP's side (but this is nothing to do with type) - that and how nonsensical I found the ISTP. However, I did try to consider both sides and perhaps sound more biased than I really am.

That said, you have a point Orangey. I was in a similar situation to your example myself: in primary school I once pushed a boy off a chair because he was bullying me so relentlessly (for weeks and months on end, might I add) and got a detention for it. But it is slightly different for adults when they have the maturity and language skills to explain themselves.

 

[onemoretime]

Historically-I Lived with MIL and DIL after their son left me with a 1 week old baby. I lived there for four years during my undergrad. I worked the whole time and never accepted money. Their kindness allowed me to finish my undergrad degree. I love them both very much. However MIL has always been a little Fe-ish and always sort of nagged me about little weird things raising my children. Understanding Fe has been a huge help in learning that her Fe nudges were signs of love.

This situation was different-because it was aimed at a potential innocent, not me. The harsh language used during Ti/Fe venting translates VERY badly to be honest. Exceptionally so. I know and hear you guys saying it is not meant to be condemnatory-but that IS how it translates. It is VERY valuable to hear your internal perspective and viewpoint here.

That's the key bit of information. She wasn't venting because she necessarily felt that way about the woman. She was venting, because knowing what her son did to you, and knowing the struggle you've faced as a result, she likely assumed that the other woman's behavior deeply offended you. She was trying to empathize with what she perceived to be your inevitable outrage at the situation. I mean, your child's father abandoned you, but you didn't just give up - you fought and struggled to provide your children with the best upbringing you could. She wasn't thinking that you would identify with the woman; she thought that you would identify with the plight of her children, given your role as mother. In her eyes, it doesn't matter what explanations she may have for her actions - once you've taken on the responsibility of having children, your own personal needs and desires are at a perpetual second in the hierarchy of priority.

 

[sculpting]

As far as the actual scenario: how much of your MIL's earlier life are you familiar with, O? Her reaction may seem incredibly harsh, but do you know what experience she is speaking from? You don't get that sort of thing from a happy background.

Second thing - perhaps there is an additional way to interpret the pain and outrage that you felt upon her words. Along with it being about her insensitivity, maybe you were mirroring her own anguish arising from a similar situation. The tricky thing is, you can't know for sure unless you ask, and when you ask, you have to be prepared for her to say no.

You never engage a person on an instantaneous basis. You're always interacting with a timeline, some apparent, some deeply hidden, and some repressed by that person. This is where the act of loving comes in: you harbor that indignation with patience, temper that harshness with kindness, assuage that outrage with humility, subdue the desire for an outburst with grace, and comfort the hurt you feel with unselfishness. The transcendent love referred to earlier? That's what the Greeks called agape. That could very well be what you're looking for.

This is really beautiful, omt. she was raised by an overmedicated enfp and an istp dad. She was a very rogue istp little girl.. I get what you are saying regarding history, but this resonates with me due to my Si. Would an ISTP carry the burden of history the same way an INTP might? I dunno, I really dont.

 

[onemoretime]

Historically-I Lived with MIL and DIL after their son left me with a 1 week old baby. I lived there for four years during my undergrad. I worked the whole time and never accepted money. Their kindness allowed me to finish my undergrad degree. I love them both very much. However MIL has always been a little Fe-ish and always sort of nagged me about little weird things raising my children. Understanding Fe has been a huge help in learning that her Fe nudges were signs of love.

This situation was different-because it was aimed at a potential innocent, not me. The harsh language used during Ti/Fe venting translates VERY badly to be honest. Exceptionally so. I know and hear you guys saying it is not meant to be condemnatory-but that IS how it translates. It is VERY valuable to hear your internal perspective and viewpoint here.

That's the key bit of information. She wasn't venting because she necessarily felt that way about the woman. She was venting, because knowing what her son did to you, and knowing the struggle you've faced as a result, she likely assumed that the other woman's behavior deeply offended you. She was trying to empathize with what she perceived to be your inevitable outrage at the situation. I mean, your child's father abandoned you, but you didn't just give up - you fought and struggled to provide your children with the best upbringing you could. She wasn't thinking that you would identify with the woman; she thought that you would identify with the plight of her children, given your role as mother. In her eyes, it doesn't matter what explanations she may have for her actions - once you've taken on the responsibility of having children, your own personal needs and desires are at a perpetual second in the hierarchy of priority.

 

[sculpting]

That's the key bit of information. She wasn't venting because she necessarily felt that way about the woman. She was venting, because knowing what her son did to you, and knowing the struggle you've faced as a result, she likely assumed that the other woman's behavior deeply offended you. She was trying to empathize with what she perceived to be your inevitable outrage at the situation. I mean, your child's father abandoned you, but you didn't just give up - you fought and struggled to provide your children with the best upbringing you could. She wasn't thinking that you would identify with the woman; she thought that you would identify with the plight of her children, given your role as mother. In her eyes, it doesn't matter what explanations she may have for her actions - once you've taken on the responsibility of having children, your own personal needs and desires are at a perpetual second in the hierarchy of priority.

dude. perhaps this is where i agree with the final answer-my children take priority over my needs-ALWAYS. However I measure that priority in terms of my Te responses-graduating school, financial security, maintaining a job I may not like. She uses Fe as an objective measuring stick-not realizing I cant understand it and even find it offensive, but feels I would share her opinion on the final answer. I actually do. The ISFP is a total Te fail at the moment and her and her husband need to get their shit together.

That was a really awesome insight time. (you have been renamed time as omt just sounds funny in my head.)

 

[onemoretime]

This is really beautiful, omt. she was raised by an overmedicated enfp and an istp dad. She was a very rogue istp little girl.. I get what you are saying regarding history, but this resonates with me due to my Si. Would an ISTP carry the burden of history the same way an INTP might? I dunno, I really dont.

Everyone carries their battle wounds with them - that's not about functions. That's simply part of being human. Everything we experience is seen through a filter that's established when we're very young. If anything, perhaps it's these unmet needs that spur function differentiation.

So if your grandmother-in-law had constantly been loopy and unresponsive from drugs while your mother-in-law was growing up, it can't be surprising that seeing a (most likely clinically depressed, and thus unresponsive) mother neglecting her children would aggravate a very old, very deep wound. This is where Fi works at its best - but you've got to develop it. You felt her anger and disgust viscerally, and of course, the first impulse is to recoil at the white-hot rage of a 50+ year old lesion of the soul, left to fester all that time. Out of fear, you shift to self-preservation mode. However, this will leave you unsatisfied.

That's when you must have confidence in your internal reactions, and face the implications unafraid. Fi is saying "holy crap, this is intense!" Inferior Si is screaming at you to stay back, you don't want to get hurt! Of course, that's not when you're at your best. That's when you have enough confidence in the determinations you're making through Fi to let Ne get to work. It'll never satisfy you to simply let the woman's emotions be; you wouldn't have started this huge thread otherwise. However, and for what reason, I can't know, you're doubting the strength that Fi gives you, the confidence that you'll be able to handle the worst shit that this planet can throw at you, because in the end, whatever doesn't kill you only makes you stronger.

You have to go into the breach. You have to ask her why she's so upset about all of this. You have to be prepared for her to shove back sharply. And you have to remain steadfast in your love for her. That's the source of your strength - knowing that there's nothing the other person can do to make you stop loving them. There isn't a force on the planet that can overcome that. No matter what, you've got to be there for her, because it's likely that she's never been able to talk to anyone about this, thinks that what she went through was normal, and that grieving for her lost childhood would be somehow disloyal to her parents. In the face of all these awful, grotesque and corrosive thoughts, you've got to stay there, showing her that no matter what she says, you'll still love her no matter what.

That's how you save the world, one person at a time.

 

[PeaceBaby]

^ I don't mean to offend, but your posts here seem very presumptuous onemoretime, unless you have information no one else here is privy too. What are you vibing on? Is this what you sense here?

This advice and this extrapolation just feels way off to me.

I will think about this further ...

 

[Fidelia]

I'd be interested in knowing why you react so strongly to that, PB (I mean that as an honest question). I don't know if either of you are right, but his guess didn't seem completely implausible to me. Where does your discomfort eminate from?

 

[PeaceBaby]

^ The posts feel wrong, but I have to think on it a bit to explain, if I can ... 'til the morning! Again, no offense intended to OMT.

 

[Orangey]

Actually, for once I agree with PeaceBaby. The post seems like a bunch of armchair psychoanalysis to me.

 

[A window to the soul]

That's the source of your strength - knowing that there's nothing the other person can do to make you stop loving them. There isn't a force on the planet that can overcome that. No matter what, you've got to be there for her, because it's likely that she's never been able to talk to anyone about this, thinks that what she went through was normal, and that grieving for her lost childhood would be somehow disloyal to her parents. In the face of all these awful, grotesque and corrosive thoughts, you've got to stay there, showing her that no matter what she says, you'll still love her no matter what.

That's how you save the world, one person at a time.

Wow, you're speaking my language, I like that! Right or wrong, that was absolutely beautiful and inspiring.

 

[Tallulah]

^ I don't mean to offend, but your posts here seem very presumptuous onemoretime, unless you have information no one else here is privy too. What are you vibing on? Is this what you sense here?

This advice and this extrapolation just feels way off to me.

I will think about this further ...

It doesn't feel right to me, either. It humanizes the ISTP, for sure, but it's all conjecture. People vent for a billion reasons, including hating to see disorder, feeling powerless/helpless, feeling frustrated and grasping at straws to make feel better, feeling like crap but wanting to momentarily feel superior, whatever. Not everything can be traced to a childhood wound. If feeling like that's where the ISTP is coming from helps Orobas to sympathize with her (the ISTP has become the underdog in this scenario!), then it's useful, I guess.

 

[onemoretime]

It doesn't feel right to me, either. It humanizes the ISTP, for sure, but it's all conjecture. People vent for a billion reasons, including hating to see disorder, feeling powerless/helpless, feeling frustrated and grasping at straws to make feel better, feeling like crap but wanting to momentarily feel superior, whatever. Not everything can be traced to a childhood wound. If feeling like that's where the ISTP is coming from helps Orobas to sympathize with her (the ISTP has become the underdog in this scenario!), then it's useful, I guess.

It's not the disapproval of the situation that suggests a childhood origin, but the level of vitriol within the reaction.

 

[Fidelia]

See, I didn't really feel the lady was being that vitriolic though. I mean for venting (which isn't meant to reflect truth with perfect accuracy), it just didn't seem to me that it was that horrific. I just read it as frustration.

 

[Athenian200]

Everyone carries their battle wounds with them - that's not about functions. That's simply part of being human. Everything we experience is seen through a filter that's established when we're very young. If anything, perhaps it's these unmet needs that spur function differentiation.

Okay, I'm with you so far...

So if your grandmother-in-law had constantly been loopy and unresponsive from drugs while your mother-in-law was growing up, it can't be surprising that seeing a (most likely clinically depressed, and thus unresponsive) mother neglecting her children would aggravate a very old, very deep wound. This is where Fi works at its best - but you've got to develop it. You felt her anger and disgust viscerally, and of course, the first impulse is to recoil at the white-hot rage of a 50+ year old lesion of the soul, left to fester all that time. Out of fear, you shift to self-preservation mode. However, this will leave you unsatisfied.

Wait, what?

What is leading you to this conclusion? You're an ENTP, the last time I checked. Why are you telling these people what they felt, and why?

That's when you must have confidence in your internal reactions, and face the implications unafraid. Fi is saying "holy crap, this is intense!" Inferior Si is screaming at you to stay back, you don't want to get hurt! Of course, that's not when you're at your best. That's when you have enough confidence in the determinations you're making through Fi to let Ne get to work. It'll never satisfy you to simply let the woman's emotions be; you wouldn't have started this huge thread otherwise. However, and for what reason, I can't know, you're doubting the strength that Fi gives you, the confidence that you'll be able to handle the worst shit that this planet can throw at you, because in the end, whatever doesn't kill you only makes you stronger.

Actually, she DID end up talking to the woman afterwards, and she apologized for venting. I think it's resolved... umm, seriously.

Also, I think you're expecting a whole lot from Fi that you really shouldn't... Fi can't just make you Superman in terms of confidence and courage. That's as silly as saying that Ni can make you psychic.

You have to go into the breach. You have to ask her why she's so upset about all of this. You have to be prepared for her to shove back sharply. And you have to remain steadfast in your love for her. That's the source of your strength - knowing that there's nothing the other person can do to make you stop loving them. There isn't a force on the planet that can overcome that. No matter what, you've got to be there for her, because it's likely that she's never been able to talk to anyone about this, thinks that what she went through was normal, and that grieving for her lost childhood would be somehow disloyal to her parents. In the face of all these awful, grotesque and corrosive thoughts, you've got to stay there, showing her that no matter what she says, you'll still love her no matter what.

That's how you save the world, one person at a time.

O... kay. You're getting a little off the wall here... umm, calm down! You're not the one in the situation. *pours bucket of ice water on OMT*

For one thing, you don't know how close these people are, or how close they want to be. For another, why do you assume she wants to save the world and try to take on such a huge task like you're asking? Maybe she just wants to let it go, accept that some people have different values and experiences, and move on?

I mean, I can appreciate how much you value all this "tough love" stuff, and want to believe in the power of love and sticking by people, and all that stuff... but there's a place for pragmatism in these situations. Seriously. You're being WAY too idealistic, passionate, and making too many assumptions here.

 

[onemoretime]

See, I didn't really feel the lady was being that vitriolic though. I mean for venting (which isn't meant to reflect truth with perfect accuracy), it just didn't seem to me that it was that horrific. I just read it as frustration.

I'm trusting O's judgment as to how the conversation went. From words alone, I'm missing a good 60% of conversation, the part that came from body language. If O was reacting the way she was, I prefer not to dismiss her read on the situation as her being oversensitive.

The statement was also filled with universals in a way that doesn't suggest solely situational frustration.

 

[onemoretime]

Okay, I'm with you so far...


Wait, what?

What is leading you to this conclusion? You're an ENTP, the last time I checked. Why are you telling these people what they felt, and why?

"If" is the key word here. What does it matter what my supposed type is in this circumstance?

Actually, she DID end up talking to the woman afterwards, and she apologized for venting. I think it's resolved... umm, seriously.

Also, I think you're expecting a whole lot from Fi that you really shouldn't... Fi can't just make you Superman in terms of confidence and courage. That's as silly as saying that Ni can make you psychic.

If everything were OK, then she wouldn't still be talking about it. I'm expecting nothing from a function - I'm expecting a lot from a person.

O... kay. You're getting a little off the wall here... umm, calm down! You're not the one in the situation. *pours bucket of ice water on OMT*

For one thing, you don't know how close these people are, or how close they want to be. For another, why do you assume she wants to save the world and try to take on such a huge task like you're asking? Maybe she just wants to let it go, accept that some people have different values and experiences, and move on?

I mean, I can appreciate how much you value all this "tough love" stuff, and want to believe in the power of love and sticking by people, and all that stuff... but there's a place for pragmatism in these situations. Seriously. You're being WAY too idealistic, passionate, and making too many assumptions here.

O and I have had long conversations in the past. I don't know her perfectly, but I have a decent read on the way she sees things.

Finally, and this is critical - what I'm saying isn't nearly as important as how I'm saying it. I'm talking to her in a way that I think she can understand me best.

 

[Athenian200]

"If" is the key word here. What does it matter what my supposed type is in this circumstance?

Well, it just seems to me that unless you're an xNFP like Orobas, or an ISTP like the woman she's talking about... you wouldn't know what they were feeling well enough to make assumptions like that.

If everything were OK, then she wouldn't still be talking about it. I'm expecting nothing from a function - I'm expecting a lot from a person.

Okay, fair enough. I just assumed we were still talking about it because other people still had questions. But since you know O, I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt here.

O and I have had long conversations in the past. I don't know her perfectly, but I have a decent read on the way she sees things.

Finally, and this is critical - what I'm saying isn't nearly as important as how I'm saying it. I'm talking to her in a way that I think she can understand me best.

Aha!

Now I get it... you're trying to use NFP language in a way that communicates the importance of your own worldview. That's why I was so confused. Looking at it that way, I think I can make sense of what you're saying. Especially given the fact that you've had long conversations with the OP in the past, so your assumptions might hold some weight.

 

[uumlau]

See, I didn't really feel the lady was being that vitriolic though. I mean for venting (which isn't meant to reflect truth with perfect accuracy), it just didn't seem to me that it was that horrific. I just read it as frustration.

That's what makes this pattern fascinating.

Aside from the possibility that people are engaging in confirmation bias -- that is, reading the title of the thread about Fe/Fi, and choosing sides in that manner -- I don't see any alternative explanation than a cognitive one. Actually I don't think it's "Fe/Fi", but Ti/Fi. The Ti and Fe peeps are reading what the ISTP is saying, and getting it in a way the Fi folks don't, in TEXT format, without any personal cues than word choice. By and large, the Ti respondents do not get the OP's Fi reaction at all, while the Fe respondents are split, some seeing both sides and others only seeing the Ti side. There is an inherent sympathy for the ISTP that is expressed in both Ti and Fe responses, combined with an inherent skepticism or reserved judgment toward the Fi version of events.

And the Fi responses are equal and opposite to the Ti responses: they get the OP's perspective, and are baffled or offended by the ISTP's behavior. I'm the only Te person in this thread, and I'm not your typical INTJ, so we don't have a set of data for the Te reaction, but I suspect it would mirror the Fe reaction: not so quick to judge the ISTP's behavior, but completely understanding the Fi perspective on the matter.

The question for me is not which version is right, ISTP or OP, but why do we have a clear dividing line on who naturally identifies with each side. My usual approach is along the lines of finding a perspective that recognizes both ISTP and OP versions as valid and "true," granting the benefit of the doubt to both. Such a truth is usually not "somewhere between" as is often suggested, but rather very different from either personal version. This is the story of the blind men and the elephant all over again: no one sees the elephant, but the elephant is the core truth that is interpreted in so many ways.

The cognitive functions are the blind men, each seeing a piece of the elephantine truth, but collapsing it into something unrecognizable as an elephant.

I wonder if there's a way for anyone to step back and see the elephant? Or move around and feel the elephant?