You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.
The shamelessly random nature of it all is the hard work aspect of course. After all we have to hope there can be at least some effort to change....otherwise why would anyone make the effort?
Totally agree with [MENTION=5109]Glycerine[/MENTION] and you as well. That effort to change is a great variant to add.
As a side note, I'd like to add that I don't have a clue which I am, or what any of you are unless you have INFP under your name. And, that's only because I figured that out by the posts. All I'm going by is pure "people", and I'm fine with it. The more I hear about functions, the less I want to delve into it. I think I'll save it for when I fall for someone and want to absorb all the knowledge I can about them.
All I'm going by is pure "people", and I'm fine with it. The more I hear about functions, the less I want to delve into it. I think I'll save it for when I fall for someone and want to absorb all the knowledge I can about them.
Yeah, seems like people don't like being called either selfishly manipulative or sheeple and controlling by people who have never met them and who are (worse in my opinion) basing that opinion on shaky information and doing it in such a way that it's matter-of-fact and indefensible.
As a side note, I'd like to add that I don't have a clue which I am, or what any of you are unless you have INFP under your name. And, that's only because I figured that out by the posts. All I'm going by is pure "people", and I'm fine with it. The more I hear about functions, the less I want to delve into it. I think I'll save it for when I fall for someone and want to absorb all the knowledge I can about them.
Awesome. It's a good idea not to delve too much into functions because there is a lot of forced and arbitrary delineations in order to categorize and define what each function is and then it can be hard not to think of people in terms of types and functions so there are a lot of assumptions being made that may or may not be true. It's so hard not to resist.... it's a freaking drug...
Awesome. It's a good idea not to delve too much into functions because there is a lot of forced and arbitrary delineations in order to categorize and define what each function is and then it can be hard not to think of people in terms of types and functions so there are a lot of assumptions being made that may or may not be true. It's so hard not to resist.... it's a freaking drug...
I can so seriously see how that's possible. That could possibly be dangerous for me if I let it go too far. In a way, I've done it with just MBTI! I can't help but try to guess types. Luckily, I've escaped the tendency to try to predict if I'll hate/like them based on it. Mostly, it's an after thought. "Oh, that's why I got along so well with/wanted to throw off a cliff so-and-so."
Awesome. It's a good idea not to delve too much into functions because there is a lot of forced and arbitrary delineations in order to categorize and define what each function is and then it can be hard not to think of people in terms of types and functions so there are there are a lot of assumptions being made that may or may not be true. It's so hard not to resist.... it's a freaking drug...
So, yeah, I guess I did miss the point. So, if someone sincerely wants to learn and understand, without turning people into stereotypes, then one is just sh*t out of luck because of all the personal bias, devil's advocacy, butt hurt, and semantics twisting that inevitably goes on? Even by Jung? No one is immune?
You're right that there is nothing inherently wrong with the cognitive functions. I was just saying that when one gets too much into functions, it can be difficult not to think in terms of "so-so did this because their Fi clashed with my Fe", "I am this way because I am in the inferior grip or dom/tertiary loop", or "I don't get along with person because he's XXXX", or something to that effect even if it might something completely unrelated.
In my opinion, it can be a bit limiting if you read too much into it.
Analogically speaking, I get frustrated with Te because from my perspective its user's are aggressive, oppressive, and don't even listen to what I have to say as a Ti.
The difference I see in Fe vs Fi and Te vs Ti is that T is supposed to be an objective, purely logical domain, whereas F is a subjective, not-purely-logical domain (rather, it's values-based). As such, the Te vs Ti problem is really annoying, because the two should be able hash things out objectively/logically (and, well, probably often can, I think), but often subjective factors get in the way (Ti's inherent subjectivity, that messes with its counterposing desire to be objective; Te's shadow Fi, which can seep in, and cause the TJ to actually be less objective than they think they are being).
Considering the enormous number of INFP's on this website my first conjecture would be that the amount of Fe hate is based on the number of FP's on the site who have an issue with being "put into a box."
And hell, even a good number of the TPs are bothered by it (often due to rejection/suppression of the inferior).
For whatever reason, Fe seems to get more hate than any other function, and it's not just from FPs.
I think it has something to do with it making subjective value judgments that it (falsely) considers to be objective.
That act of judging has implications for those being judged, and that mistaking what is actually subjective (and normative) for being objective seems to be rather inherently irksome (Fe, as seen in what I wrote above about Te and Ti, is not the only function to make this objective/subjective mistake, but I think it's this conflation combined with the judging of others based on that conflation that causes Fe to be so widely held in contempt).
Likewise, from my perspective (an Fe user) I have little sympathy for Fi dominants because, Fe users can feel whatever they want to feel, but usually have the common courtesy to keep it to themselves. From our perspective, we're allowed to feel whatever we want to. That's our right.
First off, have you considered the possibility that Fe users aren't really keeping these feelings/judgments to themselves? They might not be actively voicing them (at least the moment), but they very well may be exhuding them (not to mention talking about them later, behind the person's back). That's not exactly "keeping the feelings/judgments to themself". Quite the opposite, really.
Have you considered the possibility that these judgments are shallow and false, and that judging in such a way is inherently problematic?
That perhaps by engaging in less shallow and false judging, Fe users would trigger less negative responses from Fi users.
Honest question. I think your explanation was reasonable. But I'm trying to find where both parties can improve.
...thus ruining the fun atmosphere. I'd rather be listening to the music and dissolving my soul into dreamland euphoria instead of listening to how someone is pissed at someone else. Put aside your differences for a few minutes and have some fun for a change. In a sense, it almost feels as if the party is all about the Fi person and no longer about the party itself. Completely self centered and uncaring of anyone else's feelings. Its abrasive.
All around me there are people who feel negative things about me, and I can sense these things. However, I appreciate that they don't act on these judgements and keep it to themselves. If it become a problems I'll usually do what I can do fix the situation.
Fe dominants are usually trying to do whatever they can to maintain a peaceful atmosphere and keep things friendly. This however, can backfire when the Fe users are too chicken to approach the other person and settle any beef.
As a Ti dom, I'm the unfortunate hybrid of confrontational and harmony seeking in this situation, where I ask questions and try to settle our differences in a direct and curt fashion and get to the root of the problem. I also know plenty of Ti doms who have absolutely no concern for group harmony and make complete asses of themselves in public, (ie: me in high school).
You're right that there is nothing inherently wrong with the cognitive functions. I was just saying that when one gets too much into functions, it can be difficult not to think in terms of "so-so did this because their Fi clashed with my Fe", "I am this way because I am in the inferior grip or dom/tertiary loop", or "I don't get along with person because he's XXXX", or something to that effect even if it might something completely unrelated.
In my opinion, it can be a bit limiting if you read too much into it.
Like genocide for example, there's always a time and a place and at some point an appropriate configuration of necessity and context will arise to support it.
Te Fi is funny. The Te uses only objective facts over subjective logic (Ti). Either what they're saying is true or false, or slightly mistaken. But the point is, the only way to argue against objective facts is to say "That never happened." This in turn makes the Te user think they're being accused of lying. This in turn becomes a giant penis contest of whoever has the bigger ego. So "Intillectual" conversations are often just attempts at emotional domination and not an actual logical debate in the way Ti users argue with one another. To me, it appears unproductive, tyrannical and even childish.
The difference I see in Fe vs Fi and Te vs Ti is that T is supposed to be an objective, purely logical domain, whereas F is a subjective, not-purely-logical domain (rather, it's values-based). As such, the Te vs Ti problem is really annoying, because the two should be able hash things out objectively/logically (and, well, probably often can, I think), but often subjective factors get in the way (Ti's inherent subjectivity, that messes with its counterposing desire to be objective; Te's shadow Fi, which can seep in, and cause the TJ to actually be less objective than they think they are being).
What you are describing are Fi vs Te. Fi is the only feeling function that can be debated. Fe can not.
Ti can be debated as well. Te can not.
The TJs often can't stand it, either.
I am one who is definitely often rankled by Fe.
And hell, even a good number of the TPs are bothered by it (often due to rejection/suppression of the inferior).
For whatever reason, Fe seems to get more hate than any other function, and it's not just from FPs.
I think it has something to do with it making subjective value judgments that it (falsely) considers to be objective.
That act of judging has implications for those being judged, and that mistaking what is actually subjective (and normative) for being objective seems to be rather inherently irksome (Fe, as seen in what I wrote above about Te and Ti, is not the only function to make this objective/subjective mistake, but I think it's this conflation combined with the judging of others based on that conflation that causes Fe to be so widely held in contempt).
I think what I should have said was, Fi users go out of their way to make it apparent that they disagree. As in, person A and B are having a racist conversation, Fi person C hears it and feels a compulsion to step into a conversation that is ultimately none of their business, whether its insulting or not.
If the value judgment they pick up on is false, shallow, and arbitrary/group-normative-based, why shouldn't they be offended?
Because the people making these judgements don't have any relevance or association with the Fi user in the first place. Its invasive.
A couple questions:
First off, have you considered the possibility that Fe users aren't really keeping these feelings/judgments to themselves? They might not be actively voicing them (at least the moment), but they very well may be exhuding them (not to mention talking about them later, behind the person's back). That's not exactly "keeping the feelings/judgments to themself". Quite the opposite, really.
See, they're not verbally stating them. Its still an assumption on your end as you try to judge the internal value judgements of these people. One key difference between Fe and Fi is that Fe can be reworded as objective emotion, while Fi can be reworded as subjective emotion. Fi doms often times don't require verbal affirmations of affection in relationships because... they just assume it on their own.
Fe users on the other hand often times need verbal affirmations because they don't assume anything until it is verbally stated, which is why TP's are so straight forward and businesslike (and awkward) when it comes to dating.
"Hey, I like you. Do you like me?"
Have you considered the possibility that these judgments are shallow and false, and that judging in such a way is inherently problematic?
I would need an example of a shallow and false Fe judgement. I know I'll categorize people like, "he's a gymnast" or "he's a military guy" just because these generalizations assist in overall communication with the person. As an Fe user I tend to talk to a LOT of people on a shallow level vs one or two in depth, because I find that more stimulating. (Its also why I can count the number of connections I've felt with people in my life on two hands.)
Te Fi is funny. The Te uses only objective facts over subjective logic (Ti). Either what they're saying is true or false, or slightly mistaken. But the point is, the only way to argue against objective facts is to say "That never happened." This in turn makes the Te user think they're being accused of lying. This in turn becomes a giant penis contest of whoever has the bigger ego. So "Intillectual" conversations are often just attempts at emotional domination and not an actual logical debate in the way Ti users argue with one another. To me, it appears unproductive, tyrannical and even childish.
How does "Te uses only objective facts" somehow become "giant penis contest of whoever has the bigger ego"?
No offense, but I really doubt this interpretation arises only because of the actions of the Te user.
What is it about the Ti user that causes them to interpret the situation as a "giant penis contest of whoever has the bigger ego" and/or participate in such a way that the situation turns into what they interpret as a "giant penis contest of whoever has the bigger ego"?
It just seems like a big jump from "only uses objective facts" to "only cares about ego aggrandizement".
On a related note: you didn't answer why it is you think Te users might (re)act in such a way (i.e., a way you interpret as aggressive, oppressive, etc.)...
I think what I should have said was, Fi users go out of their way to make it apparent that they disagree. As in, person A and B are having a racist conversation, Fi person C hears it and feels a compulsion to step into a conversation that is ultimately none of their business, whether its insulting or not.
Wait a second, where's [MENTION=6164]Riva[/MENTION] ?
I love, Riva, how you just start a Fe/Fi thread knowinbg full well it will balloon quickly & have plenty of contention in it, and then just sort of walk away, probably laughing your ass off at the mess it will make. Things must have been getting still around here, or that INFJ/INFP thread has been too peaceful.
You're soooo Ne! You're my hero for the next 23 minutes, Riva.
The arguments turn into a penis contest because, objective data cannot be argued. Only the person's reputation for storing objective data and whether or not he is a credible source of objective data.
You shouldn't get upset when someone calls you "wierd." Yeah, its incredibly shallow. And we ourselves don't take something like that very seriously either. I wonder if you're expecting the statement to be much more thought out than it actually is or something.
You shouldn't get upset when someone calls you "wierd." Yeah, its incredibly shallow. And we ourselves don't take something like that very seriously either. I wonder if you're expecting the statement to be much more thought out than it actually is or something.
)*
