[Fe] How can I use Fe instead of Fi?

[Cellmold]

You're idealising this, which means it's going to be somewhat inaccurate.

If you want to appear (which is what this reads like) kinder and more responsive then you can take steps to pay attention to others, deliberately force yourself to listen, if you weren't already, and express. I don't believe there is a precise guide to this unless someone were to make the effort to break down all the possible variations on social context. But the thing is, if your natural reaction is not to demonstrate an expression... then don't.

That's just a level of forced interaction that will only be all the more obvious to those who feel like they do it without thinking. I mean you can develop a habit, but it won't be the same.

But like you said "accept myself blah blah blah". In any case it's about reading body language and tone as well as content. I don't think Fe means you will be good at this, it's all learned, it's just that the focus is on giving a certain response by context, but making that effort sometimes comes at the cost of making more penetrative insights. It's also tied up with the mutual selfishness of wanting a standing within a group or maybe approval, while at the same time (allegedly) governing the mood you think is most beneficial to those around you.

None of this is usually a conscious choice though, it's understood in retrospect and can be broken down, but in the moments of interaction it's large bodies of information that people are feeding you and there is a lot of mental energy invested in quickly deciphering this information, all for the appearance of being warm and kind.

What is being done in the outcome of the process is actually really simple, but the breakdown of how it works isn't. This probably isn't that helpful, maybe you could do with some kind of guide, though I think that would be unnecessary.

Practice and make effort I suppose.

PS: Don't confuse sympathy for empathy. Empathy is possibly more important and requires imagination, sympathy is commonplace and only requires a set reaction.

 

[Entp/infjGal]

[MENTION=25377]SearchingforPeace[/MENTION]
What you've written is absolutely beautiful. I can actually feel the love off of you

Do you have examples of when you've met someone with contrary beliefs and found common ground instead? I find it hard to put that in action without knowing how it actually plays out. It seems that I might come off the wrong way and that the other person will think I'm either changing the topic, being too hesitant to agree with them, or perhaps secretly judging them when I actually don't mean any of the above.

How do you talk to everyone so comfortably? I'm socially awkward so it's a bit hard for me to strike up a conversation that lasts longer than 3 seconds.

Another thing, do you find you often express your emotions? Since Fe extroverts feeling and all. Also, when I was doing the socionics test, it said "I often say things to get an emotional reaction out of people". I'm assuming that was for Fe. How do you do that specifically? Any examples?

I an unsure of my type but sure that I do use Fe and Ti, so take my thoughts for what they're worth and no more

I have NEVER had trouble liking or at least "NOT disliking" people whose views are diametrically opposed to mine. I have always been puzzled by people who express what seems like genuine dislike or disgust at other people for reasons that make little sense to me, such as the person having a "wrong" value system, or wrong thoughts/views, or some aspect or quirk of their personality or physical being or their status or social misteps, things that have nothing really to do with whether this person is a good person or a bad person. I genuinely dislike people once I'm convinced they have ill-will, are malicious, and for almost no other reason.

The process [MENTION=25377]SearchingforPeace[/MENTION] described above resonates to my core. It is seeing the good in others, easily, naturally, even if there are other things that might be off-putting. And thinking those loving thoughts or having that loving predisposition seems to communicate itself to other people somehow.

 

[Entp/infjGal]

I fully agree that NFs can end up doing the same thing but different ways.

NFPs look inside themselves to relate to others. NFJs don't. I don't look inside myself to connect to anyone.

My ENFP friend and I have discussed this in depth. She feels connected to most people in general, but struggles to feel comfortable with strangers. And she disconnects from those with evil natures. She just can't NeFi it to force herself to do so.

For me, because I don't need to look inside, that doesn't happen to me...... I can interact with those with pretty dark hearts and still feel their common humanity.....

Dear Lord...This is confusing??? Because this describes me! I can't genuinely connect with people I am convinced are evil-hearted. By this I mean people who will evil for others. I don't mean in a day-to-day sense, but people who are malignant narcissists, they genuinely feel happiness if they can hurt someone. I am not sure it's hate I feel, but there is genuine dislike. If I am forced to be around them due to work, I can act like we are OK but my heart is disconnected. I see them as bad people, I can't help it.

But I have to say that for me, it takes A LOT to make this conclusion. I have to see something truly, truly awful or a consistent display of ill motives towards others.

I had an office mate whom I seriously disliked not because he did anything to me (at first, anyway) but because he was constantly talking badly about our other co-workers for reasons I could not fathom. They had done nothing to him. He was just jealous, caught up in this constant comparative game in which he was always trying to win. Once, he told me a story about a co-worker whose baby had died at one month old some years back...a secret. When he told me, I was horrified and felt deeply sorry for her, clutched my chest and started talking of how awful it must have been for her....He seemed ANNOYED! Then he started to tell me how he and his boyfriend are in a good stable relationship unlike this 38 year old who can't hold it together. Mind you, she was supposed to be his friend!!! Literally everything was for him an opportunity to make himself better than others by negative comparison. I came to the conclusion that he had no other way to see or relate to anything except through this sick comparative game. He'd look sad if someone in the office shone or annoyed if you praised someone else, immediately contradict you and start to give you other totally unrelated reasons why this person isnt all that great afterall. I actually believe he sabotaged me on a certain venture going behind my back to our boss to make sure it wouldnt happen just because it threatened him.

By the end of it all, to say I did not seriously dislike that kid would be a massive understatement. I see him as evil. Dangerous, in other words. Someone who doesn't play fair.

EDIT: Though I think I have to say that this doesn't mean I wouldn't still feel compelled to help him if he was in some trouble...which is weird. Do I like or dislike him? I dislike him in the sense I think he's evil but am not blind to the fact that he is still human. It would bother me if he was in genuine pain.

 

[Eilonwy]

Can you spot the Fe use? We're the ones talking about ourselves and how exceptionally nice we really are.

But being nice to people who are "evil" or "unlikeable" is a behavior/action that just about any human being can display. What gives away the thinking behind the action is the external value judgment and the implication that the group will agree with that value judgment.

Also, in reality, Fe does not display the high amount of niceness that it believes it does. Again, the thinking highlights a blind spot for Fe. Sometimes the niceness is only from that Fe perspective--a cruel to be kind sort of thing. But because we do actually deeply believe that we are being kind, we will provide reasonable explanations to back up that belief.

Understanding the Fe thought process might be interesting but I think you might have a better chance of success by looking at your inferior Te, seeing how you use it in external judgment expression, and moving forward from there to develop your outward expression.

 

[anticlimatic]

Noooo.... because exploring different contexts and seeing what is beneath the surface is more of a Ne thing (iNtuition in general).
Fi doesnt require Te to reason....it is rational in itself. Feeling IS rational reasoning. The impersonal logic of Thinking doesn't determine value. Te might help you figure out practical steps to reach a goal in line with a value. It may be a part of using factual information to back it up. But Fi is very much about forming lines of reasoning to explain/support/create a value judgment or concept.

I think you have your functions all muddled up, which is understandable because none of them really function in a vacuum separate from one another. Fi is rational but it's based on feeling value judgements, rather than Ti value judgements which are based more on mathematical logic and ratios. But since Fi cannot work independent of Te, it's going to (ideally) be checking its feeling based value judgements against empirical reality. Sensing and intuition are just the paths thoughts and feelings happen to take, absent reason. Ne is forward moving towards externalization, often taking the form of constructive and impulsive creativity.

 

[fetus]

Feelings are thoughts for Feeling types. We experience it as rational reasoning (Feeling is a rational function that reasons to determine value), not merely as emotion (which is more data that is considered as relevant).

This is a brilliant explanation. So true, especially for me as an F-dom.

 

[OrangeAppled]

I think you have your functions all muddled up, which is understandable because none of them really function in a vacuum separate from one another. Fi is rational but it's based on feeling value judgements, rather than Ti value judgements which are based more on mathematical logic and ratios. But since Fi cannot work independent of Te, it's going to (ideally) be checking its feeling based value judgements against empirical reality. Sensing and intuition are just the paths thoughts and feelings happen to take, absent reason. Ne is forward moving towards externalization, often taking the form of constructive and impulsive creativity.

No Fi CREATES value concepts. The experience of the inner world is ordered so as to "make sense" of it, to form concepts of what is significant to the human experience.

Sure, functions dont exist in a vacuum, but functions are ego types anyway; there is no real, single thought process that equals a function. This is a matter of mindset.

Ti is not a mindset focused on creating value concepts, and so that is generally a blindspot for them. Emotions are not given shape or order or even context. Jung says Thinking tells us what something IS - it is a technical classification, not classifying worth, especially in terms of the human experience. Feeling tells us what something is worth and emotion is merely a signal to consider. Both are rational and use reasoning to reach their conclusion, which for Feeling is "what meaning does this have for the human experience?".

I think you should read Jung, because a type's inferior function is largely unconcious, a rejected mentality.
Of course no function is in a vacuum, but the inferior function is opposed to the dominant. It is not a complement. That is the auxiliary. All introverts need to "check" their internal models against reality, but in the MBTI system, this would typically be done via extroverted perception with Ji types, in an exploratory manner. With Ne, there is seeing hidden potential for ideals to manifest and exploring it to cultivate it. For INFPs, "evidence" is experiential, and they explore the outer world via Ne. Te is more of a linear, step by step process which has a clear cut goal, a goal which may or may not have value. Since values are usually pretty conceptual and can rarely be boiled down to a singular goal, a far more complementary process is Pe, or Ne for INFPs, because they need to explore to see how a value manifests in reality.

Ideally, with age, the inferior can be integrated, and INFPs may get better with things like task and time management and following steps to concrete goals, but Fi types are not incapable of reasoning until that time, because their ego is already a rational one - someone who requires reason.

Edit: this might clarify it.....does a "fact" tell you if something is personally fulfilling? Not really.... The blindspot is figuring out how to take steps to manifest a value, not validating a value, but before you can even decide what to work towards, you have to explore what a value may even look like in reality. In contrast, the blindspot for Te types is figuring out if their logical plans and acheivement of particular goals is even worth something to them personally.

 

[anticlimatic]

[MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION] I've heard it said that the dominant and inferior functions get the most use, one consciously and one unconsciously, and that's always made a lot of sense to me. Since the inferior cannot be deactivated or controlled it's going to get plenty of action. Likely just as much as the favorite dominant function, which forces them into an interesting working relationship. I've always put more focus on how the judging functions work together than how the Dom/aux tert/inferior work together.

I don't think you have a very good handle on Ti, which would be comparable to Fi for me as last place in my functional abilities stack (the inverse of the inferior). Ti is about value judgements the same as Fi, it just incorporates different objects that the value can be relative to, for worth and value are inherently relative terms. Fi is easy in that value is always measured relative to the individual. Ti measures value against any subjective objects it can formulate, in a logical order. Fe works with it to provide an objective context for the subjective objects to reorder their relative values. What something "is" creates value relative to what another something "is" once context is provided for the two objects. Fi works blindly without multiple contexts because the context is always the same: "what is its value to ME." It doesn't ask "what does this person want?" It asks "what would I want if I was this person?"

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

Now moving on, How do I develop Fe? You Fe users often have such kind voices and facial expressions. Also, you guys apparently recognize other people's emotions without relating it back to your own. There was also something else about focusing on external values instead of internal ones. Personally, I'm too monotone and find it hard to express any feeling on my face. I'd also like to be able to make the people around me feel at ease and be able to recognize the mood or atmosphere of the group. Preferably, it'd be nice to have examples that show it in action. In the examples, if you can compare it to how Fi would respond, it'd be all the more helpful. So to end with, how can I, a Fi-dom, use Fe instead?

Are you asking about ways to interact better socially? It's a little ironic for me to answer because I deal with being an extreme introvert myself, and I don't have a clear sense or identification with Fi or Fe, except that I understand the basic obvious differences between them.

My impression of the world is that people often desire to be heard. When I do interact with people, I try to smile at them and listen to them. Most people will do most of the talking when interacting, and smiling is a simple thing that has that broad Fe-based acceptance. I find people will even talk about themselves easily if you can ask awkward questions. By listening to others you learn a wide range of feelings, thoughts, and behaviors of others. It broadens the perspective regardless of functional preferences. I think you could even come up with a list of general questions that work in most cases. Very extroverted people will talk even without the questions as long as you remain standing near by and make some eye contact.

I'm not certain that the kind voice and facial expression is an indicator of Fe. I think even extreme Fi-doms can have expressive faces and voices.\

Edit: Also, some people initially feel defensive, so giving some compliments when it is true, and communicating non-judgment when that is also true, can go a long way for interacting with people.

 

[OrangeAppled]

[MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION] I've heard it said that the dominant and inferior functions get the most use, one consciously and one unconsciously, and that's always made a lot of sense to me. Since the inferior cannot be deactivated or controlled it's going to get plenty of action. Likely just as much as the favorite dominant function, which forces them into an interesting working relationship. I've always put more focus on how the judging functions work together than how the Dom/aux tert/inferior work together.

This is about EGO. The inferior is not USED like a tool. It "gets action" as far as seeping out in rather infantile ways, yes. It is a part of the personality, yes, but it is often distorted. The person has rejected it from their consciousness. This makes it an antagonistic, opposing force in the psychology, not some little helpful aid.

I don't think you have a very good handle on Ti, which would be comparable to Fi for me as last place in my functional abilities stack (the inverse of the inferior). Ti is about value judgements the same as Fi, it just incorporates different objects that the value can be relative to, for worth and value are inherently relative terms. Fi is easy in that value is always measured relative to the individual. Ti measures value against any subjective objects it can formulate, in a logical order. Fe works with it to provide an objective context for the subjective objects to reorder their relative values. What something "is" creates value relative to what another something "is" once context is provided for the two objects. Fi works blindly without multiple contexts because the context is always the same: "what is its value to ME." It doesn't ask "what does this person want?" It asks "what would I want if I was this person?"

But you have a good handle on Fi?
Again, type is about MINDSET. Can a Ti type determine value? Of course, because there is no one actual process that is Ti or Fi or whatever. But their lens for reality is not focused on personal value. It is not the priority of the ego. Often, for T types, value becomes about pragmatic use, not personal fulfillment. Similarly, Fi can determine how things work logically if it suits their purposes. This is not "Te", because that is not a tool, but a whole attitude. The person is still very much in Fi mode, but that does not exclude many real time thought processes (which don't perfectly line up with any one function).

You are basically making Fi sound like handicapped Ti or Fe, which makes this conversation pointless, IMO, because there is too much bias on your end. Your statements contradict actual sources for this theory. If that is your personal take, fine, but it doesn't jive with anything "objective".

Fi is seeking pure, timeless concepts of value, hence a resistance to affect from the object, whereas Fe is about the current external context, hence its close associations with culture and social groups and susceptibility to affect from the object. To apply its value concepts, Fi seeks multiple contexts, which is where Ne comes into play (as a broadening of the mentality - not a skill or tool). The value concepts of Fi are not ONLY about the individual self - they are about fundamental human nature, separated from the influences of the current social atmosphere.

I am getting the impression this is going over your head or in one ear & out the others, so I am done going 'round and 'round on this. It doesn't seem that relevant to the OP either.

 

[anticlimatic]

This is about EGO. The inferior is not USED like a tool. It "gets action" as far as seeping out in rather infantile ways, yes. It is a part of the personality, yes, but it is often distorted. The person has rejected it from their consciousness. This makes it an antagonistic, opposing force in the psychology, not some little helpful aid.

You are basically making Fi sound like handicapped Ti or Fe, which makes this conversation pointless, IMO, because there is too much bias on your end. Your statements contradict actual sources for this theory. If that is your personal take, fine, but it doesn't jive with anything "objective".

I am getting the impression this is going over your head or in one ear & out the others, so I am done going 'round and 'round on this. It doesn't seem that relevant to the OP either.

It's relevant to the OP because the OP is trying to convert Fi to Ti, and through our discussion she or he now has the means: reorientation from judging things according to how the self values them to judging their worth or value relative to one another instead.

Everything you've said has sunk in just fine. Relative to other Fi users I can judge the worth of your words. Unfortunately your dominant Fi blocks you from reciprocating, since your mono-context value judgements don't understand the relative and flexible nature of right and wrong, since you're stuck in just the one reference point (self).

This is why it's very hard to maintain any discussion with heavy Fi users when differing opinions come into play. They attempt to bully their opinion into a state of unquestionable righteousness then flee the conversation if that fails. It's one of the main reasons I do, in fact, consider Fi a kind of broken form of Ti.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

It's relevant to the OP because the OP is trying to convert Fi to Ti, and through our discussion she or he now has the means: reorientation from judging things according to how the self values them to judging their worth or value relative to one another instead.

Everything you've said has sunk in just fine. Relative to other Fi users I can judge the worth of your words. Unfortunately your dominant Fi blocks you from reciprocating, since your mono-context value judgements don't understand the relative and flexible nature of right and wrong, since you're stuck in just the one reference point (self).

This is why it's very hard to maintain any discussion with heavy Fi users when differing opinions come into play. They attempt to bully their opinion into a state of unquestionable righteousness then flee the conversation if that fails. It's one of the main reasons I do, in fact, consider Fi a kind of broken form of Ti.

I know this dialog is between you and someone else, but I have to notice the INTP urge to push the big red button. Ti-doms are skilled at getting reactions out of others while remaining "calm" themselves - or at least attempting to do this often.

It's fine for you to think Fi is a broken form of Ti, but if you are reasoning within Jung's system, your statement is not logical. That isn't how it is framed in that system of thought. I would say that Ti is far more subjective in nature than most Ti-doms are capable of seeing because their personal identity tends to be based on being objective, and so it is difficult to admit those instances of subjective thought. It costs Ti a higher price than Fi to admit personal bias, even when its perspective is equally invested in Self. I would venture to say that the broken form of Ti is exactly that projection onto Fi of its own inclination towards subjectivity when it's basis and system requires pure rational thought for it to function. The subjective side of Ti is the broken form of Ti. Fi is something different because it processes the subjective realm with the tools that are effective in subjective systems. Process Fi information with pure logic and you get your broken function.

 

[anticlimatic]

I know this dialog is between you and someone else, but I have to notice the INTP urge to push the big red button. Ti-doms are skilled at getting reactions out of others while remaining "calm" themselves - or at least attempting to do this often.

It's fine for you to think Fi is a broken form of Ti, but if you are reasoning within Jung's system, your statement is not logical. That isn't how it is framed in that system of thought. I would say that Ti is far more subjective in nature than most Ti-doms are capable of seeing because their personal identity tends to be based on being objective, and so it is difficult to admit those instances of subjective thought. It costs Ti a higher price than Fi to admit personal bias, even when its perspective is equally invested in Self. I would venture to say that the broken form of Ti is exactly that projection onto Fi of its own inclination towards subjectivity when it's basis and system requires pure rational thought for it to function. The subjective side of Ti is the broken form of Ti. Fi is something different because it processes the subjective realm with the tools that are effective in subjective systems. Process Fi information with pure logic and you get your broken function.

I agree that Ji functions are subjective, which is why I qualified it with "I do consider" rather than simply stating that "Fi is a broken form of Ti." Since we're more prone to weighing things in percentages and ratios rather than hard YES/NO value judgements, it can appear as though we're holding a bias, even though in our minds it may only be at a 51% chance of rightness. Start us at 90% and work us down to 55% and it will appear as though we're unwavering in our stubbornness, but not necessarily so behind the scenes. Typically we only defend things that we start in the 75%+ range, and keep anything less than that in a state of questioning. This is probably another reason why we seldom admit we're wrong- we play the odds well enough that it seldom happens.

 

[Thalassa]

Maybe turn feelings into logical postulates, and build with those instead. Dissect value judgements truthfully and impartially down to their mechanics, beyond the context of yourself. Try considering them in the context of others. Should put you smack dab in the middle of Fe territory.

I know you're really full of yourself, but Fi does have thoughts. I've noticed Fi types may be better at interpretation of music or poetry considered subtle, or complex. I'm honestly embarrassed for people who say things like "Lykke Li is just interesting because she tries to be interesting" or " Lana del Reys Ultraviolence is pretentious and entirely in monotone" with these people not grasping that they're emotionally simplistic and tone deaf. There is a real problem among people, who say are good at maths, thinking it's the only form of intelligence, so they don't realize how moronic they come across making these kinds statements.

The things you say are similar. You're like a tone deaf person listening to complex music and saying that the music is stupid because you don't understand it.

I understand every type does this to a degree, Se types think they're more with it, Fe types think they have social command. ..but people who self type as NT really bother me a lot...not because they're NT, Einstein was a TRULY INTELLIGENT NT who also understood why love was paramount and vegetarianism was the future, but honestly a lot of self typed NT online expect people to be smarter than they are, with a bizarre air of contempt.

Like oh, have to have our own type of intelligence, have enough Fe to politely ignore you being too ignorant to understand it, then also make minor displays of your type of intelligence on top of it.

How about you actually use Ti/Fe and understand why function theory actually exists.

 

[Myths Of Zephyr]

[MENTION=15392]Cellmold[/MENTION]

I don't necessarily mean a precise guide but more a specific one-time example. I find that descriptions often have the underlying idea of the functions down and no concrete examples. Personally, it's a lot easier for me to understand something if I have to fish out the underlying idea myself rather than being given it so readily.

I don't quite think I explained my question the right way. You are right though. Being kind and learning what people's expressions means is not necessarily what Fe is about but I guess that's where my problem lies. I don't know what Fe is exactly. I don't understand how Fe comes to conclusions since I've only ever seen the world through a Fi-lens. Also, true. It's difficult to be thinking while you're in the middle of an interaction. The reason why I want to be able to express emotions on my face is because if I can't it makes the other person uneasy or feel discouraged. I'd like them to feel comfortable instead but I'm not sure how to do that if whenever they tell me something that means a lot to them I respond with a completely blank expression.

Don't worry about it. Your post made me realize that I should've cleared up some things.

Plus: I apologize if my grammar and comma placements (more like lack of) suck. I'm still working on it

 

[Myths Of Zephyr]

[MENTION=20035]anticlimatic[/MENTION] [MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION]

Guys calm down ._.. This is just a discussion. We can just express different ideas and see how it turns out. Anticlimatic's idea wasn't bad. It's true that if you use one function, without realizing it, you're probably going to be using it's opposing function as well. If the idea doesn't work out then it's fine. Also, I realize your argument was originally about how you can't exactly turn Fi into Ti but I think the discussion would be a lot more productive if we came up with an idea that will actually work out rather than trying to shoot down or stick to the original idea that was presented. Also, don't fight. You've both got good advice so play nice ^_^.

 

[PeaceBaby]

[MENTION=20035]anticlimatic[/MENTION] [MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION]

Guys calm down ._.. This is just a discussion. We can just express different ideas and see how it turns out. Anticlimatic's idea wasn't bad. It's true that if you use one function, without realizing it, you're probably going to be using it's opposing function as well. If the idea doesn't work out then it's fine. Also, I realize your argument was originally about how you can't exactly turn Fi into Ti but I think the discussion would be a lot more productive if we came up with an idea that will actually work out rather than trying to shoot down or stick to the original idea that was presented. Also, don't fight. You've both got good advice so play nice ^_^.

You do not need to "become more Fe". The question you actually have is how to be more liked and likable. That's a question worth discussing.

 

[PeaceBaby]

I agree that Ji functions are subjective, which is why I qualified it with "I do consider" rather than simply stating that "Fi is a broken form of Ti." Since we're more prone to weighing things in percentages and ratios rather than hard YES/NO value judgements, it can appear as though we're holding a bias, even though in our minds it may only be at a 51% chance of rightness. Start us at 90% and work us down to 55% and it will appear as though we're unwavering in our stubbornness, but not necessarily so behind the scenes. Typically we only defend things that we start in the 75%+ range, and keep anything less than that in a state of questioning. This is probably another reason why we seldom admit we're wrong- we play the odds well enough that it seldom happens.

You think Fi is binary?

 

[Myths Of Zephyr]

You do not need to "become more Fe". The question you actually have is how to be more liked and likable. That's a question worth discussing.

Well yes, but I'm mostly interested in how to become more Fe.

 

[ceecee]

Well yes, but I'm mostly interested in how to become more Fe.

Why?