Pretentious Fi

[Amargith]

Q, you rule. Alternatively, you could briefly acknowledge the Fi-users values on the topic and ask them to discuss sheer thoughts instead, without any judgement, just for the heck of it. But make sure you acknowledge first, as it is uncomfortable to discuss something that goes against our values or seems to skim close to the border of them without stating so and making sure the other person gets that.

Once that's out of the way, I'm open to the craziest thoughts and will gladly go along with it. If we then end up on another topic, you might have to do the same again, in order to keep things going, as it's automatic reflex

For the record: I don't mean to imply you have to do all the work, coz you're wrong in the way you go about things. However, it's practically impossible to get every Fi-user you wanna talk to to read this thread and accept a compromise between you two. So, if you want to talk to them, you'll have to use some tricks to manoevre around the minefields. I try to do the same with NTPs.


Speaking of which, I'd love to hear the opinion of some of the NTPs I regularly converse with as that mostly goes well and I'd love to hear how they experience that communication and what they consider to be handy when dealing with Fi-users (aka me amongst others )


Oh, and here's another tip: get to know the Fi-user first, before getting into heavy debates. If we have a baseline of who you are, and how you naturally respond to things, it's way easier to not get defensive on you during debate as we inherently know what you are like. Otherwise your debating skills and zeal are the first input in our systems...not the best first impression, especially not with the miscommunication and emotions that tend to flare up


Edit: I'm sorry, Tesla, but the way you formulated things is partly at the core of the problem. Sure we can take it..doesn't mean we want to glance over your nonchalant emotional formulating. Just as NTPs tend to not want to glance over our nonchalance in language when debating your pet topics and misinterpret what we're saying as they disect things to a level we didn't even think they would go, which leads to reading things in what we say when we actually didn't mean them that way. Same prob

 

[teslashock]

Orangey, notice I ignored many posts that identified with my claim as well. You're just looking for evidence that supports your theory rather than unbiasedly collecting and analyzing data. What kind of NTP are you anyway?

I'd love to go back and respond to some of the posts that I had to "ignore", and I think I'll do that in a bit.

But ya know what? You got me. I didn't respond to every single post, and since I didn't respond to the ones arguing against my perceptions of Fi, that means I have zero interest in changing my perceptions and that my main goal is to just complain about this "pretentious Fi." Fuck you, Fi users! You all suck, and the world would be a better place without you!! Doesn't everyone agree??

There, you happy now?

 

[Orangey]

Hey, I never said that the appearance of not caring about contradictory information meant that you really didn't care about it or take it into account. I was just offering an explanation for why people might have reacted the way that they did (well, more of a justification, but I still stand by it.)

You know, the whole being/appearance distinction.

 

[teslashock]

Hey, I never said that the appearance of not caring about contradictory information meant that you really didn't care about it. I was just offering an explanation for why people might have reacted the way that they did.

Oh, well I already had that one figured out, but thanks. People don't like giving the benefit of the doubt, and I left room for doubt, so I deserved what I had coming I suppose. It just was annoying because I wasted so much time having to justify myself and clarify my intentions, and you appeared to exacerbate the problem.

I would have liked to spend my posts in analyzing other posts pertinent to the topic at hand (like yours and Poki's and Seymour's), but I had to waste so much time clarifying and reclarifying that I'm just over it now. I'll definitely come back to it later though. See you then perhaps.

 

[Amargith]

LOL..ok that's ironic
You sound like me when NTPs give me a head ache

 

[wildcat]

Does anybody feel like strong Fi users are really pretentious when it comes to understanding emotions? It seems like Fi people constantly think they know how other people are feeling but are wrong many times. In my experience, Fi users seem to feel the overwhelming urge to convince me that I'm feeling a certain way. It can be kind of annoying at times, but maybe it's some times helpful?

Why do you Fi users do this? Or is this not an Fi thing and just something I made up in my head?

Perhaps Fi users hear another person's perspective and think in terms of how their own mind would manifest that perspective and automatically assume that the rest of the world would express it the same way, leading to flaws in their emotional analyses.

I feel like NFJs are so much better than NFPs at interpreting feelings and thinking about human behavior in terms of the feelings that guide such behaviors, but NFPs simply think they absolutely rock the world of emotional analysis. It's obnoxiously arrogant. SFPs are also more accurate than NFPs (maybe it's the Ni?). I don't know about SFJs. I think they just don't really try to overanalyze other people's heartfelt issues as much as other F types.

Is this an Fi thing, or am I giving Fi a bad rap? Thoughts?

I see the value in Fi when it's used more realistically, but it seems to me like oftentimes it's just completely out of control.

Now before you Fi types start declaring how arrogant Ti is, I'm alread acknowledging this. I pretend/think that I know/understand a lot more about logical systems than the average Joe, so if you bring up arrogant Ti, please make it relevant to the issue at hand rather than a tool for bashing the NTP who started this thread, k?

You refer to Fe.
Not Fi.

 

[onemoretime]

Once again, the eternal torment - seeming to always ask the questions no one wants to answer.

 

[ajblaise]

This is what happens when someone makes broad claim/theory based on a weak premise. Pages and pages of backtracking and "you don't understand me!" from the OPer.

Just think through your ideas more next time.

 

[onemoretime]

Myopia...

 

[teslashock]

This is what happens when someone makes broad claim/theory based on a weak premise. Pages and pages of backtracking and "you don't understand me!" from the OPer.

Just think through your ideas more next time.

Well I wasn't making any broad claims. I was asking for peoples' inputs on my perceptions. I didn't really even have a premise. I just wanted the OP to spur random trains of thought. I didn't want it to be organized and direct and explicit.

 

[Amargith]

Then start out with asking for furter information on something you don't seem to understand and reserve judgement ("pretentious) till after you get all the facts and you're sure you understand it. And yes, I know it wasn't meant as a judgement. It still is a hypothesis/judgement though..worse even, an unfounded one.

 

[simulatedworld]

lol this is awesome:

"Ok I'm done with you now, but....[12 MORE PARAGRAPHS OF BITCHING]"

"Yeah whatever I'm done too! but...[26 MORE PARAGRAPHS OF BITCHING]"

awesome

 

[ajblaise]

Well I wasn't making any broad claims. I was asking for peoples' inputs on my perceptions. I didn't really even have a premise. I just wanted the OP to spur random trains of thought. I didn't want it to be organized and direct and explicit.

You did have a premise, on Fi users being pretentious. You don't have to run away from that, it's what you titled the thread.

But pretentiousness involves an "exaggerated outward show" and ostentatiousness. Which isn't introverted feeling.

Or maybe you've already realized that.

 

[teslashock]

Read the OP instead of just the title. We've already touched upon the fact that perhaps I should have put a question mark in the title. My mistake. I left a lot of room for debate and insight in the thread itself, and that should have more weight than the title, but whatever.

And pretentious doesn't only mean being ostentatious or exaggerated. It can also mean:
"Claiming or demanding a position of distinction or merit, especially when unjustified; characterized by assumption of dignity or importance." Obviously I didn't mean to imply that Fi users are showy and try to attract attention to themselves. I never implied that at all.

Anyway I reserve the right to ignore any more posts about "YOU SHOULD HAVE MADE THE OP CLEARER! MORE ORGANIZED. MORE PREMISES." Alright, I get it now. I didn't know things needed such organized outlines to warrant decent discussions.

I made two other posts after the OP that should have clarified my intentions. Any more arguments about this will be overlooked.

I'll touch upon the more pertinent content of this thread tomorrow. You guys have put a bitter taste in my mouth for the moment.

 

[ajblaise]

And pretentious doesn't only mean being ostentatious or exaggerated. It can also mean:
"Claiming or demanding a position of distinction or merit, especially when unjustified; characterized by assumption of dignity or importance."

"Claiming" and "demanding" isn't introverted feeling behavior either.

Vanity or self-absorption would have worked better for Fi. Pretentiousness is more of an extroverted activity.

 

[Amargith]

And pretentious doesn't only mean being ostentatious or exaggerated. It can also mean:
"Claiming or demanding a position of distinction or merit, especially when unjustified; characterized by assumption of dignity or importance."

I'll touch upon the more pertinent content of this thread tomorrow. You guys have put a bitter taste in my mouth for the moment.

How would you like it if someone denied that Ti-users are any good at making logical sense of something? That they seem to think they know everything but really are incompetent at the one thing that drives them?

I'm guessing you'd probably laugh and shrug, without even contemplating their claim, figuring that they clearly don't comprehend in the slightest way what Ti does and how it works and that therefore their perceptions are to be ignored.

Fi's reaction is quite similar, with the distinction that most of us do wanna be understood...desperately, as it creates harmony and minimizes miscommunication. Therefore it is hurtful to see someone presume, based on incomplete observations, that I as a person must be pretentious, coz you cannot see the merit or value in what I do.

Do we get it wrong? Hell yes. Do Ti-users never fuck up a theory? Hell no. Why is it then, that you're not using that word and its definition on Ti-users?
It's a skill, just like your Ti is. We make mistakes. Everybody does. There's nothing mystical or incomprehensible about Fi. It's just not something you find useful as a tool or know how to wield. I don't pretend to know how to wield Ti or to find it even makes sense to me. But you don't see me wondering if Ti is useful at all and accurate in any way. I don't know, I'm incompetent at it. But I recognize it's potential and what it can do..in the hands of someone else, even if that person regularly gets it wrong. I've seen it work, when wielded properly.

 

[The Outsider]

Why do you Fi users do this?

We don't.

 

[Poki]

I'm not telling them how they are. I'm telling them how I perceive them, and I am asking anyone (not just Fi users) to analyze my perceptions.

I don't think I made any personal attacks on any invidual Fi users or any cruel generalizations about Fi itself. I don't see why anybody should be taking anything personally at this point. I'm fine with people arguing with my claims and defending Fi for its good qualities, but it'd be nice if the defense didn't come purely in the form of an attack on Ti and/or unjustified interpretations of the claims I'm making.

Havnt read any other claims, but lets take this from an ISTP cause and effect standpoint.

1. You didnt mean for it to come across this way
2. INFP took it as personal

You see the disconnect. So do you change how you come across, apologize because you didnt mean to, argue, or try and fix it next time(which can still have an apology). This is concrete and what is real. Instead you responded by attacking them for an Fi response that was driven by what you said and used it to attack them.

I'm not telling you how you feel. I'm speculating. Please don't start with the Fi victimization this early on in the thread.

 

[Udog]

Does anybody feel like strong Fi users are really pretentious when it comes to understanding emotions? It seems like Fi people constantly think they know how other people are feeling but are wrong many times. In my experience, Fi users seem to feel the overwhelming urge to convince me that I'm feeling a certain way. It can be kind of annoying at times, but maybe it's some times helpful?

Fi is a cognitive function. An empty shell of a process that has no meaning, value, or purpose until it is given life within a person. It's a car without a driver. This is the main flaw and limitation of function analysis. We can talk about the car all we want, but really, it's the driver that determines where it goes or what it does.

Fi isn't pretentious. Fi users might be.

 

[teslashock]

Fi is a cognitive function. An empty shell of a process that has no meaning, value, or purpose until it is given life within a person. It's a car without a driver. This is the main flaw and limitation of function analysis. We can talk about the car all we want, but really, it's the driver that determines where it goes or what it does.

Fi isn't pretentious. Fi users might be.

Um wow, well here's what I said that you quoted me on:

Does anybody feel like strong Fi users are really pretentious when it comes to understanding emotions? It seems like Fi people constantly think they know how other people are feeling but are wrong many times. In my experience, Fi users seem to feel the overwhelming urge to convince me that I'm feeling a certain way. It can be kind of annoying at times, but maybe it's some times helpful.

Let's not argue semantics anyway. That's kind of pointless.