Pretentious Fi

[teslashock]

I'm going to have to disagree with that. Sometimes Ti seems pedantic and out of touch with reality. Te seems more "useful" than Ti to me. I definitely value Ti, even admire it at times, but I wouldn't go as far as to say that I think it's always "useful." It annoys the shit out of me sometimes, actually, and seems intellectually pretentious as opposed to emotionally pretentious. I actually think that Ti and Fi mirror each other in many ways, and this mirror both draws me and repels me when I find it in NTPs.

That.

 

[Thalassa]

That.

 

[PeaceBaby]

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

That was the other thing I wanted to do with the OP! Perhaps it was already done...

We all have our blind spots; just need to learn to balance them out.

 

[teslashock]

That was the other thing I wanted to do with the OP! Perhaps it was already done...

We all have our blind spots; just need to learn to balance them out.

Yeah it's already been mentioned. I even touched upon this argument in my OP and how it's a bit irrelevant to the thread actually. Why don't you start your own thread on it? You can even use the template from my OP if you want .

 

[PeaceBaby]

Well hey, I'm not reading 160 posts, I'm happy to move on from this thread. Ciao!

 

[teslashock]

Well hey, I'm not reading 160 posts, I'm happy to move on from this thread. Ciao!

Oh you can stay if you want. Just don't get offended when I note your repetition. It doesn't bother me; I just like making fun of people wherever I can.

And plus you wouldn't have had to read through 160 posts. I mentioned in the OP that the counterargument using Ti is a viable one but a bit irrelevant to the topic at hand.

 

[PeaceBaby]

I threw in the disclaimer at the start that I hadn't read all the posts, so no need to rub it in all the time, is there?

I wanted to share my personal data on the topic in order to assist you. Having done so, I shall meet up with you in another thread sometime.

 

[sofmarhof]

Ti is widely recognized as 'useful' and 'logical' and gets a lot more credit than Fi ever does.

I would never call Ti useful, in fact its complete non-usefulness it what I like about it. You know "art for art's sake"? Gautier said nothing useful can be beautiful. That's how I feel about Ti. That useful thinking isn't really thinking.

 

[Fidelia]

I just read through the last few pages of the discussion that I missed during the course of the day. As a Fe user, I too have sometimes run into the issue mentioned in the OP and so this subject is of interest to me. While I do not believe that this is a general Fi user characteristic, I have experienced Fi users who erroneously believe they can read my feelings without stopping to further inquire whether they have all the information needed and if they are interpreting it correctly. On the other hand, I have also experienced Fi users who have very correctly been able to figure out what true motivations/feelings of people around them (including myself) have been. I believe this is mostly due to the experience of the person using Fi and also their willingness to accept that they could be mistaken or that Fe users appreciate them checking to see that they are correct.

I believe though that Udog's distinction between Fi and Fi users is a useful one. It is like each function is a car, each with a different set of advantages and disadvantages as well as potential capabilities. While it is true that each car is distinct in what it offers, the driver of the car (ie user of that function) also brings their driving style and driving experience (or lack thereof). This driver influences how other people on the road view the capabilities and characteristics of that particular type of car (function).

Amargith has done a good job of putting herself in other shoes, as well as respectfully explaining things from her perspective. As you have acknowledged yourself Tesla, Fi is a very useful function in its best form. It appears to me that what you are taking issue with is the inexperienced driver form of Fi, just as many Fi users regularly react to either a misconceived understanding of, or example of inexperienced driving with Fe. I liked the comparison between Fi and Ti that Amargith used.

 

[Amargith]

Thanks Fidelia

Tesla, one more thing..I know you don't wanna discuss how you formulated the OP..an I think you should revisit. The reason? You don't seem to realize how important that is. What Peacebaby said, you didn't consider substantial. While to me, that was the core of why you got jumped all over. Those are not neutral words. Those words tend to just irritate anyone if applied to them, in normal conversation.

Also, it's kinda ironic, that you are annoyed with Fi-users, especially those who..oh shall we say, don't communicate their gut feeling too well, since you yourself don't seem to grasp the necessity of using the right emotionally loaded words for a sensitive topic such as this.

As for us, Fi is very hard to translate in words. For that matter, precise language is mostly used be Ti. And the fact that Fi-users cannot formulate correctly what *exactly* they are feeling seems to be part of the problem. I actually *learned* on here (thanks to, amongst others, and shockingly, Bluemonday and other NTPs) to differentiate between the gut feeling, the interpretation you make, the background story that goes about it, and the action you can take with this stuff. For me, this was all one big bubbly cauldron. It still is. I had no clue what I did, I just did it and even nowadays I have to make a conscious effort to seperate it. To compartmentalize like that, is something you need to learn. And those who haven't been actively trying to take their Fi apart, don't realize that. It also means they are less accurate in expressing what they mean. They sense anger and their first reaction is: you must be angry with me, otherwise, why would you express it? While you might be angry of a situation, the way the convo is going, another person, etc etc. It's like an inexperienced Ti user tossing out his craziest new idea. It might have merrit, if he thought it through more. Instead, you piss people off coz you waste their time with something that's clearly got flaws everywhere still. Fi is fuzzy that way, not specific, it takes sifting through to get to what *actually* is going on. Also, without further info, Ne goes wild on interpretations which is the real problem. As Fi is so vague and it doesn't get recognized a lot, you are almost prompted to come up with an argument to back it up, which, without additional info could be a score or flatout wrong. And then, it still requires eloquence to bring it into words, as Fi is just not that translatable, so chances are that you botch this up while having the right idea, and still getting told you're wrong. Add debate-pressure to the mix and that just goes out the window. I like Fidelia-Udog's Car metaphore for this definitely. Realize that when you get a response like that, it's probably just badly formulated. There's probably truth to the core and plz, take a moment to see if their 'premise' has merit

Also realize that Fi-users have to go through two processes to translate their hunches:
a) We have to learn social graces (Fe) to express it in an emotionally neutral way, or we present it, like you did your OP, and cause a ton of emotional upheaval. This btw, is not fun, coz it's like a bomb blowing up in our faces

b) We have to learn Te, to be able to make Fi believable to others. To be accurate and eloquent about what it is we are exactly sensing.

Plz, give us a break. It takes time to learn those things. Those *do* not come easy to us, unlike NeFi. They're just tools to make it translatable to other people.

As for Ti being useful...well, in comparison to Fi it's way more recognized as such.
In fact, I'd say Fi is probably the function that gets encourage the least and taught the least in schools, at least that's how I experienced it here.

In fact, it's often encouraged to surpress it coz if you wanna be empathic, you have to use the social norm (Fe). Anything else, is weird and emo. Things feeling right has no value to others, cannot be quantified, therefore it's useless. As for using it in art, creating things etc etc,...maybe that's different in America, but here that's laughed at and makes your parents worry about your future as you have no way of supporting yourself with that, usually. I might be biased, but imo, Fi is incredibly difficult to develop, especially because of it's fragile nature and all the flak it gets. You're told so many times by people who don't understand how it works that it's wrong, selfish, and difficult that you end up believing it, carving out a piece of yourself to 'grow up' and becoming pretty much rudderless, which people then completely roll their eyes at.

Meanwhile miscommunications between people are abundant, people are unhappy and don't know what they want in life, don't know what's important to them coz they've been brainwashed by society and told what is supposed to be important to them, and they're left feeling empty while striving for the wrong things. Relationships fall apart, love is hard to find, intimate connections are rare. Ever wonder why? Not saying this all is solely Fi, but an underdevelopped/surpressed Fi in Fi-users can definitely contribute to that. Even in non-Fi users, I've seen it happen. And Fi *is* hard to teach, but it needs to be done coz people just get stuck in an endless self-destructive loop they don't know how to get out of. (this is personal experience btw).

And it is for that reason, Tesla, that I do commend you for making an effort, making a very controversial thread, and very much appreciate you trying to understand it. It's also the reason why I'm so present in this thread..maybe too present.

/rant.

 

[Virtual ghost]

I will joing the thread from INTJ prespective.


I find all feelers to be like this at some point.

And misunder standing comes from the fact they don't understand Ni+Te duo.

The thing is that Ni is not under control of feelings as much as Ti (since it is not conscious)

Ni simply goes where it wants and noting controls it. For example when I find a problem my mind automaticly tries to find a solution. (even if I don't want that)Also I have realized that sometime is counter productive for me to think about things, Instead it is just better to wait that the answer comes to me. (and it always does)However in this entire process there is pretty much nothing emotional. Especially since sometimes your mind is solving problems you are not trying to splve.


Especially it can be awkvard when someone is "glorifying my work". While I am just listening to the person and wonder did I really do what the preson is saying I did.It came out of me but it is not exactly a product of my thought process and it is a little bit wrong to take credit for it. Quite often I actually have the impression that my ideas are not actually mine.


While Fi user can even go as far as claiming how he/she is intrigued by how much I probably invested in all of this and how much passion I needed to link all that dots. While entire thing was created in a blink and maybe it was even created without me searching for it.


As I said in a number of threads. My biggest feeling killer is actually Ni (what people don't suspect). While Te actaully boosts feeling side since the process is consious. What means that it has to be powered by something.


So basicly this is why we often claim that we are not emotional about something even if NFP is getting different vibes. Since NFP Te is powerd by Fi for the most part. While at my case Ni does most of the work and need Fi only to help it regulate the conscious thinking process . (and this is what creates misunderstanding(s) in communication)


This post is generalization.

 

[Fidelia]

Both Amargith and Antisocial, I just learned a lot from reading the last two posts. Thank you!

Amargith, you and I have had conversations about Fe vs Fi and you said that using Fe as an ends towards a means seemed manipulative. However, what you just did in that last post looks very much like Fe to me. You have found a way to translate what you have to say into a form that is both acceptable and useful to those that don't naturally understand it. This is a great example of it in action and that's the usefulness I was referring to when we discussed Fe. However, while Fe has useful attributes to offer, it needs to be backed up by convictions or else it is kind of empty. In other words, it needs to have a driver!

I think that each of the functions needs the complimentary function to temper it and balance it out. Just as with strong emotions, emotionally mature people have enough tempering emotions to even out their behaviour. None of us start at that place emotionally and none of us start with well-developed inferior functions to make our naturally strong functions useful. I think that is why differing personalities often react so strongly to untempered functions that are foreign to their natural way of thinking. They are responding to an untranslated or untempered form of that function (the user) rather than what the function itself has to offer.

 

[Into It]

I always think it seems pretty obvious how people feel, except in those cases when it just...isn't, whether someone is being purposely guarded or they are not sure themselves how they feel, or are just not at all reactive/expressive. But I always experience this as a kind of *perception* very distinct from what I see in the Fe users' judgment (as orangeappled said) of how I should feel or how I would most likely feel in that situation, as if they don't need to see me personally at all to come to their conclusion. I never get in situations where I am corrected or told that I am behaving in some presumptuous way, so I really can't say how accurate I am. It feels like I am always on target, markedly less so with strong T's and NT's specifically, but I don't normally "read them wrong," I just feel like I *can't* read them at the time. If someone told me that I was treating someone in such a way that was incongruous with their feelings, I would stop immediately. I never feel as if I have some authority *ha* over them in the area of their emotions, and I am rarely even dubious when they tell me they feel a way I wouldn't expect.

So I may be a bit presumptuous, but I wouldn't press on if I were wrong, which is particularly annoying. I think that my track record with getting new people to open up very quickly is some testament to this ability, though, and unlike you, I see Fi users being particularly adept at this skill.

 

[teslashock]

I just read through the last few pages of the discussion that I missed during the course of the day. As a Fe user, I too have sometimes run into the issue mentioned in the OP and so this subject is of interest to me. While I do not believe that this is a general Fi user characteristic, I have experienced Fi users who erroneously believe they can read my feelings without stopping to further inquire whether they have all the information needed and if they are interpreting it correctly. On the other hand, I have also experienced Fi users who have very correctly been able to figure out what true motivations/feelings of people around them (including myself) have been. I believe this is mostly due to the experience of the person using Fi and also their willingness to accept that they could be mistaken or that Fe users appreciate them checking to see that they are correct.

The bolded is kind of my take on it too. I never ever meant to imply that this is a characteristic of normal Fi. I just meant to imply that *some* Fi users come across as very arrogant when it comes to being "in tune" with others' emotions.

I believe though that Udog's distinction between Fi and Fi users is a useful one. It is like each function is a car, each with a different set of advantages and disadvantages as well as potential capabilities. While it is true that each car is distinct in what it offers, the driver of the car (ie user of that function) also brings their driving style and driving experience (or lack thereof). This driver influences how other people on the road view the capabilities and characteristics of that particular type of car (function).

I completely agree with this analogy. I just didn't really see the point in Udog bringing it up. I thought that distinction was so obvious that it didn't really warrant discussion. However your car analogy is really great, and I definitely like that you put it into a frame that makes the distinction more meaningful.

I never meant to imply that the Fi car is pretentious. I meant to imply that some of those driving the Fi car think they can just drive up next to me in my Ti car, roll down the window, and tell me that I'm obviously angry simply because I accelerated with a little too much haste.

Amargith has done a good job of putting herself in other shoes, as well as respectfully explaining things from her perspective. As you have acknowledged yourself Tesla, Fi is a very useful function in its best form. It appears to me that what you are taking issue with is the inexperienced driver form of Fi, just as many Fi users regularly react to either a misconceived understanding of, or example of inexperienced driving with Fe. I liked the comparison between Fi and Ti that Amargith used.

Yes I really appreciate Amargith's posts here. She definitely quantified Fi in a way that makes more sense to me than any other attempts at describing it.

And to the bolded: that's spot-on with how I feel. I thought I made it clear in my OP that I don't think Fi is an inherently pretentious function by saying over and over again "Fi users" and "Fi people" and using noncommittal language, but I guess that just wasn't clear enough.

 

[teslashock]

Tesla, one more thing..I know you don't wanna discuss how you formulated the OP..an I think you should revisit. The reason? You don't seem to realize how important that is. What Peacebaby said, you didn't consider substantial. While to me, that was the core of why you got jumped all over. Those are not neutral words. Those words tend to just irritate anyone if applied to them, in normal conversation.

Also, it's kinda ironic, that you are annoyed with Fi-users, especially those who..oh shall we say, don't communicate their gut feeling too well, since you yourself don't seem to grasp the necessity of using the right emotionally loaded words for a sensitive topic such as this.

I have agreed time and time again that I clearly didn't formulate the OP in the most productive way possible. I really didn't realize beforehand that it would be so provocative though. I figured that some really sensitive people would get caught up in it, but I didn't know the majority of the thread would consist of critiquing my OP.

Words are not very often emotionally loaded for me, and I'm not very sensitive about critiques of my values and beliefs. I feel like I communicated my idea effectively, like I got the meaning out, but perhaps there was a more tactful way that I could have communicated the idea while keeping its meaning. I just don't always remember to value that tact (tert Fe). Meh, oh well. I'll do better on any more discussions I start pertaining to Fi.

As for us, Fi is very hard to translate in words. For that matter, precise language is mostly used be Ti. And the fact that Fi-users cannot formulate correctly what *exactly* they are feeling seems to be part of the problem. I actually *learned* on here (thanks to, amongst others, and shockingly, Bluemonday and other NTPs) to differentiate between the gut feeling, the interpretation you make, the background story that goes about it, and the action you can take with this stuff. For me, this was all one big bubbly cauldron. It still is. I had no clue what I did, I just did it and even nowadays I have to make a conscious effort to seperate it. To compartmentalize like that, is something you need to learn. And those who haven't been actively trying to take their Fi apart, don't realize that. It also means they are less accurate in expressing what they mean. They sense anger and their first reaction is: you must be angry with me, otherwise, why would you express it? While you might be angry of a situation, the way the convo is going, another person, etc etc. It's like an inexperienced Ti user tossing out his craziest new idea. It might have merrit, if he thought it through more. Instead, you piss people off coz you waste their time with something that's clearly got flaws everywhere still. Fi is fuzzy that way, not specific, it takes sifting through to get to what *actually* is going on. Also, without further info, Ne goes wild on interpretations which is the real problem. As Fi is so vague and it doesn't get recognized a lot, you are almost prompted to come up with an argument to back it up, which, without additional info could be a score or flatout wrong. And then, it still requires eloquence to bring it into words, as Fi is just not that translatable, so chances are that you botch this up while having the right idea, and still getting told you're wrong. Add debate-pressure to the mix and that just goes out the window. I like Fidelia-Udog's Car metaphore for this definitely. Realize that when you get a response like that, it's probably just badly formulated. There's probably truth to the core and plz, take a moment to see if their 'premise' has merit

I actually think it would really benefit Ti users to think about how Fi applies to their own Ti beliefs, and I think the same would be beneficial for Fi users in thinking about how Ti could be used to analyze Fi. I just don't know how it's possible to do that without some kind of mediation, as the two functions are in such opposition with each other.

Also realize that Fi-users have to go through two processes to translate their hunches:
a) We have to learn social graces (Fe) to express it in an emotionally neutral way, or we present it, like you did your OP, and cause a ton of emotional upheaval. This btw, is not fun, coz it's like a bomb blowing up in our faces

b) We have to learn Te, to be able to make Fi believable to others. To be accurate and eloquent about what it is we are exactly sensing.

Yes well realize that Ti has to do the same thing with Fe and Te too. I think the lack of Fe in my OP is a great example of how Fe really should be more incorporated into my analyses and claims.

As for Ti being useful...well, in comparison to Fi it's way more recognized as such.
In fact, I'd say Fi is probably the function that gets encourage the least and taught the least in schools, at least that's how I experienced it here.

I'll agree with that. I think Fi is encouraged only by teachers who have strong Fi and are willing to spread their values in the classroom.

In fact, it's often encouraged to surpress it coz if you wanna be empathic, you have to use the social norm (Fe). Anything else, is weird and emo. Things feeling right has no value to others, cannot be quantified, therefore it's useless. As for using it in art, creating things etc etc,...maybe that's different in America, but here that's laughed at and makes your parents worry about your future as you have no way of supporting yourself with that, usually. I might be biased, but imo, Fi is incredibly difficult to develop, especially because of it's fragile nature and all the flak it gets. You're told so many times by people who don't understand how it works that it's wrong, selfish, and difficult that you end up believing it, carving out a piece of yourself to 'grow up' and becoming pretty much rudderless, which people then completely roll their eyes at.

I was actually thinking before I got to this part of your post that the one place that Fi really is acceptable in schools is in the arts. I think a lot of theatre people reach into their Fi to be able to act in the school productions, and I think a lot of visual art people are free to express their emotions through their works. Fi seems to be best expressed through metaphors, and art is a great way to fuel and manifest these metaphors. When I was in high school, I was one of the "artsy" students (though not emo), and most of the art in our classes had a clear emotional overtone, and these pieces were always the ones that stood out the most (more than my silly Ne/Ti works that most people found too nonsensical to truly enjoy).

And it is for that reason, Tesla, that I do commend you for making an effort, making a very controversial thread, and very much appreciate you trying to understand it. It's also the reason why I'm so present in this thread..maybe too present.

Heh well thanks. And you're definitely not too present in this thread. You are one of the few NFPs members whose presence has done a lot of great things in this thread, and I really appreciate it.

 

[teslashock]

I will joing the thread from INTJ prespective.


I find all feelers to be like this at some point.

And misunder standing comes from the fact they don't understand Ni+Te duo.

The thing is that Ni is not under control of feelings as much as Ti (since it is not conscious)

Ni simply goes where it wants and noting controls it. For example when I find a problem my mind automaticly tries to find a solution. (even if I don't want that)Also I have realized that sometime is counter productive for me to think about things, Instead it is just better to wait that the answer comes to me. (and it always does)However in this entire process there is pretty much nothing emotional. Especially since sometimes your mind is solving problems you are not trying to splve.

Do you have problems like this from Ti too? Ti is pretty consistent as is Fi (just about different things) but Ni is so much more open-ended. It seems like you'd have the same kind of issues with Ti that you have with Fi, maybe just not as emotionally distressing.

Especially it can be awkvard when someone is "glorifying my work". While I am just listening to the person and wonder did I really do what the preson is saying I did.It came out of me but it is not exactly a product of my thought process and it is a little bit wrong to take credit for it. Quite often I actually have the impression that my ideas are not actually mine.

Wow, is this how Ni feels? I guess it kind of makes sense, but the ideas came from you, so it seems like you'd be able to equate that with your abilities.

While Fi user can even go as far as claiming how he/she is intrigued by how much I probably invested in all of this and how much passion I needed to link all that dots. While entire thing was created in a blink and maybe it was even created without me searching for it.

Ti does the same thing with Ni. I don't know if I speak for most Ne/Ti users, but I'm blown away with Ni. I'm intrigued not because I think you Ni users exhibit a strong passion; I'm intrigued because of the kind of focused analytical skills that I feel must go into the kinds of ideas and realizations that Ni users have.

As I said in a number of threads. My biggest feeling killer is actually Ni (what people don't suspect). While Te actaully boosts feeling side since the process is consious. What means that it has to be powered by something.

It seems like Ti and Fi fight with each other by throwing punches, but Ni fights Ji by just shooting it with a giant laser beam and turning it into nothingness.

This post is generalization.

It's hilarious to me that this kind of afterword is so necessary around these parts.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Do you have problems like this from Ti too? Ti is pretty consistent as is Fi (just about different things) but Ni is so much more open-ended. It seems like you'd have the same kind of issues with Ti that you have with Fi, maybe just not as emotionally distressing.

Much less since Ti is logical. So it gets along with my Te much better than Fi.
That is undeveloped for an INTJ.

Wow, is this how Ni feels? I guess it kind of makes sense, but the ideas came from you, so it seems like you'd be able to equate that with your abilities.

Well that is what I am doing but somehow it doesn't seem 100% right.

Ti does the same thing with Ni. I don't know if I speak for most Ne/Ti users, but I'm blown away with Ni. I'm intrigued not because I think you Ni users exhibit a strong passion; I'm intrigued because of the kind of focused analytical skills that I feel must go into the kinds of ideas and realizations that Ni users have.

It seems like Ti and Fi fight with each other by throwing punches, but Ni fights Ji by just shooting it with a giant laser beam and turning it into nothingness.

If you say do.

It's hilarious to me that this kind of afterword is so necessary around these parts.

With having alot of Ni around things stop having a clear pattern. So I had to post this as a "warning".

 

[Amargith]

Tesla, since part of your OP asked what you could do to improve the communication, I'll elaborate on that still:

I think that each of the functions needs the complimentary function to temper it and balance it out. Just as with strong emotions, emotionally mature people have enough tempering emotions to even out their behaviour. None of us start at that place emotionally and none of us start with well-developed inferior functions to make our naturally strong functions useful. I think that is why differing personalities often react so strongly to untempered functions that are foreign to their natural way of thinking. They are responding to an untranslated or untempered form of that function (the user) rather than what the function itself has to offer.

Very much true. It's important that we see the potential in the other and understand that it *is* their gift, even if they don't know yet how to wield it properly. And that is where that arrogance, that confidence is coming from. This is what works for them most of the time so it's hard to be told that you're wrong. Instead of taking it badly, try to join them in their thinking and see what they are likely to have picked up on.

I've had NTPs tell me my motivations behind how I think which were preposterous suggestions. And I did laugh and roll my eyes, as they saw my explanation of what I did in a paranoid way, thinking I must be hiding or lying in order to look better than I am, thinking I must be selfish as this is how every person responds, but without being able to see that I am selfish in my own way, by trying to be a good person, and that that is ok, that it is a drive and motivation as anything else which doesn't necessarily have to corrupt the work I did. On the contrary, it gives me the reason to do it as well as I can. They just logically deducted that the way I did/viewed things could only come about if I were to be hiding the real me. That was..yeah. Laughable. However, you have to admire the logical reasoning capacities they have. Sure they missed some important data, but that doesn't negate the obvious skill that is present. At that point, I try (which is hard for me) to clarify as many of their seeming illogical inconsistances and i do need to take the time to formulate them properly and in their language or the paranoia will start all over again.

Fi is the same. We try to make logical emotional sense of what people do. If there is an inconsistency, we'll try to find an explanation by Ne-ing, one that would seem 'logical' to us, and that you potentially aren't aware or aren't willing to own up to.

Much like Ti. If you then are able to, with emotionally correctly used and loaded words, explain that it is in fact the situation that causes the anger, or something else, and tell them how it came about, the pieces of the puzzle will fall into place, and they will normally let go. You need to do this though right away, and not after tons of denying that you are in fact angry. Coz that just proves that you're lying. First you weren't angry you said, and now you're saying you're are angry, just not of them?? You see where I'm going with this, I'm sure. Even harder is explaining to them that although you may well be emoting anger and frustration, it's something that doesn't bother you. Acknowledgement of the fact that you do, however, should already do a lot. Coz then it confirms that we were in fact not seeing ghosts. That there is something there. And it dispells any paranoia on denial and lies.

So when a Fi-user tells you that you are in fact vibing out something, take a moment to step back and wonder what they picked up on. What could set off that alarm. It *is* our skill. How well that Fi-user is able to use the skill, how precise they are depends on experience. But something made that thing go off. And for them, it's important, much like NTPs are obsessive about getting info out of your head to solve logical inconsistencies. So if you value the conversation and the info you're getting, take two seconds to reflect and explain. They wouldn't bring it up if it was just a blip either, they're considering it important enough to affect the conversation. Help them pinpoint what the cause is, and in essence, sharpen their skill by providing a sounding board, and experience. They'll learn how to hone it, and the next time they'll be a lot more accurate


One more thing:

I cannot count the amount of NTs that have told me after the facts that I was 'in fact right' about my guess as much as they denied it at the time. That doesn't help. I think all Fi-users have had this experience at one time or another, which happens to strenghten our belief that you are in fact sometimes unaware of things that we pick up on, and therefore it's hard to take your word when you insist nothing is going on (see the example with denying anger, this however also happens with actual emotions that do influence you a lot). Now, I always try to keep in mind that I can be off, due to not fulfilling one of the 4 prerequisites, which i might not be aware of, but not all Fi-users are aware of those, as that comes with experience (hell, I might still be off and learning shit and find there are 6 instead of only the 4 I've discovered so far). So what I end up doing is, accepting what the person tells me (coz I know it doesn't help to argue, it just makes them defensive). But that hunch keeps jumping at me like a little alarmbel as an unresolved inconsistency. And it really takes effort to walk away from it and let it ring, coz I wanna help you figure it out. It's a mystery I wanna see resolved and I wanna give you that extra info to work with yourself as well. This can be annoying to my conversational partner, as I don't lie very well, or omit things well, so they can tell I am not entirely taking them on their word. Which can hurt. I at this point will try to explain to them why, and I do my best to ignore the bell and accept their explanation. I'll also be fully open to being wrong, and will let time tell what exactly the reason was for that alarmbell. Coz yeah..I have been wrong about the reason behind the bell. I've even been wrong about the kind of bell that went off (saw anger where there was frustration etc, coz those look the same, just the intensity varies a bit). It might have been a not so important bell which is why you didn't see it, and why I shouldn't worry about it, and I mistook it for important. I could be wrong that way.

But never about the presence of the bell. Whether you like it or not, you're beaming something out. That, we do not imagine or are not wrong about. If you just would acknowledge the bell, and if possible at all explain it, that would be awesome, coz it's driving us bananas!

(exception: someone who's incredibly emotionally unstable themselves at the time and is severly projecting, as you would find in a Fi-user under serious pressure, which makes it impossible to escape your own emotions at all)

 

[Fidelia]

Excellent point! I think you are absolutely right that Fi is like a beeper that goes off when those vibes are being transmitted. It then becomes the Fi user's call for how and when it is right to bring up what signals they are receiving and how the other person would like them best to respond.

Amargith also privately made a point that I found useful: Fi users naturally assume that if someone is sad, they would want to be comforted etc, because that is what they would like and because that is what comes very naturally. That natural empathic response goes beyond conventions. The tricky part comes in when the receiver of that comfort does not respond as the Fi user expects, or when a Fe user assumes that the Fi user wouldn't want comforting in certain contexts. On both sides, we tend to do what we would want done for us, instead of recognizing how we are different from each other.

In another thread it was discussed how Fe is conventionally understood through how it is expressed in SFJs (social conventions etc) and yet that doesn't apply to how other Fe users express it. I'm wondering if Fi is the same way? Is it expressed differently depending on what type is using it?

Also, out of the discussion that she and I have had, I'm realizing that on both sides, much of our wariness/frustration with the opposite function is from it not being tempered with enough use of the other function. This addition of the other function in with it translates it and makes it useful to both Fi users and Fe users instead of just one or the other. It also conveys a much more judicious and informed use of either function because the user has all of the context to take into account.

One of the reasons I found Amargith's response in this thread useful was that although she didn't abandon her Fi values, she put it in terms that allowed my Fe to accept that she was not just stuck on one point without being willing to consider the potential validity of the point made in the OP (at least in the perception of those receiving Fi). This in turn allowed me to see her Fi as being something worthy of consideration. I would be curious to know from her perspective how she developed this, because I think it is very applicable to the discussion at hand. I'm also curious about what Fe users using Fi would look like to Fi users and how that can be developed.

 

[Amargith]

I would be curious to know from her perspective how she developed this, because I think it is very applicable to the discussion at hand. I'm also curious about what Fe users using Fi would look like to Fi users and how that can be developed.

You're too kind, Fidelia. I very much appreciate your input though, coz this Fe vs Fi thing has been a puzzle I've been dying to resolve.

I have no idea how to explain what you've asked about though...I've kinda been mulling it over, but...It mostly came from the clashes I've had with ENTPs, I think. God those gave me a bunch of head aches (yeah, you know who you are out there ) but I'm also very grateful for that because it made me realize why we push each others buttons, and how Ti and Fi are soooo alike in so many ways. They have the same mechanics to them, just a different goal. Learning that was hard, but it also has helped me tremendously, because it helped me systematize Fi and get more of a grip on it, which in turn makes it easier to put it into words again. So, in essence, it was Ti users that cleared the fog in my head and provided me with the tools and terminology to attempt a clarification of Fi.

The same happened with several Fe-users, such as yourself, but also several others who have had the Fe vs Fi debate with me over and over again, coz again, as you noticed, we're sooo alike and yet so different. In this case we are alike in the area we focus on but we go about things very differently and although our intent can overlap, it's not guaranteed.

I actually had an interesting debate with Proteanmix about this recently. We were trying to figure out the exact difference, where we split ways. The usual came up, focus on group vs focus on individual, how both can seem selfish to the other, social conventions feeling restrictive vs being beneficial, who has the best use of their F to counsel, and how each function goes about it etc. So one of the questions was...how do we disable that resentment between the two and appreciate each in it's own right.

And one of the things we came up with was:

Both Fe and Fi see the entire rainbow of emotions, and experience it as such. Both can experience it incredibly intensely.

However.

Fi lives in that intensity, at least ime. We're fixed there. We have no choice but to intensely experience things whether we want to or not. This means the good, the bad and the very ugly. An inexperienced Fi-user will get overloaded, fight those emotions and at some point become so overwhelmed he can no longer contain it and starts affecting those around him, which is then considered selfish by the environment, as the intensity of that scares them and disrupts the normal way things in the group. This is, again, from what I hear, unacceptable behavior to an Fe-user and something that puzzles them greatly.

At the same time, I'm drawn towards that intensity of emotion in others. Again, the good, the bad and the ugly. If it's a bad emotion, I'll try to transform it into another emotion. From what I gather, a Fe-user will try to disable the intensity of that emotion. Not me. I'll try to transform it into another emotion with the same intensity. From what I've been told, a Fe-user will warn people and try to keep them out of the 'dark forest of negative emotions' and keep from going near it themselves, if they can avoid it. Not me. You wanna go there? Great, lemme grab my lantern, and I'll gladly walk you through that forest. I *live* there, it's my home, and I'm not afraid to walk through it. I'm aware that it's dangerous, that it's intense, and that it resembles a frigging nightmare. Being there isn't productive...but walking through it, imo, very much can be. A Fe-user will guide you around the forest, from what I hear, because they feel protective of the people, don't wanna see them get harmed and feel that it's stirring up trouble for nothing. Whereas I am of the principle that what doesn't kill you, makes you stronger. And since I've walked that forest before, I know there's nothing in there that will in fact kill the person walking through it. That's doesn't mean it will be a pleasant journey, or a painless one. But if you go in there with right mindset, the pain is definitely worth the gain.

In essence, it comes down to this:

The worst thing you can do to me is the absence of something to connect to. The absence of emotion. Cold, stark emptiness is my biggest enemy. Give me desperation, sadness, grief, heartbreak, mourning anytime over that. Of course, I prefer bliss, and joy and all those good emotions. But let me feel alive, plz. This is literally my fuel in life, and, I'm embarassed to say, my addiction. I have to work hard to tone down my emotions and my intensity to a level where I don't scare people, in normal life (I do this through Fe) and it always leaves me feeling a little frustrated and empty..lonely even. Oddly enough, once people are in emotional crisis, they come and find me. It's like I have a stamp on my forehead advertizing that I'll be ok with them doing so. And I get a kick out of them doing that. Even if it's bad emotions, I can work with that, hell I love working with that. I love helping out, and it makes me feel connected to them, while I try to change their pain into another state that is more enjoyable to them if I can, and otherwise I'll try to make them use their pain, to get past it towards personal growth, towards gain. I'll try to give them the tools, if I can, to deal with this situation themselves next time, how to weather the emotions to get to the light at the end of the tunnel. If they are overflowing with joy and choose to share it with me, I bask. It's awesome that they would share that with me. Once again, I feel really close to them. And if they ask me to invoke powerful emotions in them, I'll gladly oblige coz we will both enjoy it. One thing, I too can get overwhelmed, especially when stressed by other stuff in life that I have to deal with, or when dealing with a group of people who are all emoting like mad. Then I shut down. I prefer to do this one on one.

Fe-users, again, from what I hear, have the ability to be flexible in their feeling-use. They vary intensity and synchronize it automatically with the person/group in front of them. This means that if they have an emo-ing Fi-user in front of them, they can match their intensity and will do so. However, they prefer emotions to be more moderate as it's better for group harmony, and gives them more of a sense of control over the situation. From what I hear, intense emotion also tires them out, even one on one and they prefer getting people to harmonize together in a group and have a warm steady flame going there (whereas I prefer a roaring fire in one person). They will therefore be more prone to pulling the plug on intense emotion and find a way to soothe it to a more moderate level. That means that the person who is emoting negative emotions will find relief as the emotion will be soothed and directed towards that warm fuzzy flame that Fe-users prefer. If that's not possible though, they'll rather find a way to 'not feel' at all, and therefore removing the (to them) harmful emotion in some way, than to stay there, effectively preferring being emotionless to feeling negative emotions, something I would never do as it a) makes me feel dead inside and b) is playing ostrich politics, imo, and pretending that the emotion won't influence you and you won't have to deal with it if you just pretend it's not there. However, I have seen it be succesful for problems that weren't deeprooted, and weren't in need of deep analysis, so I do recognize that it has its uses and has the added benefit of keeping you functional and able to deal with other potential problems that are also part of the situation. Introspection requires time, and effectively puts you into stasis for a while, which can be impractical at times as well as make you overanalyze and overcomplicate things.

Ok..I hope this *somehow* made some sense...


(I have got to stop ranting in this thread )