Dear Fe User,

[uumlau]

I would think he protests Seal Clubs, don't you?

For age discrimination, surely.

 

[highlander]

So after starting this thread, and diving into the subject, now I'm seeing Fe everywhere. It's sort of remarkable discovery to recognize and understand it.

 

[Athenian200]

Dear Fi User,

On the one hand, I admire Fi. Its focus on personal needs, ethics, artistic interpretation, unspoken emotional understanding, and resisting conformity are a big part of what makes the world a diverse place to live. It "honors" its own feeling judgments, which is really wonderful and because of all of these remarkable qualities, it facilitates the building of ethical ideals in the way that perhaps no other function can replicate. Without it, I don't know if social change would be possible.

At the same time, there are things which deeply disturb me about Fi. I don't like the judgements it applies to decide its own actions are appropriate based only on its own perspective or desires. A combination of the arrogance that its perspective is right along with the fact that it tends to reflect a unpopular view means that it can lead to all sorts of things such as offending people, destroying social unity, and preventing cooperation. A bad situation can continue to exist for the sake of maintaining integrity. Also, there is the particular challenge that when the Fi perspective is voiced, others quickly feel forced to choose sides, because of course it reflects a unpopular view - even if that perspective is wrong. An extreme negative example of Fi would be the Doctor Kevorkian's assisted suicide cases, in which the doctor and patient were in agreement, but didn't take into account the feelings of their families or Kevorkian's obligations under the Hippocratic oath. It's like a sheep straying too far from the herd and leading others along with them to get eaten by wolves.

Don't get me wrong. I am a huge Fi fan. As I first stated, I see all of the good that it does in the world. Still, I'm quite happy to be an Fe user, with my own sociable and polite judgments, and to be freed from the tyranny of seeing everything in terms of personal will and subjectivity. Trust me Fi user, I've listened to what you said. The fact that I go along with others doesn't mean that I DON'T agree with you, nor does it mean you are wrong. It means that we've decided it is not a battle worth fighting. If I were to fight against every belief or cause I disagreed with, I would quickly exhaust myself. When I say something is right or it's wrong in public, it's the opinion of others and not my own thoughts. With that perspective in particular, it is important to pick your battles.

Anyway, I guess what really bothers me is a deep disconnect on the values as to what is important. It is enough to understand this and to see the worth of both perspectives, I suppose for now.

Thank you very much and carry on.

 

[skylights]

^ lol, fair enough

it tends to reflect a unpopular view

does it usually? i don't think so. i think it's actually usually quite on par with Fe. it's just that it's rather outspoken when it's not.

i am a proponent of seeing similarities/overlap between F functions

 

[Amargith]

It would be interesting to do this for Te and Ti as well

 

[Virtual ghost]

It would be interesting to do this for Te and Ti as well

Then start posting here

 

[Athenian200]

does it usually? i don't think so. i think it's actually usually quite on par with Fe. it's just that it's rather outspoken when it's not.

Well, exactly. Fe tends to keep silent or lie when it disagrees, but makes a point to express agreement. Fi tends to keep silent when it agrees, and becomes outspoken when it disagrees. Is it any wonder we don't understand each other? I probably tend to think Fi users disagree more often than they really do, just because they're not expressing their agreement in the same way as Fe users.

i am a proponent of seeing similarities/overlap between F functions

There's plenty, actually. All F users tend to be more sensitive in some way, and make decisions based on values rather than logic.

 

[Salomé]

Fe tends to keep silent or lie when it disagrees, but makes a point to express agreement. Fi tends to keep silent when it agrees, and becomes outspoken when it disagrees.

Good observation.

So why do you keep telling everyone to lie? Just because it makes you comfortable? Telling Fi users to be Fe users is like telling black people to be white.

 

[Athenian200]

So why do you keep telling everyone to lie?

I'm not necessarily telling them to lie, so much as keep their disagreement to themselves and talk about other things.

Telling Fi users to be Fe users is like telling black people to be white.

Well, I mostly think that they need to learn how to use Fe in public or group settings in order to avoid constantly having fights break out. I'm not telling them to be Fe users, just to learn Fe skills in order to get along better with others.

I know INTJs who have done this successfully, so I know it can be done if the person realizes that it's necessary and works at it.

 

[Salomé]

I'm not necessarily telling them to lie, so much as keep their disagreement to themselves and talk about other things.

Same difference. To a Fi user.

Well, I mostly think that they need to learn how to use Fe in public or group settings in order to avoid constantly having fights break out. I'm not telling them to be Fe users, just to learn Fe skills in order to get along better with others.

I know INTJs who have done this successfully, so I know it can be done if the person realizes that it's necessary and works at it.

This is patronizing beyond belief. Have you listened to yourself?
So dripping with "Fe-way or the highway". Some people have no interest in worshipping Fe the way you do. Deal with it.

 

[Athenian200]

Same difference. To a Fi user.

Fair enough. I guess I didn't think of it that way. I just have this way of thinking where omission isn't technically lying, and thus doesn't count... but Fi users can't emotionally get away with using technicalities to dodge responsibility/guilt, because their sense of accountability comes from within. They judge themselves for inaction just as much as action.

Thank you for explaining the Fi perspective. I really appreciate it.

 

[highlander]

On the one hand, I admire Fi. Its focus on personal needs, ethics, artistic interpretation, unspoken emotional understanding, and resisting conformity are a big part of what makes the world a diverse place to live. It "honors" its own feeling judgments, which is really wonderful and because of all of these remarkable qualities, it facilitates the building of ethical ideals in the way that perhaps no other function can replicate. Without it, I don't know if social change would be possible.

At the same time, there are things which deeply disturb me about Fi. I don't like the judgements it applies to decide its own actions are appropriate based only on its own perspective or desires. A combination of the arrogance that its perspective is right along with the fact that it tends to reflect a unpopular view means that it can lead to all sorts of things such as offending people, destroying social unity, and preventing cooperation. A bad situation can continue to exist for the sake of maintaining integrity. Also, there is the particular challenge that when the Fi perspective is voiced, others quickly feel forced to choose sides, because of course it reflects a unpopular view - even if that perspective is wrong. An extreme negative example of Fi would be the Doctor Kevorkian's assisted suicide cases, in which the doctor and patient were in agreement, but didn't take into account the feelings of their families or Kevorkian's obligations under the Hippocratic oath. It's like a sheep straying too far from the herd and leading others along with them to get eaten by wolves.

Don't get me wrong. I am a huge Fi fan. As I first stated, I see all of the good that it does in the world. Still, I'm quite happy to be an Fe user, with my own sociable and polite judgments, and to be freed from the tyranny of seeing everything in terms of personal will and subjectivity. Trust me Fi user, I've listened to what you said. The fact that I go along with others doesn't mean that I DON'T agree with you, nor does it mean you are wrong. It means that we've decided it is not a battle worth fighting. If I were to fight against every belief or cause I disagreed with, I would quickly exhaust myself. When I say something is right or it's wrong in public, it's the opinion of others and not my own thoughts. With that perspective in particular, it is important to pick your battles.

Anyway, I guess what really bothers me is a deep disconnect on the values as to what is important. It is enough to understand this and to see the worth of both perspectives, I suppose for now.

Thank you very much and carry on.

Try and be more original though

 

[CrystalViolet]

Well, I mostly think that they need to learn how to use Fe in public or group settings in order to avoid constantly having fights break out. I'm not telling them to be Fe users, just to learn Fe skills in order to get along better with others.

I know INTJs who have done this successfully, so I know it can be done if the person realizes that it's necessary and works at it.

You make seem like Fi doms and auxs are always fighting the rest of the world.
Although if you are taking your impression from this site, I guess that would be a fair impression, admittedly, but really I'm more of a lover not a fighter. I think that goes for most Fi-doms, and auxs.
The thing is if you suspect something is not o-fai, is it not better to sound off, and be wrong, then to keep quiet and be right, but have a mess on your hands? My ego can handle being wrong, but the guilt of being right and nothing said....well, it's a bit harder to reconcile.
I do get your point though. It's easier said than done though, trying to go through the proper channels, rather than head tackling the problem on the spot.

 

[Athenian200]

You make seem like Fi doms and auxs are always fighting the rest of the world.

Well, only the extreme ones. I'm sure a lot of them have learned ways of coping that don't involve fighting so much.

Although if you are taking your impression from this site, I guess that would be a fair impression, admittedly, but really I'm more of a lover not a fighter. I think that goes for most Fi-doms, and auxs.

LOL, yes, I think a lot of the Fi users I encounter on here tend to be the more extreme ones, which is why I end up addressing them. So, don't worry... I know that plenty of them are more into love than fighting.

The thing is if you suspect something is not o-fai, is it not better to sound off, and be wrong, then to keep quiet and be right, but have a mess on your hands?

That really depends on the situation, and whether sounding off could create a bigger mess than not sounding off. In some cases, I would say you're definitely right.

My ego can handle being wrong, but the guilt of being right and nothing said....well, it's a bit harder to reconcile.

Ah, I see. I'm actually afraid of being perceived as having said/done something wrong. "Better to keep quiet and appear foolish than to open your mouth and remove all doubt," is how I tend to see things.

Still, I can think of a lot of situations that I could have handled more easily if I'd said something. For instance, I once wore some shoes that were a little small once my feet started to swell, and very uncomfortable, on a trek through a city. They were new shoes, and they had felt fine up until this point. Soon into the walk, my feet were hurting terribly. I complained a little, but I let other people push me to continue walking in them, deciding that I was just "soft" and not used to walking. On several occasions, I thought of taking my shoes off and carrying them, or stopping somewhere to buy new ones... but I was afraid of looking ridiculous if I pushed to do something like that. I ended up hobbling near the end, and trying not to grunt with each step. When I got back from the walk, I removed the shoes and found that the backs of both feet and one pinky toe had had most of the flesh rubbed off, and my shoes were filled with blood. It took them months to heal. I wasn't able to wear anything but flip-flops, because the sore was so deep and large that anything else would have prevented it from healing.

That whole situation could have been avoided, except that I didn't know how to tell other people to take my problem seriously when they were dismissing me.

I do get your point though. It's easier said than done though, trying to go through the proper channels, rather than head tackling the problem on the spot.

Ah, for me... it's hard to tackle a problem on the spot. I always go through proper channels... sometimes to my detriment. Trust me, we both probably have a lot to learn from each other.

 

[Chad of the OttomanEmpire]

Well, since this is stickied, since I am an Fe-user, and since I am super bored right now, I'll pick it apart. Not in a mean way, in a Ti way.

At the same time, there are things which deeply disturb me about Fe. I don't like the judgements it applies to decide if somebody's actions are appropriate or not based on a generally accepted perspective or the feelings of the group.

Serious question: as an Fi-user, how do you gauge what's appropriate behavior?

I assumed that if it makes other people uncomfortable, it's rude. Of course, what makes people uncomfortable depends on what the group values, and I thought Fe made calculations based on that.

A combination of the arrogance that its perspective is right along with the fact that it tends to reflect a popular view means that it can lead to all sorts of things such as inaction, maintaining the status quo and conformity.

You probably know a lot more about the functions than I do, and probably did when you wrote this post. But, speaking as an Fe-user, I actually tend towards non-conformity. Now, I'm Fe-tert, so it may be a bit different, but I challenge the "popular" perspective quite a lot. I didn't swoon over Leonardo diCaprio in high school just because all the other girls did, for instance. I'm not a silly fool.

The popular view isn't always right, it's simply a matter of "when in Rome" with me. If all those other girls liked di Caprio, I just wouldn't start spouting off in front of them that their idol is worthless. This is a matter of politeness, and if I were seriously pissed off or wanted to insult someone, my boundaries on that matter might change.

To me, Fe is more like a social code. I'm not Dom or Aux, so it's something I've had to develop and modify. It protects me socially; I always know the right thing to say to someone because I've developed this code of interaction. Maybe I'm a bit of a social robot, but hey. Gotta get through the night somehow.

It's actually much like Te; rather than being a logical code, it's a social code. It's a dynamic, ever changing, ever modifying system, and it gets people where they need to go (with a smile on their faces).

A bad situation can continue to exist in the sake of maintaining harmony.

I know Fi-dom 9s who do this, however, and it infuriates me.

Also, there is the particular challenge that when the Fe perspective is voiced, others quickly pile on, because of course it reflects a popular view - even if that perspective is wrong. An extreme negative example of Fe would be the Salem Witch Trials in which the mob was in agreement and yet all collectively wrong. It's like the sheep all running over the cliff together.

I really don't think it's about sheep. What you're describing is a social phenomenon that has more to do with human nature than any function in particular. I'm sure plenty of Fi-users were in the Salem Witch Trials mob as well. I think what you're pissed off about is conformity, and yes, a skilled Fe-user could speak to popular sentiments very well because the code entails knowing the right thing to say to who. But that doesn't constitute herd-behavior, which, as a ragin Fe user, I utterly detest.

If I find someone with an "incorrect" perspective (however you wish to define "incorrect"), my mode is generally to treat him/her civilly and let them have their say. It doesn't matter if this is a popular opinion or not. I want that person to feel OK. Unless I strongly disagree, I'd be inclined to say "Isn't that true!" or something as a means of making that person feel accepted (it wouldn't actually change my mind). That's how the calculation works for me; I adapt to others' perspectives out of politeness. I do not conform on a deeper level. Maybe it's different for me as a tertiary user.

Don't get me wrong. I am a huge Fe fan.

Me too!

As I first stated, I see all of the good that it does in the world. Still, I'm quite happy to be an Fi user, with my own personal and subjective judgments, and to be freed from the tyranny of group think.

I consider myself free from the tyranny of group think. Again, I think that's another phenomenon entirely. A social code is not "group think". It's a way of facilitating interactions. I certainly have personal, subjective judgements, even if I don't bring them up out of respect to others' preferences.

Trust me Fe user, I've listened to what you said. The fact that I go along doesn't mean that I agree with you, nor does it mean you are right.

I have this, though. It doesn't mean I agree if I go along, nor does it make that person right. It means I'm being polite. I likewise take other peoples' agreement with me as a similar thing--they're just being polite. What really counts is what we do when push comes to shove.

It means that I've decided it is not a battle worth fighting. If I were to fight for every belief or cause I felt strongly about, I would quickly exhaust myself. When I think something is right or it's wrong, it's my own opinion and not the opinion of others. With that perspective in particular, it is important to pick your battles.

I agree. And if I'm not fighting a battle, I default to the social code because that way I always know exactly what to do socially. No more feelings of social awkwardness!

Anyway, I guess what really bothers me is a deep disconnect on the values as to what is important. It is enough to understand this and to see the worth of both perspectives, I suppose for now.

I don't know why Fe-users have the reputation of having no personal values. Again, I think personal values are very different territory from social calculation. We may outwardly conform to make the other person feel OK--as you say, some battles are not worth fighting--but this does not preclude any ability to form individual principles, or to fight for them when pushed.

Well, those are a few of my thoughts. I don't think Fe is everything people attribute to it (though if you want to make a case for us being emotionally manipulative, I might not be able to rebut that). Like I said before, I'm an ENTP, so it may be a bit different than an xxFJ. Still, many of the FJs I've known seem to be similar (including my ISFJ mother who, on principle, refused to go along with the status quo during the Iraq War when all the brainwashed masses were putting down the French.)

 

[uumlau]

For Fi-users, it's a freedom from the tyranny of "group-FEEL", not a freedom of tyranny from group-THINK. Ti has that honor.

However, to INTJs (and I suspect for other Fi types), it can seem like freedom from group-think because the topic at hand is a matter of opinion, of feeling, of acceptability, not logic, not thinking.

 

[highlander]

Well, since this is stickied, since I am an Fe-user, and since I am super bored right now, I'll pick it apart. Not in a mean way, in a Ti way.


Serious question: as an Fi-user, how do you gauge what's appropriate behavior?

I assumed that if it makes other people uncomfortable, it's rude. Of course, what makes people uncomfortable depends on what the group values, and I thought Fe made calculations based on that.


You probably know a lot more about the functions than I do, and probably did when you wrote this post. But, speaking as an Fe-user, I actually tend towards non-conformity. Now, I'm Fe-tert, so it may be a bit different, but I challenge the "popular" perspective quite a lot. I didn't swoon over Leonardo diCaprio in high school just because all the other girls did, for instance. I'm not a silly fool.

The popular view isn't always right, it's simply a matter of "when in Rome" with me. If all those other girls liked di Caprio, I just wouldn't start spouting off in front of them that their idol is worthless. This is a matter of politeness, and if I were seriously pissed off or wanted to insult someone, my boundaries on that matter might change.

To me, Fe is more like a social code. I'm not Dom or Aux, so it's something I've had to develop and modify. It protects me socially; I always know the right thing to say to someone because I've developed this code of interaction. Maybe I'm a bit of a social robot, but hey. Gotta get through the night somehow.

It's actually much like Te; rather than being a logical code, it's a social code. It's a dynamic, ever changing, ever modifying system, and it gets people where they need to go (with a smile on their faces).


I know Fi-dom 9s who do this, however, and it infuriates me.


I really don't think it's about sheep. What you're describing is a social phenomenon that has more to do with human nature than any function in particular. I'm sure plenty of Fi-users were in the Salem Witch Trials mob as well. I think what you're pissed off about is conformity, and yes, a skilled Fe-user could speak to popular sentiments very well because the code entails knowing the right thing to say to who. But that doesn't constitute herd-behavior, which, as a ragin Fe user, I utterly detest.

If I find someone with an "incorrect" perspective (however you wish to define "incorrect"), my mode is generally to treat him/her civilly and let them have their say. It doesn't matter if this is a popular opinion or not. I want that person to feel OK. Unless I strongly disagree, I'd be inclined to say "Isn't that true!" or something as a means of making that person feel accepted (it wouldn't actually change my mind). That's how the calculation works for me; I adapt to others' perspectives out of politeness. I do not conform on a deeper level. Maybe it's different for me as a tertiary user.


Me too!


I consider myself free from the tyranny of group think. Again, I think that's another phenomenon entirely. A social code is not "group think". It's a way of facilitating interactions. I certainly have personal, subjective judgements, even if I don't bring them up out of respect to others' preferences.


I have this, though. It doesn't mean I agree if I go along, nor does it make that person right. It means I'm being polite. I likewise take other peoples' agreement with me as a similar thing--they're just being polite. What really counts is what we do when push comes to shove.


I agree. And if I'm not fighting a battle, I default to the social code because that way I always know exactly what to do socially. No more feelings of social awkwardness!


I don't know why Fe-users have the reputation of having no personal values. Again, I think personal values are very different territory from social calculation. We may outwardly conform to make the other person feel OK--as you say, some battles are not worth fighting--but this does not preclude any ability to form individual principles, or to fight for them when pushed.

Well, those are a few of my thoughts. I don't think Fe is everything people attribute to it (though if you want to make a case for us being emotionally manipulative, I might not be able to rebut that). Like I said before, I'm an ENTP, so it may be a bit different than an xxFJ. Still, many of the FJs I've known seem to be similar (including my ISFJ mother who, on principle, refused to go along with the status quo during the Iraq War when all the brainwashed masses were putting down the French.)

I'll respond to your post more in detail later but for now, I think it might be worth reposting something that I had earlier which summarized things. I started this thread when I was frustrated with a particular Fe person - who is a wonderful person really - but at that particular point, something she had done hit a nerve. I can't even remember what it was. Anyway, it was kind of a discovery process for me because I don't think I really understood Fe vs. Fi at the time. There was a lot of good dialogue and here is what I learned through the thread.

-----------------------------------------

1. The need for a common language - One of the things that occurs to me is that there are a lot of different terms thrown around that are related. Emotions, passions, values, feeling, feeling function, Fe, Fi, etc. It seems difficult to arrive at conclusions without a clear set of definitions and understanding of terminology. I think there might be a lot of confusion between sensing, intuition, feeling and thinking in general - with one being mistaken for the other. I look at my own language - I say "I feel", "I think", "I believe", "My sense is" etc. etc. I don't really differentiate between these things very well in my own communications. I use different words because I don't want to be repetitive vs. assigning precise meaning.

2. My feelings/your feelings vs. our feelings - It's been solidified in this thread but previously, I don't think I fully understood the Fe perspective. I used to think that we all individually had our own feelings. I'm not sure I understood the importance of the concept of "our feelings." I have come to understand that Fe types tend look at collective feelings - or "our feelings" - and that this is an important perspective to consider. Also, and I could be leaping to a conclusion but people who prefer Fi seem to understand their own feelings better than the feelings of others and people who prefer Fe seem to understand the feelings of other people better than their own.

3. Understanding dominant intuitives - I've come to understand a lot more about INFJs than I did before and the similarities that exist due to sharing the same dominant function. Both INTJs and INFJs seem like a "mastermind" type to me - just oriented in different directions. I've also learned something about my own sensitivities and theirs - what may cause us to be offended. Finally, I've learned that sometimes when we communicate a "perspective shift" that it may take time for others to absorb what we are saying. If we desire for our perspective to be understood, follow up two way communication is helpful to elaborate or expound upon the ideas and transform them into something that is concrete enough for the other person to assimilate and do something with.

4. The Fe/Fi conflict is not just about those two functions - What's at play in this ongoing set of discussions and debates involves much more than a difference in those two functions. If we were to compare an ISFP, ENFP, INFP and INFJ for example - there are enormous differences in function preferences and function order. Those differences can lead to misunderstandings or miscommunication.

5. But the conflicts/differences on Fe/Fi are quite real - These are the things I've heard:
- Fi users don't feel that Fe users (and perhaps Te users) allow them to communicate in a way they prefer to communicate.
- Fe types and Fi types both feel judged and unappreciated by the other at times - setting off sensitivities and projections
- Fi personal values are abstract to Fe types - they want Fi types to communicate their values in a more concrete way
- Fe types are frustrated with what they perceive as inflexibility of the Fi types to consider the perspectives of others
- Fi types feel threatened by Fe social dynamics (a game they don't want to play)
- (EDIT) Fi types feel that Fe type's orientation towards decisions that support group norms, consensus, or harmony can sometimes lead to problems not being confronted or addressed

6. How Fe is different than Fi - Well, the dialogue and results could be more conclusive but it does appear the two processes operate differently. In particular, what I struggle with is my perception that a lot of the articulated Fe perspectives seem to be Fe + Ni. Here is my shot at synthesizing what's been said or what I understand (without the Ni bias)

General comments:
- The higher in the function order is Fi, the less likely a person is to care about systematizing the outer human environment, and by default the less able they are to systematize that outer environment, while the higher the Fe, the more likely the person is to care about outer organization and engage in organizational activity.
- Fi and Fe may often result in the same behavioral pattern-for very different underlying motivations.
- Fi and Fe may often result in drastically different behavioral patterns-for very different underlying motivations.
- Fi and Fe may result in drastically different behavioral patterns-for very similar underlying motivations.

Interaction styles are important in understanding how Fe or Fi manifests itself:
Interaction Styles | The InterStrength Group


Fe users
- seek to understand others behaviors, motivations, desires and beliefs
- are ruled by objective and more broadly accepted values
- express emotion with intentionality and forethought for optimal effect
- seek to objectively understand the feelings of others
- have a harder time confronting others; are more diplomatic
- seek harmony with others
- are more practical; willing to make compromises
- focus on understanding how the group works, connects, gets along (or doesn’t) and all of their views, decides what course of action is most amenable to the intended goal while accommodating the most people
- assess consistency of behavior of individuals and behavior with social protocols
- focus on observable patterns of behaviors and motivations that others seem have
- are focused on the dynamics of how people relate to each other
- focus on how decisions, actions, or expressed opinions are going to be reacted to, countered or felt by others and weighing benefits and costs of the course of action

Fi users
- seek to understand their own behaviors, motivations, desires and beliefs
- are ruled by their own subjective and personal values
- express emotions they feel strongly about without as much intentionality and forethought about optimal effect
- project their experience with feelings onto the other person to understand them
- have an easier time confronting others; are more brash
- seek harmony with self
- are more idealistic; less willing to make compromises
- focus on understanding how they feel, decides what course of action is most amenable to the intended goal while maintaining their own sense of personal integrity
- assess incongruities of behavior of individuals with self (i.e. are they authentic)
- focus on how behaviors and motivations of others are the same or different than their own
- focus on being true to who they are
- focus on how decisions, actions or expressed opinions are going to be consistent with their own beliefs, values, and personal convictions

 

[1487610420]

I'll respond to your post more in detail later but for now, I think it might be worth reposting something that I had earlier which summarized things. I started this thread when I was frustrated with a particular Fe person - who is a wonderful person really - but at that particular point, something she had done hit a nerve. I can't even remember what it was. Anyway, it was kind of a discovery process for me because I don't think I really understood Fe vs. Fi at the time. There was a lot of good dialogue and here is what I learned through the thread.

-----------------------------------------

1. The need for a common language - One of the things that occurs to me is that there are a lot of different terms thrown around that are related. Emotions, passions, values, feeling, feeling function, Fe, Fi, etc. It seems difficult to arrive at conclusions without a clear set of definitions and understanding of terminology. I think there might be a lot of confusion between sensing, intuition, feeling and thinking in general - with one being mistaken for the other. I look at my own language - I say "I feel", "I think", "I believe", "My sense is" etc. etc. I don't really differentiate between these things very well in my own communications. I use different words because I don't want to be repetitive vs. assigning precise meaning.

2. My feelings/your feelings vs. our feelings - It's been solidified in this thread but previously, I don't think I fully understood the Fe perspective. I used to think that we all individually had our own feelings. I'm not sure I understood the importance of the concept of "our feelings." I have come to understand that Fe types tend look at collective feelings - or "our feelings" - and that this is an important perspective to consider. Also, and I could be leaping to a conclusion but people who prefer Fi seem to understand their own feelings better than the feelings of others and people who prefer Fe seem to understand the feelings of other people better than their own.

3. Understanding dominant intuitives - I've come to understand a lot more about INFJs than I did before and the similarities that exist due to sharing the same dominant function. Both INTJs and INFJs seem like a "mastermind" type to me - just oriented in different directions. I've also learned something about my own sensitivities and theirs - what may cause us to be offended. Finally, I've learned that sometimes when we communicate a "perspective shift" that it may take time for others to absorb what we are saying. If we desire for our perspective to be understood, follow up two way communication is helpful to elaborate or expound upon the ideas and transform them into something that is concrete enough for the other person to assimilate and do something with.

4. The Fe/Fi conflict is not just about those two functions - What's at play in this ongoing set of discussions and debates involves much more than a difference in those two functions. If we were to compare an ISFP, ENFP, INFP and INFJ for example - there are enormous differences in function preferences and function order. Those differences can lead to misunderstandings or miscommunication.

5. But the conflicts/differences on Fe/Fi are quite real - These are the things I've heard:
- Fi users don't feel that Fe users (and perhaps Te users) allow them to communicate in a way they prefer to communicate.
- Fe types and Fi types both feel judged and unappreciated by the other at times - setting off sensitivities and projections
- Fi personal values are abstract to Fe types - they want Fi types to communicate their values in a more concrete way
- Fe types are frustrated with what they perceive as inflexibility of the Fi types to consider the perspectives of others
- Fi types feel threatened by Fe social dynamics (a game they don't want to play)
- (EDIT) Fi types feel that Fe type's orientation towards decisions that support group norms, consensus, or harmony can sometimes lead to problems not being confronted or addressed

6. How Fe is different than Fi - Well, the dialogue and results could be more conclusive but it does appear the two processes operate differently. In particular, what I struggle with is my perception that a lot of the articulated Fe perspectives seem to be Fe + Ni. Here is my shot at synthesizing what's been said or what I understand (without the Ni bias)

General comments:
- The higher in the function order is Fi, the less likely a person is to care about systematizing the outer human environment, and by default the less able they are to systematize that outer environment, while the higher the Fe, the more likely the person is to care about outer organization and engage in organizational activity.
- Fi and Fe may often result in the same behavioral pattern-for very different underlying motivations.
- Fi and Fe may often result in drastically different behavioral patterns-for very different underlying motivations.
- Fi and Fe may result in drastically different behavioral patterns-for very similar underlying motivations.

Interaction styles are important in understanding how Fe or Fi manifests itself:
Interaction Styles | The InterStrength Group


Fe users
- seek to understand others behaviors, motivations, desires and beliefs
- are ruled by objective and more broadly accepted values
- express emotion with intentionality and forethought for optimal effect
- seek to objectively understand the feelings of others
- have a harder time confronting others; are more diplomatic
- seek harmony with others
- are more practical; willing to make compromises
- focus on understanding how the group works, connects, gets along (or doesn’t) and all of their views, decides what course of action is most amenable to the intended goal while accommodating the most people
- assess consistency of behavior of individuals and behavior with social protocols
- focus on observable patterns of behaviors and motivations that others seem have
- are focused on the dynamics of how people relate to each other
- focus on how decisions, actions, or expressed opinions are going to be reacted to, countered or felt by others and weighing benefits and costs of the course of action

Fi users
- seek to understand their own behaviors, motivations, desires and beliefs
- are ruled by their own subjective and personal values
- express emotions they feel strongly about without as much intentionality and forethought about optimal effect
- project their experience with feelings onto the other person to understand them
- have an easier time confronting others; are more brash
- seek harmony with self
- are more idealistic; less willing to make compromises
- focus on understanding how they feel, decides what course of action is most amenable to the intended goal while maintaining their own sense of personal integrity
- assess incongruities of behavior of individuals with self (i.e. are they authentic)
- focus on how behaviors and motivations of others are the same or different than their own
- focus on being true to who they are
- focus on how decisions, actions or expressed opinions are going to be consistent with their own beliefs, values, and personal convictions

The problem with making B&W blanket statements that pigeon-hole people in an attempt to make us feel in control and our world view more comfortable & is both the essence & epitome of typology's kool-aid demise.

 

[uumlau]

The problem with making B&W blanket statements that pigeon-hole people in an attempt to make us feel in control and our world view more comfortable & is both the essence & epitome of typology's kool-aid demise.

You do know this is a B&W blanket statement, right?

 

[1487610420]

You do know this is a B&W blanket statement, right?