[Fi] Fe blindness; Fi shortsightedness

[PeaceBaby]

Now this is simply NO FAIR! You went and held the party without me LOL! I make a thread, sits dead for a few days then WHAMMO!

Understand too from my perspective it seems almost impossible to pull functions apart and attribute behaviour one way or the other (oh that is Fe, that is Fi) so this thread is aimed at understanding. Although not discussed very much in thread, I do still wonder about how accurate my OP was. Still interested in any comments on that.

And although much of the responses have trailed off into tangents, I have read ... them ... (since I made the thread I felt obligated to ) and have a bunch of things to reply to.

Bolded part = why this is not really Fe. If your so-called "Fe use" is directly motivated by a more important Fi value, then it's just Fi.

Ok very interesting sim. Tell me then why they feel at odds with each other to me. Example: I am tired and simply want to have some alone-time for a recharge. Get a phone call, someone is feeling down and wants to talk / can I come help at church whatever. I don't really want to do anything (empathy-ometer is reading LOW) but they need help. So I put my own needs in the back-seat. Are you saying Fi is arguing with Fi? In my limited understanding of the functions, I see this as Fi arguing with Fe. Fe wins, but because I placed a high value to be responsive to the needs of others ala Fi.

What do you think of that? Or is is just because I am afraid no one will like me if I don't help ALL the time? And what would function would that be attributable to?

I always see Fi as being concerned with individuals. If people have internal peace, then they will exude that feeling and it will color their interactions and motives, resulting in more external harmony, and the world will be closer to the ideal.

I think Fi can seem self-absorbed to Fe because it's so concerned with its individual self and authenticity, and it can ignore group standards, but that concern is extended to other individuals in many situations (often why we root for the underdog, the outcast, the misunderstood). In that sense, yes, we are "short-sighted", because we cannot skip past the internal feeling - it must be dealt with first before we can step outside ourselves and gain perspective.

I see Fe as being concerned with group harmony. If people get along and things run smoothly between them, then that will affect how they feel inside for the better, creating internal peace that further supports external peace, and the world will be closer to the ideal.

I think Fe can start with promoting the peace externally before it is felt internally, and that seems to "fake" to Fi - Fe can be "fake it until it's real" from my Fi perspective. In that sense, yes, they are "blind", because they cannot see the trees for the forest - individual feelings can get lost while promoting group needs, including the Fe's own personal feelings/needs.

I like this, but I can't ignore group standards. I am too aware of them, too aware of expectations. Perhaps this is what makes Fi so ephemeral to explain - it is uniquely expressed in each individual as opposed to Fe, where the rules seem more clear.

I also think that extreme Fe can feel oddly impersonal sometimes (despite being warm). One starts to wonder "does this person value me for me, or am just filling the 'friend' slot for this person?" and "is this person having lunch with me because they WANT to, or is it a dreary obligation to them on some level?"

Seymour, I love you in this whole thread. Bolded the above part since I sometimes sense it in others (who I already know or assume are Fe dom.)

I'm genuinely surprised that anyone found my posts in this thread to be angry or hostile.

I received no such message from you. But I work with LOTS of NT's so your statement just seemed direct to me.

But argue away if you want to, I love that too (puts on my Te gloves and gets ready for the battle!)

This is directly relevant in a thread about Fi short-sightedness.

Indeed.

Actually I think this thread yielded a relevant and educational example of Fe vs. Fi:

Fe is much better at gauging how other people feel and responding appropriately. The downside comes when Fe users neglect how people do feel and start focusing on how the Fe user thinks they should feel. Fe can become blind to the needs of others when it gets too caught up in critiquing their fulfillment of perceived social obligations.

Fi is much better at getting in touch with one's personal feelings, but the downside occurs when the Fi user starts projecting these feelings and motivations onto others (generally due to poor understanding of what actually motivates others.)

I understand that if Fi is your dominant function, it's hard not to see everything in terms of personal emotional values, but that's the very definition of "Fi short-sightedness", now isn't it?

So you would agree (roughly) with the OP? Just curious.

I have thought people angry at me that weren't (esp in my twenties had to learn to own what I felt vs other's feelings and my interpretation of that), but more frequently I have encountered individuals who deny feeling something and are later proven to have simply been unaware / withholding or denying it.

As far as projecting, though, I don't tell anyone about it, I just work through it. I wouldn't presume to tell you that the vibes I receive are different than what you are willing to tell me.

Taking things personally is not the same as projecting. One has to do with your own feelings, the other has to do with the feelings of others.

I think you are assuming that projecting means saying it out loud. Is that the distinction you are making OA?

Can someone please answer why Fi users (actually NFPs because SFPs aren't claiming this) want to claim so badly the Empathy Prize. Fi does not have a monopoly on empathy, Fi is not more predisposed towards empathy.

I'm not sure any Fi users want to claim a prize, but I do think it might make one more predisposed to developing empathy. After all, when you feel emotions and pain from others, and it affects you to a significant degree, it's not a hard leap to make to want to help relieve it in others. Because it relieves it in yourself.

On the other hand, it sometimes makes me want to escape your pain, because it is not energy-infusing for me to help you deal with it, and I have had to deal with burn-out in the past related to this. Over-extending myself. Not realizing that the well can indeed run dry.

These are character traits, these are learned traits, the are developable traits, not traits inherent to a cognitive function.I noticed this thread went unanswered for a couple of days and I was interested in hearing from what people had to say, I thought it had the potential to be an enlightening thread. When responses do finally start coming in within 30 posts it descends into mudslinging. Typical.

Yes, empathy can be learned. Much as logical thinking can be learned and fostered. But I may never be as effective as a highly proficient NT (better than most, but not all ). So could the same statement be make towards a highly proficient NF and empathy? Perhaps.

And yes, the degeneration was disappointing to me, because although I made a catchy thread title, I wanted to be neutral and discuss this in a fair and even manner. After all, everything has pros and cons.

I prefer to remain untouched, not to have empathy stirred - that is tiring.

However, when there is a pattern of denying any emotion in the moment and then later admitting the Fi person was correct, then it's hard to take that person's denial seriously if they exhibit that very same behavior in the future. This is why I don't project - If I don't know someone well, I have no sense of who they are and cannot pretend to know; I can only go by what they express. If I know someone very well, that is the only time I may trust my instinct over their claims, because it's based on a consistent pattern of behavior I have noted. That's still rare because I don't push confrontation, and if someone says, "I don't feel that way", then I am content to leave it there. I've never seen an NFP insist that someone feels something they do not, so I imagine I am pretty typical. The insistence that we do that is tiring and needs to be dropped.

Agreed.

Very nicely put. This thread is like the tactful version of my "Pretentious Fi" thread (read: tactful because it was started by an NFP rather than an NTP), yet the mudslinging still ensues.

Well, I was pondering a personal situation in addition to contemplating your thread. So perhaps you can see it as a template for tactful OP wording, since it wasn't my post that started the mud-slinging LOL Perhaps there simply is no way to get through these types of discussions though without someone's toes getting stepped on.

why should a Fi user be more likely to swing on the happier sunnier side of that emotion than the negative? When people make claims or believe such things it's just as easy to find the less savory parts. If you're standing in the light, you're casting a shadow somewhere.

The dark scares me. I prefer to stay in the light. I am not an NFP who embraces this part of me, these negative emotions. If I was so inclined, I could really be hurtful. That is not who I want to be. So I make conscious choices. I think back to a few choice events from my youth and cannot believe I had a few very "evil" reactions that I deliberately master-minded. (My "evil" likely seems tame to anyone else, but nonetheless, it was "evil" to me.)

However, that same Fi that pushed me towards emotional insight also made me aware of the costs of manipulation and button pushing. Fi lends itself to self-criticism. I think it's a hard place for an Fi-dom to live without quickly falling into self-hatred.

Well said.

Walking through a crowd by myself was like riding an emotional roller coaster: happy, sad, angry, depressed, deadened, in-love... all in the space of seconds as I looked at various people.

As much as the NT's barf at this, I can relate. Emotions can be sticky for sure.

I have a very close INFP friend that says very similiar things about herself. She claims that she can't watch graphic, intense movies without taking on the emotions of the movie herself. It's like there's no barrier, and it's quite interesting.

I stopped reading fiction years and years ago because many authors have no respect for the emotional journey they are taking their readers on. I watch movies and they are very visceral to me; I find it a challenge to be emotionally detached.

Perhaps you guys are very inclined towards empathy, but I still think it's an acquired skill, and nobody can be naturally good at empathizing.

If someone said NT's were naturally inclined with constructs, would you argue with that?

You have to ask questions from your outer world, create some sort of emotional database for referencing, and come across an array of different people before you can accurately empathize. Until you do that, the feelings that you believe you are taking in are just arbitrary hunches with nothing to back them except your own gut. I think this might be why Fi users come off as presumptuous some times, honestly. They don't ask the questions that they should ask in order to enhance their empathetic skills. I simply refuse to believe that Fi users have an innate ability to understand the emotions of others. That sounds almost supernatural. I believe that Fi users are inherently sensitive and generally place a lot of value in emotions, so they take pride in being empathetic, even when their empathy is erroneous.

Lets assume we have an innate ability to feel the emotions of others. But we learn how to understand them, by using the critical analysis you describe above. Just like NT's hone their natural talents as well.

It's like a loop actually... We (INFPs I mean) are conflict-averse and every post we make seems like we are sticking our necks out. And given the fact that we are not very good at explaining what Fi is, our positive comments either get ignored as biased or get shot down. Which would seem like a personal attack on us instead of our ideas, and we become even more cautious and defensive of what to say, and end up bottling everything up inside.

Well said.

We can be wrong. We can be mistaken. It's empathy, but it's fallible empathy.

Being accurate is an acquired skill. Being tuned into subtle cues and reading into them less so.

I can cope well with an individual's pain-the pain of the masses can overwhelm me. My entp asks how I know that the pain I feel is what they feel. I have no idea. All I know is that I feel pain and anxiety.

At work I had an office I'd say was as good as the CEO's.

I traded it for a cube this last week as I could not handle the constant stream of traffic. Every face would carry stress, anxiety, emotion. I could not block it.

Again, as much as other types might barf at this, I can relate as well.

The Te reaction is something like the following:

1: who the F do you think you are? (If a superior, go to 2, if not, start raising hell)
2: do the words coming out of the person's mouth sound like English? (If yes, go to 3, if no, go to 4)
3: do those words make any sense? (If yes, go to 5, if no, ignore and continue on as before)
4: is the person supposed to be speaking English? (If yes, ignore and continue on as before, if no, switch gears to proper language and start again at 1)
5: do the instructions logically follow? (If yes, go to 6, if no, go to 7)
6: is there any way the instructions could be improved? (If yes, point out the improvements, and go to 8, if no, comply with the instructions)
7: does it make any sense to raise the issue? (If yes, start the NeTi browbeating, if no, comply passive-aggressively)
8: does the superior agree with your improvements? (If yes, feel good about yourself, if no, comply passive-aggressively and start looking for a new job)

Loved that; hilarious!

For example, I find empathy to be presumptuous. ... I think empathy divorced from action is rather self-serving and dishonest, in general. So, I don't indulge in that either. For example, it may seem logical to feel pity or sadness for a homeless person, but for all I know they may enjoy living on the streets. It's not completely improbable. Likewise, unless I am sufficiently motivated to "do something" about homelessness, why should I engage in empathy? Because I am struck by disgust, pity, sadness, or the questions and conflicts the concept of homelessness stirs in me?

Well said.

Exactly. Or like someone with good pitch being forced to listen to something off-key. You can't NOT react... but it's not supernatural.

Indeed! And please, no pitchiness allowed.

You're welcome! I am your humble servant.

To my mind, the process should be as follows:

* Pang of emotional reaction
* Check the emotional reaction for reasonability and consonance with reality.

AHA! Condensed by an ENTP. Synarch, I send you a million !

I know for me, my empathy is bound to situations I've personally experienced. When someone says they have/had a family member who has cancer and all the effects of that I feel like I can safely say I empathize.

But there are so many contexts; I respectfully submit you may not know what that person is experiencing at all. It's sympathy, a kinship definitely. But empathy cannot assume to EVER understand. FEEL, yes. UNDERSTAND, no. You are all correct in seeing presumption if someone claims to understand how you feel.

Do you ever notice that when a loved one is touched with a disease (for example) some folks will suddenly grow interested in fund-raising for that cause. But the pain didn't just start there, you know what I mean? The need has been there all along. But only when someone gets personally affected do they do anything about it. Sympathy is easier to pick and choose; empathy not so.

What's interesting to me is why this thread sat here for a couple of days before anyone commented? Maybe people were reluctant to...obviously there's a lot of opinion about this topic anytime it's brought up it typically explodes into this.

LOL, I wondered if I had stated something so obvious that it didn't bear further dissection. I am curious myself really.

But it only took off once someone felt like they got offended. So I can't take any credit...

For me, I feel like a little boat bouncing amongst the waves. The deep water contains my hidden emotional world. But, I can see it only dimly from above.

can't stop me

I've always liked the deep ocean metaphor - it's fitting. It's easy for INFPs to explore the depths and ignore the surface, and ENTPs to do the opposite. It's not possible to focus on everything at once, as the ocean is pretty big.

From the depths, I may notice underwater currents that affect the surface directions, but I'm capable of missing the storms and winds that often have a larger affect on a surface dwelling boat.

But that is what makes it admirable.

They stick to their guns. No compromises to the vision.

can't stop me

Fi is not necessarily more authentic but Fi users seem let their feelings go more out into the open, IME.

Ewwww, no, don't agree with that

So I was saying that empathizing isn't claiming special inner knowledge of the other person necessarily. It's just an inner echo of what emotion we perceive, correctly or incorrectly.

I can't read your mind, but I am good at picking winning lottery tickets, so y'all can call me anytime for the lotto numbers!

Love the discussion; thanks for the hearty responses! Fi or Fe, I just loves you all!

 

[Kalach]

Do you find you just say Fuck You and quit playing if people refuse to listen to Te? ie Apathy? Then watch them all bomb and just say "I told you so"

Depends. If I'm Audi, then I won't be around to watch the project bomb. I'll have washed my hands of it and disappeared. But extricating myself is a tough business. It takes some hard decision-making and maybe some tantrums before I can.

To have first become involved I'll have emo-agreed (with myself) to deploy the vast insight and pendulous tools that are mine in the direction of the objects concerned. And I'm either committed or I'm not, since half-assing stuff feels bad. And having grown up with a very modest attachment to the immediate physical world plus a tendency to need lots of time to do semi-guided speculation (and like it), my commitment tends to be advisory, as in "My contribution is this: follow it, you fucks!", requiring with a whip that the other people add the muscle. In other words, I'm committed to finding an answer and a means. It's an odd combination and the emo tends to be wearying and one gets a little too aware of the cost of failure. Thus, commitments are made knowing their cost, meaning once the commitment is made, it's made, because a shitload of other commitments had been for quite the longest time avoided and if I'm in this one, it's one of the few that I'm in and I want to be able to do at least something in this life. Can be a tough emo to break.

Something like that.

 

[OrangeAppled]

I like this, but I can't ignore group standards. I am too aware of them, too aware of expectations. Perhaps this is what makes Fi so ephemeral to explain - it is uniquely expressed in each individual as opposed to Fe, where the rules seem more clear.

I can ignore them, to my detriment. It doesn't come naturally for me to recognize the value in them. I have to reason it out & connect it to a base value I hold, and sometimes I need help from someone else. My ISFJ mom and I have a lot of discussions where she helps me to see the value in what I unfairly write off as rote and fake, and I help her to see that people can have very different motivations, feelings, and responses from what she sees as the "norm" and that it is not necessarily "wrong".

I think you are assuming that projecting means saying it out loud. Is that the distinction you are making OA?

No, I was talking about taking personal offense. That has nothing to do with projecting feeling onto people. I may be sensitive to criticism, but that doesn't mean I project motive onto people. The reaction is about my feeling, not theirs. However, if I learn the motive, it can temper my feeling or incite it further. Someone can have noble motive, but I don't have to accept their manner because of it. I don't see how sensitivity equals projecting, basically.

 

[simulatedworld]

Ok very interesting sim. Tell me then why they feel at odds with each other to me. Example: I am tired and simply want to have some alone-time for a recharge. Get a phone call, someone is feeling down and wants to talk / can I come help at church whatever. I don't really want to do anything (empathy-ometer is reading LOW) but they need help. So I put my own needs in the back-seat. Are you saying Fi is arguing with Fi? In my limited understanding of the functions, I see this as Fi arguing with Fe. Fe wins, but because I placed a high value to be responsive to the needs of others ala Fi.

No, this is just Fi arguing with physical tiredness. The "I want to stay in and rest" is just coming from your own base physical needs, not cognitive functions.

In this case you end up deciding to go help the person because being supportive of friends who ask for support is important to you. It's Fi because the source of the value comes from your internal ethical system, not from any external standard. Again it's the source of motivation that matters here, not the actual behavior itself. Fi can easily be responsible for motivating you to help others, if helping others is an important part of your internal subjective values.

What do you think of that? Or is is just because I am afraid no one will like me if I don't help ALL the time? And what would function would that be attributable to?

Being afraid of not fulfilling externally imposed social obligations would be Fe. Since that has no importance to you and you're helping due to a personal belief that it's important to be emotionally supportive to your friends, it's Fi.

I like this, but I can't ignore group standards. I am too aware of them, too aware of expectations. Perhaps this is what makes Fi so ephemeral to explain - it is uniquely expressed in each individual as opposed to Fe, where the rules seem more clear.

You may be aware of expectations, but you don't follow them unless they're in line with your personal standards. That's what makes this Fi.

An Fe user would fulfill whatever social obligations his/her group expects of him regardless of whether they seem internally consistent to him/her. An Fi user needs to personally feel that it's the right thing to do without any feedback or influence from any external standard.

Again, just because you're doing something to help others that may happen to fall in line with group standards doesn't mean you're using Fe. It's not Fe unless you're following group standards for the sake of group standards alone.

 

[PeaceBaby]

I don't see how sensitivity equals projecting, basically.

Ahh, thanks for the clarification.

No, this is just Fi arguing with physical tiredness. The "I want to stay in and rest" is just coming from your own base physical needs, not cognitive functions.

In this case you end up deciding to go help the person because being supportive of friends who ask for support is important to you. It's Fi because the source of the value comes from your internal ethical system, not from any external standard. Again it's the source of motivation that matters here, not the actual behavior itself. Fi can easily be responsible for motivating you to help others, if helping others is an important part of your internal subjective values.

Being afraid of not fulfilling externally imposed social obligations would be Fe. Since that has no importance to you and you're helping due to a personal belief that it's important to be emotionally supportive to your friends, it's Fi.

You may be aware of expectations, but you don't follow them unless they're in line with your personal standards. That's what makes this Fi.

An Fe user would fulfill whatever social obligations his/her group expects of him regardless of whether they seem internally consistent to him/her. An Fi user needs to personally feel that it's the right thing to do without any feedback or influence from any external standard.

Again, just because you're doing something to help others that may happen to fall in line with group standards doesn't mean you're using Fe. It's not Fe unless you're following group standards for the sake of group standards alone.

Thanks sim - but how am I so aware of group standards at all? In your opinion, am I not using Fe anywhere in this equation? If I didn't use Fe how would I know?

And this makes Fe sound like it lacks a set of fundamental values, an ethical core, since you say it can change basically at whim. If an Fe user were transplanted into another culture, theoretically it would be easy for them to change their behaviour to meet the new standards (once understood). But would Fe users say this sounds like them?

And Fi sounds like it only feeds upon itself - but the values had to come from somewhere - where did they come from? (And I think that is mentioned in thread already somewhere else, perhaps by you, I'll check.) If Fi values are built over time via experience and reaction, this does have to look outside - be cognizant of a variety of factors, both internal and external.

Is this not indicative that the functions cannot exist in isolation without coloring the others?

 

[KLessard]

Fi in SFPs

Does Fi here only apply to NFs with Fi or Fi in general? In my dealings with SFPs, I have encountered a very different Fi than the empathetic NFPs' Fi.

I have found that some SFPs are so attuned to their own feelings that they will miss out on how their actions hurt or affect other people's feelings. If they feel right about what they are doing, that's all that matters. For example, this is a quote from shortnsweet on her difficulties with commitment (which is a potential source of conflict/pain/frustration in a relationship): "I feel like I am justified in everything." Is that what you call shortsightedness?
You have to tell them quite clearly that you have been hurt, or they will only realize/ deal with it long after the incident.

I don't remember having had those problems in my relationships with NFPs. The N makes a big difference somehow. I think it's about being able to imagine how the other person will feel and acting accordingly.

What do you think?

 

[sculpting]

this is a very old thread...with answers I never checked back in for...interesting..I guess I was busy entp hating back then....

As for Fi in Se users...they lead with Se and back up with Ni.

What I have found in myself is that My Si is written in stone. Thus I cant ignore or modify the FiSi loops and guilt I feel. I can try and supress with Te or move on with Ne, but my FiSi waits for me....then I feel very heavily loaded by emotional guilt. It is very hard to not be honest with myself.

What I see in my ESFP sister is a different approach. She will often "replay" past experiences through Ni...thus seeing them from a "new" perspective. A perspective that justifies her actions. My mom and I used to think she was a pathological liar as her version of an event would be so very far from what we recalled and contain no sense of responsibility.

Now, keep in mind my sister qualifies as quite unhealthy thus is an extreme example of this behavior-not at all like the kindness I have seen shortnsweet display.

But I could see during periods of being very, very hurt, that this Ni shift is used to protect the Fi from all of the emotional pain and later the SeFi user can sort or reprocess the event.

Fi pain can be horrifying, thus to be SeFi or FiSe could be nightmarish if they did not have that Ni ability to shift perspective and step away from their pain.

But these are, as always, just guesses, thus I hope are of no offense to anyone.

 

[KLessard]

I don't doubt shortnsweet's kindness. I think SFPs rarely ever hurt intentionally. They only fail to imagine how you are feeling (shortsightedness). And if they don't feel like they have done something wrong, they won't realize there is a problem at all. I think it also has to do with SPs' difficulty with conventions. They sometimes don't see that something is potentially hurtful or impolite in itself.

 

[sulfit]

Whatever internal subjective values my Fe gets loaded with are in fact derived from my Ni and Ti, introverted subjective functions. According to what Jung wrote all of the extraverted functions are objective and I tend to agree with him. They are directed at the world outside, at the object. Only if you give holistic analysis to this model and recognize that Fe does not function on its own, then it becomes clear how Fe users are even able to promote their own personal goals in life and not always conform to the group.

 

[Affably Evil]

If an Fe user were transplanted into another culture, theoretically it would be easy for them to change their behaviour to meet the new standards (once understood). But would Fe users say this sounds like them?

I worked for two years in rural Japan. Despite being extremely different from what I was used to (social expectations, language, work environment/expectations, etc.) this is exactly what I did. To the point where another friend argued vehemently that I was overly subsuming myself in this other culture and its demands to unhealthy degrees. It wasn't that it was easy to change my behavior, rather, more like it was requisite that I adapt myself to that external social world as much as possible.

 

[skylights]

huh. this is an intense thread. interesting, but intense.

I'm a southern and many of the customs seem to be Fe-based. There is a lot of importance on what is socially appropriate. On one hand, I really like the fact that I can go out in public and be greeted kindly by complete strangers. However, I also like the fact that whenever I visit family up north that usually when I'm greeted it's, like you said, because the people are genuinely interested in me.

this is such a good point! i was born and live in the south but my family is northern, and i agree that southern culture is more Fe and northern is more Fi. i do really love southern hospitality and am quite well-versed in it, but in a lot of ways i still relax when i go up north, because up there it's not really held against me if i'm not immediately friendly or accommodating.

You're already claiming the apex of emotional intelligence: empathy. Any student of psychology or casual self-help book puts empathy at the top of the emotional food chain and evidently NFPs are naturally predisposed towards that than any other type. I can't do anything better than that! You have the golden ticket!

this is interesting. i'm psych student and i dunno if i'd put empathy at the top of the emotional food chain. more like self-esteem, actually.

i envy NiFe a lot regardless of who lays claim to empathy. if there's one function i'm really impressed by and covet, it'd be Ni. i don't really get why empathy is the "golden ticket", but it does kinda suggest why you're adamant that it does not belong to Fi.

You're welcome! I am your humble servant.

To my mind, the process should be as follows:

* Pang of emotional reaction
* Check the emotional reaction for reasonability and consonance with reality.

so simple and well-put! i completely agree with you. when Te is working well for me, this happens.

For us (well, some of us) emotions are not inherently threatening. They just are. Plus they often carry meaningful data with them. When I feel irritated at someone, I ask why. That irritation is important information and may indicate subtle things like underhanded manipulation on the other person's part. My irritation isn't the only truth, but it represents a bunch of subtle, unconscious judgments and should be taken seriously. On the other hand, if I'm irritated just because the other person has a habit of saying "ummm" every other word... not so important.

very much yes, to this. emotions can be annoying or upsetting, but are generally not threatening. like seymour said, they just are. they tell me things and i can alter them to a certain extent if i choose to do so. but often i do not want to - just like i tend not to take drugs unless it's very important. the signals i am receiving from my body and mind are indicators of something - a fever indicating increased immune response and uneasiness indicating incongruity in a situation. if i read these signals well, they tell me how to take care of myself as well as how better to interact with the world at the given time.

The funny part is that I know I'm an arrogant ass... the thing is, my little bro knows that I've got his back 24/7/365. I think that might be the key for Fi-users... if they know you'll be there for them no matter what, there's less likelihood for them to interpret your actions outside of good faith.

haha, yeah, this is true.

You know a super simple personal understanding of Fe vs Fi is that Fe is that warm, outgoing even touchy feely quality in people. Fe is confidently coming up to strangers and hugging them.

Fe and Fi irl from what Ive seen feel very different. Fi is often cold and prickly and awkward and self conscious itself unless buffered with other aspects.

to me, the big difference is that Fi feels passive while Fe feeks active - so Fi is just accepting, while Fe is actively warm. or cold, depending. i don't get "cold" so much out of Fi as simply uninterested (which can feel "cruel" too). Fi is simply not as aware or intentional, regardless of whether that contributes to the impression being good, or bad.

I stopped reading fiction years and years ago because many authors have no respect for the emotional journey they are taking their readers on. I watch movies and they are very visceral to me; I find it a challenge to be emotionally detached.

me too! i cannot do those books written for women about other women like a lot of my friends read. they affect me too much. i avoid some movies, too. i like action and adventure and fun. i have enough emotion in my life already, thx, i don't want a tearjerker movie.

oddly enough this makes me way more likely to enjoy moviegoing with an STP or other such type than another NF.

Lets assume we have an innate ability to feel the emotions of others. But we learn how to understand them, by using the critical analysis you describe above. Just like NT's hone their natural talents as well.

yes!!! Fi is a mirror for feeling, but not necessarily for understanding. we have to interpret motivation, and we don't know. we can't even pinpoint emotion, but it's a certain 6th sense of just... well, picking up on "feelings." just like Ti has a 6th sense for whether something's gonna work. i would hate to ever assume that i understand exactly what another person is going through. but it's easy for me to be where they are at, so to speak. to get right on their emotional level, so i can begin to see things from where they are. and that makes it easier to understand their point of view, but also easier to lose my own.

And this makes Fe sound like it lacks a set of fundamental values, an ethical core, since you say it can change basically at whim. If an Fe user were transplanted into another culture, theoretically it would be easy for them to change their behaviour to meet the new standards (once understood). But would Fe users say this sounds like them?

well, i do feel like i have decent Fe, but i did this when i moved abroad for a while too. it was fun changing to meet the new culture, but i didn't feel like i was selling out or anything because i was still being myself, just in a different way.