[Fe] Fe: No cute title...I just don't get it

[heart]

Protean, those women put you on the spot, that's not at all what's meant about Fe feeling fake to some of us Fi people. They really forced you to fabricate and they were rude by strict standards of behavior really.

The following comment not Fe related, the dreaded office potluck is to many people!

LOL, I'm always on a "diet" ad "not hungry" at those times. I am phobic as hell about people's food safety habits. Why? Because of what I've seen!

I know I've pissed a lot of people off in my time over this issue, most of them women.

Edit: Like once at work they brought in KFC and while I was over in the corner being mousey and avoiding the feeding and social freenzy, I heard the manager tell his pet that he'd spilled the mashed potatoes all over his backseat but had scraped them up and back into the container. That food had also sat in his car a good four hours with no refrigeration.

 

[BlueScreen]

FPs et al, please tell me what you would've done not appear "fake" still be polite, and come out unscathed. Because I don't know if you know what it's like to have a coven of women hovering around you asking you to try their food and then daring to ask if you like it or not. Do you say "oh the cornbread was a little dry" or "Your pansit has pork in it and I don't eat pork" or "the sweet potatoes taste like vomit." Do you all really say those things flat out to people? You know what the hell I did? I smiled and said each time I was asked "It tastes delicious!" I guess I am fake as hell then.

I'm OK with it though.

We just spin it a bit. Like I'm not a fan of this, but damn that dip is awesome. It evens out enough that they don't punch us .

You have to also think about the consequences of being nice in each situation. That is half the reason an NFPs thinking will circumvent niceness in some cases not others; the Ne maps in something that has a higher value. For example: What if the person with the food was actually looking for feedback and making decisions on it. They get to the end of the day and think all these people loved my product I should market and sell it. A year later after much hard work and spending of all their savings they get it ready for sale, but it really tasted crap and they go bust in the first few weeks. If you had told them it was crap they would've been happier. Obviously these people were probably just offering you food, I just thought I'd give an insight why we have less trouble telling truth about it.

On the topic you quoted from me it might be INFJ in an uncomfortable spot rather than their normal state. I think it is the introversion sometimes can drag them away. It wasn't a good thing to demonise or to attribute to Fe, because it probably has nothing to do with it and more to do with shyness. I actually quite enjoy ENFJ company, and INFJ for that matter, just being perfectionist wanted to iron out the bumps, but maybe pushed too hard to get answers.

 

[BlueScreen]

Yeah, people are gonna have to give me some examples here.

I'm hearing people talk about Fe in the abstract being "fake" but it's thin on actual situations. It's almost as if people that decry Fe as fake are never in situations that require some fancy footwork to extricate themselves from. If you all have any pointed I would LOVE to hear them. I'm serious because I could use some new moves.

This is actually quite interesting. A lot of things we don't conform to are because they give us one of those catch 22 situations with our values. I actually understand this. In the discussions you'll see ENFP needs truth over formality and the goal is understanding for all but we also want people at their full potential and happy. Sometimes these things completely entangle and we don't see a correct way out. So we look at longer term and decide in the short term harmony going is better than grid lock, because it propels people to move out of their comfort zone hence learn and move through the problem. You'll see lot of other examples also. But it's cool how Ne and Ni and Fe and Fi both have similar workings and problems.

 

[sarah]

Yeah, people are gonna have to give me some examples here.

I'm hearing people talk about Fe in the abstract being "fake" but it's thin on actual situations. It's almost as if people that decry Fe as fake are never in situations that require some fancy footwork to extricate themselves from. If you all have any pointed I would LOVE to hear them. I'm serious because I could use some new moves.

I'll even give yall one.

This past week we had the dreaded Annual Multicultural Potluck Celebration. That's when people bring in homecooked dishes representing their culture or cultures of their choosing. I HATE IT. I don't trust eating people's food, I don't like pretending I like it, I just hate this thing. This year a friend and I were going to sneak out for lunch before our coworkers we're friends with came looking for us to go the potluck.

I made it to the elevator and the damn thing was taking an eternity to get to my floor. The door opened and here was one of my coworkers going to the kitchen to heat up her food.

"Where are you going?"
"Oh, I'm headed downstairs."
"You're not going to the potluck?"
"Um, I'm going to get lunch downstairs " (Now that I think about it maybe this is where I should've lied!)
"Why are you buying lunch when we have the multicultural luncheon?"
"I love to waste money when I don't need too!"
"Are you at least going to try my [insert dish]?"
"Well you know those burritos fill you up..."
"OK, well I'll save you some!"

By now a couple of other coworkers I'm friendly with have seen me and they're like "where are you going too" Repeat story from above. They all are like "well why don't you just look around and see if there's anything you like." I end up caving and eating food, people asking me if I like and I LIE LIKE HELL.

FPs et al, please tell me what you would've done not appear "fake" still be polite, and come out unscathed. Because I don't know if you know what it's like to have a coven of women hovering around you asking you to try their food and then daring to ask if you like it or not. Do you say "oh the cornbread was a little dry" or "Your pansit has pork in it and I don't eat pork" or "the sweet potatoes taste like vomit." Do you all really say those things flat out to people? You know what the hell I did? I smiled and said each time I was asked "It tastes delicious!" I guess I am fake as hell then.

I'm OK with it though.

Wow! What PUSHY coworkers! How awful, being forced into a situation like that (even if the food were actually delicious). I think you deserve masses of credit for being gracious to them.

This potluck is only once a year, right? Could you just plan on taking a sick day on the day of the potluck and do work from your home computer?

I guess I'm not as funamentally honest as some people here are because I would probably have lied right at the elevator door and said I didn't feel too well and was thinking of going home. If they pushed me about trying their food anyway, I'd probably fake feeling dizzy and a little nauseous and gone home just to get away from them. They can "save me" all the leftover food they want to, and if they asked me about how it tasted later, I'd just say something vague and noncommittal like "You know, that reminds me of something I've had before, but I can't remember where. Do you have the recipe and would you be willing to share?" (I figure asking for the recipe would make them they think I liked it without my actually having to say I liked it.)

Sarah

 

[Amargith]

I'd have to agree with noigmn. When you try the food and you do not like it, just say that it's not your cup of tea, but make it a point to point out the one thing you did like. Really look for that one thing. It evens the scales. I also would use: It's not bad, but I'm not fond of [insert ingredient]. That way, you don't put all the blame on the cook and can keep the peace while still being honest.

 

[Eric B]

What I always thought was phony Fe was in megachurches when they say "OK; everyone now greet the person next to you", who are mostly stangers. I prefer smaller churches where everyone can know each other, and that feels more like real group connection.

 

[TenebrousReflection]

FPs et al, please tell me what you would've done not appear "fake" still be polite, and come out unscathed. Because I don't know if you know what it's like to have a coven of women hovering around you asking you to try their food and then daring to ask if you like it or not. Do you say "oh the cornbread was a little dry" or "Your pansit has pork in it and I don't eat pork" or "the sweet potatoes taste like vomit." Do you all really say those things flat out to people? You know what the hell I did? I smiled and said each time I was asked "It tastes delicious!" I guess I am fake as hell then.

I'm OK with it though.

Well there are a few things like most fish, and eggs (boiled or fried) that I strongly dislike and will not eat (and will be blunt about not liking) if I see or smell those things in them, but for the most part I like trying new foods. In that situation, I would first look for anything that did look appealing, and take a good portion of it, then I would take a small portion of a few other things. This would enable me to fill a plate with something I could probably give a positive comment on, and a few other things I could give a critique in the way you mentioend you thought and FP might (somethign like "well, the cornbread was fairly good, but I think I would have enjoyed it more if there had been some butter and honey to go with it" or for something a bit more dislikeable "Well, the pumpkin stew was rather unique, but I think its best in small amounts to add some variety to the meal"). And for the things I wanted to avoid, I would say, oh, I didn't have enouhg room to try everything and my plate was full before I got to your dish. - but back to the original idea, a white lie thats told to protect someones feelings (especialy when someone is confronted about it in a food situation like you mention) is not the kind of fakeness that offends me (I'd still rather get honest polite criticizm than a white lie, and try to avoid them myself, but I don't get too upset by them). Its the out of the blue stuff thats insincere that bothers me (as I mentioned expressing interest in someones well being etc when its not a genuine concern of the speaker or unprompted flattery without sincerity). When one is put on the spot about the same things, then it becomes a case of finding somethign diplomatic to say, and while Fi and Fe are comfortable with different things there, the acto of puttign someone on the spot is excuses any fakeness that may occur for the sake of harmony (at least for me, thats a dividing line).

 

[proteanmix]

You have to also think about the consequences of being nice in each situation. That is half the reason an NFPs thinking will circumvent niceness in some cases not others; the Ne maps in something that has a higher value. For example: What if the person with the food was actually looking for feedback and making decisions on it. They get to the end of the day and think all these people loved my product I should market and sell it. A year later after much hard work and spending of all their savings they get it ready for sale, but it really tasted crap and they go bust in the first few weeks. If you had told them it was crap they would've been happier. Obviously these people were probably just offering you food, I just thought I'd give an insight why we have less trouble telling truth about it.

Noigmn dearest I realize this.

Which is why I thought it would be a higher value for me to choke down food that I don't particularly care for, for a couple of hours, with people who I do enjoy (they're not bad people), for an event that happens once a year. I guess I don't view a potluck as a battleground for my values. No I don't like it and I didn't want to go, but it wasn't the end of the world.

And I also think about the repercussions of my "niceness." What's it worth to me and the other person in the long run. How it will affect our relationship. These are people I work with, day in and day out. There's some bobbing and weaving that is necessary. I personally don't think it's a good idea for me to situations like this as battleground for values.

If I'm going to a food tasting and I've been to those before where the chef is looking for critical feedback on their food, I'm not going to tell them "It's delish!" when I know that is detrimental to their whole purpose. This particular situation I used is not a situation where critical feedback is welcome. It was a casual work event, not Top Chef.

Given that I'd considered those factors in the few minutes while I was being mobbed, I thought to myself what will it hurt you to do this? Of course I momentarily panicked and thought about my stomach cramping from diarrhea and hours on the toilet but eh.

I guess I'm not as funamentally honest as some people here are because I would probably have lied right at the elevator door and said I didn't feel too well and was thinking of going home. If they pushed me about trying their food anyway, I'd probably fake feeling dizzy and a little nauseous and gone home just to get away from them. They can "save me" all the leftover food they want to, and if they asked me about how it tasted later, I'd just say something vague and noncommittal like "You know, that reminds me of something I've had before, but I can't remember where. Do you have the recipe and would you be willing to share?" (I figure asking for the recipe would make them they think I liked it without my actually having to say I liked it.)

Sarah

Me too Sarah. When threads like this happen I sometimes feel like people are saying Fi will always be honest and truthful and those with Fe will be slippery and untruthful, when I just don't see it that way. I hope I'm not inflating my dealings with people but I think I get along with 95% of people I come into contact with on a daily basis and when low stakes social stuff like this happens, I credit this type of action to keeping it that way. I guess you could also say the accumulation of this small stuff makes some Fe-doms look like Pink's smarmy used car salesman. When I encounter other FJs I suppose we know the "rules" that sometimes asking how someone is doing really doesn't mean that you really want to know. I don't find that kind of thing fake. I just say great and keep moving. I know the people who I can really go deep with and everyone else is white noise. I make it very clear to those people who I really want to know the depth and extent of what's going on in their lives that it's not some passing nicety tossed out over my shoulder. It depends on the nature of the relationship and my appropriateness meter kicks in.

TenebrousReflection, thank you for the advice. When you've used that method in the past, how have people responded? Like I said, I have little problem with lying in smaller annoyances like this. Now my whole moral framework is in jeopardy of crumbling! :steam:

 

[BlueScreen]

What I always thought was phony Fe was in megachurches when they say "OK; everyone now greet the person next to you", who are mostly stangers. I prefer smaller churches where everyone can know each other, and that feels more like real group connection.

I have trouble with lots of things in churches, but this isn't one of them. I actually like the chance to be social and greet new people. I feel uncomfortable and antisocial sitting in a room next to people and not greeting or knowing the people.

 

[BlueScreen]

And I also think about the repercussions of my "niceness." What's it worth to me and the other person in the long run. How it will affect our relationship. These are people I work with, day in and day out.

...

This particular situation I used is not a situation where critical feedback is welcome. It was a casual work event, not Top Chef.

. Yeh, get where you are coming from. eg. If Martha brings in cookies for the kids we obviously aren't going to go analytical on her, but I'll say from my point of view, there is little chance a work colleague will stop liking you because you didn't choke down their food, or say it was nice. It is not really something that decides a relationship.

Still a lot of the time it is inappropriate to make a statement about not liking it because of the context, ie. with the cookies, no one really wants to know your view on not liking them; so you say if you like them as a compliment, and don't say if you don't like them. And if they ask in that situation, depending on how much it mattered to them, I'd tell the same lie as you guys, because it is a harmless lie (builds them up at no cost to anything).

We aren't really bound to truth either. For us truth doesn't hold as much ground as clarity and understanding. A lie is in no way wrong or evil, unless accompanied by malice and intent to harm, and our view on that even extends to impact and justification of the malice. Like I love 'The Count of Monte Cristo', and there is no way he is non-malicious or truthful in his dealings. It's probably the same with everyone; There are so many factors in the decision that you can't make a general rule. I've got a feeling on the truth thing though that we factor in more distant and low percentage things than most types; seeing Ne is throwing all contradictory possible futures at us. And all we need is one that can cause devastation, it can even be at the 20% chance sort of level, and we will try to find a nice way to tell the truth.

p.s. higher values meant higher values in our value system (Fi), not anything universal or moral. We tend to jump from absolute, emotional and core to completely subjective and logical a lot. Most things we write are contextual though, so look at what surrounds them. You probably got that looking at your response but I've noticed it doesn't always translate correctly.

 

[heart]

. but I'll say from my point of view, there is little chance a work colleague will stop liking you because you didn't choke down their food, or say it was nice. It is not really something that decides a relationship. ..

Have you worked in an office?

It might not be a deciding factor for you about who you would like or not like at work, but my goodness I've worked with some petty and/or messed up people in the past and I have even seen people dislike someone over the type of shoes they wear!

Anyone rude enought to push "did you like it, did you really like it!" may very well not have the personally development to rise above pettiness.

Work social situations are so scary and bizare to me, lol.

 

[BlueScreen]

Have you worked in an office?

It might not be a deciding factor for you about who you would like or not like at work, but my goodness I've worked with some petty and/or messed up people in the past and I have even seen people dislike someone over the type of shoes they wear!

Anyone rude enought to push "did you like it, did you really like it!" may very well not have the personally development to rise above pettiness.

Work social situations are so scary and bizare to me, lol.

Nah, I haven't worked in an office. I have the bad ENFP habit of getting stuck at uni and studying new things.

It might also be a cultural difference. People are really laid back in Australia. If they are around then maybe I avoid those people or something...

I love your signature quote too .

 

[sarah]

Noigmn dearest I realize this.
When threads like this happen I sometimes feel like people are saying Fi will always be honest and truthful and those with Fe will be slippery and untruthful, when I just don't see it that way. I hope I'm not inflating my dealings with people but I think I get along with 95% of people I come into contact with on a daily basis and when low stakes social stuff like this happens, I credit this type of action to keeping it that way. I guess you could also say the accumulation of this small stuff makes some Fe-doms look like Pink's smarmy used car salesman. When I encounter other FJs I suppose we know the "rules" that sometimes asking how someone is doing really doesn't mean that you really want to know. I don't find that kind of thing fake. I just say great and keep moving. I know the people who I can really go deep with and everyone else is white noise. I make it very clear to those people who I really want to know the depth and extent of what's going on in their lives that it's not some passing nicety tossed out over my shoulder. It depends on the nature of the relationship and my appropriateness meter kicks in.

Hm.... I think it's vanity that makes some Fi-preferring people think that they're only capable of being fundamentally honest and people who have their "opposite" preferences must therefore not be. Honesty isn't related to type preferences.

From what I understand, Fi is related to self-awareness and self-reflection, and Fi-preferring people tend to be very good at knowing what they value and why, and also what they believe to be true regardless of what all their friends value and believe is true. And they're very likely to stick up for their beliefs and values regardless of what others say because it's kind of unthinkable for us to be living a lie all the time. But that doesn't translate into Fi-preferring people being honest all the time, although I think we tend to be really bothered by our actions --and even wallow in self-loathing-- if we know we aren't living in accordance with our values. Still, whether Fi-preferring always speak the truth no matter what depends on what they choose to value and how they see value in expressing it.

Since honesty is a value that is highly esteemed by most people all over the world, naturally it stands to reason that Fe-preferring people value it too, and believe that society as a whole would crumble if people didn't agree to uphold it together as a shared value. It seems to me that whether or not Fe-preferring people are always honest has everything to do with specific social interactions. For example, it may be fine to lie about your opinion of somebody's potluck dish, but wrong to lie about stuff that would atually hurt someone. (I might be wrong about this, but it seems to me that Judith Martin's advice in her Miss Manners books might be a good example of how one can avoid lying outright and yet be evasive about one's real opinions in order to keep whatever is said within the boundaries of appropriateness and socially-acceptable rules of behavior.)

FWIW, my Fe-dominant husband (ENFJ) is one of the most honest people I know. He can't stand the thought of living inauthentically, and he's very good at wording his disapproval in terms that don't hurt others' feelings. I admire that about him.

Sarah

 

[Kestrel]

Hm.... I think it's vanity that makes some Fi-preferring people think that they're only capable of being fundamentally honest and people who have their "opposite" preferences must therefore not be. Honesty isn't related to type preferences.

Great post. I absolutely agree. Some of the most honest people I know are FE users. But, I'm not an expert on these functions (and judging from some of the earlier posts in this thread, neither are many others).

I can occasionally process my emotions before they manifest themselves in other people's realities. This is not always the case... sometimes I can't get away or get the space needed to do this. Or if I'm really enraged, I'll just totally skip this phase (doesn't happen often).

Fi seems honest in the regard that it's raw and unprocessed. But the downside seems to be that it has the potential to be reactionary and unyielding. Someone correct me if I'm off-base.

 

[BlueScreen]

Fi seems honest in the regard that it's raw and unprocessed. But the downside seems to be that it has the potential to be reactionary and unyielding. Someone correct me if I'm off-base.

In the Fe domain: yes, we are unyielding. But that is because we don't value a lot of the things you do. We have no reason to work toward them or chase them, and we don't find fulfillment in achieving them unless they also achieve an Fi value. You just need to judge productivity outside your view of the world.

Just out of interest also, do you guys notice it is a little insulting calling Fi raw and unprocessed, or reactionary and unyielding? It's just we always seem to get pulled up by Fe on this stuff, but don't really make a show back about it.

 

[Kestrel]

Just out of interest also, do you guys notice it is a little insulting calling Fi raw and unprocessed, or reactionary and unyielding? It's just we always seem to get pulled up by Fe on this stuff, but don't really make a show back about it.

I didn't mean to be insulting, but how many "Fi people" have slammed Fe in this and other threads? I'm pointing out a "downside". Doesn't every function have a downside? I asked you to correct me if I was wrong in my observation.

Both functions seek the same thing, why does one have to be better?

 

[sarah]

Just out of interest also, do you guys notice it is a little insulting calling Fi raw and unprocessed, or reactionary and unyielding? It's just we always seem to get pulled up by Fe on this stuff, but don't really make a show back about it.

Well, I can't say I specifically experience my use of Fi as raw and/or unprocessed, since I spend a great deal of time processing my feelings by thinking about them, trying to understand them, and trying to live in accordance with them. But maybe it looks that way to others who don't have my preferences. Maybe what Kestrel is saying is that the feelings of Fi-preferring people seem to often not be related to anything outside of those people's OWN interpretation of events (correct me if I'm wrong...) I think Fe-preferring people are more likely to be in tune with how everyone else in the room is feeling whereas Fi preferring people are more likely to be in tune with how they feel regardless of others.

I didn't mean to be insulting, but how many "Fi people" have slammed Fe in this and other threads? I'm pointing out a "downside". Doesn't every function have a downside? I asked you to correct me if I was wrong in my observation.

Both functions seek the same thing, why does one have to be better?

Agreed. Every function has a downside, and I think Fi can come across as looking self-absorbed to others who don't understand the Fi-preferring persons' values, or who don't share them. This is not to say that the Fi-person atually IS self absorbed or inflexible -- just that they may look that way if they're fighting against the group values for reasons they can't explain rationally or don't think they should have to explain.

I think it's more helpful to champion all the cognitive processes, even the ones in our shadows, so as to better appreciate why the people who are good at those processes use them and trust them. Ultimately, I agree with the type theorists that say all 8 cognitive processes work best when they work in tandem with other processes. There's really no way you can only use one favorite process and get quite the same results as you would if you combined it with other ways of judging and perceiving.

I speak for msyelf here -- and I realize that Fi-preferring NFs are probably much more empathic than I am. I used to be the queen of doing my own thing and being oblivious to how my actions are affecting others. I've found that trying to devleop Fe in myself (awareness of how others are feeling and appreciation for their values, and trying to find out why shared values are shared by people in the first place rather than simply rebelling against them because they're the "norm") has worked wonders in my social life. I think people trust me more -- they think I'm actually interested in them and on their side, rather than always doing my own thing and never joining the group.


Sarah

 

[BlueScreen]

I didn't mean to be insulting, but how many "Fi people" have slammed Fe in this and other threads? I'm pointing out a "downside". Doesn't every function have a downside? I asked you to correct me if I was wrong in my observation.

Both functions seek the same thing, why does one have to be better?

Edit: I don't appreciate having my post used like this. First you call my post insulting then ask others to agree with you. Then you turn it into an "us vs them" deal. Don't twist my intentions. And please don't use me as an example.

With respect to the Edit: yawn...

But to clarify: unyielding was probably the main insult. How is Fi unyielding? I'm guessing the word has its normal meaning of not producing anything.

Also it doesn't change the fact a destructive idea is put out there when you put maybe you decide at the end of a paragraph. I will give an example if that isn't clear. Also two wrongs don't make a right, so the comparative argument is just a naive way of saying everyone else is being destructive, so I can too. You pointed out a downside that doesn't exist with no justification of why. So if you can justify how Fi is unyielding without taking a narrow inside the box viewpoint, I'll let it slide.

 

[heart]

I think it's a given that other types tend to see Fi as unyeilding. It's actually something I don't have a problem hearing. Some things shouldn't be yielded on. The only thing I wouldn't want to actually be would be mindlessly unyielding.

 

[Kestrel]

With respect to the Edit: yawn...

But to clarify: unyielding was probably the main insult. How is Fi unyielding? I'm guessing the word has its normal meaning of not producing anything.

Also it doesn't change the fact a destructive idea is put out there when you put maybe you decide at the end of a paragraph. I will give an example if that isn't clear. Also two wrongs don't make a right, so the comparative argument is just a naive way of saying everyone else is being destructive, so I can too. You pointed out a downside that doesn't exist with no justification of why. So if you can justify how Fi is unyielding without taking a narrow inside the box viewpoint, I'll let it slide.

I had some big reactive post but then I realized you were thinking of the wrong definition of unyielding.

I meant unyielding in the respect of not backing down when your values are on the line. That's certainly not a bad thing.

I did not mean unyielding as in the definition of "not having any yield."

So it was miscommunication. No harm no foul.