[Fi] INFP/ENFP: Do you feel "safe" to openly & freely share your thoughts about Fi here?

[RDF]

[...] There are people on this forum who say things to be deliberately mocking, hurtful and cruel to a degree that they would likely never dare to in "real life". These types of interactions read like "road rage" to me, yet they appear openly tolerated and are an accepted forum practice.

A recent example is the Fi thread that made it to the Graveyard, now split and the remnants inappropriately titled "Fi Gone Bad" ... in a thread about Fi, Fi users weren't "allowed" to discuss, debate, contradict, refine or otherwise engage the material without having to endure harassing, provocative comments throughout the thread.

Personally, when we talk about Fi on the forum, I want to talk about Fi in an Fi way. I don't want to talk about it through the lens of Fe. Every day I operate in society through that lens; I honor it and respect it, but here on the forum, I dare to hope my lens will be respected, contemplated, and even intriguing for others to hear about it.

It's naive of me to hope for that. But I do. Over and over again.

If we really want a thread talking about Fi in an Fi way, it's easy enough to create a thread and ask that only Fi-doms (INFPs and ISFPs) contribute. Or whatever specific group we want to hear from.

But to be perfectly honest, I wouldn't even read such a thread. I saw lots of those threads over at INFP-gc when that message board was still alive, and those threads were devastatingly bad. They were one-sided and simplistic. Frankly, it's the things that are "mocking, hurtful, and cruel" that add depth and keep us honest.

Look, here's how I see these things:

If you really want an in-depth discussion of Fi, I think it's imperative to include all types. Fifty percent of all types are going to have at least some direct, personal experience of Fi, and that experience is going to vary widely depending on whether they're experiencing their own Fi as Dom, Aux, Tert, or Inferior. (I think the Inferior experience can be especially invaluable, since inferior functions almost have to be consciously re-fashioned in order to bring them under control; I'm disappointed that the other thread didn't have more ENTJ/ESTJ input.) The other fifty percent of all types are probably going to have some experience of Fi from the outside; i.e., they'll have family or friends or co-workers who are Fi-Dom or Fi-Aux. To some extent, these latter fifty percent are going to have the best input on what constitutes Fi on a general or universal level.

To the extent that Fi has some universal traits or features, the latter fifty percent (the non-Fi types) are going to be best positioned to identify those things. We Fi-Doms are not opaque, after all. We actually wear much more of our hearts on our sleeves than we like to admit. I've mentioned that my wife and I are both INFPs; I also worked in an INFP-heavy field (translation). As such, I see INFPs from the outside and I agree with the latter 50 percent when they say that we're much more identifiable, homogeneous, and predictable than we like to admit.

Yeah, there's going to be a lot of shouting in a thread open to all types. Some possessors of Fi are going to take a very personal approach and say, "I experience my Fi as such-and-such, so the description of Fi should be such-and-such too." Other personality types are going to get frustrated at that kind of personalization of an objective thing--a cognitive function--and they're going to raise a fuss about it. And they're right to do so. As I said, their job is to keep us honest.

My solution: I've found that the non-Fi types are generally willing to back off and give us some room to discuss things when asked politely. But in return, we have to keep the discussion "honest." IOW, I can't individually personalize the function and try to make the thread specifically about how I manifest my own Fi personally. The thread shouldn't be about me. If I try to make it about me, the non-Fi types are going to object. And naturally, my feelings are going to get hurt, since I've made the thread about ME.

To make a comparison:

It's like having a thread to define what constitutes "a good and complete definition of the female face." Other threads will be devoted to what constitutes "a good and complete definition of the male face" (in place of Fe), "...the female body" (Ni), "...the male body" (Ne), "...the female reproductive system" (Ti), and so on. You get the picture.

So in the thread what constitutes the female face, let's say we have invited women, men, medical doctors, artists, beauticians, plastic surgeons, movie actresses and actors, transgender people, etc. Some are going to speak from an insider's (woman's) point of view, and some are going to speak from an outsider's (man's) point of view. Issues of beauty and ugliness are going to come up; issues of political correctness and gender politics are going to come up. There will be questions of what constitutes "femininity"--is it a synonym for female appearance? And so on. But the discussion can probably handle all of that.

So what's going to kill the discussion? It's when one or maybe several individuals try to turn the debate into a discussion of their own face and how it specifically embodies femininity. Sure, sometimes an individual example is illuminating, especially one that breaks all the rules (as in "the exception that proves the rule"). Still, the discussion has to return back to universal rules pretty quickly, or people are going to start objecting. And frankly, you're setting yourself up for some cattiness if you try to insist that you yourself exemplify the ideal of feminine looks. Also, some of the participants have seen it all, and they're going to get a little irritated if the discussion hangs up too long on features that may seem unique and individual to one person but really aren't all that uncommon to people who have seen a lot of cases.

Okay, getting back to Fi: What happens when someone personalizes the discussion, tries to make the thread about themselves and their relationship with their Fi, and they are dismissed by the other participants? What happens when, for example, I speak up and the other participants say things to me that that are "mocking, hurtful, and cruel"? I feel ashamed, and I learn a lesson.

Frankly, I think shame is a wonderful thing. As I grow older, I come to have more and more respect for it, both in receiving it and doling it out. When I feel ashamed, it's a good reality check. It almost always means that I'm relying too hard on one cognitive function (in my case Fi, usually) and that it's time to engage another cognitive function. I've gotten too wrapped up in my own needs, and it's time to look around me and recognize the needs of the other people sharing the room or the thread.

In the case of those who personalize the subject matter to the point of making the thread "about them"--and then end up feeling ashamed when the point they are making is dismissed or rejected--the lesson is simple enough: You need to put your point in other language that the other participants will respect. Use a little Te and research the subject. Find some indication that the phenomenon exists outside the single example of you alone; back up your assertions with a citation from experts, or point out where the phenomenon is visibly manifested on the message board itself.

Or use your Te to compartmentalize: Learn to discuss Fi only in threads where NFs can post, i.e., where you can create your perfect audience, and stay out of threads for the entire population of 16 types.

In other words, don't let your Fi get injured; bring in another function (usually Te for Fi-Doms, though sometimes Fe is useful too) for support and reinforcement. Be realistic about what the situation demands if you really want to win your point. Remember the cardinal rule for performers: Know your audience.

To sum up: If you really do want an open, freewheeling discussion about Fi with some real depth, then you need to invite in other types. Fifty percent of all types are going to have at least some direct, personal experience of Fi, and the other fifty percent of all types are probably going to have some experience of Fi from the outside. But that's a lot of variety of experience. You aren't going to get a free pass with that crowd.

In a freewheeling discussion venue like this one, there's no harm in bringing up a personal observation of whatever nature. But by the same token, there's no harm when others dismiss it or even ridicule it. If you really think your point has validity, then be realistic about what the debate situation demands. Don't let your Fi get injured; bring in another function to counterbalance your Fi and put your argument in language the other participants will respect.

A recent example is the Fi thread that made it to the Graveyard, now split and the remnants inappropriately titled "Fi Gone Bad" ...

I think it needs to be retitled, "Fi Gone Wild," and then we can post pictures of Fi-Doms on spring break pulling their shirts up over their heads. Both sexes are invited of course, in the name of political correctness. The "Quick Reference Guides" are all kind of dead in the water; at least with "Fi Gone Wild," we could get some additional mileage out of one of the threads...

(Hey it's all pop psychology in the end. Gotta have a sense of humor about it. )

 

[Southern Kross]

If we really want a thread talking about Fi in an Fi way, it's easy enough to create a thread and ask that only Fi-doms (INFPs and ISFPs) contribute. Or whatever specific group we want to hear from.

But to be perfectly honest, I wouldn't even read such a thread. I saw lots of those threads over at INFP-gc when that message board was still alive, and those threads were devastatingly bad. They were one-sided and simplistic. Frankly, it's the things that are "mocking, hurtful, and cruel" that add depth and keep us honest.

So true. I think its the varying viewpoints that makes this place so interesting. You never properly develop an idea if its premise(s) goes unchallenged; without different avenues of thought explored. To challenge and question is central but I don't know about "mocking, hurtful and cruel" language though. Effective debate doesn't warrant personal attacks and insults - in fact it actually becomes an obstacle in the discussion.

 

[OrangeAppled]

If we really want a thread talking about Fi in an Fi way, it's easy enough to create a thread and ask that only Fi-doms (INFPs and ISFPs) contribute. Or whatever specific group we want to hear from.

But to be perfectly honest, I wouldn't even read such a thread. I saw lots of those threads over at INFP-gc when that message board was still alive, and those threads were devastatingly bad. They were one-sided and simplistic. Frankly, it's the things that are "mocking, hurtful, and cruel" that add depth and keep us honest.

If you really want an in-depth discussion of Fi, I think it's imperative to include all types.

Yeah, there's going to be a lot of shouting in a thread open to all types. Some possessors of Fi are going to take a very personal approach and say, "I experience my Fi as such-and-such, so the description of Fi should be such-and-such too." Other personality types are going to get frustrated at that kind of personalization of an objective thing--a cognitive function--and they're going to raise a fuss about it. And they're right to do so. As I said, their job is to keep us honest.

My solution: I've found that the non-Fi types are generally willing to back off and give us some room to discuss things when asked politely. But in return, we have to keep the discussion "honest.

Use a little Te and research the subject. Find some indication that the phenomenon exists outside the single example of you alone; back up your assertions with a citation from experts, or point out where the phenomenon is visibly manifested on the message board itself.

To sum up: If you really do want an open, freewheeling discussion about Fi with some real depth, then you need to invite in other types.

The bolded is funny to me, as I have yet to see that happen. I think discussion was asked for politely in the recent thread, and instead the other posters kept deeming it unnecessary. It was like, "agree or GTFO".

I didn't get the impression the OP was suggesting a thread where only Fi-doms talk about Fi in a Fi way. I got the impression that she was saying that when there is a thread about Fi involving many types, that Fi-doms should be able to describe their dominant thought process the best way they know how to do it - generally, this means in a "Fi way", as that is our reasoning process (in conjunction with our Pe process). Other types don't "allow" this, leaving the Fi-doms' view of their own dom function ignored & left out of their neat little consensus on how Fi actually works (whether it's accurate or not). They're free to discuss also, but they don't actually discuss Fi; they just discuss the Fi poster's style & not their ideas. They are detracting from the discussion, not adding to it. (I'm using "they" in a very general manner; it's not meant to be all-inclusive).

Yes, Fi judgments are personal in nature, but the feeling is still a gauge that something is off or accurate, and generally the Pe function is what is used to actually connect this feeling to something external & unearth ideas from outside yourself; it becomes much more global & conceptual then (well, Ne+Fi in particular). This is an exploration of ideas as much or more than feelings, and I think it is LESS personal than any other type of discussion you might ask a Fi-type to engage in. It's as much in Pe terms as Fi terms.

However, I think this is threatening to other types (especially inferior/tert Fe users, ie. NTPs, and maybe even inferior Fi users; in fairness, actual Fe-dom & aux types are usually far less dismissive) because it IS dealing with something semi-objective now - it's using an extroverted lens. Fe (or really, other types in general) has made this consensus that Pe is now upsetting, wanting to poke & challenge it and see if it really holds up under closer scrutiny. In this case FiPe is checking this "consensus" for truth & consistency. It's especially threatening when Fi types begin to form a consensus among themselves (which DOES happen more than it does not).

And why should the adjustment in communication ALWAYS be on the FiPe user's end anyway? Sure, some adjustment in communication is always needed when dealing with other types, but it seems there is far less or NO adjustment on the other end towards us. It is not fair to ask one type to do all the adjusting. And frankly, if they're going to be derisive in tone, then they better be able to take it themselves.

So it seems to me, the other types are the ones being overly sensitive & unwilling to reassess their own viewpoint, not open to having their ideas/thoughts challenged & questioned. It would be GREAT if they actually joined in a discussion & debated ideas; but they often don't. They just make scornful comments instead of actually addressing points made by the Fi people and creating a valid argument. It's devaluing the poster instead of attacking their argument. These are the ones who don't want a real discussion; the pattern is to mock or accuse, likely to get a reaction, then to invalidate the poster(s) based on the reaction, and then to comment on how ridiculous the thread is so as to perpetuate the propaganda that Fi types are hysterical, irrational people. Even though, looking back on these threads, the whiniest, most unreasonable posters are often not even F types.

In many, many of these discussions, you know what types are the ones quoting Jung & other legit typology sources? The NFPs. However, these posts aren't regarded any better than a more "personal" post from a different Fi user. The detractors tend to ignore these thoughtful posts, and only comment on posts that have left themselves more open to a derail on how ridiculous Fi-doms/aux are.

Really, I get why Fi-doms just say "fuck it" when it comes to direct, verbal communication and go create art and then laugh at how everyone else laps up the very same ideas in a different form. We should probably all save our breath & write a novel or paint a canvas.

 

[PeaceBaby]

Skipping forward from a few posts, but will return to those. Have some thoughts to share on this first.

If we really want a thread talking about Fi in an Fi way, it's easy enough to create a thread and ask that only Fi-doms (INFPs and ISFPs) contribute. Or whatever specific group we want to hear from.

True that. But FineLine, I feel like you have missed the point I am trying to make in this thread, and misunderstand my apprehension.

You & I, we don't know each other well. I make no claim, nor have I ever, to be some exemplar or poster child for INFP's or Fi doms. As an executive summary to the rest of my response, the only way I can compare my experience of Fi to other Fi doms or aux's is to bring it to the light, make it visible, and hear what others say. I take that all back inside, process it, refine it, bring more of me out to the light, receive feedback, process that, rinse & repeat. That process of processing ... I need that, and I like to be able to do it in an environment free from being minimized as a person.

Of course, that's a fantastical perfect world, and this forum is not perfect either - but here on the forum, in my mind (since the forum is about typology) it's supposed to be a place where we are permitted to explore those questions without continual concern about censure.

Frankly, it's the things that are "mocking, hurtful, and cruel" that add depth and keep us honest.

No, it's not. Those are, quite frankly, primarily elements of control designed to prey off of fear. I am certainly not saying I don't receive or deserve my share of "humble pie" from time to time. Being on the receiving end of harassment however is not something that keeps me "honest". The design of such comments is to shut people up, to silence, to ensure compliance and to oppress.

If anything, it makes me honest insofar as I will speak up to speak up against it.

If you really want an in-depth discussion of Fi, I think it's imperative to include all types. {+ the rest of this para.}

Agreed.

To the extent that Fi has some universal traits or features, the latter fifty percent (the non-Fi types) are going to be best positioned to identify those things. We Fi-Doms are not opaque, after all.

But we are not transparent. If that were so, wouldn't INFP's be more universally understood? I've been here long enough to know that's not the case. Although, if you are saying that similar tactics can push an INFP's buttons, that is likely true. I could push other people's buttons as well, if I were so inclined. But when someone is sharing here on the forum on a personal level, I don't levy an attack when their soft underbelly is exposed. It's dishonorable. Making an Fi exploration is exposing that soft spot, those weak points. But necessary to foster understanding and comprehension. It simply saddens me when other people take advantage of it HERE, where it would be nice to actually feel SAFE.

Yeah, there's going to be a lot of shouting in a thread open to all types. Some possessors of Fi are going to take a very personal approach and say, "I experience my Fi as such-and-such, so the description of Fi should be such-and-such too." Other personality types are going to get frustrated at that kind of personalization of an objective thing--a cognitive function--and they're going to raise a fuss about it. And they're right to do so. As I said, their job is to keep us honest.

Nah, their job is to probe, query, even cajole ... but not to ridicule. Why do you feel this is "right"? Fi is not objective in the first place, which leads to the next point:

My solution: I've found that the non-Fi types are generally willing to back off and give us some room to discuss things when asked politely. But in return, we have to keep the discussion "honest." IOW, I can't individually personalize the function and try to make the thread specifically about how I manifest my own Fi personally. The thread shouldn't be about me. If I try to make it about me, the non-Fi types are going to object. And naturally, my feelings are going to get hurt, since I've made the thread about ME.

But Fi is personal; to me, it's an amalgamation of all of our individual experiences. Exploring that only serves to deepen understanding IMO, not discredit it. Heck, I wish more people would be honest about how they experience their Fi here ... I want that depth in order to refine my own understanding and appreciation. I need more data points than just my own.

To make a comparison:

It's like having a thread to define what constitutes "a good and complete definition of the female face."

This example fails because it is about something one can see ... it's a subjective evaluation of an objective entity. The basis of comparison is already "in the light" - we can explore it fully with our 5 senses and agree or disagree with statements rendered about what makes one face beautiful and another not.

Exploring Fi differs in that it is a subjective evaluation of the subjective ... BUT, by bringing one's own Fi experience to the real world it thus becomes a more quantifiable and definable entity capable of receiving objective critique. I would posit it is essential in order to create a definition that stands up to scrutiny. If I don't let you "see" my Fi, how can one define the indefinable? How can one challenge the subjective?

Okay, getting back to Fi, what happens when someone personalizes the discussion, tries to make the thread about themselves and their relationship with their Fi, and they are dismissed by the other participants? What happens when, for example, I speak up and the other participants say things to me that that are "mocking, hurtful, and cruel"? I feel ashamed, and I learn a lesson.

Shame is not a wonderful thing. Shame originates from being devalued as an individual, from being dehumanized, either by oneself or by others. Feelings of shame originate with the owner, as they compare themselves to (inner or outer, functional or dysfunctional) benchmarks of moral behaviour.

If I intentionally hurt you (in a MOL universally accepted and agreed upon moral sense), and you point it out, and you say "PB, how could you do that to me?" then yes, I would be ashamed, because I have let myself behave in a less than compassionately human way. I have dishonored myself, disgraced myself.

But what I hear you saying here is that if someone mocks me, humiliates me, for sharing who I am or what I think, I earned that somehow? That I deserved to be knocked down a peg or two, for being momentarily egocentric and talking about myself, even for a brief time?

I cannot agree with this.

In the case of those who personalize the subject matter to the point of making the thread "about them"--and then end up feeling ashamed when the point they are making is dismissed or rejected--the lesson is simple enough: You need to put your point in other language that the other participants will respect. Use a little Te and research the subject. Find some indication that the phenomenon exists outside the single example of you alone; back up your assertions with a citation from experts, or point out where the phenomenon is visibly manifested on the message board itself.

IOW, I need to sanitize my thoughts to be politically correct for others. Hmmm, thanks for the suggestion; I only do that 99.99% of the time in my real life. I need no expert but of an understanding of myself to share about myself on this forum and to talk about Fi; the creation of this thread itself is an exemplar that in feeling "unsafe" to talk about Fi here I am not alone. Not at all. There's some Te real world data to chew on! That is the whole point of the thread. I sense and see a trend - if I complain about it myself, solo, it will fall on deaf ears - so I need more reference points, I need more data.

Here it is.

Or use your Te to compartmentalize: Learn to discuss Fi only in threads where NFs can post, i.e., where you can create your perfect audience, and stay out of threads for the entire population of 16 types.

I don't need to isolate myself, have never done so thus far. I ignore most of the ridicule and mocking that Fi gets around the forum generally. I am saying - why do we accept this? Why is it so widespread? Why is it so accepted?

It only takes one or two "bad" apples to rot the whole barrel unfortunately.

In other words, don't let your Fi get injured; bring in another function (usually Te for Fi-Doms, though sometimes Fe is useful too) for support and reinforcement. Be realistic about what the situation demands if you really want to win your point. Remember the cardinal rule for performers: Know your audience.

To sum up: If you really do want an open, freewheeling discussion about Fi with some real depth, then you need to invite in other types. Fifty percent of all types are going to have at least some direct, personal experience of Fi, and the other fifty percent of all types are probably going to have some experience of Fi from the outside. But that's a lot of variety of experience. You aren't going to get a free pass with that crowd.

In a freewheeling discussion venue like this one, there's no harm in bringing up a personal observation of whatever nature. But by the same token, there's no harm when others dismiss it or even ridicule it. If you really think your point has validity, then be realistic about what the debate situation demands. Don't let your Fi get injured; bring in another function to counterbalance your Fi and put your argument in language the other participants will respect.

I respect your POV, and your advice, I really do - I feel it coming from a good place in your heart; but I'm not 12 years old either. I pick my battles, and I am not looking for the free pass. The cardinal rule of performers is not know your audience - it's that the show must go on ... and I am still in here, still performing. I wish to drop the facades though from time to time and have a real discussion, and be true to who I am, and be respected for who I am. What I hear you saying is that is too much to ask.

Perhaps in this regard, you are correct.

 

[RDF]

Well, there's really too much by way of response to answer everything or even a sizable portion. So I'm just going to skim across the top and try to pick out a couple central issues.

1. I sympathize with you all. Frankly, I catch it from both sides. I catch it as much as anyone from non-INFPs; some folks see the "INFP" beneath my avatar and seem to do a bit of pushing just to see if I really can handle a bare-knuckles debate. And I don't begrudge them that little bit of testing--I understand the reason. On the other hand, as an older poster I also feel obliged to tell INFPs to "man up" at times as well. I had a rocky relationship with INFPs at INFP-gc, and I have a rocky relationship with INFPs at times here as well. So I catch it from INFPs as well. Again, I don't begrudge them the push-back; I understand where it's coming from.

Still, what am I supposed to do about it, according to your rules? Shall I :steam: all the time with both INFPs and non-INFPs?

Personally, my route is to try to reach out to my audience a bit: I use a little Te with non-NFs and maybe a little Fe with NFs. Fi is nice for a starting point, i.e. for finding my moral bearings when deciding my stand on an issue. But after that, there is still the issue of polishing my message for public consumption. Ne helps me find my voice, but Te and Fe help me connect better with my audience. Or to put it better, Te and Fe help me hear what my audience is trying to tell me and respond in kind.

Spin it any way you want, but we're talking "real world" here: You can't climb up on a stage, put on an unpolished performance, and then insist that the audience has no right to boo you. If you want adulation for an unpolished performance, pick your audience appropriately; do your act where only NFs can get at it. On the other hand, if you want to perform for an audience of all types, then research your audience, polish your act, and get it right. Or prepare for catcalls and rotten tomatoes. That's the rules in the real world.

2. As a corollary to my point above: In my previous post I put the words "mocking, hurtful, and cruel" in quotes as much for irony as anything else. Frankly I didn't see much in the earlier thread that was genuinely mocking, hurtful and cruel. What I saw was some personalization of the issue by INFPs, some push-back by non-INFPs, then a lot of stressed-out inferior Te from INFPs along the line of "I am Fi! Hear me roar! You have no right to disrespect me!", and finally a whole lot of irritation from non-INFPs.

Just because it was a thread about Fi didn't mean that the Fi-Doms owned it. Furthermore, all this talk about needing a "safe environment" for expressing our Fi strikes my own Fi as bogus. We're all adults here; we shouldn't need safety nets.

The message board specifically offers "safe environments" if you absolutely need that: The NF Private Forum and the NF Personal Threads. But for that very reason, the open forum has to be deemed "unsafe" (IOW, subject to normal adult debate and pushback) by comparison, and any insistence to the contrary is just your own spin. You'll have to quote chapter and verse from the FAQ to convince me otherwise.

3. Just to wrap things up, I'll reiterate one more thing: Shame is good. Shame is a reality check. Everyone is subject to it equally. Shame teaches us lessons.

People think of Fe as the main shaming function, but Fe-Doms are subject to it as well. I once saw an ENFJ boss whose section was hit by 50 percent layoffs. He ran around trying to help people, offer them a shoulder to cry on, and provide whatever help he could. Trouble was, he couldn't deliver anything of substance; in the end it was all just heat and noise. In the end, people still had to be laid off. People eventually got disgusted with this ENFJ boss and started mocking him. They didn't need a weepy buddy; they needed a boss who would act like a boss. Given the times and the situation, they preferred stability and predictability over warmth and weepiness. The boss needed to learn some Fi; he needed to respect the dignity of his office and play out the role that came with that office.

Analytical types get shamed for being unfeeling robots, especially when they put their Dominant function on display too much and don't moderate it with some feeling. Fe-Doms get shamed for being good at superficial social connections but skittish about making deeper personal connections. Ne-Doms get shamed for being flakes. And so on.

We all have roles to play in life, and as adults we're expected to play those roles in a complex and responsive manner. We can't be a one-trick pony (IOW play only to our Dominant function) and insist that the world adjust to us; if we play that game, we're going to be shamed for our troubles. Again, spin it any way you want, but that's the rules of the real world.

And if we're smart, we'll be happy to have learned that lesson so cheaply. Because many of life's lessons come at much greater cost than a little public shame.

 

[Rebe]

1) I don't take this forum too seriously. If things get nasty, I either deliver a one-liner or just get myself out. Just because people on this board disagree with my ideas or feelings or whatever, that doesn't mean I need to to be insecure or totally conform or change my thoughts.

2) People on this board does not represent the world at large; this is just a tiny tiny tiny fraction. Some members are really young, some members are really assholes. Not every conversation is mature or stimulating. If they are not, if they get nasty, I just check myself out. I am not going to spend a lot of energy arguing just to convince someone...who that person is, who knows. If I want to argue to clarify my own thinking process, then cool I will and it's helpful.

3) I have read some really ridiculous threads on here and people still respond to them as if they are normal or worth responding to ... and they aren't about Fi. And some 'normal' threads that one member responds to. Feel free to be ridiculous and see what kind of responses you get.

4) Don't make yourself vulnerable to an online community and expect all nice answers. Maybe that's what you mean by Fi thoughts. Not everyone knows how to respond to you in an appropriate and helpful manner. Be selective of your audience.

5) What do you mean by Fi thoughts? Personal or more philosophical?

I didn't read the thread where Fi was attacked or debated over. I am just responding to the general question here and how I express Fi so my post is out of context, just my general thoughts.

 

[Southern Kross]

Oh dear, this is starting to sound familiar. You guys are in serious danger of wandering into the 'blame the victim' territory, which is something I abhor.

Personal attacks are never appropriate. They may be a regular feature in life that we must learn to endure (which I believe, we INFPs have been doing remarkably well here) but they are never warranted, and reacting with disgust and annoyance to them is perfectly natural.

Expecting me to alter my behaviour when I am attacked is ridiculous. I am not the one with the problem.

 

[freeeekyyy]

Not an FP, but I feel for you all. There seems to be a strong bias against Fi users by certain members of this forum. It doesn't really make much sense. I was reading some from the thread that this one seems to be based off of, and all I can say is, wow. So much anger. I really don't get it.

 

[Eckhart]

Oh dear, this is starting to sound familiar. You guys are in serious danger of wandering into the 'blame the victim' territory, which is something I abhor.

Personal attacks are never appropriate. They may be a regular feature in life that we must learn to endure (which I believe, we INFPs have been doing remarkably well here) but they are never warranted, and reacting with disgust and annoyance to them is perfectly natural.

Expecting me to alter my behaviour when I am attacked is ridiculous. I am not the one with the problem.

Yes, this, thank you!

 

[Amargith]

I'm to the point where I've learned how to navigate these waters and no longer feel the need to splash about or create waves. No, I do *not* feel safe to be completel vulnerable and 'fi' on these forums. I never have. And it did frustrate me, and annoy me (and thank god I missed the last thread gone awry), and it still makes me shake my head at times. I do feel for Fi-users, as their preferred function is beautiful in so many ways but has one disadvantage, if you will. It leaves them open and vulnerable to attack. That vulnerability and rawness is what makes Fi so precious, but also so misunderstood. It is something others don't prfer to show, are often not even aware that they have themselves as well. And it functions as a mirror for them, making them either lash out, or ashamed of themselves which they then project onto the Fi-user, who they are embarassed for then. It makes them mistake the intention of the Fi-user, which is to show the process of creation, for a finished product, that they should provide feedback on. That, imo, is how an Fi-user experiences this 'gap'.

But typology taught me something else as well. There's a time and a place for every function. Where every function shines. And unfortunately for us, Fe rules at the group/community stuff. It's just where it is at its best. So, it overshadows Fi. And perhaps rightly so. It keeps the harmony and focus of the group safe. Fi, on the other hand, to me, is the tool to use one on one, when self-reflecting, when going into deep debate...when someone is in deep emotional distress and needs to figure out who they are in order to proceed, but also when ideas wrt beauty are born and expanded to make a great piece of art that will touch so many people in their own right. That's where Fi shines. Notice that this is usually one-on-one with someoen else, or by yourself. It *can* be expanded to perhaps 3, maybe 4 people. But after that, we're back into the territory of Fe, ime. Too many people with too different views to connect in that kind of deep way and expect harmony in the group. Does not work.

Look around. This is a forum with how many people? We *are* on the turf of Fe. There is no question about this. So, it would stand to reason to utilize Fe in this setting. And if you are dying for an Fi-use, without having to adjust (coz Fe does feel tiresome to keep up for us especially after a while, and often causes resentment due to the differences in perspective), keep the number of people involved down. We do have one benefit here: it's a written medium. And INFPs are quite good at making written mediums their own *as long as they deliver a finished product* and even then you will get critique (cfr novels). So you do need to think twice, reread your draft, shorten your posts (I am *not* a good example!) and make them concise to captivate your audience, if you feel your 'pearl of wisdom' is worth this massive exposure.

Interestingly, when we look at the NF types (don't know about the SF Types..have to think that through), you see this stuff reflected in the types as well although some flexibility is possible:

ENFJ= ruler of harmony in great groups, keeping everyone happy and on their toes and moving towards a common goal, keeping a community on track and feeling as one family.
INFJ= wing man of the ENFJ, and ime often the ones that help out with the people that need special care one on one, to get back on 'track' with the purpose of the group (shrinks)
ENFP= entertainer, instigator and all around happy vibing person who bounces off of people...master of the 'tap on the shoulder' to then go 'phoof' and disappear. Only to come back later. Plays groups by the amount of energy and inspiration they instill, by keeping their encounters often one-on-one, deep, but SHORT to move on to the next person and do the same.
INFP= The person who serves as a source of deep inspiration for those that need that one-on-one talk and are in need of a guide on their journey to find themselves. They do the long, one on one thing, with only very few people and only those who are in fact interested in that specific quest. They can reach a lot of people but often through an indirect medium, such as art, a novel, etc.

All have their purposes, and all have their specific time to shine, their platform.
That also means that you cannot get Fi-heavy and lengthy and in depth in a big group, without getting some serious resistance, as not everyone is up for that. And, because it is so personal and in depth, it's best to do it with a small number of people as it will be taxing to have all those personal views understood. So you can go like the enfp and keep it short, simple, sweet and sexy, which then invariably has a more lighthearted tone to it, risking it not being taken so seriously, but better received in the group. Or, you can express it via Fe..which is harder for us to use.

For the best result, know thy context!

 

[MacGuffin]

If I may...

As a corollary to my point above: In my previous post I put the words "mocking, hurtful, and cruel" in quotes as much for irony as anything else. Frankly I didn't see much in the earlier thread that was genuinely mocking, hurtful and cruel. What I saw was some personalization of the issue by INFPs, some push-back by non-INFPs, then a lot of stressed-out inferior Te from INFPs along the line of "I am Fi! Hear me roar! You have no right to disrespect me!", and finally a whole lot of irritation from non-INFPs.

I'd say that is mostly accurate, from my non-Fi viewpoint. There were a few non-Fi people that crossed the line, but most of it was simply annoyance at what they saw as Fi-users' self-absorbtion.

In short, the Fi-users conflated a few incidents to a widespread attack, and non-Fi-users (let's see if I can add another hyphen) threw out the baby with the bathwater by combining legitimate complaints with some overly dramatic whinging and dismissing it all.

Oh dear, this is starting to sound familiar. You guys are in serious danger of wandering into the 'blame the victim' territory, which is something I abhor.

Personal attacks are never appropriate. They may be a regular feature in life that we must learn to endure (which I believe, we INFPs have been doing remarkably well here) but they are never warranted, and reacting with disgust and annoyance to them is perfectly natural.

Expecting me to alter my behaviour when I am attacked is ridiculous. I am not the one with the problem.

I agree, but I'd be hesitant to label oneself a "victim" to claim moral high ground. Real victimization is rare on the internet (just log out, no one is forcing you to participate). If you view every major clash or disagreement in this light, eventually no one will take you seriously and just see you as a drama queen.

Report the posts and ignore them. Rule violations should be taken care of by the mods.

 

[Southern Kross]

If I may...

I'd say that is mostly accurate, from my non-Fi viewpoint. There were a few non-Fi people that crossed the line, but most of it was simply annoyance at what they saw as Fi-users' self-absorbtion.

In short, the Fi-users conflated a few incidents to a widespread attack, and non-Fi-users (let's see if I can add another hyphen) threw out the baby with the bathwater by combining legitimate complaints with some overly dramatic whinging and dismissing it all.

See here's the problem; it was not self-absorption at all. You're attempting to undermine the perfectly reasonable arguments of the Fi users with another unjustified swipe at us. What I saw was Fi-users expressing their difference in opinion and engaging in polite debate, and a bunch of (predominantly) NTs getting pissy with them because they weren't playing according to their unspoken rules (ironic isn't it, that it was the Thinkers and not the Feelers, using irrational, emotional-driven arguments). Any attempt by the Fi-ers to explain themselves only lead to further, uncalled for, ad hominem type-based attacks on them. It was close to total derailment of the thread by lashing out with, what clearly seems to be, a personal prejudice against a type among many here.

While, in all fairness, that thread is probably not the worst in TC history in terms of attacks on a function or type, it holds significance because it exists amongst a clear trend of them against Fi. This thread is in reaction to the constant need for Fi-users, to not merely explain, but defend ourselves; and frankly its becoming exhausting doing so. I don't give a shit if people disagree with me - I simply want to have discussion without being called names or having everything I say twisted into, what is proclaimed to be, 'whiny, hysterical nonsense' based on a projection of someone's prejudices.

I agree, but I'd be hesitant to label oneself a "victim" to claim moral high ground. Real victimization is rare on the internet (just log out, no one is forcing you to participate). If you view every major clash or disagreement in this light, eventually no one will take you seriously and just see you as a drama queen.

Report the posts and ignore them. Rule violations should be taken care of by the mods.

Actually I was reluctant about using this term knowing it may be read this way. I think we are all over the actual situation itself and I don't mean to make this to be more than it is. I don't think anyone is claiming this is persecution on a grand scale. We simply struggle to understand why as a group we are so targeted for childish, obnoxious remarks and insults, then only to be accused of 'bringing it upon ourselves'.

This may be the internet, but there are real people involved. I'm sure we are a bunch of fairly reasonable adults; I don't see that basic respect and decency as being a big ask. People can self-censor and monitor their own behaviour IRL without the need of mods; what's so difficult about doing so here. And I don't see that I should be expected to leave because others are enjoying a free-for-all at my expense too much to stop.

 

[MacGuffin]

See here's the problem; it was not self-absorption at all. You're attempting to undermine the perfectly reasonable arguments of the Fi users with another unjustified swipe at us. What I saw was Fi-users expressing their difference in opinion and engaging in polite debate, and a bunch of (predominantly) NTs getting pissy with them because they weren't playing according to their unspoken rules (ironic isn't it, that it was the Thinkers and not the Feelers, using irrational, emotional-driven arguments). Any attempt by the Fi-ers to explain themselves only lead to further, uncalled for, ad hominem type-based attacks on them. It was close to total derailment of the thread by lashing out with, what clearly seems to be, a personal prejudice against a type among many here.

While, in all fairness, that thread is probably not the worst in TC history in terms of attacks on a function or type, it holds significance because it exists amongst a clear trend of them against Fi-users. This thread is in reaction to the constant need for Fi-users, to not merely explain, but defend ourselves; and frankly its becoming exhausting doing so. I don't give a shit if people disagree with me - I simply want to have discussion without being called names or having everything I say twisted into, what is proclaimed to be, 'hysterical nonsense' based on a projection of someone's prejudices.

We are going to have to disagree on the interpretation of the events. Just know I'm not the only one that sees them in that way.

I've found this is a huge blind spot for Fi-users: they believe they are being positive and healthy, where others seem them as negative and disruptive. It's strange, for group that is so good at relating to others one-on-one and analyzing their own emotional states/feelings, they are disadvantaged when addressing larger groups and trying to convey their inner states/beliefs in a way that doesn't grate on others.

 

[sleepy]

I've found this is a huge blind spot for Fi-users: they believe they are being positive and healthy, where others seem them as negative and disruptive. It's strange, for group that is so good at relating to others one-on-one and analyzing their own emotional states/feelings, they are disadvantaged when addressing larger groups and trying to convey their inner states/beliefs in a way that doesn't grate on others.

How can you know you speak for the group, when you say they are seen as negative and disruptive(feeling the air?)?

How do you know this from a third eye perspective? That a few people who disagree or just don't get it projects their own feelings onto the group, and as such illusionary come to this conclusion. (I don't like Fi user-must protect the group).

I'm not sure what Fi is, besides descriptions and peoples experiences, and maybe myself. But your above observation seems fraught with possibility for falseness, even worse, creating untruth by accusing Fi user of creating unrest.

I dunno. I have seen these situations. People so consumed by subjectivity that they think they speak for the whole group. And if you run a poll you may get ex 7 to 47 votes against the pov one feels affect the group. And still one will insist one speaks for the group.

I don't get it. This behaviour I've seen from some T identified people using inferior Fe. When all evidence points to the contrary, except from a small sample. While most Ts wont experience this form of illusion, some will, and this puzzles me.

What if a T isn't capable to accurately measure the emotional state of the group? Is it then wise to do so and assume one speaks for the group? And then like for real creating unrest when the group rebels against you, or becomes manipulated? And the Fi user didn't really have anything to do with this, except triggering you.

Ok, I see I went around my tale here, as this will still mean it was the Fi user that triggered the unrest. Is this what is meant?

 

[Fidelia]

Judging from the ENFP thread, I think I'm seeing that Fi/Te users are especially strong on the idea that everyone's voice is equally valid, whereas Fe/Ti users look a lot at presentation style and who you are before they place credibility on the words. Fe/Ti users will show a lot more care and regard for the way they approach someone else's ideas, while Fi/Te users will show more care and regard for how they approach someone's feelings and values. Because Fe/Ti users don't see their emotions/values (for lack of better words) as the essence of their identity, they cannot really see why it's such a big deal to question, criticize, scrutinize or debate those things. Similarly, Fi/Te users don't see their thoughts and the extensions of them as the essence of who they are, but rather as something more open to scrutiny, debate and evolution and they can't see why Fe/Ti users take such exception to them openly challenging those things.

In both cases, it would appear to me that Fe and Te are to the opposite users very blustery looking, smug or self-assured functions. On closer inspection though they are mostly called out when Fi or Ti are threatened and are in fact self-defense, rather than attack.

In a group setting, Fe is going to be more commonly supported over Fi. It may seem unfair, but Fi's very individuality, privacy, retiscence and outspokenness makes it hard to wield effectively in a large group. In personal settings, Fi is a superstar and can be much more insightful and precise than Fe.

I'm inclined to agree with FineLine to some extent that you have to look at which setting you are in to determine what is going to be most effective. There is nothing wrong with people using Fi in a large group setting, but they have to be prepared for the possibility or even likelihood that it will be misinterpreted or derided. Because values and emotions are Fi's area of vulnerability, this can make Fi users feel unduly attacked and marginalized, when in fact Fe users see it as a way to try to make things work for the most people possible. More understanding of each other's perspective certainly is useful for a more accurate and kind response.

The other thing the ENFP thread has brought out is that when there is conflict, Fi users tend to want to come closer to the person, while Fe users want to disengage. When the Fe users are not willing to do this, Fi brings in Te defensively. When Fi users are not willing to give space, then Ti brings in Fe defensively. Both provoke a kind of ever-worsening feedback loop.

Fe users will be much more likely to respect the Fi users' feelings if they allow space and don't try to use force through Te. When we disengage for a bit, we may even be able to look for the parts that we do agree with, or try to find a way of compromising or meeting in the middle. Without that, we will become increasingly blunt.

Because our feelings/values are not our main area of vulnerability, a Fi user striking back at our intentions/motivations/feelings is more likely to annoy than hurt us. Criticize our thoughts or something that matters greatly to us and that is where we are more likely to react. Unfortunately, this often leaves Fi users in a position of feeling attacked where it hurts most, without a way to respond that will impact the other person as deeply and make them rethink their way of engaging.

 

[Fidelia]

Sleepy, one thing I've noticed is that Fi users are very reluctant to speak for anyone except themselves. Even when I've solicited individual's opinions about relating better to Fi users, they sprinkle it with tons of "This is only my perspective"s. Fe users tend to check that they are not mistaken in their impressions by asking people whose judgement they trust before they express their point of view. This is not just a bid to create social pressure and force Fi users to do as they wish. Instead it is like getting a bunch of people to mirror back an image of them. If most of the images are the same, that's how they'll conclude they (or whatever is being mirrored) do in fact look.

I actually think MacGuffin is fairly accurate in speaking for a lot of Fe users. While those inclined to do so can even recognize that the intent is not to create unrest or to seem negative, the way it is expressed does tend to rub the wrong way. I think this has a lot to do with the Fi belief that it is important to speak the message out (particularly if it is a value) and that everyone should have a voice to say their say. What happens afterwards with it is out of their control, but it has to be said. Fe users tend to look more at the impact they feel something has rather than at the thing itself. They also seem to be flexier on values/emotions etc depending on the amount of discussion they have with a variety of other people (like Te is about thoughts/facts - they want the best, most practical response). Therefore, they don't see any point in expressing something UNLESS your intent is to try to effect change or to evoke an emotional response in someone. This is why Fi efforts at speaking out are seen as disruptive or negative. It is perceived as you trying to garner sympathy, having a pity party with each other, or trying to change people's minds by saying how you feel about it (which to a Fe user is implying that you think your opinion is worth a much bigger slice of the pie of influence than anyone else's).

Don't know if I have stated it right, but you just won't find Fe users feeling that another Fe user has been presumtuous in speaking out for them becauase they likely have checked to see others agree and because they are looking for the most workable, practical outcome (much less individuality or precision required).

 

[William K]

Standard Disclaimer : This is only my perspective

I think this has a lot to do with the Fi belief that it is important to speak the message out (particularly if it is a value) and that everyone should have a voice to say their say. What happens afterwards with it is out of their control, but it has to be said.

I remember reading on this forum someone (I think it was Sim, but not sure) saying something like "I don't mind having a discussion with someone who is wrong because it is the audience that I'm speaking to." To me, it is kind of like the reverse. I don't mind making statements that could be wrong and being corrected, because as long as someone learns something from it, it IS of value.

Think of it like pieces of a huge, complicated jigsaw puzzle. Everyone has a different puzzle. My opinions are pieces of my puzzle. Chances are, I won't have evidence or statistics to back them up. Not all the pieces will fit in other people's puzzles, maybe even none. But once in a while, someone will pick up a piece and go "Eureka!", and you receive a rep and it makes all the other dozens of times people calling you an idiot worthwhile

Edit : Oh, and to answer the OP, posting about Fi here can sometimes feel like jumping into waters where you know there are sharks lurking. There are some scary smart people in this forum

 

[Keps Mnemnosyne]

Sorry to add another non-Fi voice to this thread, but I meant to before the influx of the Swarm and am just a slow replier.

First to FineLine's point about shame:
I think FineLine was talking about the sense of self-shame. As an example:

Let's say a college student enjoys math as a subject. This kid however didn't study before a test and fails the test. She tells herself "Well I didn't enjoy math anyway." A concerned friend sees her grade and tells her "You could have done so much better." The kid feels ashamed and works to improve their grade later.

This is different than her studying days ahead of time, obtaining a decent but not awesome grade, and then an adversarial classmate telling her she's stupid for not obtaining perfection.

Both are senses of shame, but they are different. FineLine if I misconstrued your point, I apologize.

And why should the adjustment in communication ALWAYS be on the FiPe user's end anyway? Sure, some adjustment in communication is always needed when dealing with other types, but it seems there is far less or NO adjustment on the other end towards us. It is not fair to ask one type to do all the adjusting. And frankly, if they're going to be derisive in tone, then they better be able to take it themselves.

This is an assumption, that only FiPe users are adjusting or adjusting more. It could easily be argued back and forth. Any interaction I adjust; Offline I feel the collision of society and individuals. If I had to pick out 'functions' for the bad sides of my culture, I would argue that different sub-cultures have different weaknesses i.e. one sub-culture I deal with frequently is of forced uniqueness which for me exemplifies the negative collusion of Fi and Fe. You have to be considered 'different' or you are considered a worthless sheep. I mention this because I have seen that a lot of Fi-posts have said that they deal with Fe offline all day and are sick of adjusting to it. Which is a fair point, but please realize Fe and other function dominant users have also had to adjust to their culture's standards. You may argue that Fi adjusts more, but that is spinning wheels in sand and unprovable.

I guess my point being, how are these attacks different from attacks on any other group or user?
During my time here, I have been insulted and condescended to. I have seen TJs insult FPs, FJs insult SJs (so on and so forth), condescension from those I respect and from those who have yet to earn it. I have looked back at some of my own posts dripping with condescension not meant and yet done.

My only sense of a true difference that I feel is that there are more moderators who willingly enter, sometimes forcefully, but always eloquently portray Fe, in these discussions than there are moderators willing to enter the arguments for Fi. But the sample size is a) small and b) perhaps not significant to the argument.

 

[Tallulah]

I have to back Mac and fidelia up on that. I'd say Fi can/often does come off as self-absorbed and/or unnecessarily disruptive to Fe users. I think I have a better understanding now of where Fi is coming from, and am trying to understand and appreciate it on its own, and not through an Fe lens. But old habits die hard.

I think most people tend to think others' motives/processes are similar to their own. Fe users are so used to taking the temperature of the room, so when we encounter someone who is obviously being led from within, it can seem like the Fi didn't consider anyone's feelings but their own. I know that's not true, but it can sometimes look that way.

 

[RDF]

Sorry to add another non-Fi voice to this thread, but I meant to before the influx of the Swarm and am just a slow replier.

First to FineLine's point about shame:
I think FineLine was talking about the sense of self-shame. As an example:

Let's say a college student enjoys math as a subject. This kid however didn't study before a test and fails the test. She tells herself "Well I didn't enjoy math anyway." A concerned friend sees her grade and tells her "You could have done so much better." The kid feels ashamed and works to improve their grade later.

This is different than her studying days ahead of time, obtaining a decent but not awesome grade, and then an adversarial classmate telling her she's stupid for not obtaining perfection.

Both are senses of shame, but they are different. FineLine if I misconstrued your point, I apologize.

You got it right. As you described, I was talking about getting by on what you're good at (your Dom function), and then one day failing badly and realizing that you need more tools if you want to handle more complex roles.