The Opposite of Truth

[Salomé]

Ti is the “Truth” function, right? So is Fe the lying function?

Discuss.

 

[Fidelia]

What if you're Fe/Ti?

 

[Moiety]

I see you're late to the party. They even changed the word "fake" in the dictionary to "feke". Like ....ten thousand years ago!!!

 

[Jaguar]

Simply ridiculous.

 

[Salomé]

What if you're Fe/Ti?

No such thing. (How schizo would that be?)

 

[Totenkindly]

Wait, you mean this?

Ti = Truthiness
Fe = Feeliness
Se = Sexiness
Ni = Nixieness
Ne = Nerfiness
Fi = Finickiness
Si = Sinceriness
Te = Twerpiness

.... or probably not.

 

[ragashree]

Ti is the “Truth” function, right? So is Fe the lying function?

Discuss.

Incorrect antonym. My Ti says so. Furthermore, each judging function only determines what it determines to pass judgement with respect to itself, not other judging functions. Ti evaluates validity vs invalidity, with reference to an internalised model of comprehension. This can be taken as truth vs falsity if you like, but the distinction only holds true with respect to the framework against which validity is evaluated, so the truth value of a Ti derived evaluation is as meaningful as the framework on which it is based.

What do you think Fe evaluates again, and how does it form its categorical distinctions?

 

[Salomé]

What do you think Fe evaluates again, and how does it form its categorical distinctions?

I didn't really want to get too much into what I think. Mostly because I know what I think but I don't know what others think. That's why I phrased the OP as a question.

But just for you. The thought occurred to me whilst watching The Invention of Lying. And also a thread on INTPc about being INTP and unapproachable. What would the world look like if lying were impossible? Turns out it would look a lot like an Aspie ward.
Even fake smiling is lying, when you think about it - if you're not happy, you're lying about your emotional state to make other people feel comfortable. Most Dom-Tis (with undeveloped Fe) seem to have a problem with faking emotions or faking interest in something/one they're not interested in. A lot of social niceties are based on less than total honesty. Maybe that's why they are so problematic for us. It's not a lack of empathy or a lack of knowledge of the kind of behaviour that is deemed socially acceptable - it's just that such behaviour is directly opposed to the raison d'etre of Ti.
I just found the connection interesting...

 

[rav3n]

Rationale doesn't equate to truth. Social harmony isn't equivalent to falsehood.

 

[Stanton Moore]

Ti is the “Truth” function, right? So is Fe the lying function?

Discuss.

Ti does not equal truth. Most times it doesn't even mean logic.

 

[SecondBest]

You probably don't mean Ti as truth function or Fe as lying function in any absolute sense, so I'm taking the question as I interpret it.

In my experience, yes. When I'm looking for the truth or honest opinion regarding a situation, it is far more likely for a Fe to give me the answer that will make me feel good (often anything less than the truth) whereas a Ti will give it to me straight (the truth as how they see it - which is what I'm looking for anyway).

So in that sense, yes, Fe is the lying function.

 

[Saslou]

You probably don't mean Ti as truth function or Fe as lying function in any absolute sense, so I'm taking the question as I interpret it.

In my experience, yes. When I'm looking for the truth or honest opinion regarding a situation, it is far more likely for a Fe to give me the answer that will make me feel good (often anything less than the truth) whereas a Ti will give it to me straight (the truth as how they see it - which is what I'm looking for anyway).

So in that sense, yes, Fe is the lying function.

Don't come and ask me for an honest answer then .. I ooze Fe but i'll give you Ti.

I agree that Fe would be considered the lying function.

 

[Lady_X]

I didn't really want to get too much into what I think. Mostly because I know what I think but I don't know what others think. That's why I phrased the OP as a question.

But just for you. The thought occurred to me whilst watching The Invention of Lying. And also a thread on INTPc about being INTP and unapproachable. What would the world look like if lying were impossible? Turns out it would look a lot like an Aspie ward.
Even fake smiling is lying, when you think about it - if you're not happy, you're lying about your emotional state to make other people feel comfortable. Most Dom-Tis (with undeveloped Fe) seem to have a problem with faking emotions or faking interest in something/one they're not interested in. A lot of social niceties are based on less than total honesty. Maybe that's why they are so problematic for us. It's not a lack of empathy or a lack of knowledge of the kind of behaviour that is deemed socially acceptable - it's just that such behaviour is directly opposed to the raison d'etre of Ti.
I just found the connection interesting...

well i think it's interesting too...it's like kids blurting out exactly what's on their mind or having a tantrum when they're upset. they have not yet learned to adjust their behavior to make others feel better...it's total honesty and i love it....sometimes i wanna have a tantrum too and it's just not allowed at my age...kinda not fair.

 

[Mole]

Love and Understanding, Acting Out and Abreacting

Ti is the “Truth” function, right? So is Fe the lying function?

Discuss.

Just as love is not the opposite of hate, lying in not the opposite of truth.

And just as love and hate are two sides of the same coin with the opposite as indifference, turn lying over and we find truth. No, the opposite of lying and the truth is repression.

Yes, repression is much sadder and more invisible than truth or lying. For in repression we hide the truth from ourselves and we lie to ourselves.

And then we do something extraordinary, we hide even the fact of repression from ourselves. We lie about repression itself and so repression becomes invisible.

And repression only starts to become visible when we act out. And repression only starts to become visible when we abreact.

Unfortunately acting out and abreacting are out of our conscious control and so can be dangerous in a normal environment. So it is best to act out and abreact in a safe, protected environment where we won't be held accountable for our actions.

And unfortunately Central is not such an environment, for those who act out or abreact are banned.

This is very sad for all they need is love and understanding.

 

[Mole]

...sometimes i wanna have a tantrum too and it's just not allowed at my age...kinda not fair.

I remember a woman presented in distress, saying, "I just want to scream all the time". And I said, "Why don't you? Why don't you just scream?".

So we set up Kingsley Hall in the centre of London where we could scream to our heart's content.

 

[wildcat]

I didn't really want to get too much into what I think. Mostly because I know what I think but I don't know what others think. That's why I phrased the OP as a question.

But just for you. The thought occurred to me whilst watching The Invention of Lying. And also a thread on INTPc about being INTP and unapproachable. What would the world look like if lying were impossible? Turns out it would look a lot like an Aspie ward.
Even fake smiling is lying, when you think about it - if you're not happy, you're lying about your emotional state to make other people feel comfortable. Most Dom-Tis (with undeveloped Fe) seem to have a problem with faking emotions or faking interest in something/one they're not interested in. A lot of social niceties are based on less than total honesty. Maybe that's why they are so problematic for us. It's not a lack of empathy or a lack of knowledge of the kind of behaviour that is deemed socially acceptable - it's just that such behaviour is directly opposed to the raison d'etre of Ti.
I just found the connection interesting...

A good post.
Eysenck found a high correlation between the L (Lie) scale and Fe-kind characteristics.
It supports the view Fe is demonstration of Feeling.

Demonstration

show
display
exhibition
proof

 

[Magic Poriferan]

I was so expecting this to be a wildcat thread.

 

[wildcat]

I was so expecting this to be a wildcat thread.

I thought so, too- for a fraction of a second.
Morgan Le Fay makes sense all the same.

 

[redacted]

Ti is the “Truth” function, right? So is Fe the lying function?

Discuss.

Disregarding your error of discluding the extroverted attitude of Thinking, your conclusion still has no basis.

Feeling and Thinking are not opposites. They don't even get in the way of each other whatsoever. To imply that they do just means you've been misapplying the system.

Feeling is important/unimportant. Thinking is truth/not-truth.

To even conclude that you shouldn't do something Thinking labels false (for example), you are using an F function. Feeling to say it's unimportant, Thinking to say it's false.

To set up premises for an argument, you use Feeling (and intuition to the extent that the idea even crosses your mind). Thinking merely asseses the logical structure, it doesn't set it up too.

Both are completely indispensable.


If you want to talk about T-types and F-types, that's a whole different discussion.

 

[Little_Sticks]

Ti is the “Truth” function, right? So is Fe the lying function?

If you want or say so. Am I lying?