The nature of Fi

[Blaze]

huh you guys really think it's that big of an effort to be a little er effusive?

well i guess i think it's too big of an effort to pay attention to every little nitpicky social etiquette rule or boundary violation or role violation a la "stepping on somebody's toes". so it makes sense.

there really is a divide about this it seems.

Yes, I'm with you on this. I hate that stuff.

Hmm, yeah, I also hate that stuff. *shrug* Don't think it's Fi btw.

it's leading Fi not creative.

So you're saying that it's IxFjs that are all about social etiquette?

no that would be too simple. but leading Fi's do tend to define social etiquette, don't you think? look at Miss Manners!

[Blaze]

huh you guys really think it's that big of an effort to be a little er effusive?

well i guess i think it's too big of an effort to pay attention to every little nitpicky social etiquette rule or boundary violation or role violation a la "stepping on somebody's toes". so it makes sense.

there really is a divide about this it seems.

Yes, I'm with you on this. I hate that stuff.

Hmm, yeah, I also hate that stuff. *shrug* Don't think it's Fi btw.

it's leading Fi not creative.

As a leading Fi person -- I'll disagree and say, nope, it's not.

then give your arguments for what it is...help us understand this better.

[Joy]

external=action, internal=not

In terms of information aspects: dynamic = action, static = not

Also: external = observable or measurable, internal = not

[FDG]

external=action, internal=not

In terms of information aspects: dynamic = action, static = not

Noooo we're not talking about this don't muddle the issue! I was talking about WHO DOES THE THINGS IN THE COUPLE not who perceives bla bla, ok? Or you would say an INTp-Ni is more active than an ESFp-Se?

[Joy]

huh you guys really think it's that big of an effort to be a little er effusive?

well i guess i think it's too big of an effort to pay attention to every little nitpicky social etiquette rule or boundary violation or role violation a la "stepping on somebody's toes". so it makes sense.

there really is a divide about this it seems.

Yes, I'm with you on this. I hate that stuff.

Hmm, yeah, I also hate that stuff. *shrug* Don't think it's Fi btw.

it's leading Fi not creative.

So you're saying that it's IxFjs that are all about social etiquette?

no that would be too simple. but leading Fi's do tend to define social etiquette, don't you think?

Not at all.

look at Miss Manners!

I don't know who that is.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Blaze]

external=action, internal=not

In terms of information aspects: dynamic = action, static = not

Noooo we're not talking about this don't muddle the issue! I was talking about WHO DOES THE THINGS IN THE COUPLE not who perceives bla bla, ok? Or you would say an INTp-Ni is more active than an ESFp-Se?

just to muddle it some more, when i spoke of actions i meant that emotions for Fi/Te types are demonstrated through action more than through direct emotional expression.

like my dad who is an infj...he'll make breakfast for you...then rip you a new asshole about what you shoulda coulda said or done better in thus and such a situation. so the caring attitude lies in the making of breakfast...but i'm not supposed to take the Fi evaluation an indicative of the status of my relationship with him.

[FDG]

external=action, internal=not

In terms of information aspects: dynamic = action, static = not

Noooo we're not talking about this don't muddle the issue! I was talking about WHO DOES THE THINGS IN THE COUPLE not who perceives bla bla, ok? Or you would say an INTp-Ni is more active than an ESFp-Se?

just to muddle it some more, when i spoke of actions i meant that emotions for Fi/Te types are demonstrated through action more than through direct emotional expression.

like my dad who is an infj...he'll make breakfast for you...then rip you a new asshole about what you shoulda coulda said or done better in thus and such a situation. so the caring attitude lies in the making of breakfast...but i'm not supposed to take the Fi evaluation an indicative of the status of my relationship with him.

Mmmm. I think serious types have a lower thresold of emotions "needed" to gauge a relationship. That's why to us it doesn't seem like there's a lack of warmth replaced by actions, but simply both (I don't think that you can have a relationship without emotions, heck, you can't do anything being completely unemotional).

[Blaze]

@joy: you could google miss manners. she has a column in virutally every major city newspaper. i actually like her she's kind of funny in a way.

@diana: your explanation is too theoretical for me to get my Fi polr mind around. what about examples. if Ti were about defining boundaries in relationships between people then people with weak Fi would not have the ethical problem they do. Ti will focus more on concepts and things not people. i do experience Fi as being judgemental and proper though. it comes across to me that way for sure.

[Joy]

perhaps the lack of atmosphere with Fi creates a tense atmosphere for an Fe valuing person.

Fi is clearly evaluative, static, and judges people according to ethical right and wrong. roles and boundaries are what defines relationships i would think. according to Fi you're to behave properly for your role and negotiate appropriate boundaries based on your role and the role of the other person(s) involved. how is this not Fi? if one's relationship is not defined by emotional expressed as with Fe, then exactly how would it be defined other than by actions and words? again how is that not Fi?

This is a good appraisal. From the perspective of a Fi valuing person, I would say that actions and words are defined by the relationship (as opposed to the reverse), but your description makes sense.

I think the reason you're getting resistance with the "roles and boundaries" thing is because you brought up social rules and etiquette. Fi is more about interpersonal "roles and boundaries" (instead of social). At least it is from a Gamma perspective... Delta may have more of a concern for society's rules? I'm not sure.

[redbaron]

@joy: you could google miss manners. she has a column in virutally every major city newspaper. i actually like her she's kind of funny in a way.

@diana: your explanation is too theoretical for me to get my Fi polr mind around. what about examples. if Ti were about defining boundaries in relationships between people then people with weak Fi would not have the ethical problem they do. Ti will focus more on concepts and things not people. i do experience Fi as being judgemental and proper though. it comes across to me that way for sure.

I do too. My INFj Mom comes across to me as very judgmental, even without saying a single word! She called the other day and was tiptoeing around the fact that I never call her (nothing against her, I hate talking on the phone but she takes this as a personal offense since I am her daughter and somehow that means that my role is to call her on a regular basis or else something is wrong with our relationship) and they don't get to see the kids very much (we live in a different state, etc, they could visit us more often but I guess they are waiting for an engraved invitation? Guess I should consult Miss Manners on that? )

[Joy]

@diana: your explanation is too theoretical for me to get my Fi polr mind around. what about examples. if Ti were about defining boundaries in relationships between people then people with weak Fi would not have the ethical problem they do. Ti will focus more on concepts and things not people. i do experience Fi as being judgemental and proper though. it comes across to me that way for sure.

Your concept of Fi is, I believe, accurate from a Ti perspective. You're using Ti to define Fi, which is fine. A Fi type will most likely disagree with your description though, since they don't interpret Fi through Ti.

[Joy]

@joy: you could google miss manners. she has a column in virutally every major city newspaper. i actually like her she's kind of funny in a way.

@diana: your explanation is too theoretical for me to get my Fi polr mind around. what about examples. if Ti were about defining boundaries in relationships between people then people with weak Fi would not have the ethical problem they do. Ti will focus more on concepts and things not people. i do experience Fi as being judgemental and proper though. it comes across to me that way for sure.

I do too. My INFj Mom comes across to me as very judgmental, even without saying a single word! She called the other day and was tiptoeing around the fact that I never call her (nothing against her, I hate talking on the phone but she takes this as a personal offense since I am her daughter and somehow that means that my role is to call her on a regular basis or else something is wrong with our relationship) and they don't get to see the kids very much (we live in a different state, etc, they could visit us more often but I guess they are waiting for an engraved invitation? Guess I should consult Miss Manners on that? )

I think moms have a special talent for that.

[Blaze]

@diana: your explanation is too theoretical for me to get my Fi polr mind around. what about examples. if Ti were about defining boundaries in relationships between people then people with weak Fi would not have the ethical problem they do. Ti will focus more on concepts and things not people. i do experience Fi as being judgemental and proper though. it comes across to me that way for sure.

Your concept of Fi is, I believe, accurate from a Ti perspective. You're using Ti to define Fi, which is fine. A Fi type will most likely disagree with your description though, since they don't interpret Fi through Ti.

thank you for the socionic analysis of what i'm doing.

more to the point, how does the Fi perception of the underlying interrelationships, translate into emotion, behavior and words? examples....

[aka-kitsune]

to me Fe is a signal of where the relationships stands. if the emotional vibe is cold, then i think that there's a problem or that the other person is having a bad day.

as a Ti person, i look for consistency between emotional expression, behavior, and communication. i want these to line up. when they don't i start to think there's a problem.

i'm much more effective when there's a pleasant flow of positive Fe.

I think this is what I was getting at, from my personal POV.

I've noted a difficulty feeling "connected" to some -valuers I was attempting to get to know better. Usually, in person this isn't really a problem. Eventually, with enough exposure, I can learn to tell when they're upset about something or feeling down, and not take it personally. And it's not necessarily about being effusive, either. I also begin to pick up small actions that reflect intimacy, like a pat on the shoulder, or a smile, or even sitting closely.

But it's more a recurring sense of lack of consistent connection. ie: they don't often take initiative to contact me, although they normally acknowledge and respond politely. I get this "out of sight, out of mind" vibe that I think prevents me from feeling close and/or genuine reciprocal interest. I find myself thinking are we friends? Or am I presuming too much? If I'm always the one initiating contact, I begin to feel like the friendship is one-sided. I need to be sought out occasionally to feel that I'm not bothering the other person, that they really do value me. Lack of communication and/or missing the occasional indication that the other person intends to continue the association gives me the sense that I'm just "convenient" at times. Not to mention, bonds are built on shared time, communication. Like any breathing entity, they need to be fed regularly.

Like if someone says to me, "Yeah, blah is right around the corner!" (but it's really 2 months away) I start to think ack! why don't they want to see me or hear from me before then????

a heavy Fi atmosphere makes me feel cornered and tense and evaluated. seems like positive Fi is demonstrated primarily by actions rather than emotions, words or mood. FWIW.

In the absence of any of this, what is there to go on?

[Blaze]

@joy: you could google miss manners. she has a column in virutally every major city newspaper. i actually like her she's kind of funny in a way.

@diana: your explanation is too theoretical for me to get my Fi polr mind around. what about examples. if Ti were about defining boundaries in relationships between people then people with weak Fi would not have the ethical problem they do. Ti will focus more on concepts and things not people. i do experience Fi as being judgemental and proper though. it comes across to me that way for sure.

I do too. My INFj Mom comes across to me as very judgmental, even without saying a single word! She called the other day and was tiptoeing around the fact that I never call her (nothing against her, I hate talking on the phone but she takes this as a personal offense since I am her daughter and somehow that means that my role is to call her on a regular basis or else something is wrong with our relationship) and they don't get to see the kids very much (we live in a different state, etc, they could visit us more often but I guess they are waiting for an engraved invitation? Guess I should consult Miss Manners on that? )

lol yes. it's even worse with an Fi valuing mom. they try to get you to show them lots of Fi actions...there was a thread about this in alpha awhile ago where gilly's mom kept trying to get him to do something with her shampoo bottles as evidence of his devotion to her! lol

or my father, upon my inviting him to help himself to coffee felt compelled to tell me "what an exemplary hostess" i was (sarcasm added) if this isn't judgment what is?

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Joy]

lol yes. it's even worse with an Fi valuing mom. they try to get you to show them lots of Fi actions...there was a thread about this in alpha awhile ago where gilly's mom kept trying to get him to do something with her shampoo bottles as evidence of his devotion to her! lol

or my father, upon my inviting him to help himself to coffee felt compelled to tell me "what an exemplary hostess" i was (sarcasm added) if this isn't judgment what is?

this stuff sounds more related to Si than Fi, imo

[Blaze]

to me Fe is a signal of where the relationships stands. if the emotional vibe is cold, then i think that there's a problem or that the other person is having a bad day.

as a Ti person, i look for consistency between emotional expression, behavior, and communication. i want these to line up. when they don't i start to think there's a problem.

i'm much more effective when there's a pleasant flow of positive Fe.

I think this is what I was getting at, from my personal POV.

I've noted a difficulty feeling "connected" to some -valuers I was attempting to get to know better. Usually, in person this isn't really a problem. Eventually, with enough exposure, I can learn to tell when they're upset about something or feeling down, and not take it personally. And it's not necessarily about being effusive, either. I also begin to pick up small actions that reflect intimacy, like a pat on the shoulder, or a smile, or even sitting closely.

But it's more a recurring sense of lack of consistent connection. ie: they don't often take initiative to contact me, although they normally acknowledge and respond politely. I get this "out of sight, out of mind" vibe that I think prevents me from feeling close and/or genuine reciprocal interest. I find myself thinking are we friends? Or am I presuming too much? If I'm always the one initiating contact, I begin to feel like the friendship is one-sided. I need to be sought out occasionally to feel that I'm not bothering the other person, that they really do value me. Lack of communication and/or missing the occasional indication that the other person intends to continue the association gives me the sense that I'm just "convenient" at times. Not to mention, bonds are built on shared time, communication. Like any breathing entity, they need to be fed regularly.

Like if someone says to me, "Yeah, blah is right around the corner!" (but it's really 2 months away) I start to think ack! why don't they want to see me or hear from me before then????

a heavy Fi atmosphere makes me feel cornered and tense and evaluated. seems like positive Fi is demonstrated primarily by actions rather than emotions, words or mood. FWIW.

In the absence of any of this, what is there to go on?

yes yes yes to all of this.

it's kind of like Fe valuing types have trouble perceiving the Fi stuff unless it comes out as a clear judgment.

[Blaze]

lol yes. it's even worse with an Fi valuing mom. they try to get you to show them lots of Fi actions...there was a thread about this in alpha awhile ago where gilly's mom kept trying to get him to do something with her shampoo bottles as evidence of his devotion to her! lol

or my father, upon my inviting him to help himself to coffee felt compelled to tell me "what an exemplary hostess" i was (sarcasm added) if this isn't judgment what is?

this stuff sounds more related to Si than Fi, imo

yet another socionic labelling. we can pick this apart if you want...but i see more "since i'm your father you should serve me instead of expecting me to serve myelf. you are not behaving properly for what the relationship is."

shampoo bottles? Si? how's that exactly?

[redbaron]

But it's more a recurring sense of lack of consistent connection. ie: they don't often take initiative to contact me, although they normally acknowledge and respond politely. I get this "out of sight, out of mind" vibe that I think prevents me from feeling close and/or genuine reciprocal interest. I find myself thinking are we friends? Or am I presuming too much? If I'm always the one initiating contact, I begin to feel like the friendship is one-sided. I need to be sought out occasionally to feel that I'm not bothering the other person, that they really do value me. Lack of communication and/or missing the occasional indication that the other person intends to continue the association gives me the sense that I'm just "convenient" at times. Not to mention, bonds are built on shared time, communication. Like any breathing entity, they need to be fed regularly.

Like if someone says to me, "Yeah, blah is right around the corner!" (but it's really 2 months away) I start to think ack! why don't they want to see me or hear from me before then????

Sigh. FWIW, I have felt this way around not just leading types but others as well. I wonder if it's more of an IEI problem. In the INFp description, doesn't it say something about tending to feel closer to people than the relationship warrants. This occasionally happens to me. I feel like we have a friendship when come to find out later, it didn't mean as much to the other person as I thought it had. It's almost like in my head, I have already decided that I want to be friends with someone and so I jump ahead in my trust of them (or something, I dunno) and suddenly in my MIND it's like we've been friends for years and we're close and I find myself telling them all sorts of things. But they may only think of me when I'm standing in front of them and it doesn't seem like a big deal to wait for the Christmas party until our next get-together (which to me, seems like an eternity). I could be way off here but this has been my experience anyway. I think that sometimes my own enthusiasm jumps ahead and the other person needs real time to catch up. ??

[aka-kitsune]

to me Fe is a signal of where the relationships stands. if the emotional vibe is cold, then i think that there's a problem or that the other person is having a bad day.

as a Ti person, i look for consistency between emotional expression, behavior, and communication. i want these to line up. when they don't i start to think there's a problem.

i'm much more effective when there's a pleasant flow of positive Fe.

I think this is what I was getting at, from my personal POV.

I've noted a difficulty feeling "connected" to some -valuers I was attempting to get to know better. Usually, in person this isn't really a problem. Eventually, with enough exposure, I can learn to tell when they're upset about something or feeling down, and not take it personally. And it's not necessarily about being effusive, either. I also begin to pick up small actions that reflect intimacy, like a pat on the shoulder, or a smile, or even sitting closely.

But it's more a recurring sense of lack of consistent connection. ie: they don't often take initiative to contact me, although they normally acknowledge and respond politely. I get this "out of sight, out of mind" vibe that I think prevents me from feeling close and/or genuine reciprocal interest. I find myself thinking are we friends? Or am I presuming too much? If I'm always the one initiating contact, I begin to feel like the friendship is one-sided. I need to be sought out occasionally to feel that I'm not bothering the other person, that they really do value me. Lack of communication and/or missing the occasional indication that the other person intends to continue the association gives me the sense that I'm just "convenient" at times. Not to mention, bonds are built on shared time, communication. Like any breathing entity, they need to be fed regularly.

Like if someone says to me, "Yeah, blah is right around the corner!" (but it's really 2 months away) I start to think ack! why don't they want to see me or hear from me before then????

a heavy Fi atmosphere makes me feel cornered and tense and evaluated. seems like positive Fi is demonstrated primarily by actions rather than emotions, words or mood. FWIW.

In the absence of any of this, what is there to go on?

yes yes yes to all of this.

it's kind of like Fe valuing types have trouble perceiving the Fi stuff unless it comes out as a clear judgment.

With it's clear there's always a pulse. With it's almost like it just completely goes flatline without input. Radio silence that just makes you begin to wonder.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[aka-kitsune]

But it's more a recurring sense of lack of consistent connection. ie: they don't often take initiative to contact me, although they normally acknowledge and respond politely. I get this "out of sight, out of mind" vibe that I think prevents me from feeling close and/or genuine reciprocal interest. I find myself thinking are we friends? Or am I presuming too much? If I'm always the one initiating contact, I begin to feel like the friendship is one-sided. I need to be sought out occasionally to feel that I'm not bothering the other person, that they really do value me. Lack of communication and/or missing the occasional indication that the other person intends to continue the association gives me the sense that I'm just "convenient" at times. Not to mention, bonds are built on shared time, communication. Like any breathing entity, they need to be fed regularly.

Like if someone says to me, "Yeah, blah is right around the corner!" (but it's really 2 months away) I start to think ack! why don't they want to see me or hear from me before then????

Sigh. FWIW, I have felt this way around not just leading types but others as well. I wonder if it's more of an IEI problem. In the INFp description, doesn't it say something about tending to feel closer to people than the relationship warrants. This occasionally happens to me. I feel like we have a friendship when come to find out later, it didn't mean as much to the other person as I thought it had. It's almost like in my head, I have already decided that I want to be friends with someone and so I jump ahead in my trust of them (or something, I dunno) and suddenly in my MIND it's like we've been friends for years and we're close and I find myself telling them all sorts of things. But they may only think of me when I'm standing in front of them and it doesn't seem like a big deal to wait for the Christmas party until our next get-together (which to me, seems like an eternity). I could be way off here but this has been my experience anyway. I think that sometimes my own enthusiasm jumps ahead and the other person needs real time to catch up. ??

This sounds really familiar to me too.

I do often decide I want to be closer friends with specific people and feel especially more attached when some emotional barriers drop really dramatically. And I find myself wondering if I'm just imagining the degree of closeness, although it certainly feels highly reciprocated at times. In the past, I've had people occasionally tell me that I want too much too soon. (Makes me think "How Soon Is Now??")

Perhaps I'm magnifying the good feelings with ...

[Joy]

@diana: your explanation is too theoretical for me to get my Fi polr mind around. what about examples. if Ti were about defining boundaries in relationships between people then people with weak Fi would not have the ethical problem they do. Ti will focus more on concepts and things not people. i do experience Fi as being judgemental and proper though. it comes across to me that way for sure.

Your concept of Fi is, I believe, accurate from a Ti perspective. You're using Ti to define Fi, which is fine. A Fi type will most likely disagree with your description though, since they don't interpret Fi through Ti.

thank you for the socionic analysis of what i'm doing.

more to the point, how does the Fi perception of the underlying interrelationships, translate into emotion, behavior and words? examples....

When a Fi valuing type is confident that a Fi relationship exists, the presence or absence of emotion or emotional expression at any given moment doesn't mean much. (One's overall feelings/emotions do though.)



Fi defines the underlying relationships between people/things, and the relationships define the types of words and behavior that are appropriate. I can see how Fi could be considered judgmental in that sense. I can see how defining the appropriateness or inappropriateness of an action towards another person could be considered "creating rules", in a way.

Example: A Te type colleague recently asked me to meet with him to discuss some of the things we're both working on. He started the invitation with the words "Would it be appropriate if we met... ". That sort of stood out to me because that's exactly what I am thinking anytime I consider trying to make plans with someone. I'm poorly aware of the relationship and what would be appropriate vs. what would be weird. (It's something I want to know though.) I end up thinking, "Maybe asking this person to do something with me would just be weird... like 'why would you think we'd do that?'... but maybe it would be fine and I could make a friend or get something accomplished or whatever (depending on the situation) and it would be stupid not to ask... I just don't know."

[Blaze]

@joy: you could google miss manners. she has a column in virutally every major city newspaper. i actually like her she's kind of funny in a way.

@diana: your explanation is too theoretical for me to get my Fi polr mind around. what about examples. if Ti were about defining boundaries in relationships between people then people with weak Fi would not have the ethical problem they do. Ti will focus more on concepts and things not people.

Well Ti and Fe go together -- they're part of the same group and work together. It's probably the Ti that had my ex saying - "this is my mom, so you should make an effort" because he wouldn't care how I acted towards someone else. Does it really matter that it was his mom? Not to me it didn't. But for his sake I made more of an effort. It's like when a friend of mine (ISFp) had said he was going to give me something, then later gave it to his sister instead - just because she was his sister and for no other reason. I believe that's a Ti>Fi kind of response. The rules and roles override any Fi connections between people, or lack thereof. You do this because that's what the role defines, not because of how you feel about a person. You keep people happy and it's dependent on defined characteristics such as "this is my family so they deserve such and such" "this is my boyfriend/girlfriend so this is how they should be treated" "this is how you respond to a friend". That's how it appears to me -- correct me please if I'm wrong. Anyway, that's where I see Ti coming into the Ti-Fe relationships. IMO, the reason Fi polr makes it hard is because you're tuned in to Fe, that's what you use to "define" relationships. The warmth that appears to be lacking to you in Fi types is clear to you in Fe types. You notice how someone reacts to you, the way you both make each other feel, evident through the Fe response. But you miss the pulse that's underneath that Fi types are more tuned into. We all feel, we all experience emotion and closeness and bonding, all types both Fe and Fi valuing - but Fi isn't obvious to Ti folks, and gets missed, or misread, and Fi folks misread Fe as an expression of strong Fi in cases as well. We all make mistakes in relationships, Fi types aren't immune to that for sure.

bold i agree with.

italics: doesn't Fi inform these kinds of decisions? doesn't Fi pick up on the natural connection and then seek to express it in different ways? i don't see this as Ti at all. i wouldn't use Ti to analyze roles and boundaries i'd use Ti to look for consistency between the amount and type of Fe and in how much time does the person spend with me, how often do the reciprocate, does their emotion match their behavior etc etc. to what degree does this stuff match up? the answer to this question would then define the relationship.

you are right Ti dominants would not see the underlying connections...i think we go external.

Fi judgments wreck the mood for me, which then effs up the relationship.

[aka-kitsune]

When a Fi valuing type is confident that a Fi relationship exists, the presence or absence of emotion or emotional expression at any given moment doesn't mean much. (One's overall feelings/emotions do though.)

Fi defines the underlying relationships between people/things, and the relationships define the types of words and behavior that are appropriate. I can see how Fi could be considered judgmental in that sense. I can see how defining the appropriateness or inappropriateness of an action towards another person could be considered "creating rules", in a way.

How do these underlying relationships change, then? How do you define an "Fi relationship"? I seem to get the feeling I'm waiting for a green light, actually, whereas I'm usually warranting a flashing yellow.

Also, "appropriateness" sounds so restrictive, albeit completely accurate. (I tend to resist roles and strain at limitations)

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[redbaron]

I do often decide I want to be closer friends with specific people and feel especially more attached when some emotional barriers drop really dramatically. And I find myself wondering if I'm just imagining the degree of closeness, although it certainly feels highly reciprocated at times. In the past, I've had people occasionally tell me that I want too much too soon. (Makes me think "How Soon Is Now??")

Perhaps I'm magnifying the good feelings with ...

It definitely feels highly reciprocal which is why the eventual disappointment to find out that it doesn't necessarily mean anything other than the fact that we were having a good time in the moment (is this the issue between leading Ni and leading Si friends? I sometimes feel that way with an ISFp friend I have--I absolutely know he had an equal amount of fun talking to me as I did with him but that it doesn't mean he cares to talk to me for the rest of the week). I hate that "out of sight, out of mind" feeling. If I get the sense that that is what I am to someone, I feel kinda devalued.

[Joy]

lol yes. it's even worse with an Fi valuing mom. they try to get you to show them lots of Fi actions...there was a thread about this in alpha awhile ago where gilly's mom kept trying to get him to do something with her shampoo bottles as evidence of his devotion to her! lol

or my father, upon my inviting him to help himself to coffee felt compelled to tell me "what an exemplary hostess" i was (sarcasm added) if this isn't judgment what is?

this stuff sounds more related to Si than Fi, imo

yet another socionic labelling.

You're the one who gave it a Socionics labeling. I was just pointing out that I think a different label would be more applicable.

we can pick this apart if you want...but i see more "since i'm your father you should serve me instead of expecting me to serve myelf. you are not behaving properly for what the relationship is."

I don't want to get into a big discussion over this here either... The reason I said Si is because both (especially the coffee) sound like care taking things. You know your dad and I don't, but if someone commented on my poor hostess skills I would not assume they said that for any reason that relates to my relationship with them... I would assume they said it because it's my house, and when you have guests in your house you're "supposed to" make sure they're comfortable by offering them something to drink or whatever (but I never do that kind of shit lol).

shampoo bottles? Si? how's that exactly?

I seriously have no idea how that shampoo bottle thing could be Fi. Only a borderline pd person would be like "You would fill the shampoo if you loved me! Why don't you love me?!?!" (Again though, Gilligan knows his mom and I don't... maybe she really is like that? ) It sounded more like his mom was trying to delegate various chores because she wanted her home to be properly maintained in typical TeSi fashion. The thing she was trying to accomplish had a Si motivation. Her methods sounded more like Aristocracy and EJ-ness than anything, if I recall correctly.

[Blaze]

When a Fi valuing type is confident that a Fi relationship exists, the presence or absence of emotion or emotional expression at any given moment doesn't mean much. (One's overall feelings/emotions do though.)

Fi defines the underlying relationships between people/things, and the relationships define the types of words and behavior that are appropriate. I can see how Fi could be considered judgmental in that sense. I can see how defining the appropriateness or inappropriateness of an action towards another person could be considered "creating rules", in a way.

How do these underlying relationships change, then? How do you define an "Fi relationship"? I seem to get the feeling I'm waiting for a green light, actually, whereas I'm usually warranting a flashing yellow.

Also, "appropriateness" sounds so restrictive, albeit completely accurate. (I tend to resist roles and strain at limitations)

yes. appropriate is a good word that describes how Fi evaluates i think. it sounds restrictive to me also. it seeks to define the relationship right from the outset in this example. we would need a reason to meet, we couldn't just meet. sounds right for work i spose.

what if an Fi type picks up on repulsion in the underlying connection, yet they are in a situation which requires them to interact according to a set role, rule, or boundary?

[Joy]

When a Fi valuing type is confident that a Fi relationship exists, the presence or absence of emotion or emotional expression at any given moment doesn't mean much. (One's overall feelings/emotions do though.)

Fi defines the underlying relationships between people/things, and the relationships define the types of words and behavior that are appropriate. I can see how Fi could be considered judgmental in that sense. I can see how defining the appropriateness or inappropriateness of an action towards another person could be considered "creating rules", in a way.

How do these underlying relationships change, then? How do you define an "Fi relationship"? I seem to get the feeling I'm waiting for a green light, actually, whereas I'm usually warranting a flashing yellow.

Also, "appropriateness" sounds so restrictive, albeit completely accurate. (I tend to resist roles and strain at limitations)

I don't know how Fi types determine those relationships. I just go with them, for the most part. Obviously if someone's trying to hook up with me and I'm not interested, I'm not going to go along with it. I can't recall a single time that a Fi ego type has ever put me in that position though. Hmmm...

[Blaze]

@joy: you'd have to read the thread. i think it's called Anti-Fi Rant or something like that. i quite agreed with the conclusions reached about Fi there.

my purpose is not that of labeling, but to understand how the functions express themselves. to understand this you need examples, which you finally did provide a good one which illustrates exactly what i've been saying all along: Fi is about defining relationships in different ways including roles and boundaries.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Joy]

When a Fi valuing type is confident that a Fi relationship exists, the presence or absence of emotion or emotional expression at any given moment doesn't mean much. (One's overall feelings/emotions do though.)

Fi defines the underlying relationships between people/things, and the relationships define the types of words and behavior that are appropriate. I can see how Fi could be considered judgmental in that sense. I can see how defining the appropriateness or inappropriateness of an action towards another person could be considered "creating rules", in a way.

How do these underlying relationships change, then? How do you define an "Fi relationship"? I seem to get the feeling I'm waiting for a green light, actually, whereas I'm usually warranting a flashing yellow.

Also, "appropriateness" sounds so restrictive, albeit completely accurate. (I tend to resist roles and strain at limitations)

yes. appropriate is a good word that describes how Fi evaluates i think.

I think all rational information elements determine what's appropriate or not appropriate, they just do it with different aspects of reality.

For example, if someone hits on their employee, it's inappropriate on a few levels. First of all, it could be inappropriate due to Fi, which would mean that the employee dislikes the fact that this person tried to engage her in a manner in which she did not wish to be engaged. There's also the Ti perspective, which would say that it's against rules/laws to hit on an employee. It could be inappropriate according to Fe if it creates an awkward and uncomfortable mood. It could be inappropriate according to Te if hitting on her will ultimately make her less productive or result in a law suit. I'm sure there are other ways in which it's appropriate or inappropriate, too.

it sounds restrictive to me also. it seeks to define the relationship right from the outset in this example.

It's not that relationships never change. It's that they're not defined in the moment by the mood.

we would need a reason to meet, we couldn't just meet.

You'd want that nasty guy who's always looking you up and down and undressing you with his eyes to be free to just meet with you whenever and where ever (for any reason)?

sounds right for work i spose.

I think this may be the essence of Merry vs. Serious...

what if an Fi type picks up on repulsion in the underlying connection, yet they are in a situation which requires them to interact according to a set role, rule, or boundary?

You do what you gotta do, I guess?

[Joy]

@joy: you'd have to read the thread. i think it's called Anti-Fi Rant or something like that. i quite agreed with the conclusions reached about Fi there.

I remember the thread, and I remember disagreeing that it was about Fi, but I don't remember all of the specifics.

my purpose is not that of labeling, but to understand how the functions express themselves. to understand this you need examples, which you finally did provide a good one which illustrates exactly what i've been saying all along:

Which example?

Fi is about defining relationships in different ways including roles and boundaries.

Yes. But again, this is a Ti definition/description of Fi. Fi is about those relationships themselves. Fi sees the internal (the way the people relate to each other, in a relational sense), Ti is about the external (the roles and boundaries created by Fi).

[Blaze]

I don't want to get into a big discussion over this here either... The reason I said Si is because both (especially the coffee) sound like care taking things. You know your dad and I don't, but if someone commented on my poor hostess skills I would not assume they said that for any reason that relates to my relationship with them... I would assume they said it because it's my house, and when you have guests in your house you're "supposed to" make sure they're comfortable by offering them something to drink or whatever (but I never do that kind of shit lol).

actually i see what you mean, and i'm pretty casual too esp with family. "mi casa su casa" help yourself. he knows this; it's the way i run my household when family visits. but he sees my role as being that of hostess; his evaluation of how well i fulfill this role is what i see as being Fi. and then the idea that i should serve him just because he thinks my role is hostess even though he's not fulfilling his role of being a pleasant guest. so kind of like i'm supposed to play by his Fi rules (even though it's my house) AND he doesn't have to.

soooo the Fi/Fe point here is that esp when a strong Fi judgment is not accompanied by any positive Fe, that's when i would react strongly negatively. again, inconsistency in application of Fi judgment and inconsistency between Fi and Fe.

effing family issues.

[Joy]

I don't want to get into a big discussion over this here either... The reason I said Si is because both (especially the coffee) sound like care taking things. You know your dad and I don't, but if someone commented on my poor hostess skills I would not assume they said that for any reason that relates to my relationship with them... I would assume they said it because it's my house, and when you have guests in your house you're "supposed to" make sure they're comfortable by offering them something to drink or whatever (but I never do that kind of shit lol).

actually i see what you mean, and i'm pretty casual too esp with family. "mi casa su casa" help yourself. but he sees my role as being that of hostess; his evaluation of how well i fulfill this role is what i see as being Fi. the idea that i should serve him just because he thinks my role is hostess even though he's not fulfilling his role of being a pleasant guest. so kind of like i'm supposed to play by his Fi rules but he doesn't have to. soooo the Fi/Fe point here is that esp when a strong Fi judgment is not accompanied by any positive Fe, that's when i would react strongly negatively. again, inconsistency.

It could be a combination... but I can assure you that, unless said in a facetious way, the type of comment he made is not something you'd typically hear out of Gamma.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[aestrivex]

sygyt mezhegei öske cherde eshten charlyyry berge kombu khöömei kongurei igil bayan dugai kargyraa ching söörtükchülerining yryzy