Can't decide between Te/Fi and Fe/Ti valuing?

[Joy]

It may be helpful to use the role of Fe (emotional expressiveness, emotional environments) in your romantic relationships to figure it out.


For Te/Fi valuers, consistency between Fi input (verbal explanations of the status of the relationship) and actions is important, but Fe input (emotional expressiveness) is not.

Fi dominants are Fe ignoring, so the only connection between Fe and Fi for Te/Fi rationals is that the Te dominant may use Fe too much when they're not getting enough Fi. The Fi dominant is then like, "ew, what's all this Fe nonsense?" and, realizing that the Te dominant is feeling insecure, simply tells them that everything is fine. The Te dominant can believe this coming from a Fi dominant because what they say never changes, and their day to day actions (not emotional expressiveness) back up what they're saying.

As for Te creatives, how exactly are they of all types supposed to depend on Fe to know that the Fi is okay? The only connection between Fe and Fi for Te/Fi irrationals is that the Te creative feels safe with the Fi creative because the Fi creative thinks the Te creative's inability to read and utilize Fe properly is endearing. The Fi creatives finds Fe fun but unimportant, so they take care of reading Fe cues FOR the Te creative. There certainly isn't any expectation for the Te creative to be capable of reading or utilizing Fe situational cues in order to feel that their need for Fi is being fulfilled.


Fe/Ti valuers, however, are dependent on situational cues because the status of their relationships is defined with Ti, not Fi. Ti is "cold and objective" compared to the ethical information elements, so an additional ingredient (Fe) is necessary in order for them to know that the relationship is indeed functioning as it should be.

[Joy]

(Of course, this would only apply to relationships between two Te/Fi valuers or two Fe/Ti valuers.)

[1981slater]

[Gilly]

Fe/Ti valuers, however, are dependent on situational cues because the status of their relationships is defined with Ti, not Fi. Ti is "cold and objective" compared to the ethical information elements, so an additional ingredient (Fe) is necessary in order for them to know that the relationship is indeed functioning as it should be.

Ti/Fe valuers base their relationships on Ti? Sorry, but that is total horseshit.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Joy]

Ti/Fe valuers base their relationships on Ti? Sorry, but that is total horseshit.

Define, not base.

[Gilly]

Explain.

[Joy]

lol

And then there's that.

For me, day to day I need to see that I can count on a person, that their everyday actions back up what they're saying. They can't ignore me, lie to me, make promises that they break, and then expect to suddenly make up for all of that with one big action. I just feel that they're dishonest, undependable, and don't actually care about me. I need to be shown that I actually matter to them, and I'm not just something extra slid into an open time slot when it happens to dawn on them. My time is important too, and I'm not going to invest it somewhere where it's not valued.

Life is every day, not events scattered here and there. If every day I feel undervalued, then I'm wasting my life being undervalued. And nothing really makes up for that. And certainly a bunch of words, no matter how emotional and sincere they may sound is going to make any difference to me. So yeah, emotional expressiveness really means jack shit to me, what really matters is the constancy of actions.

Exactly.

[Joy]

Explain.

The status of a relationship (are we married? are we dating? etc.) is a Ti thing, not a Fi thing (Fi defines it more subjective terms). Though it would make sense to me if these definitions meant more to Fe/Ti rationals than irrationals?

Knowing you're "technically with" a person isn't sufficient though (as you said, a relationship shouldn't be based solely on Ti), so Fe expressions are extremely important. That's how Fe/Ti valuers know what's going on in the relationship. The absence of Fe expressiveness in any form might be taken by a Ti ego type to mean that the other person doesn't really care about them, no matter what their words are.

[Joy]

My ray of light in stormy, turbulent seas.

Interesting. I see Fi as my anchor in stormy, turbulent seas.

[1981slater]

My ray of light in dark, turbulent seas.

The hijacker is under control, Sir. Her name is Carla. Hey type, LII

[Joy]

I think it's an interesting comparison because somewhat illustrates the differences between Fi and Fe. Fi is static and rational, so it's more suited to serve as something solid or fixed than a dynamic information aspect.

[Mattie]

I think a lot of this is from an valuing rational type perspective, because I don't really feel as something so rigid or reassuring... And I don't think the SiTe I've been around really see it that way as well. I can agree with the actions bit though, but it seems a lot more free-form than how you describe it. I agreed with everything in Diana's post, but it seemed like an extreme version of how I feel. There's no way that would really work for an SiTe until you're grounded in the relationship (I have novels of personal testament to this), and who knows really after that, I'll report it if my current situation works out.

[Gilly]

The status of a relationship (are we married? are we dating? etc.) is a Ti thing, not a Fi thing (Fi defines it more subjective terms). Though it would make sense to me if these definitions meant more to Fe/Ti rationals than irrationals?

Knowing you're "technically with" a person isn't sufficient though (as you said, a relationship shouldn't be based solely on Ti), so Fe expressions are extremely important. That's how Fe/Ti valuers know what's going on in the relationship. The absence of Fe expressiveness in any form might be taken by a Ti ego type to mean that the other person doesn't really care about them, no matter what their words are.

The problem is, you're making it sound like the Ti aspect of knowing "we're in a relationship" is the actual substance, and that affection ISN'T displayed in behavioral nuances and actions, so it's made up for by being HAPPY AND ENTHUSIASTIC AND YAAAAY, which simply isn't true. I don't expect that at all; I don't even want that most of the time. I care about trust, honesty, and the subtle warmth and emotional vulnerability that comes as a natural result of being with someone; not them being happy just for me. That's phony and disgusting.

For me, day to day I need to see that I can count on a person, that their everyday actions back up what they're saying. They can't ignore me, lie to me, make promises that they break, and then expect to suddenly make up for all of that with one big action. I just feel that they're dishonest, undependable, and don't actually care about me. I need to be shown that I actually matter to them, and I'm not just something extra slid into an open time slot when it happens to dawn on them. My time is important too, and I'm not going to invest it somewhere where it's not valued.

These things are important to Ti/Fe types too; we don't want to be with people who lie or cheat.

The point is, you're making it sound FAR more black-and-white than it really is.

[Danielle]

Thank you, this is quite useful information. For me. I predict somewhat less useful for "Fe/Ti valuers" (they got two sentences here), but maybe one of them can write their own.

[07490]

I think it's an interesting comparison because somewhat illustrates the differences between Fi and Fe. Fi is static and rational, so it's more suited to serve as something solid or fixed than a dynamic information aspect.

Right, it's similar to comparing Ti and Te. I suppose that a leading Fe type would think of Ti as their anchor and I wonder what a leading Fi type would say about Te?

that is interesting because I think on the duality description http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...-ovcharov.html the duality rational pair description sound somewhat isolated against the world, and it involves around the two person, It clearly sounds like that on LIE/ESI, EIE/LSI and LSE/EII duality.

[Logos]

Interesting. I see Fi as my anchor in stormy, turbulent seas.

I AM the ocean floor. I barely move and the turbulent waters move around me.

But your Fi/Te analysis is far more thorough (and pleasant sounding) than your skim amount that you applied to Fe/Ti. If this was all that I had to go on, I would definitely say that I leaned Fi/Te.

[Joy]

Right, it's similar to comparing Ti and Te. I suppose that a leading Fe type would think of Ti as an anchor and I wonder what a leading Fi type would say about Te?

Probably similarly to "a ray of light", though the ray of light would be more in the form of useful information and practical suggestions. (It's colder than Fe.)

Thank you, this is quite useful information. For me. I predict somewhat less useful for "Fe/Ti valuers" (they got two sentences here), but maybe one of them can write their own.

The idea of the post is to help Te/Fi types identify themselves and Fe/Ti types to rule out Te/Fi. I'd be quite interested in reading a similar post from a Fe/Ti perspective.

The problem is, you're making it sound like the Ti aspect of knowing "we're in a relationship" is the actual substance, and that affection ISN'T displayed in behavioral nuances and actions, so it's made up for by being HAPPY AND ENTHUSIASTIC AND YAAAAY, which simply isn't true. I don't expect that at all; I don't even want that most of the time. I care about trust, honesty, and the subtle warmth and emotional vulnerability that comes as a natural result of being with someone; not them being happy just for me. That's phony and disgusting.

How would you describe Te/Fi rational relationships from a Fe/Ti perspective?

These things are important to Ti/Fe types too; we don't want to be with people who lie or cheat.

The point is, you're making it sound FAR more black-and-white than it really is.

The idea, as I stated above, is more to help Te/Fi types identify themselves and Fe/Ti types to rule out Te/Fi.

[Joy]

I AM the ocean floor. I barely move and the turbulent waters move around me.

That's a good comparison from the IJ perspective, but what's a poor EJ trying to keep his/her head above water to do?

But your Fi/Te analysis is far more thorough (and pleasant sounding) than your skim amount that you applied to Fe/Ti. If this was all that I had to go on, I would definitely say that I leaned Fi/Te.

Actually, when I was writing this I was thinking that Ti dominants may read this think that they're more like the Te/Fi relationship description if they haven't been in a relationship with a Fe dominant before. Ti dominants as a whole are pretty cool and collected.

Okay, I'm officially looking for volunteers to write something similar to this from a Fe/Ti perspective.

[Logos]

The idea of the post is to help Te/Fi types identify themselves and Fe/Ti types to rule out Te/Fi. I'd be quite interested in reading a similar post from a Fe/Ti perspective.

The idea, as I stated above, is more to help Te/Fi types identify themselves and Fe/Ti types to rule out Te/Fi.

I am not sure if the idea worked. If you merely focus on Te/Fi and do not illustrate the differences, then people will not be able to truly identify themselves or rule anything out. But I could probably save a lot of time with helping people figure out their type if I only presented one type, so you are able to identify with this type or you are not this type. But that is not a good empirical method.

[electric sheep]

I think types rely on types to be consistent in their actions, stick to their principles no matter what, and to hold themselves to the same standards as everyone else. Dishonesty is almost unforgivable because that undermines the basis of (was it all just an act?).

[Joy]

I am not sure if the idea worked. If you merely focus on Te/Fi and do not illustrate the differences, then people will not be able to truly identify themselves or rule anything out. But I could probably save a lot of time with helping people figure out their type if I only presented one type, so you are able to identify with this type or you are not this type. But that is not a good empirical method.

True.

I would have thought most Fe/Ti valuers would have been turned off by the Te/Fi description though.

[Joy]

I think types rely on types to be consistent in their actions, stick to their principles no matter what, and to hold themselves to the same standards as everyone else. Dishonesty is almost unforgivable because that undermines the basis of (was it all just an act?).

I think Fe/Te dominants are probably the same in looking for this out of Fi/Ti dominants. That's just the nature of static rational information aspects. One's just focused on the internal and one on the external.

[Logos]

That's a good comparison from the IJ perspective, but what's a poor EJ trying to keep his/her head above water to do?

From my perspective, you are the water.

Actually, when I was writing this I was thinking that Ti dominants may read this think that they're more like the Te/Fi relationship description if they haven't been in a relationship with a Fe dominant before. Ti dominants as a whole are pretty cool and collected.

I have been in a Fe-dominant relationship, but most Fi/Te relationship descriptions actually sound like meaningful relationships and most Ti/Fe relationship descriptions sound so shallow and superficial.

[electric sheep]

I have been in a Fe-dominant relationship, but most Fi/Te relationship descriptions actually sound like meaningful relationships and most Ti/Fe relationship descriptions sound so shallow and superficial.

They do, but only because the true depth is never really verbalized. It's like dark matter. You can't see the love itself--you can only see its effects.

[Gilly]

How would you describe Te/Fi rational relationships from a Fe/Ti perspective?

I guess they probably appreciate people who are "mature" in the sense of being emotionally restrained and not turbulent, value explicitness in communication and don't expect their partner to read between the lines, or visa versa. They say what they want to be communicated, rather than what they are feeling. They want to be with people who are generally predictable in their behavior; they want to know who other people are in their entirety, and don't like feeling like they "don't know who they're dealing with," as opposed to Ti/Fe types who enjoy the idea that their partner is complex and intruiging.

[Joy]

From my perspective, you are the water.

lol

There was a song I used to like years ago called "you're an ocean". (The singer said he was an island though, not the ocean floor, but the idea was the same.)

I remember Diana posted something a while back about an unstoppable force and an immovable object that I liked.

I have been in a Fe-dominant relationship, but most Fi/Te relationship descriptions actually sound like meaningful relationships and most Ti/Fe relationship descriptions sound so shallow and superficial.

My parents are Fe/Ti (probably LSI and SEI), and there relationship is far from shallow or superficial. They're very committed, open, and honest with one another. There is a big focus on what looks to me like sugary lovey dovey-ness though. I guess you'd call it affection and appreciation. It seems to be a staple of the relationship, an expression of love that they could't do without. The Te/Fi rational couples I've seen have much more understated expressions of affection and love.

Having been with two Ti dominants (an LSI and an LII), from my perspective I think they didn't seem to "get" what I was saying to them unless I was emotionally expressive about it. With them, the relationship was sort of based on whatever sugary lovey dovey-ness I came up with. It was defined by their "if I didn't want to be with you, I wouldn't be" approach. And if I was upset about something, the only way to get results from them was to throw a big, embarrassing fit. Of course, by the time I even understood that I was upset, much less let it build up enough for me to be willing to do such an uncomfortable thing, the problem had already escalated far beyond the point it should have... Far, far beyond the point a Fi dominant would have allowed it to go. And with a Ti dominant + Te dominant pairing, the issues aren't so easily solved, either. The Ti dominants would seem to think that everything was okay as long as I wasn't throwing a fit, so after I'd calmed down a lot of times the underlying issue (which neither of us truly grasped) had been solved. It would dwell just under the surface until I was once again unhappy enough to throw a fit.

Anyways, my relationships with an ESI and EII have been more playful as a means of affection rather than the more "romantic" type of affection that was present with the LSI and LII.

Obviously this isn't a good way to understand Fe/Ti relationships. That's why I'd rather hear it from a Fe/Ti type.

[Joy]

I guess they probably appreciate people who are "mature" in the sense of being emotionally restrained and not turbulent, value explicitness in communication and don't expect their partner to read between the lines, or visa versa. They say what they want to be communicated, rather than what they are feeling. They want to be with people who are generally predictable in their behavior

Just out of curiosity, are there any Fe/Ti types here who would disagree with this?

To me it just sounds like a mature relationship, HOWEVER, based on the Fe dominants I've known (even the mature ones), I suspect that the term "emotionally restrained" may mean different things to different types. (Just like what I was saying in my above post about how affection takes different forms in different relationships and what seems sugary to one person may seem normal to another.)

they want to know who other people are in their entirety, and don't like feeling like they "don't know who they're dealing with," as opposed to Ti/Fe types who enjoy the idea that their partner is complex and intruiging.

I don't relate to that sentiment though.

[Mattie]

they want to know who other people are in their entirety, and don't like feeling like they "don't know who they're dealing with," as opposed to Ti/Fe types who enjoy the idea that their partner is complex and intruiging.

I think this is, indeed, just particular to the rational Fi/Te bits. For me personally, I think an NeFi/SiTe is a mix between those two ideas there... They want to know the entirety of each other, but are complex and intriguing enough to keep surprising the other with something new, and therefore, will never always know them in their entirety.

[Logos]

They do, but only because the true depth is never really verbalized. It's like dark matter. You can't see the love itself--you can only see its effects.

That was deep. Of course, I always saw Ti as a black hole that sucked all the fun out of the universe.

Re: Joy - I will get to your post later at a more convenient time when I'm not slacking off at work.

[Gilly]

I actually like being with people who are emotionally turbulent; I'm very turbulent "inside," and when I'm around someone else who is stormy, it feels like "permission" to allow myself to really let go, say exactly what's on my mind, and know that it's not off-limits, that minor transgressions, over-stepping boundaries, saying things that aren't nice or are maybe even blatantly offensive, will be forgiven, because it's assumed that they will happen. When people around me are too restrained, I assume that's what expected of me, and that anything else will be met with negativity; this leads to me either penning shit up inside and getting depressed, or boiling over and exploding some day.

[Gilly]

I don't relate to that sentiment though.

Interesting.

[Joy]

I actually like being with people who are emotionally turbulent; I'm very turbulent "inside," and when I'm around someone else who is stormy, it feels like "permission" to allow myself to really let go, say exactly what's on my mind, and know that it's not off-limits, that minor transgressions, over-stepping boundaries, saying things that aren't nice or are maybe even blatantly offensive, will be forgiven, because it's assumed that they will happen. When people around me are too restrained, I assume that's what expected of me, and that anything else will be met with negativity; this leads to me either penning shit up inside and getting depressed, or boiling over and exploding some day.

lol, then why did you say that Ti/Fe types don't generally like emotionally turbulent people?

Interesting.

Would you expect me to?

It's not that I have a problem with the statement, I just don't particularly relate, either. It seems... overrated? unnecessary? I will say that I don't like surprises though. While people may be somewhat mysterious without causing distrust, their character should be consistent (in order for me to feel I can trust them).

[Gilly]

lol, then why did you say that Ti/Fe types don't generally like emotionally turbulent people?

I didn't...

Would you expect me to?

Well, your answer makes sense. Maybe I made it seem overstated because, as someone who prefers a level of unpredictability and randomness from someone else, I think the idea is overrated. All that matters to me is knowing I can trust someone; I don't need their behavior to be predictable to know that.

[FDG]

Anyway, I think this - for cultural reasons - will play out differently if the female is the Fi dominant and the male is the Te dominant.

[Joy]

I didn't...

Ugh. Sorry. I totally misunderstood what you were saying. I thought you were describing mature Fe/Ti relationships and thinking "that's how I'd describe Te/Fi relationships... how exactly are Fe/Ti relationships different then?"

Okay, never mind. Sorry about the confusion.

Well, your answer makes sense. Maybe I made it seem overstated because, as someone who prefers a level of unpredictability and randomness from someone else, I think the idea is overrated. All that matters to me is knowing I can trust someone; I don't need their behavior to be predictable to know that.

I would tend to think that EJ's in general would want a certain level of predictability out of their partners? I guess I'm saying that "preferring a level of unpredictability and randomness" doesn't seem like a very EJ thing? This almost sounds more like a rationality vs. irrationality thing than a Te/Fi vs. Fe/Ti thing.

[Joy]

Anyway, I think this - for cultural reasons - will play out differently if the female is the Fi dominant and the male is the Te dominant.

How so?

[FDG]

Because women are more emotionally expressive than men (for either cultural or biological reasons), so an ISFj-INFj male is often less outward expressive - averaging over all situations - than an ENTj-ESTj female, while an ISFj female will be same, or more than, an ENTj male.

[Joy]

True. I've never observed a LIE/ESI couple, but I have a female ESI acquaintance who is a lot more openly friendly and social than the male Fi dominants I've known. (But I wonder what she's like around her close friends and family?) My Fi dominant sister is more like the Fi dominant males I've known though.

I have, however, known two LSE/EII couples, and they do fit into the description I wrote.

[electric sheep]

I actually like being with people who are emotionally turbulent; I'm very turbulent "inside," and when I'm around someone else who is stormy, it feels like "permission" to allow myself to really let go, say exactly what's on my mind, and know that it's not off-limits, that minor transgressions, over-stepping boundaries, saying things that aren't nice or are maybe even blatantly offensive, will be forgiven, because it's assumed that they will happen. When people around me are too restrained, I assume that's what expected of me, and that anything else will be met with negativity; this leads to me either penning shit up inside and getting depressed, or boiling over and exploding some day.

I like this, but it's a little too intense for me. Take some of the edge off, then I'll agree completely.