Okay, I thought I pretty much understood the difference... but now I'm not so sure.
another Fi vs. Fe thread
Okay, I thought I pretty much understood the difference... but now I'm not so sure.
Can we identify which of the following is Fe and which is Fi?
-Being able to sense tension in a group of people and having a pretty good idea why it's there.
-Knowing how to relieve that tension.
-Actually doing something to relieve that tension.
-Being able to instantly tell if someone is attracted to someone else.
-Being able to tell the extent of that person's interest (lust, infatuation, love, selfish love, etc.)
-Talking to someone about your emotions.
-Talking to someone about his/her emotions.
-Doing something to get an emotional response from others.
-Being able to sense other's emotions and relate to those emotions.
-Not wanting to do something to upset someone else.
-Charisma (knowing how to get others to have a positive emotional response to you).
Grrrrr there's more... I'm still thinking. Also, if someone cares about how other's feel about a situation or is concerned with how something will effect others but doesn't mind doing something that causes others negative emotions if it is for the best?
Well, I'm going to give it a try.
-Being able to sense tension in a group of people and having a pretty good idea why it's there.
Not sure on that one.
-Knowing how to relieve that tension.
-Actually doing something to relieve that tension.
-Being able to instantly tell if someone is attracted to someone else.
-Being able to tell the extent of that person's interest (lust, infatuation, love, selfish love, etc.)
-Talking to someone about your emotions.
-Doing something to get an emotional response from others.
-Being able to sense other's emotions and relate to those emotions.
-Not wanting to do something to upset someone else.
-Charisma (knowing how to get others to have a positive emotional response to you).
ILE
That is definitelyOriginally Posted by Joy
I'd say that the following is also
I'd say that the rest is mainlyNot wanting to do something to upset someone else.
In my opinion, the
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Also, if someone cares about how other's feel about a situation or is concerned with how something will effect others but doesn't mind doing something that causes others negative emotions if it is for the best?
I have a real hard time making decisions like that. I know sometimes the best action is one that will hve negative emotions on others, but I get real tangled up on it. Actually bothers the hell out of me to the point I get depressed. I think if I do this the person might start to dislike me, or if I don't then I will be showing I care about the person a little too much. Stuff like that puts me in a tight spot. I will often flee to try and get away from it.
ILE
Let's say a person does not instantly have strong opinions/feelings on a matter of ethical/moral concern because she likes to evaluate the situation and believes in trying to see the matter from as many perspectives as possible before coming to a decision... is that weak Fi because that person doesn't know what she thinks without giving it consideration, or strong Fi because her values demand that she sees the situation from other's perspectives? Can a "live and let live" attitude be a Fi trait if it is based on respecting others and valuing their rights?
If you don't believe that your emotions or your idea what is ethical is supreme and you don't think others should conform to your values, it could be considered weak Fi... right???
In the past I've gone through periods where I've catered to the needs and emotions of others, placing them above my own. I've also often had an attitude at times of not caring if I offend someone with what I said (they shouldn't be so sensitive). At this point in my life, I value my needs and emotions more than others only because I have seen what happens if I do not... it is not healthy for anyone involved. I've enabled too many people. Enablers feel that they are being kind and compassionate, but in reality are quite selfish. Unhealthy love is selfish love.
So anyways... I sometimes do things that hurt others knowing that it's for the best. I can't (and shouldn't) help everyone to feel better in a shitty situation. Their personal growth is not dependent on me.
Well if indeed I am ENTp, and I'm pretty damn sure I am, I have this whole thing where your ethics are different than mine and I will not conform to yours if there is a conflict. I do not expect people to conform to mine. I do consider the many view points on ethically situations, and I have an almost Machiavellian ethic system. I am probably the last person to get ethical advice on. If someone asked me should they cheat on their boyfriend/girlfriend, and they gave me some background on the relationship, I could probably give a logical reason for them doing so within the framework of the relationship presented. Now for cases where someone's life is in danger I'm a little bit more concerned. I still take a passive attitude though, like "doing that will be bad, here is why, but its up to you."
So weak Fi? I would say so.
ILE
I'm a good person to ask ethical advice of. I ask a lot of questions and get to the heart of the motivations of each person involved. I ask a lot of questions about what will happen to each person involved, looking for a best and worst case scenario. I help people understand their feelings about the situation, the main goal of which is to allow a person to get a glimps of what his/her perspective would be minus any feelings of guilt or shame or resentment or fear (which cloud one's ability to make healthy decisions). I help them use their values as well as a realistic expectation of the cause and effect relationships at play so that they may make the best decision possible. Sometimes people get irritated with this because they don't want to set aside their fear or resentment long enough to see another person's perspective.
I think that's a clear
To add to the list in my second post:
-Being able to see the hidden emotional motivation behind what a person says/does, often before it is even known to him/her.
Then why do Fi types make me feel like I have weak Fi?I think that's a clear
I think it's because
Edited for gayness.
ENTp
Well... both. Here I've been accused of having weak Fi because of the "just get over it attitude" I have when I feel someone is being overly sensitive. I guess it's the same IRL, too. I care about other's feelings, but I'm solution oriented. Yes, we must allow ourselves natural emotional responses, but a lot of people dwell on them too long (not that I never do). My "okay, so fix it" approach bothers people who aren't happy unless they're unhappy. I have no patience for defeatist attitudes and "self declared victim of life" mentalities.
-Being able to sense tension in a group of people and having a pretty good idea why it's there.
Fe is good with sensing a tension I guess. Fe can also understand it in superficial level like "Guy A, B, C, D have tension, this is caused by what guy A says/does -> silence Guy A and problem is solved". Fi is needed to understand why Guy A is doing what he does and to solve the problem in the long run.
-Knowing how to relieve that tension.
Well Fe is good at instantly changing the emotional dynamics of situation. In long term relievance you need Fi.
-Actually doing something to relieve that tension.
Fe usually acts immediately to emotional tension just like Te acts to statements which don't make sense.
-Being able to instantly tell if someone is attracted to someone else.
Fe can quickly sense if someone is trying to hit on someone else or flirt with them but I think you need Fi to understand if there are deeper feelings involved or is he/she just trying to get laid, having fun etc.
-Being able to tell the extent of that person's interest (lust, infatuation, love, selfish love, etc.)
Fi I think.
-Talking to someone about your emotions.
Fi to talk about your real feelings. Fe can smash people with emotions without really talking about feelings.
-Talking to someone about his/her emotions.
Again Fi is needed to really get what the other one is feeling. Fe can talk about it but it is more superficial.
-Doing something to get an emotional response from others.
Attention seeking ->Fe. But Fi people can say something, hug and kiss and do stuff that they expect a response. Fi may seek people to express their real feelings. Fe is more likely to only seek for attention, passion excitement and not care too much whether it is "real" or "fake". It is like my expression of positive emotions are always somehow fake to Kimmie because even though they are real not fake in any way they are more or less tied to the current situation and context and she calls them "sugarcoating" etc. If she was Fe then she would probably take them positively.
-Being able to sense other's emotions and relate to those emotions.
Fe can sense what emotions are "flying in the air" but to understand the real emotional motivations you need Fi. So relating part is more Fi.
-Not wanting to do something to upset someone else.
Fe can do this not because they care about a particular person's feelings but because it is best for the situation as a whole (like "I'm not upsetting that serial killer now in order to save the life of me and my family"). Fi is more empathetic I think (like "I'm not upsetting that person because it will make him/her feel bad and then it makes me feel bad too"). Keep in mind that both Fe and Fi can be used negatively too. Fe to manipulate voters or consumers or whatever. Fi in manipulating deeper feelings of individuals. And Fe/Fi types are more likely to do this manipulation stuff than the "cold" Te/Ti types because it is one of their strengths.
-Charisma (knowing how to get others to have a positive emotional response to you).
Superficial charisma is Fe. But Fi people can have charisma too. Fi charisma is just more "hidden" in a way. Fe charisma is in your face style.
Not sure how accurate this is...anyways you should remember that you can have both functions strong. Try to separate which is your natural and typical way to feel/act from your occasional behavior.
One other thing...Fe being an extroverted function can do better on its own. I would think Fi needs more support from extroverted functions. If the person doesn't use the extroverted functions to feed the Fi with accurate information then the result can be distorted. Much like Ti without good Se or Ne support is "the devil" as someone said. Detached from reality sort of.
Thanks XoX... that's pretty much my understanding, too.
<3333333
I think XoX's post was very good and accurate, expect for this -- a point I keep getting back to. I think
This makes sense... a Fe type would be better at perceiving another's feelings (deep or not), while a Fi type would care more deeply(?) and would imagine what another's feelings are based on what their's would be in that situation.
Edited for gayness.
ENTp
I have seen this IRL I think. This is why I added that Fi without a good support from Se/Ne can be detached from the reality in a way. If Fi and Se/Ne are used to support each other fully then it works great but relying too much on Fi makes you overly subjective and makes you mix your feelings with the other person's.I think XoX's post was very good and accurate, expect for this -- a point I keep getting back to. I think
Or do you mean Fi is ultimately and always too subjective to see other people's feelings objectively? Maybe the analogy I made to Ti breaks here then. Or my understanding of Ti is somehow incomplete
It depends on a number of things. Rationality / irrationality. Your other functions. Strength of people-watching skills. Life-experience plus priorities/ethical principles.
The equation that Fi = strong value judgments is one I find debatable. Strong Fi can have strong ethical values, but it can also believe that it won't do to clobber everyone over the head with them. Instead, it can first seek to gather enough data so it can make accurate judgments. Strong Fi can also let you empathize with another person so much that, while you STILL think they've done something wrong, you also realize they're not open to your opinion, or that they must find things out for themselves, or that they're simply at a stage in their life where they just have to do a certain thing that later would be totally wrong. You still believe in your values. But you differenciate between absolute and relative values - that is, some of them are always true for everyone, and others just depend on the situation and the people.
Ouf! I've wanted to get that off my chest for a long time. I'm feeling better already.
Oh, and XoX: great explanation. *applauds, sets of fireworks, throws tickertape*
Soooooooooo...
Fi feels it's own emotions and ethics but needs Ne/Se in order to effectively apply itself to others.
Fe knows what's going on around it and how to effect change, but needs Ni/Si in order to understand how these things apply it.
Does that make sense? And how would this differ based on judging function?
Edited for gayness.
ENTp
Yeah, for the most part, we're a community of people who don't read the actual information on the matter. We just talk and speculate among ourselves.
Edited for gayness.
ENTp
ROFLUh, sorry.
I guess I AM being kind of a pedantic dickwad huh.
Heh, I'll try to stop being such an assface sometimes, but I don't know if I can promise anything.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
awwww that wasn't directed at you. I was taking what you said and expanding on it. It is true that most of us have read very little, yet we ask questions, and worse yet, answer questions about Socionics. I'm not saying that's wrong, just saying that it's not suprising that half up us mistype others and ourselves... even those of us who have been exposed to Socionics long enough that we should have some idea. There are Ni dominant people here who can't tell you what Ni is. And how many actually understand model A? Yet here we are...Uh, sorry.
I guess I AM being kind of a pedantic dickwad huh.
Heh, I'll try to stop being such an assface sometimes, but I don't know if I can promise anything.
"I think the answer is this"
"Yes, that sounds pretty good. But what about this?"
"Oh, I hadn't thought of that. Let me think on that for a moment... I think it's because of this."
"Brilliant deduction!"
I sense fear in you Joy....awwww that wasn't directed at you. I was taking what you said and expanding on it. It is true that most of us have read very little, yet we ask questions, and worse yet, answer questions about Socionics. I'm not saying that's wrong, just saying that it's not suprising that half up us mistype others and ourselves... even those of us who have been exposed to Socionics long enough that we should have some idea. There are Ni dominant people here who can't tell you what Ni is. And how many actually understand model A? Yet here we are...Uh, sorry.
I guess I AM being kind of a pedantic dickwad huh.
Heh, I'll try to stop being such an assface sometimes, but I don't know if I can promise anything.
"I think the answer is this"
"Yes, that sounds pretty good. But what about this?"
"Oh, I hadn't thought of that. Let me think on that for a moment... I think it's because of this."
"Brilliant deduction!"
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
*raises an eyebrow*
I'm just commenting on the fact that we're pretty much all amateurs. Some have read a great deal, but most of us haven't. I, for one, have no intention of doing so. This means that I can't expect to really understand anything more than the absolute basics. The main point though is that if someone wants to understand socionics, they should read what has been written by the experts instead of asking other n00bs.
I was commenting on something else, however I am inclined to agree with your post. A lot of people here try to make themselves look like experts by regurgitating experts own words, but in the end we are all amateurs unless we are fully dedicated to it.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
care to elaborate?
Everyone and that includes me, criticize those that saying something that is contrary to their beliefs, however the passing thought that they may be incorrect never floods their mind.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
It does not appear that you have interpretted what I said correctly.
I was just giving my own insight, not necessarily interpretting what you said, unless you'd like me to.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
My mistake. I thought you were elaborating on the comment about fear.
.
.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote