Examples creative extraverted ethics Fe uses?

[jughead]

I'm having some trouble seeing the benefits of Fe... possibly due to the fact I live with an ILI and the other part of my family is delta.
Anyone care to give examples of some creative Fe where a Te type doesn't crash their parade?

[crazedrat]

In a strictly practical sense? Fe helps you to sum up whether information is relevant. It's useful if you're filtering through data and trying to get the gist of something. Ever notice Te types will criticize with specific facts / evidence which is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things? It happens all the time. That's their weak Fe. The typical response by the Fe type - 'but that does not matter'. Or 'that's irrelevant'. I have to use this phrase daily just to get through discussions..

[1981slater]

Fe makes some people laugh, which makes people live longer and healthier.

[Gilly]

Fe makes you a slave and a God at the same time.

[crazedrat]

That has fuckall to do with Fe. Being able to better separate out what's relevant vs. irrelevant information to attain a more accurate approximate gist of something, is largely a matter of one's intelligence and not their IM preferences.

Well.. first off, labeling it 'intelligence' is a cop out. Every function is also a form of intelligence. Being able to detect logical fallacies - that's also intelligence. Yet Ti is a function of formal logic. By your argument establishing an awareness of logical frameworks as 'intelligence' disproves Ti as a function of formal logic.

But to the main point: you're wrong. It's Fe.

Just look at your post right here for proof. You delegated the explanation to something outside of socionics entirely - intelligence. But I was discussing socionics.
Why couldn't you explain in socionics terms why it isn't a phenomenon of Fe? That would of been a relevant reply. Instead, your reply speaks to something completely different - it lacks relevance to my reply. It talks past my reply.. circumvents it.
By introducing a different sphere of discussion you make it impossible to analyze the framework of the argument - the two topics 'intelligence' and 'socionics' don't directly relate to eachother.

Obviously there are times when this trait is useful and called for, like if the topic is completely off base. But there are other times when it's misapplied / overused, and confuses the issue unnecessarily. I see Te types do what you just did constantly.

There may be an issue with semantics - relevance may not be the perfect word. I think the word in its strictest sense applies here but for clarity I'm willing to change words. (You could say the word relevant is relative.. I would have to argue strongly for realism to disagree).
The key points remain though - getting the general gist of something is using Fe, assessing what matters at a given time.. that is Fe. People saying things which don't matter at a given time (like what you just did).. weak Fe.

[Gilly]

Fe is predisposed with the thoughts and feelings of others. It is essentially a function of consensus, that establishes within the user a kind of natural barometer for the "proper" way of doing things, constantly adjusting based on the perceived overall flux or the most potent influences within it. Fe is quite literally the function of celebrity, the function that is always adjusting itself to the opinions of others, not solely in a self-conscious or disingenuous fashion, but as a natural response to the "forces that be." The "use" of Fe is essentially establishing, governing, and quite literally living in consensus with the world around itself. It takes the best of everything it sees and attempts to put it to use. As an Fe type, I have always had the peculiar experience of "thinking others' thoughts," quite literally; when I enter into any situation where I feel uncertain, where I feel that my own strengths are not adequate, my mind automatically flips to another person who has proven themselves competent in this area wherein I am faced with uncertainty, and I adapt what I have perceived as their strategy as my own.

Most Fe types will never admit it, but they are, in the most pure form, a reflection of the world around them, always taking the temperature in the room, always wary of what is going through the minds of everyone around them, playing a constant guessing game of push and pull between the forces in their mind, adjusting, recalibrating every time some new input is given. And input is not always solely emotional or preferential; Fe is geared mostly towards what is "best," what is seen subjectively, with or without proof, to be superior or beneficial.

This all sounds rather sociopathic, to reduce what "ought" to be subjective and personal to consensus or objective perception of some sort, but in reality it isn't; Fe types have "feelings" and emotions of their own, just like any other; the difference is simply that a portion of them is reserved for a natural intuitive awareness of the feelings, thoughts, motivations, and proportions which others in their space are due by their own subjective estimation. And that is the key: that their estimation is subjective, and this is why they, ultimately, while being emotional victims of their own perceived realities in some right, are the ultimate authorities on such things: because in the end, in their own mind, their feelings are the source of consensus, and thus they exhibit the most confidence in establishing and maintaining it, almost without knowing it. In a sense, they apply a formula of sorts to everything that is naturally assumed as being subjective and personal, which seems rather shallow, but in fact the existence of the function internally is much more dualistic, and hence much more complicated, than simply observing and establishing a consensus; it's almost as if they take everything in from the outside, mull it over, and stamp their final judgment on it before releasing it to the world as a perceived standard, which is often delivered with such presumption and certainty (having been both deliberated extensively and coming ultimately from their own seat of internal confidence) that others take it purely for granted when it is conveyed, however that might be.

[Gilly]

Writing this made me realize something about the tryptic model and the issue of subjectivity vs objectivity: internal/external refers to the source of judgment to be placed upon any given information or the area of its usage/relevance, whereas object/field is the source of the information obtained and to be judged. At least, for rational functions. With Irrational functions I suppose the internal/external would refer to the nature of the content, and object/field would refer to the perceived area of relevance.

[Computer Loser]

Fe makes some people laugh, which makes people live longer and healthier.

Ditto.

I feel like Fe is the caring/entertaining for the needs of others. I feel like Fe establishes harmony in a social setting.

I also feel like it sees the roles people play in everyday life. Every time I'm around Fe, it makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside since the people that use it always acknowledges the little things I do.

[Gilly]

Fe makes the fucking world go round.

[Rubicon]

Fe is predisposed with the thoughts and feelings of others. It is essentially a function of consensus, that establishes within the user a kind of natural barometer for the "proper" way of doing things, constantly adjusting based on the perceived overall flux or the most potent influences within it. Fe is quite literally the function of celebrity, the function that is always adjusting itself to the opinions of others, not solely in a self-conscious or disingenuous fashion, but as a natural response to the "forces that be." The "use" of Fe is essentially establishing, governing, and quite literally living in consensus with the world around itself. It takes the best of everything it sees and attempts to put it to use. As an Fe type, I have always had the peculiar experience of "thinking others' thoughts," quite literally; when I enter into any situation where I feel uncertain, where I feel that my own strengths are not adequate, my mind automatically flips to another person who has proven themselves competent in this area wherein I am faced with uncertainty, and I adapt what I have perceived as their strategy as my own.

Most Fe types will never admit it, but they are, in the most pure form, a reflection of the world around them, always taking the temperature in the room, always wary of what is going through the minds of everyone around them, playing a constant guessing game of push and pull between the forces in their mind, adjusting, recalibrating every time some new input is given. And input is not always solely emotional or preferential; Fe is geared mostly towards what is "best," what is seen subjectively, with or without proof, to be superior or beneficial.

This all sounds rather sociopathic, to reduce what "ought" to be subjective and personal to consensus or objective perception of some sort, but in reality it isn't; Fe types have "feelings" and emotions of their own, just like any other; the difference is simply that a portion of them is reserved for a natural intuitive awareness of the feelings, thoughts, motivations, and proportions which others in their space are due by their own subjective estimation. And that is the key: that their estimation is subjective, and this is why they, ultimately, while being emotional victims of their own perceived realities in some right, are the ultimate authorities on such things: because in the end, in their own mind, their feelings are the source of consensus, and thus they exhibit the most confidence in establishing and maintaining it, almost without knowing it. In a sense, they apply a formula of sorts to everything that is naturally assumed as being subjective and personal, which seems rather shallow, but in fact the existence of the function internally is much more dualistic, and hence much more complicated, than simply observing and establishing a consensus; it's almost as if they take everything in from the outside, mull it over, and stamp their final judgment on it before releasing it to the world as a perceived standard, which is often delivered with such presumption and certainty (having been both deliberated extensively and coming ultimately from their own seat of internal confidence) that others take it purely for granted when it is conveyed, however that might be.

This is awesome. I've never read something that so completely describes the way I operate socially.

[redbaron]

yeah Gilly, great post.

[anndelise]

I'm having some trouble seeing the benefits of Fe... possibly due to the fact I live with an ILI and the other part of my family is delta.
Anyone care to give examples of some creative Fe where a Te type doesn't crash their parade?

Some uses could include:

* being able to sense when a person (in same location as you) is changing their mind, or about to suddenly change their actions

an example: my father's moods could change at the drop of a pin....hell, before the pin even hit the ground. He could go from smiling and laughing and hugging you to slamming your head against the wall in less than a second. For survival purposes, I had to become much more aware of any cues coming from him that hinted a possible change. Trying to do this consciously was exhausting, thankfully my subconscious took over, leaving me to just automatically respond to whatever it picked up on regarding my dad's cues. This had saved me on numerous occasions, as well as reducing the extent of damage on even more occasions. (unfortunately, that high reactivity carried over to other relationships even after I left home, causing all sorts of problems for me)

another example would be those times on tv or movies when a character is watching another character, and is quick to respond before the other character finished his move. Think gun draws, sword/knife fights, martial arts, etc. Even some sports utilize Fe cues quite often. (not necessarily consciously, though)

* being able to sense if a person is hiding something, distracted, etc

an example, there's a tv show called "Lie to Me" which is all about reading Fe cues as similar to a lie detector type of thing. The main character fires off questions, one after another after another, watching the cues given off, and letting those cues guide his next questions...all often before the other person has a chance to verbalize an answer. Yes, it's TV, but it's also based on a book that goes into this stuff.

* useful for hypnosis and other psychological therapies. In hypnosis, the hypnotists does a much better job at aligning with the client if they are able to do a decent job at reading the client's Fe clues. For street hypnosis, mirroring is a very important skill. (note, this is one of the areas of hypnotherapy training that i had problems with, as consciously focusing on the cues was draining for me, and distracting, and obviously I wasn't that great at consciously paying attention to them. So i had to do a work around to get a similar effect.)

* useful for certain types of acting, learning a character, portraying a character, etc.

* useful for motivational speeches. often these types of speeches are written by an Fe ego type, given to someone else (particularly an estp type), who is then coached on presentation so that his signals link up with his cues.

* often used to decode political speeches, by watching the speaker's cues and how well it matches up with the content. (see the lie detector and motivational speech examples) There are groups that actually work on these kinds of things, both in decoding a given speech, writing a speech, and in coaching the president/etc prior to them giving a speech.

* useful for activating a mob (see motivational speeches)

[strrrng]

The key points remain though - getting the general gist of something is using Fe, assessing what matters at a given time.. that is Fe. People saying things which don't matter at a given time (like what you just did).. weak Fe.

I think you're right about Fe having an implicit grasp of relevancy within a defined context. because once boundaries are established, you have to read between the lines to really gauge how action manifests and stems back to more basic patterns. but I think, what you're describing here partly relates to NiFe. basically because Ni is centered around isolating the ongoing processes underlying activity; so, where Fe sorts relevance of a thing in action, Ni will determine whether it can be extrapolated on a broader level and serve as a basis for interpreting other things.

[crazedrat]

Formal logic is a learned skill, not the domain of a function. Jesus christ.

Formal logic is absolutely in the domain of Ti. It's not a learned skill, it's a fundamental part of thinking. Conventional socionics agrees. My guess is Model X disagrees? I'd like to hear why.

Too bad. You can't arbitrarily partition reality off like that and pit all questions of a theory's validity in epistemic isolation from everything else.

Yeah, I know. There are times when the trait is useful, and you'd argue it's useful now. Fine. There are also times when it's used unnecessarily. Jumping into different epistemic realms too often deprives a discussion of meaning. How could I have a discussion on socionics with you if you constantly delegated explanations into other realms?
Ultimately there's a judgment on whether circumventing the topic is necessary.

Why would I try to explain in Socionics terms a phenomenon that is completely outside the theoretical scope of Socionics? Would you use the theory of evolution to explain the creation of the universe? Of course not, because evolutionary theory isn't suitable to the task of explaining issues of cosmology. Just like Socionics isn't suitable to the task of explaining matters which are dealt with 10,000X better by more relevant theories in cognitive psych and neuroscience.

Because it's not outside the scope of socionics.
You've told me Ti is not the function of formal logic - if you believe that, there's no way you're going to agree Fe determines relevance. I think we should discuss your reasoning regarding Ti first..

The argument you made rests on the assumption what I'm saying is wrong, which I disagree with.
But again your reply is irrelevant because I'm talking about the trend of Te types to do what I described consistently; whether your doing it was necessary or unnecessary given what I was saying does not matter; I only used your response as a clear illustration of the mechanics of what I was talking about.
So once again you've done exactly what I described.. And I'm sure you'll do it a couple more times in this discussion.

And no sufficient justification exists for why we ought to believe that Socionics is in any way directly related to a person's proficiency in discriminating relevant vs. irrelevant information, or any of the other abilities you're suggesting.

Well, if you tell this to a Fe ego type they'll know it has the ring of truth to it. So I was responding to a Fe type and attempting to engage them in discussion. But I can explain more about Fe itself. To start, relevance is a value judgment - i.e. what matters right now? Before I do that I'd like to know someone was actually interested, though. With you.. First we have to deal with your belief Ti is not a function of formal logic.

.

[Rubicon]

Crazedrat, I would have thought that it's more to do with Ti - the concern with relevancy thing being more noticeable in Ti HAs than Fe-leading types. Ti leading types are fine with extracting the relevant information from whatever a Fe type might be babbling about, so getting hung up on relevancy seems a Pathetic HA issue imo.

[crazedrat]

Relevance is a matter of looking externally for relatability.
Ti is an internal function. It has no concern with relevance. It strictly looks within the system for internal discrepancies.
A Ti type will be providing information relevant to the topic, but they're remaining isolated within the topic. Compare this with Fe in the ego - they will be taking the information and making a vast range of applications outside the topic. Ti types are good at staying relevant, but they don't use it as an dynamic thought process like Fe types do.

[Beautiful sky]

Crazedrat, I would have thought that it's more to do with Ti - the concern with relevancy thing being more noticeable in Ti HAs than Fe-leading types. Ti leading types are fine with extracting the relevant information from whatever a Fe type might be babbling about, so getting hung up on relevancy seems a Pathetic HA issue imo.

correct

Relevance is a matter of looking externally for relatability.
Ti is an internal function. It has no concern with relevance. It strictly looks within the system for internal discrepancies.

you mean Te -looking externally for reliability...
Ti extracts relevant information.
If I had the strength of Ti primary, I could point to you exactly what information I see as relevant to a given situation, but I can't I have to wait until people bring that to light of information. As in, I have to wait for people to say themselves what information I consider to be relevant. I can indicate the consistancy per rule/law that I see something that someone says to be relevant; like I just did to Rubicon's message. I see something that matches to a correct data and I say that yes that is consistant with that law/rule/understanding of Ti.

[strrrng]

Ti gathers relevant information as it pertains to its systematic boundaries. it has no objective barometer of relevancy. Fe, through tracking intangible processes, generates a more specified understanding of how different aspects of a system influence each other in operation.

[crazedrat]

correct
you mean Te -looking externally for reliability...
What? No, I don't mean that at all. Go away.
Ti extracts relevant information.
If I had the strength of Ti primary, I could point to you exactly what information I see as relevant to a given situation, but I can't I have to wait until people bring that to light of information.
I just addressed this. It's a language game
As in, I have to wait for people to say themselves what information I consider to be relevant. I can indicate the consistancy per rule/law that I see something that someone says to be relevant; like I just did to Rubicon's message. I see something that matches to a correct data and I say that yes that is consistant with that law/rule/understanding of Ti.
That kind of relevance is 1 dimensional.

.

Ti gathers relevant information as it pertains to its systematic boundaries. it has no objective barometer of relevancy. Fe, through tracking intangible processes, generates a more specified understanding of how different aspects of a system influence each other in operation.

Yeah that's exactly it.

I think you're right about Fe having an implicit grasp of relevancy within a defined context. because once boundaries are established, you have to read between the lines to really gauge how action manifests and stems back to more basic patterns. but I think, what you're describing here partly relates to NiFe. basically because Ni is centered around isolating the ongoing processes underlying activity; so, where Fe sorts relevance of a thing in action, Ni will determine whether it can be extrapolated on a broader level and serve as a basis for interpreting other things.

Yeah My thinking is probably very biased for Ni. I'm not really sure how to change it for Si, though. Maybe something along the lines of determining whether information received is relevant.

[crazedrat]

What? What are you trying to say?

[Beautiful sky]

Ti gathers relevant information as it pertains to its systematic boundaries. it has no objective barometer of relevancy. Fe, through tracking intangible processes, generates a more specified understanding of how different aspects of a system influence each other in operation.

yes.

So what does role Ti do?

The same thing like Ti does but only sometimes?

[crazedrat]

Oh god can you just go away? Who gives a fuck? WHy does that matter? <---------Again

[Beautiful sky]

Oh god can you just go away? Who gives a fuck? WHy does that matter? <---------Again

I need someone to put it into the words that I am intuitively feeling.

[crazedrat]

God dammit.

[Rubicon]

Relevance is a matter of looking externally for relatability.
Ti is an internal function. It has no concern with relevance. It strictly looks within the system for internal discrepancies.
A Ti type will be providing information relevant to the topic, but they're remaining isolated within the topic. Compare this with Fe in the ego - they will be taking the information and making a vast range of applications outside the topic. Ti types are good at staying relevant, but they don't use it as an dynamic thought process like Fe types do.

Why Fe specifically though? E.g. Ti coupled with Se could do the same thing in terms of objective relevancy. Seems to me that any extroverted function could, so Ti-valuing remains the common denominator.

Ti gathers relevant information as it pertains to its systematic boundaries. it has no objective barometer of relevancy. Fe, through tracking intangible processes, generates a more specified understanding of how different aspects of a system influence each other in operation.

Sounds like you're bringing Ni into it with that tracking processes stuff.

[Aiss]

Yeah My thinking is probably very biased for Ni. I'm not really sure how to change it for Si, though.

I think the best proof how incapable of relevancy Te is by its very nature is the fact that Te-egos think most of ESE (Fe-base, therefore by definition relevant) chatter, such as details about parties, food, looks, clothes, who was there and why are you walking away I haven't told you half of it yet, I just have to relate every small tiny little thing because I'm afraid you won't connect the dots otherwise! totally irrelevant. I mean, how could they if it's relevant by definition? Of course it proves something is wrong with Te relevancy.

I realize the concept may seem alien to you, but for once be serious. Fe judges what's relevant in a given social context; as in, Fe-ego probably won't start asking technical questions when someone complains over beer that their computer is acting weird. That doesn't change the fact Te would have easier time diagnosing the actual problem - filtering what's relevant to the issue itself - which, when the person wants it fixed, is what matters. This is a technical example, and as such dependent on individual's knowledge or lack of it, but it largely illustrates the idea of how Te works - whenever you move past the matters of what is or isn't appropriate in a social situation, or rather what would or not be well received by others, in any external sense - applicable in many areas, not the least in science - Te has advantage in relevancy, just as Fe has it in less explicit matters, mostly with people.

[crazedrat]

Why Fe specifically though? E.g. Ti coupled with Se could do the same thing in terms of objective relevancy.

No, it couldn't. That's not how Ti with Se works at all. Ti is not the 'common denominator' - it has absolutely no place in the matter. It's an internal function. Relevance is a matter of external relatability. Reread, don't cut out sections of what I say, and don't repost anything about Ti. Your stupid ideas about Ti have already been fully addressed by both myself and what strrrng has said. That is all you get - no more pollution of this thread with your stupidity.

Seems to me that any extroverted function could, so Ti remains the common denominator. Sounds like you're bringing Ni into it with that tracking processes stuff.

No. Relevance is a value judgment. If something is relevant it has high value. If something is irrelevant it's worthless. That's the meaning of the word.

Fe judges what's relevant in a given social context; as in, Fe-ego probably won't start asking technical questions when someone complains over beer that their computer is acting weird. That doesn't change the fact Te would have easier time diagnosing the actual problem - filtering what's relevant to the issue itself - which, when the person wants it fixed, is what matters. This is a technical example, and as such dependent on individual's knowledge or lack of it, but it largely illustrates the idea of how Te works - whenever you move past the matters of what is or isn't appropriate in a social situation, or rather what would or not be well received by others, in any external sense - applicable in many areas, not the least in science - Te has advantage in relevancy, just as Fe has it in less explicit matters, mostly with people.

That kind of relevance is fixed within a specific realm, and on a lower dimension than that of a Fe ego. It is relevance.. isolated. We had the same discussion about Ti earlier. (For example, how does the details of another persons malfunctioning computer matter to myself or the world at large? It doesn't, unless the computer is serving some larger function - like if it was a database for a company. Then a Fe type would speak up. The computer is now 'important'. It is 'relevant'.)
Fe is relevance in the most pure form. With Fe relevance is the process itself.
Social spheres are a particular content area commonly associated with Fe, but content areas do not define a function. A function is formulaic.

[strrrng]

Sounds like you're bringing Ni into it with that tracking processes stuff.

somewhat. but the point remains, that Fe is an objective beacon for Ti. without it, Ti gets stuck in an immobile network of abstract relations that have no bearing on reality. the converse of this, is Fe continually tracking processes between people without ever considering their broader implications.

[Rubicon]

No, it couldn't. That's not how Ti with Se works at all. Ti is not the 'common denominator' - it has absolutely no place in the matter. It's an internal function. Relevance is a matter of external relatability. Reread, don't cut out sections of what I say, and don't repost anything about Ti. Your stupid ideas about Ti have already been fully addressed by both myself and what strrrng has said. That is all you get - no more pollution of this thread with your stupidity.

"Fully addressed" lol.. like you're the determiner of truth. I humbly thank you for replying to my posts. Idiot.

[Rubicon]

somewhat. but the point remains, that Fe is an objective beacon for Ti. without it, Ti gets stuck in an immobile network of abstract relations that have no bearing on reality. the converse of this, is Fe continually tracking processes between people without ever considering their broader implications.

Ok. That makes sense.

[strrrng]

as for how it differs with Si and Ni. I think Si determines relevancy more directly. as in, processes are consistently monitored, and boundaries refined and/or expanded to allow for variations (Si, like Ti, is uncertain of its own parameters, and thus needs Ne to give specific instances of relevance). Ni isolates self-contained processes that are based on observable boundaries. through instances of Se, latent patterns emerge, and so contexts can be tied together without necessarily observing them all (i.e. the "prediction" stereotype).

[Aiss]

No. Relevance is a value judgment. If something is relevant it has high value. If something is irrelevant it's worthless. That's the meaning of the word.

Relevant to something.

If you meant "significant in the bigger scheme of things, to the world at large", then say so.

That kind of relevance is fixed within a specific realm, and on a lower dimension than that of a Fe ego. It is relevance.. isolated. We had the same discussion about Ti earlier. (For example, how does the details of another persons malfunctioning computer matter to myself or the world at large? It doesn't, unless the computer is serving some larger function - like if it was a database for a company. Then a Fe type would speak up. The computer is now 'important'. It is 'relevant'.)
Fe is relevance in the most pure form. With Fe relevance is the process itself.
Social spheres are a particular content area commonly associated with Fe, but content areas do not define a function. A function is formulaic.

Then please explain how the typical Fe chatter I've mentioned earlier - and it's not just a joke, it's really this bad often - matters to the world at large? Or how does exchanging complains and stories over beer and generally acting within the social context matter to the world at large?

The only thing that comes out of it is what matters to yourself, as it is the alternative to world-wide importance you presented, and what does is predetermined by your valued functions. That's my main issue with what you keep repeating here about this oxymoron of universal relevancy; you dismiss other uses of Fe, which you claim is responsible for it, in order to make it the judge of all, forgetting it's your own NiFe ego that determines what is and what isn't relevant to you.

Whereas what is universally significant, what affects the world at large, is probably far easier to determine for a fields function than a very temporary in nature dynamics of bodies. Fe and Te are about bodies' actions; Ni and Si about their interactions. I could hardly tell how it works for static types, but I imagine they have their way to assess the importance of elements in the system, speaking in terms of statics.

Oh, and lol at Fe speaking up if it was a database for a company or something. Te person who asks usually does so to understand or, as in my example, to help with a problem which matters to the other person. I guess it wasn't as obvious from the context as I'd have thought.

[Rubicon]

as for how it differs with Si and Ni. I think Si determines relevancy more directly. as in, processes are consistently monitored, and boundaries refined and/or expanded to allow for variations (Si, like Ti, is uncertain of its own parameters, and thus needs Ne to give specific instances of relevance). Ni isolates self-contained processes that are based on observable boundaries. through instances of Se, latent patterns emerge, and so contexts can be tied together without necessarily observing them all (i.e. the "prediction" stereotype).

Yeah, that rings true re Si doing it directly. Perhaps because it's always in the moment and can't concern itself with the passing of time. :-p I usually consider any visible patterns (e.g. between a current and past situation) to be irrelevant, being that my knowledge of the past situation subconsciously renders the context different by default.

[Beautiful sky]

Yeah, that rings true re Si doing it directly. Perhaps because it's always in the moment and can't concern itself with the passing of time. :-p I usually consider any visible patterns (e.g. between a current and past situation) to be irrelevant, being that my knowledge of the past situation subconsciously renders the context different by default.

Actually that's regarding Ni PoLR; Ni Role is concerned with Time as I am concerned with logical consistencies or relevance or Ti to be exact....

[Aiss]

Yeah, that rings true re Si doing it directly. Perhaps because it's always in the moment and can't concern itself with the passing of time. :-p I usually consider any visible patterns (e.g. between a current and past situation) to be irrelevant, being that my knowledge of the past situation subconsciously renders the context different by default.

That's actually one of the more interesting things about Si I've heard in a while - assuming you're SEI and what you say is a work of Si. I've been toying with this idea that connections made by internal functions, which are so useful for many purposes, may be viewed in strictly logical terms as a carelessness of thinking, or maybe even allowing instinct to play a part in the process; in case of intuition often without much consideration for these very differences you speak of.

[Beautiful sky]

That's actually one of the more interesting things about Si I've heard in a while - assuming you're SEI, of course. I've been toying with this idea that connections made by internal functions, which are so useful for many purposes, may be viewed in strictly logical terms as a carelessness of thinking, or maybe even allowing instinct to play a part in the process, in case of intuition often without consideration of these very differences you speak of.

Aiss, you missed my post...she's ESE.

[Rubicon]

Actually that's regarding Ni PoLR; Ni Role is concerned with Time as I am concerned with logical consistencies or relevance...

Well it concerns me to some degree. I just meant that I deal with it very clumsily, usually in bursts.

[Rubicon]

That's actually one of the more interesting things about Si I've heard in a while - assuming you're SEI and what you say is a work of Si. I've been toying with this idea that connections made by internal functions, which are so useful for many purposes, may be viewed in strictly logical terms as a carelessness of thinking, or maybe even allowing instinct to play a part in the process; in case of intuition often without much consideration for these very differences you speak of.

Yeah, good point. I guess you'd have more regard for conscious thought than instinct?

[Beautiful sky]

Well it concerns me to some degree. I just meant that I deal with it very clumsily, usually in bursts.

SiFe is sometimes concerned with delving into the imaginary world as opposed to the realistic one that FeSi does not because of their Ni role function. The person becomes introverted, daydreaming, not focusing on reality, looks vacant to other "real" or "allert" individuals usually ESTj or other types like ESFj's. Are you preoccupied with your inner sensations and only
preoccupied with images that are not sensory. Thus removing themselves from real environments by their escape in the imaginary worlds. These images present the potential development of the present subjective inner
conditions. Neither these conditions, nor their potential development have anything to do with the reality. If you can imagine the world of inner images
and characters that reveal themselves through their inner
meanings and potential transformations within the
individual, that’s the world Introverted Intuitive Perception
exists in.

This is why both SiFe will be concerned and interested in stories like Harry Potter and other worldly imaginative stories, because they are removed from instances of reality, thus utilizing their Ni role function to open those doors of perception.

Do you do that?

[crazedrat]

Okay. What does "relevance in the pure form" even mean anyway? Objective relevance?
Correct or accurate relevance? What?

Yes. The process determines globalized, objective relevance.