Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 45

Thread: Fe is a persona function

  1. #1
    Punk
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    TIM
    ESE
    Posts
    1,659
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Fe is a persona function

    I just had a socionics epiphany.

    Fe which I describe specifically as

    Fe - how to do something and what to do with the surroundings and its individual people and other individual life (emotional directive-organizational subjects).

    accomplishes this by creating personas with other people. It molds itself to what they see other people are and adjusts itself according to fill the description I have above.

    This explains why Fe egos can have a hard time accepting the baseless and generally incorrect and inconsistent conclusions attributed to the functions and the theoretical relationships - because if you can adjust yourself to the type of the person in front of you, you would be stupid to let anyone tell you otherwise.

    And it explains why they would have a hard time determining a type, especially if their personas became pathological to the extent of not realizing a basic instinctive type.

    EIE, IEI, SEI, and ESE are probably the types that will overall have the hardest time finding their type because the theory doesn't cater to properly understanding the natures of the subjective functions and instead, as I have seen up until this point, attempts to describe a subjective nature as an objective nature by utilizing an objective lens to do so, which is sensibly impossible.

  2. #2
    Imagine Timeless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    San Francisco, CA.
    TIM
    ILE/ENTp
    Posts
    819
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    So basically is like a universal emotional plug?



    It can adjust and input to anybody. Except SLI/ILI's who are expressive as this:



    Which is why they can't plug and play to that because there is no emotional and expressive "output."

  3. #3
    Imagine Timeless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    San Francisco, CA.
    TIM
    ILE/ENTp
    Posts
    819
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ashton View Post
    I'm still trying to wrap my head around better understanding it.
    That's how I feel with .

    And which is why I haven't made the next and last "Ethics & (Something witty)" thread...

    ...yet

  4. #4
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    most of this is just wrong. Fe is about making qualitative judgments on the most shallow level of experience, i.e. the experiential layer of conception that requires no process of interpretation or inference to be reached.

  5. #5
    Nothing in the cage of my ribcage
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,704
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    most of this is just wrong. Fe is about making qualitative judgments on the most shallow level of experience, i.e. the experiential layer of conception that requires no process of interpretation or inference to be reached.
    ...what does that mean?

  6. #6
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    it means you get the "feel" of the input you receive without putting it through some complex process (i.e. interpretation, framing, composition, inference, etc). Just evaluate the data itself, not what it "means" or "refers to".

  7. #7
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Guzfraba.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  8. #8
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Fe types are kind of like the mini dictators and/or janitors of their own emotionally socialist world of people.

    A snapshot of the sentiment is available in Gulanzon's sig:

    Even if your heart is crying
    isn't it a clown's job to make people happy?
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  9. #9
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ok, now I get it, Gilly.

  10. #10
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,015
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If Fe is a persona/role/acting sort of function, it isn't my PoLR.

  11. #11
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Divided View Post
    I just had a socionics epiphany.

    Fe which I describe specifically as

    Fe - how to do something and what to do with the surroundings and its individual people and other individual life (emotional directive-organizational subjects).

    accomplishes this by creating personas with other people. It molds itself to what they see other people are and adjusts itself according to fill the description I have above.

    This explains why Fe egos can have a hard time accepting the baseless and generally incorrect and inconsistent conclusions attributed to the functions and the theoretical relationships - because if you can adjust yourself to the type of the person in front of you, you would be stupid to let anyone tell you otherwise.

    And it explains why they would have a hard time determining a type, especially if their personas became pathological to the extent of not realizing a basic instinctive type.

    EIE, IEI, SEI, and ESE are probably the types that will overall have the hardest time finding their type because the theory doesn't cater to properly understanding the natures of the subjective functions and instead, as I have seen up until this point, attempts to describe a subjective nature as an objective nature by utilizing an objective lens to do so, which is sensibly impossible.
    I'd say that's more related to Fe types with a Harmonizing DCNH subtype. Dominant Fe types will plow through everything in their way with their focused, high-intensity blasts of emotion. D-EIEs, especially.

    Take Hitler for example (D-EIE). If people didn't do what he wanted, he would fly into a rage and throw a tantrum. He forcefully pursued his goals using Fe to energize his allies and demoralize his enemies.

    Fe is like water. Harmonizers use it gently to mold to their surroundings, whether it be a cup or a sink or a hole in the ground. Dominants use it like a pressure-washer, blowing away obstacles with the sheer force of emotion.
    Quaero Veritas.

  12. #12
    EffyCold The Ineffable's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wallachia
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    2,195
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly View Post
    Fe types are kind of like the mini dictators and/or janitors of their own emotionally socialist world of people.

    A snapshot of the sentiment is available in Gulanzon's sig:

    Even if your heart is crying
    isn't it a clown's job to make people happy?
    That's correct for Fe Rationals - you and Gul included, not so much for Fe Irrationals. I'm gonna strangle this maverick!
    Shock intuition, diamond logic.
     

    The16types.info Scientific Model

  13. #13
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aiss View Post
    If Fe is the persona/role/acting sort of function, it isn't my PoLR.
    Fixed.

  14. #14
    Punk
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    TIM
    ESE
    Posts
    1,659
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    most of this is just wrong. Fe is about making qualitative judgments on the most shallow level of experience, i.e. the experiential layer of conception that requires no process of interpretation or inference to be reached.
    [TypesAside]
    Do you think you might be confusing your Fe dual-seeking with Fe creative? For me, I wouldn't exactly call the Fe I have as a shallow level of experience; its conception is more a process - an engulfing one that I'm only now realizing takes up almost all of my natural thought, dictates and paints the way I view and interpret things, and has the power to make me unable to separate myself from the other people around me if I allow it to integrate myself too much.
    [/TypesAside]

    But I'm not sure I agree that it's shallow and requires no process of interpretation, but I'm also not sure I care if someone wants to think it's that, since people can see things however they feel or think makes the most sense. So if you really think so, then okay.

    Edit: I just thought of something. For Fe to be shallow and have no interpretative process, then how does it know what to do? You might say Ti, but then I could say the same thing about Ti. So then what comes first, the Ti or Fe? ...chicken or egg...get it?

    But I guess you could say an irrational function, but then I have to wonder how you could have a rational function and an irrational function existing without each other. And then again I guess I would have to ask which comes first to create the other? It seems more that a rational and irrational function couple to support each other as a process, rather than truly separate.

  15. #15
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    no.

  16. #16
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,015
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by polikujm View Post
    Fixed.
    Thank you.

  17. #17
    2 EVIL I golden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Several stories high
    TIM
    EIE prob 6
    Posts
    2,969
    Mentioned
    106 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I disagree that Fe is shallow. The way I see things so far, when any IE is in the ego block (esp leading), it will not be any more shallow than YOU are shallow as a human being. And of course, we've surely seen by now how accusations of shallowness are bandied about 'round here.

    Something I've seen in closely associating with someone with Se leading, for example ... Se can do all sorts of amazing things that go well beyond what the stock Socionics descriptions tell us. As Divided stated, more or less, one can try to assert that it's not pure Se doing all that, and rather it's Se working in concert with other functions. I don't assume that any IE behaves in a pure and isolated fashion, but with the Se-ego individual I know best, I have observed Se per se as being very flexible in terms of what observations and skills it mediates/supports/produces.

    But I have said the same thing about my own use of Fe: the more I become aware of what I'm doing with it, the more I see that it goes well beyond just "here are my feelings flowing outward" or anything of the sort. It's a way of knowing the world and a way of being. It does have an adaptability and plasticity that makes it seem potentially surface-y. But no one here is inside my consciousness, living my life. The people who know me well would probably laugh at you if you told them I seemed shallow. And I don't think that's because of having Ni in my ego block, as well. Fe itself is totally sewn up with who I am and can itself, I submit, be substantial, deep, complex.

    Regarding the OP specifically, I think there's something to the idea of Fe and role playing but am not sure I agree entirely with the conclusion that Fe types will not arrive at their Socionics type easily. I do know that some of the EIE descriptions at

    http://www.socionic.ru/index.php

    point out how EIE is a role-playing type, who will try hard to fit what others expect behaviorally. If that is correct, it stands to reason that EIE might run the risk of not always having a solid or consistent sense of "this is who I am." If it also is true that Fe is part of what makes this phenomenon possible, then perhaps other Fe ego types will have similar issues.

    But I think this self-perception thing will likely vary from one person to the next. (It might be that what Krig wrote about DCNH has some validity here, though I still don't really "get" DCNH nor know which of those four subtypes I could be. I've been confused by inconsistent takes on DCNH and a general paucity of information on it.)

  18. #18
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    most of this is just wrong. Fe is about making qualitative judgments on the most shallow level of experience, i.e. the experiential layer of conception that requires no process of interpretation or inference to be reached.
    you act like emotions and thoughts are two completely separate things. They arent.

  19. #19
    2 EVIL I golden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Several stories high
    TIM
    EIE prob 6
    Posts
    2,969
    Mentioned
    106 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedratsghost View Post
    you act like emotions and thoughts are two completely separate things. They arent.
    Yeah. I said a while back that so far as I can tell, Fe "thinks." And it's not Fe + Ti I'm talking about. So when I consider the functions these days, I try to see them JUST as functions without attaching the ideas of thinking and feeling to them too much.

  20. #20
    limNol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Philadelphia
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w5 sx/so
    Posts
    130
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Golden View Post
    point out how EIE is a role-playing type, who will try hard to fit what others expect behaviorally. If that is correct, it stands to reason that EIE might run the risk of not always having a solid or consistent sense of "this is who I am." If it also is true that Fe is part of what makes this phenomenon possible, then perhaps other Fe ego types will have similar issues.
    Truth is, everyone plays roles -- EIEs are just better at it than most.

    Also, I don't think playing roles and being attentive to others' expectations is antithetical to having a solid sense of self. Someone with a strong sense of self can do these things and still know who they are while someone with a weaker sense of self will do these things and be consumed by them, or avoid them obsessively because they are afraid of losing their sense of self.

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Saugerties,NY
    TIM
    ENFj-fe
    Posts
    947
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Fwiw, you could easily come to the same conclusions for dominants, they take in raw data from the environment with little regards to interpreting and metabolizing that info.
    And, I don't get what the OP is saying about dominants having a hard time figuring out their type, could you explain why you think this?
    EIE tritype 5w4, 4w5, 9w1


    As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being.
    Carl Jung, "Memories, Dreams, Reflections", 1962

  22. #22
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bolt View Post
    That's correct for Fe Rationals - you and Gul included, not so much for Fe Irrationals. I'm gonna strangle this maverick!
    Kind of. The quote was from an anime where someone is trying to cheer an ESE up (and it works).

    If EFjs are the universal plug, IFps are the universal socket. Once you plug into an IFp, and you will, the IFps is going to be manipulating you whether you like it or not. It's my job to make people happy and relaxed and I'll be damned if I let they themselves get in the way of it!

    If EFjs are the dictators, IFps are the janitors.
    Last edited by male; 03-01-2011 at 04:17 AM.

  23. #23
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Also, Fe is shallower than Ti. Static functions are more abstract, Dynamic functions more broad.

    Labcoat is entirely on the money with this, and it's a completely value-neutral appraisal. "Shallow" does not mean "not deep", so you should get over feeling accused of being shallow, or however it was that you were slighted.

    Compared to static types, dynamic types are directly in the middle of whatever their egos perceive. Static types are always naturally abstracted from what their egos perceive. I talked with an ILE about this: where I'm always in the middle of my emotional reactions with people (and less visibly reading my own internal state), and "plugged straight in", the ILE is a lot more abstract, like she's arranging photographs of her experience, while I'm wading through it all.

  24. #24
    EffyCold The Ineffable's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wallachia
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    2,195
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Egbert Human View Post
    If EFjs are the universal plug, IFps are the universal socket. Once you plug into an IFp, and you will, the IFps is going to be manipulating you whether you like it or not. It's my job to make people happy and relaxed and I'll be damned if I let them themselves get in the way of it!
    LOL, no way! The only way Fe Creative affects me is whims. The biggest problem I have with people is that I don't take bullshit, Fe-Creative being the only manner how I accept bullshit, because they're like "it's bullshit but I like/want it, fuck off!" and that makes sense to me, if the prick wants that - without claiming it's not bullshit coming with a ridiculous theory, like Fi does - then it's fine for me, it's even refreshing somehow, because their merriness a funny example of how to live your life without concern of what's true or false, that it is possible. Fe types may act like when something is true even when it's not, this acting not interfering with my values, like claiming that it's true based on subjective means (Fi) or that the conclusion is inaccurate based on all sorts of bogus facts and erroneous statistics (Te).

    Now my problem with Fe-Base is that they go over-the-top with their preference for this lack of rigor - bullshit, when applicable -, they're pushing others into not being so concerned about true/false, right/wrong all the time - unlike Fe-Creative, you give Fe-Base an inch and they will take an ell. I'm not influenced nor I accept to be pushed, so I kick Fe-Base types back to their kennel. Until the next time .

    In my observations, Ti-Base also don't like to be pushed, it happened to me to be told by LIIs "wow wow wow, don't push me cause I get dizzy!" when I was "bombarding" them with a lot of information. But they don't snap on each detail, they don't go for each matter specifically, but they keep a slow, balanced and confident pace, taking their time to think without concern that they may loose details or information. If you stay with them then fine, otherwise fuck off, they're not interested to chase you, as Rationals they know what they think and want, sticking to it, so it's not really possible to drag them into a mess ("they keep their shit together").
    [Edit: on this, I direct folks to read what Socionics Skizotym really means (the equivalent of Jung's "Rational" and MBTI "Judging")]

    Gilly went to the core of the problem, just that it's Fe-Base and in our case dictator/janitor is the same thing applied to different social roles.
    ---

    Like I said, only the Base function (implicitly, all accepting) makes its value universal. Its relation to particulars is also explained by the human thinkers for a long time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_of_opposition#. Fe Base and Fe-Creative, although the same information, they use different quantifiers, thus having a relationship of subalternation (subalternatio).
    (What you see in the diagram is the abstraction applicable to a Model A ring (eg Ego + Super-Ego), I'll write an article when I find the relationships with the others)
    ---

    Therefore, Gul, your belief that joy and cheerfulness is an universal human necessity and that you're somehow obliged and justified to bring that upon people are only a consequence of your type, ESE, not of Fe. Sorry to disappoint you, but XEIs don't share your feelings, read some descriptions.
    And btw, stick that cheerfulness up your ass, I need to work now .
    Last edited by The Ineffable; 03-01-2011 at 05:55 AM.
    Shock intuition, diamond logic.
     

    The16types.info Scientific Model

  25. #25
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Did I say that I believe joy and cheerfulness are universal human necessities? Did I even imply it? Or are you just taking completely blank slates of information and projecting your own stupidly narrow views of certainty onto ambiguous or outright meaningless statements of fragments thereof, AS USUAL? Whoops, looks like I just enlightened myself with my own question! LOL.

    Here's a deeply intellectual thought for you, and perhaps you should ponder it: fuck off. Stop arguing my type. I don't care. And don't take that ornery attitude with me.

    Also bring back those eight trigrams correlations. They were good.

  26. #26
    Haikus Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    22,740
    Mentioned
    531 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Egbert Human View Post
    Did I say that I believe joy and cheerfulness are universal human necessities? Did I even imply it? Or are you just taking completely blank slates of information and projecting your own stupidly narrow views of certainty onto ambiguous or outright meaningless statements of fragments thereof, AS USUAL? Whoops, looks like I just enlightened myself with my own question! LOL.

    Here's a deeply intellectual thought for you, and perhaps you should ponder it: fuck off. Stop arguing my type. I don't care. And don't take that ornery attitude with me.

    Also bring back those eight trigrams correlations. They were good.
    Aren't they?

  27. #27
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Joyful people always have volatility to them. One of the most insane people I know is very joyful. Hell just look at Joy.

  28. #28
    wants to be a writer. silverchris9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,107
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by munenori2 View Post
    Ok, now I get it, Gilly.
    Yeah...

    Fe is like water. Harmonizers use it gently to mold to their surroundings, whether it be a cup or a sink or a hole in the ground. Dominants use it like a pressure-washer, blowing away obstacles with the sheer force of emotion.
    Krig wins socionics always.

    Labcoat is entirely on the money with this, and it's a completely value-neutral appraisal. "Shallow" does not mean "not deep", so you should get over feeling accused of being shallow, or however it was that you were slighted.
    I'm glad labcoat makes sense to someone. He comes off as intelligent, but I disagree with everything he says. So I'm just going to assume that I am interpreting it wrong.

    LOL, no way! The only way Fe Creative affects me is whims.
    That's. What. You. Think.




    OP: Yeah, that's not a bad description of Fe, and I feel like it made something click for you, so hold onto it until it clicks better. I mean, I like Krig's explanation, but even Dominant subtypes to a degree are acting. I mean, Hitler probably allowed his emotions to carry him away, not consciously... but in the way that Fe-dominants, at the very least, choose not to control their emotions (frequently. Obviously there are clinical situations where they are actually unable to control their emotions, but general, Fe-leading types can keep themselves from exploding emotionally like the gysers of feeling they truly are.)

    Perhaps Fe can think implicitly (maybe this is Fe + Ni, tracing things forwards and backwards along causal lines): I instinctively changed to affect emotional situation x, y, and z, in response to emotional stimuli x, y, and z. Therefore I can deduce conditions a, b, and c in reality, since those are the conditions which produce those reactions. The difference between this and Ti (it sounds rather Ti) is that these thoughts are not specific and explicit---they are realizations that are of a piece with the knowledge of what to do---knowledge of what it is bound up with knowledge of what to do, as it were, in the same kernel (and vice versa for perceiving functions).
    Not a rule, just a trend.

    IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.

    Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...

    I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.

  29. #29
    EffyCold The Ineffable's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wallachia
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    2,195
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Egbert Human View Post
    Here's a deeply intellectual thought for you, and perhaps you should ponder it: fuck off. Stop arguing my type. I don't care. And don't take that ornery attitude with me.
    For the record, I could easily replace "your type" with "Gul's type" to be the same thing. You have no obligation to agree with me, or the truth about your type for that matter.
    Shock intuition, diamond logic.
     

    The16types.info Scientific Model

  30. #30
    Imagine Timeless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    San Francisco, CA.
    TIM
    ILE/ENTp
    Posts
    819
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    Fe is like water. Harmonizers use it gently to mold to their surroundings, whether it be a cup or a sink or a hole in the ground. Dominants use it like a pressure-washer, blowing away obstacles with the sheer force of emotion.
    So basically if is like water then...


    -SEI/ISFp:




    -ESE/ESFj:




    -EIE/ENFj:




    -IEI/INFp:




    Then...

    Alpha & Beta Qudra:



    Gamma & Delta Quadra:


  31. #31
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Timeless View Post
    So basically if is like water then...


    -SEI/ISFp:




    -ESE/ESFj:




    -EIE/ENFj:




    -IEI/INFp:




    Then...

    Alpha & Beta Qudra:



    Gamma & Delta Quadra:

    Haha, perfect. Especially "Gamma & Delta".
    Quaero Veritas.

  32. #32
    Punk
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    TIM
    ESE
    Posts
    1,659
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Egbert Human View Post
    Also, Fe is shallower than Ti. Static functions are more abstract, Dynamic functions more broad.

    Labcoat is entirely on the money with this, and it's a completely value-neutral appraisal. "Shallow" does not mean "not deep", so you should get over feeling accused of being shallow, or however it was that you were slighted.

    Compared to static types, dynamic types are directly in the middle of whatever their egos perceive. Static types are always naturally abstracted from what their egos perceive. I talked with an ILE about this: where I'm always in the middle of my emotional reactions with people (and less visibly reading my own internal state), and "plugged straight in", the ILE is a lot more abstract, like she's arranging photographs of her experience, while I'm wading through it all.
    No labcoat is not on the money with this. And you haven't done anything other than explain how you perceive static versus dynamic types in terms of what you've come to see as one being shallow versus another. The truth is, and the underlying problem no one seems to catch onto is that Fe can not exist without Ti, and vice versa. Do not think that separating the two and deciding to say that one type is more shallow than another is going to be accurate at all or even marginally correct when you consider the underlying processes that happen underneath all the Jungian abstractions (although still correct in their own right).

    I'm sorry Gul. But you spread ideas that just don't help understand, but obfuscate instead. If it weren't for this, I would say nothing to you, but you aren't being considerate of other people at all in doing this. There is a lot of disagreement with others in relation to how you view socionics and trying to push your view rather than find what all the disagreement is about and trying to rectify it doesn't help at all and makes you look like you're being a forceful monster rather than trying to understand. Can you stop, if only for a little bit at a time??

    And, I don't get what the OP is saying about dominants having a hard time figuring out their type, could you explain why you think this?
    It's a simple idea. The person gets so caught up in making other people a part of their persona(s) that they blend in and don many masks to the point that they are the masks - persona. One could say this is a limitation of the theory, but it seems more likely that it is not understood in a deeper manner. All functions can be shallow, but this one in this particular case has a great potential for confusion. It seems people think Fe is the equivalent of a vapid clown...how strange...how inane...how annoying...how ridiculous...how insane...how tiresome...how stupid...how stupefying.
    Last edited by DividedsGhost; 03-01-2011 at 04:58 PM.

  33. #33

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    262
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    most of this is just wrong. Fe is about making qualitative judgments on the most shallow level of experience, i.e. the experiential layer of conception that requires no process of interpretation or inference to be reached.
    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    it means you get the "feel" of the input you receive without putting it through some complex process (i.e. interpretation, framing, composition, inference, etc). Just evaluate the data itself, not what it "means" or "refers to".
    though saying that, shallow as a descriptor seems to cause more antagonism than intended.

    Quote Originally Posted by Divided View Post
    No labcoat is not on the money with this. And you haven't done anything other than explain how you perceive static versus dynamic types in terms of what you've come to see as one being shallow versus another. The truth is, and the underlying problem no one seems to catch onto is that Fe can not exist without Ti, and vice versa. Do not think that separating the two and deciding to say that one type is more shallow than another is going to be accurate at all or even marginally correct when you consider the underlying processes that happen underneath all the Jungian abstractions (although still correct in their own right).

    I'm sorry Gul. But you spread ideas that just don't help understand, but obfuscate instead. If it weren't for this, I would say nothing to you, but you aren't being considerate of other people at all in doing this. There is a lot of disagreement with others in relation to how you view socionics and trying to push your view rather than find what all the disagreement is about and trying to rectify it doesn't help at all and makes you look like you're being a forceful monster rather than trying to understand. Can you stop, if only for a little bit at a time??



    It's a simple idea. The person gets so caught up in making other people a part of their persona(s) that they blend in and don many masks to the point that they are the masks - persona. One could say this is a limitation of the theory, but it seems more likely that it is not understood in a deeper manner. All functions can be shallow, but this one in this particular case has a great potential for confusion. It seems people think Fe is the equivalent of a vapid clown...how strange...how inane...how annoying...how ridiculous...how insane...how tiresome...how stupid...how stupefying.
    I think you're including the common use of shallow here. A decent example would be interactions between ESEs and ILIs that I've noticed where the lack of responsiveness is misunderstood in the ESE. The "shallowness" here comes from ascribing the "lack of data" by the ESE to some underlying negativity within the person rather than a variation in expressiveness. Fe in this case is skimming the surface and using it as a model for the entirety of a person's character.

    The equivalent on the Te/Ti axis is the dependence on empiricism of Te.

    All of this has to be taken in context though as no function exists in isolation which you were alluding to.
    LII?

  34. #34
    Creepy-male

    Default

    The only person I'm being a forceful monster with is Bolt. And that is because he is perpetually projecting his misguided exertions of will at me in almost the most utterly disrespectful manner imaginable. All I want is some basic respect and acknowledgement for boundaries; if that is not observed then the other person simply does not deserve either my respect in turn or my patience in dealing with them. Some people are just dickheads, douchebags, assholes, or fuckwads, and they get what they deserve. Which is none of my time, energy, or politeness, and a swift disposal to my block list, mental or software-level.

    If I come across as preaching my understanding as gospel, that's your problem, as a reader, not mine, as a writer. Nobody has to listen to me, and most people in fact will not. In an open dialogue I am quite amenable to respectful clarification of position, assumption, and the clarification of personal reasoning; but the respect inherent to such a mode of discourse is so seldom observed in this hateful, willful community that it's simply not worth rendering unless implicitly requested, either by structure of discourse, by personal relationship, or by some initiative on my part to smooth over some needlessly protracted conflict.

    If I spread confusion, then again, that's not my problem. I skip over ideas that confuse me, and read ideas that make sense to me. I spread ideas that make sense to me, whether or not they're confusing to other people. I am not responsible for confusing other people.

    Loudly proclaiming me to have some sort of deleterious effect on socionics knowledge at large is laughable at best, contemptible at worst. I am one person, I espouse one set of knowledge; my impact is significantly limited in a situation where knowledge is broadly supplied and freely available. If directly asked I can clarify and clarify until someone understands. If they still find me confusing, then they can abandon trying to see things from my point of view. I am not so arrogant as to proclaim myself a guru or a socionics master; or the be-all and end-all of What Socionics Is.

  35. #35
    Haikus
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    MI
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    10,060
    Mentioned
    223 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Fi is protecting your inner fag.
    Fe is showing your inner fag.

    By inner fag I don't mean actually homosexuality, I mean your emotional world.

    To Fi, Fe feels manipulative, like their inner fag is being attacked and invaded, when they just want to be reserved with that stuff. With Fe, they just simply can't understand the sensitivity with being sensitive. They don't like to bottle all that stuff inside, it feels dishonest to them. We're just being honest by showing our 'inner fag', but Fi types view that as manipulative. We think they're being cold and standoffish, but really, they just want their inner fag to feel sacred, and not vomit it to everybody in the world.

    But Fe then again thinks that's silly because just because you're hiding something, doesn't mean that it isn't there. But to Fi types they just aren't viewing it that way. They aren't hiding, they're just processing things differently or so they say. So both the Fi valuer and the Fe valuer will argue for hours on end (depending on the quadra and the intertype relationship, for example esfp is fi-valuing and infp is fe-valuing but they both still get along really well) until both get fed up and go away, and get naturally recharged again by their duals and people in their own quadra.

  36. #36
    Nothing in the cage of my ribcage
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,704
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Introversion and Extraversion are just semantics... and they often get mistaken as meaning "deep" and "shallow".

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    it means you get the "feel" of the input you receive without putting it through some complex process (i.e. interpretation, framing, composition, inference, etc). Just evaluate the data itself, not what it "means" or "refers to".
    I think that this is more of a description of an Irrational function than a Rational function. I thought Rational functions categorized, judged, etc, information. Saying that Fe goes by the "feel" of things is wrong, and I think that is more true of Irrationality. And actually, who doesn't "feel" things? I think that's what every humans with feelings do, we're not robots. "This generates happiness in me. I have a fear of snakes. That looks disgusting." - well, aren't they just evolutionary traits?
    Last edited by Singu; 03-01-2011 at 06:25 PM.

  37. #37
    Creepy-male

    Default

    IPs are shallow due to being immersed in a broad spread of constant information. IJs are deep due to having lots of abstract pieces to move around and plumb.

    EPs are deep due to having shifting collections of abstracts to arrange and derive their reality from. EJs are shallow due to constantly driving and directing their broad spread of constant information.

  38. #38
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,693
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BulletsAndDoves View Post
    Fi is protecting your inner fag.
    Fe is showing your inner fag.

    ...
    You only have a piece of the puzzle.

    The projections of are true, at that moment. valuers/egos still have static feelings of inner turmoil that they end up ignoring for the sake of situational emotions. So while may "show it's inner fag", it's still protecting parts of itself.
    (i)NTFS

    An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
    and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI

    31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
    My work on Inert/Contact subtypes

    Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
    Socionics Tests Database
    Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites


    Fidei Defensor

  39. #39
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,619
    Mentioned
    158 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BulletsAndDoves View Post
    Fi is protecting your inner fag.
    Fe is showing your inner fag.

    By inner fag I don't mean actually homosexuality, I mean your emotional world.

    To Fi, Fe feels manipulative, like their inner fag is being attacked and invaded, when they just want to be reserved with that stuff. With Fe, they just simply can't understand the sensitivity with being sensitive. They don't like to bottle all that stuff inside, it feels dishonest to them. We're just being honest by showing our 'inner fag', but Fi types view that as manipulative. We think they're being cold and standoffish, but really, they just want their inner fag to feel sacred, and not vomit it to everybody in the world.
    I like this explanation the best. There are a lot of weird generalizations ITT that are simply unnecessary.

    Quote Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold View Post
    You only have a piece of the puzzle.

    The projections of are true, at that moment. valuers/egos still have static feelings of inner turmoil that they end up ignoring for the sake of situational emotions. So while may "show it's inner fag", it's still protecting parts of itself.
    Warning: you may be conflating some vs. stuff in there.

  40. #40
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think that this is more of a description of an Irrational function than a Rational function. I thought Rational functions categorized, judged, etc, information. Saying that Fe goes by the "feel" of things is wrong, and I think that is more true of Irrationality. And actually, who doesn't "feel" things? I think that's what every humans with feelings do, we're not robots. "This generates happiness in me. I have a fear of snakes. That looks disgusting." - well, aren't they just evolutionary traits?
    Fe operates on an irrational function (Si or Ni). The processes aren't fully separate. The Je function orients to the difference between percepts, but this happens to such an extent automatically that it hardly makes sense to view the functions in isolation. Orienting to a percept without comparing it to other things is, in a sense, a vacuous activity.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •