Are you very good at using your demonstrative function?

[Hermit Soul]

I have Demonstrative Fi and I noticed myself using Fi a lot. Not only do I use Fi a lot, I'm also quite good at using it too.


This is how my Demonstrative Fi manifests in me:

- I noticed that I have this habit of remembering how people make me feel. I literally have a photographic memory when it comes to anything that affects my emotions.
- I care a lot about connections with people. I like making friends, I like making connections with people, and I often go to great lengths to maintain all my friendships. I especially enjoy making close connections with people, I always have at least one close friend at every stage of my life.
- I'm quite diplomatic/amiable in social situations. I'm never rude to anyone. If I find myself disliking someone, I usually just ignore their presence (if they talk to me, I'll still talk to them, but I won't initiate social interactions with them).
- I'm a deeply sensitive person on the inside, yet I have great self-control over my emotions at the outside. People rarely see me get angry, rarely see me get upset, rarely see me get over-excited over anything.
- I can be a bit judgemental when it comes to seeing immorality in people. It tends to disturb me deeply whenever I see someone being rude or unkind to others.
- I find myself valuing fairness a lot, whether it's the way others treat me, or the way I treat others.
- I'm quite good at noticing how people feel about each other, like I can tell whether someone likes another person, or whether someone dislikes another person.
- I'm such a sentimental person that I never forget about anyone in my life. If I ran into an old classmate of mine whom I have lost contact 10 years ago, you can bet that I can still remember who they are.



Does anyone else here find yourselves quite good at using your demonstrative function that you sometimes find yourself mistaking it as your base function?

[Exodus]

Well yeah, you're supposed to be good at it. It is a lower priority than the leading function, however.

[idontgiveaf]

I'm good at using all the functions because using only one will make the other functions jealous. I'm a fair fighter

[Sol]

It's strenght should be similar to creative function, but to have lesser developed skills. You may study those skills if you'll want and use them. This will be lesser interesting and pleasant than by valued functions - to study and to use, but should be not much harder than by ego functions.

[Pookie]

It's strenght should be similar to creative function, but to have lesser developed skills. You may study those skills if you'll want and use them. This will be lesser interesting and pleasant than by valued functions - to study and to use, but should be not much harder than by ego functions.

Similar to lead, but narrower scope. Much more developed than creative.

[Sol]

Similar to lead, but narrower scope. Much more developed than creative.

It's baseless heresy by the author with bs about "dimensions".
Jung or Augustinavichiute [though I read her long ago and not all] have no this. Talanov's experiment with the test seems have shown other too (with 2nd try, as in the 1st he found the mistake in the calculation).
From the core theory follows that 2nd function and 8th may work in a pair, to develop mutually. 1 and 7 should be stronger than 8th. 2nd mb a little stronger too.

[Bertrand]

I think it just has to do with the fact that for creative function output to be viable it somehow has to take into account the opposing attitude without violating it in a way that renders the creative output void... in the case of logic that means Te stuff that holds up under Ti scrutiny. The fact that you go from an extroverted judgement with a mostly or completely viable introverted structure built in is itself a wonder, the difference is the creative output was formed on the basis of the present, i.e.: it is not necessarily such that coinsciously incorporates time (this would be base Ti), but the fact that it builds in this other attitude subconsciously makes the other one develop in accordance over time in a way that must be the case, because if it is not developing over time the creative approach would lose tautness. in other words, the time component of the creative function is actually a function of the demonstrative. I think that is what model A and dimensionality is trying to convey. you can render it different ways. Model G handles it more elegantly imo. part of sol's resistance to the idea may be that he would prefer to dispense with the time factor as a conscious consideration owing to his Ni polr. this doesn't mean he's automatically wrong, it means he can likely get by on a model that handles things differently but perhaps just as well. the time component and 4 dimensional analogy is only one possible way to slice things. I often think people take them as hard limits rather than guideposts founded in analogy for other things. i.e. not a strict numerical order with supremacy as a factor, but rather a spatial analogy...

there has to be some difference between base function and demonstrative and the way model A spins out is to describe the time component of demonstrative as subconscious. people get hung up on what that means but you gotta consider how that differentiates it from as base type in another type. its precisely the difference between SLI and LSI while maintaining a kind of parity, how else do you describe how they approach Ti? true you can simply intuit it, but the dimensionality/time factor way of doing things has its merits too

if one struggles with it one can simply think "this is the difference in how LSI/SLI handle Ti" but one is not inherently superior, i.e.: guaranteed to overcome the other. one is simply bound by a local use and lets the base expand, and vice versa. if you already "intuit" that difference between them, i.e.: build that perception and understanding into your view of LSI/SLI difference then you need not resort to dimensionality or time, which is where I think Sol is coming from. Sol should realize though not everyone finds it such a stumbling block, although like I mention it certainly does make people think in what I consider too direct hierarchical terms when its more like spatial terms

another way to think about it: the creative function product would be stillborn it if it were not for the demonstrative allowing it to stand up to one who had that as their base, in time and space. also in this sense the base function is conservative, demonstrative is not, hence its creative origin

[Number 9 large]

I have Demonstrative Fi and I noticed myself using Fi a lot. Not only do I use Fi a lot, I'm also quite good at using it too.


This is how my Demonstrative Fi manifests in me:

- I noticed that I have this habit of remembering how people make me feel. I literally have a photographic memory when it comes to anything that affects my emotions.
- I care a lot about connections with people. I like making friends, I like making connections with people, and I often go to great lengths to maintain all my friendships. I especially enjoy making close connections with people, I always have at least one close friend at every stage of my life.
- I'm quite diplomatic/amiable in social situations. I'm never rude to anyone. If I find myself disliking someone, I usually just ignore their presence (if they talk to me, I'll still talk to them, but I won't initiate social interactions with them).
- I'm a deeply sensitive person on the inside, yet I have great self-control over my emotions at the outside. People rarely see me get angry, rarely see me get upset, rarely see me get over-excited over anything.
- I can be a bit judgemental when it comes to seeing immorality in people. It tends to disturb me deeply whenever I see someone being rude or unkind to others.
- I find myself valuing fairness a lot, whether it's the way others treat me, or the way I treat others.
- I'm quite good at noticing how people feel about each other, like I can tell whether someone likes another person, or whether someone dislikes another person.
- I'm such a sentimental person that I never forget about anyone in my life. If I ran into an old classmate of mine whom I have lost contact 10 years ago, you can bet that I can still remember who they are.



Does anyone else here find yourselves quite good at using your demonstrative function that you sometimes find yourself mistaking it as your base function?

seems like lead to me. demonstrative isnt even valued and disregarded for creative

[Olimpia]

I have Demonstrative Fi and I noticed myself using Fi a lot. Not only do I use Fi a lot, I'm also quite good at using it too.


This is how my Demonstrative Fi manifests in me:

- I noticed that I have this habit of remembering how people make me feel. I literally have a photographic memory when it comes to anything that affects my emotions.
- I care a lot about connections with people. I like making friends, I like making connections with people, and I often go to great lengths to maintain all my friendships. I especially enjoy making close connections with people, I always have at least one close friend at every stage of my life.
- I'm quite diplomatic/amiable in social situations. I'm never rude to anyone. If I find myself disliking someone, I usually just ignore their presence (if they talk to me, I'll still talk to them, but I won't initiate social interactions with them).
- I'm a deeply sensitive person on the inside, yet I have great self-control over my emotions at the outside. People rarely see me get angry, rarely see me get upset, rarely see me get over-excited over anything.
- I can be a bit judgemental when it comes to seeing immorality in people. It tends to disturb me deeply whenever I see someone being rude or unkind to others.
- I find myself valuing fairness a lot, whether it's the way others treat me, or the way I treat others.
- I'm quite good at noticing how people feel about each other, like I can tell whether someone likes another person, or whether someone dislikes another person.
- I'm such a sentimental person that I never forget about anyone in my life. If I ran into an old classmate of mine whom I have lost contact 10 years ago, you can bet that I can still remember who they are.



Does anyone else here find yourselves quite good at using your demonstrative function that you sometimes find yourself mistaking it as your base function?

I'd agree with n9 that it seems rather Fi lead heavy. The demonstrative function is much more unconscious. You seem way too conscious of your Fi use.

So/Sx af btw.

[The Reality Denialist]

Yes. It is just hard to explain. Some sort of automatic solution manager. I also spend good time with it to bypass Ti problems.

It is easier to understand ignoring but much harder to use it for your own benefit.

[Bertrand]

I think it just happens as a byproduct of creative. So if you're working on any given issue in a Ti sense, by the time you're done a Te path will become clear. To say you use it directly to bypass Ti is interesting, I think its more that you Ti'd in the past and derived a Te solution, that you can use as a kind of shortcut without running through the Ti again. But it was initially a product of Ti to begin with. Its really just Ti compounding itself sort of like how once you've learned certain factorials you don't need to run through the proof again you can apply the result wherever applicable. you might say determining if it applies is Te up front, and it kind of is, so perhaps that what's going on

[Delilah]

This is very interesting @op. I personally have noticed that i overestimate the presence of other people in my life, like i give them more weight than they actually carry ( say for instance when I'll really need someone to be there i know already that a lot of the people i had maintained contact with won't b there yet this doesn't stop me from assigning disproportionate weight to their presence.)

[The Reality Denialist]

1) I think I prefer to systematize things later. The inspiration comes from outside.
2) It usually uses some knowledge. Juggling with results/"facts"/methods without going to lowest level route.
3) Sometimes knowing that it just works is good enough although it tends to trouble me.


So in other words I'm fine with mathematics without making excruciatingly exact proofs although I have completed proof based math courses. I'm more interested in it as an utility (science or philosophy).

[niffer]

Same @Troll Nr 007 .

I’m extremely good at it. But I often don’t know how much I know until I need to use it. I seem to have a natural understanding of business too even though I’ve hardly ever formally studied it and never took the studies seriously. Today I explained some operating/sales procedures for a large electronics company to an ILI career woman in her 40s, even never having directly dealt with or specifically studied those kinds of things in my life. I’m all about getting value out of stuff, efficiency, maximizing profit and minimizing loss.

Several times since I’ve graduated people have gotten really excited when talking to me and have wanted me to become business partners with them lol, praising my business sense and thinking.

[Singu]

Yeah you always have some secret in-born knowledge. This can be explained by "demonstrative function". Makes perfect sense. I'm a genius.

[niffer]

Well you certainly are an endless well of subjective feelings and opinions lol.

[Soupman]

I'm good at using all the functions because using only one will make the other functions jealous. I'm a fair fighter

I find the theory exactly broken when it's deterministically associated with behaviour - I've figured out, I don't have to be as autistic if I nurture my social skills, and it's something I did as a kid.

BTW I get the impression you are truly SEE, but because none of the profiles are written by the type, they'll always be off with mistakes around common sense verification of real people.