Quick question about Introverted Ethics

[hellothere]

from wikisocion:

as a demonstrative (8th) function (SEI and IEI)

The individual is quite adept at understanding the interactions in personal bonds between two individuals, even in the absence of an obvious external emotional expression; but he is inclined to regard them as of lesser importance, and less interesting, than the broader emotional interactions in the context of a larger group. Moreover, those personal bonds are perceived as situational and dynamic rather than static.

What does the part that I've put in bold mean? Is it saying that with Fi demonstrative, your feelings towards a person depend on the situation? And are always changing?

Whereas with Fi base, your feelings towards a person are constant and independent of any external factors?

(just trying to clarify)

[Expat]

More or less.

I explained my views of Fi and Fe elsewhere:


Fi

Fi is not necessarily just about judgements regarding people but that is where Fi is most characteristic.

Fi types are most confident in evaluating reality in terms of connections between specific people - like laser beams connecting them.

Let us imagine that there are indeed laser beams connecting individuals. Everyone posses both a laser projector and a detector of other people's beams.

When a laser beam is established between two individuals, information between them is exchanged. If there is agreement on a set of criteria between the two individuals, the laser beam will turn, let us say, blue. And if there is a great lack of agreement on such criteria, the laser beam will turn red. Intermediate levels of agreement lead to intermediate colors (yellow, green, etc). The color of the laser beams connecting them to other people is the most important reality of all for Fi types.

Fi types are static. Perhaps the beam connecting them to a specific person will "flicker" a bit before settling on a specific color, but, once it does settle, Fi types prefer, and expect, that the color remains unchanged - and all things being equal, it will remain unchanged. Since Fi's own detector-criteria do not change easily, neither will the color of the beam connecting it to another person's, since Fi types tend to assume that others' color criteria are also fixed. It takes some major upheaval to make Fi reboot its laser-beam color for an specific person, and once it has changed, another, perhaps even greater, upheaval to make the color change again or change back.

Fi types prefer to surround themselves with those people with whom they share a blue laser beam, that's when they feel most comfortable. They prefer to isolate themselves from those with whom they share a red laser beam - and once it's red, it's not impossible for it to change, even to blue, but it's not something that the Fi types expect to happen very frequently. A constant change of color would leave them confused and mistrustful of the quality of their detectors.

The color can be established, of course, even with someone the Fi type never met personally, and up to a point, with people they don't really know, such as public figures - whereas in that case the color is more easily rebooted when new information is received.

The Fi types' own sense of identity, however, is not determined by how many people they can connect with in blue: rather, their sense of identity is determined by the solidity of their own detector-criteria that establish the color. Those criteria are the essence of the Fi type's willingness to establish a blue laser beam with someone, they are based on the Fi type's idea of which kind of people they would like to have a green beam to begin with. Should those criteria change and the Fi type suddenly have red beams which previously were blue, the Fi type will sense that reality itself, the own self of being, has been violated.

We can refine this image further by adding that deep romantic feelings are blue with silver stripes, for instance.

The difference between the ISFj and the INFj lies essentially on which kind of software feeds their laser beam detectors. The ISFj's is fed by an observation, and memory, of real events and real actions as perceived by the ISFj. The INFj's is fed rather by the INFj's perception of potential qualities and alternative possibilities regarding the specific person. Both are static, not easily changing; however, since the INFj's criteria are based on a potentials as perceived by the INFj, they can "jump" from one static state to another with less trauma than for the ISFj, for whom reality should be more fixed.

Fe

You know how laser beams are more easily visible when projected through some fog, some mist? Fe is like a colored fog; it can hang between two people, like the laser beams, or it can hang in the atmosphere of a group of people. And its color is influenced by the people there. People give off the fog, they contribute to it -- as if they were smoking.

Fe people pay more attention to the color of the fog, which is more variable, it changes all the time, it's dynamic. The colors of the fog and that of the laser beams are independent from each other; the laser beams have in principle nothing to do with the fog. But the Fe fog can both make the Fi beams more visible and mask their color - like a true laser beam.

Fe people - even Fe dominants with strong Fi - tend to use the color of the beams as enhanced by the color of the fog; Fi people - even with strong Fe - dislike it when the color of the fog flatly contradicts the color of the beam, when they are sure of it. They like to see the color of the beam without interference by the fog, so they prefer that the fog merely enhances the beam.

Fi PoLR people are color blind with regard to the laser beams, so they tend to rely on the fog's color. Fe PoLR are sort of color blind to the fog, and they don't contribute to it, either - they don't smoke, let us say. Fe PoLR people see the beams, but since they are blind to the fog, they are unsure if they are really seeing the beams correctly, too.

Since the fog also facilitates the visibility of the beams, a fog-poor person (or non-smoker) like an IXTp makes it difficult also for Fi types to see the correct beams between themselves and the Fe PoLR types, too. They know the beams are there, but a big of fog would be useful.

Fi-dual seeking with Fe role is different: they prefer to focus on the laser beams, and dislike the fog's "masking" effect if it contradicts the color; Fi-dual-seeking searches for "blue" people, but they are sort of afraid of seeing blue when it isn't blue. So they are relieved when the other person is more certain that it's blue than they are themselves.

[hellothere]

thank you!

[snegledmaca]

from wikisocion:

as a demonstrative (8th) function (SEI and IEI)

The individual is quite adept at understanding the interactions in personal bonds between two individuals, even in the absence of an obvious external emotional expression; but he is inclined to regard them as of lesser importance, and less interesting, than the broader emotional interactions in the context of a larger group. Moreover, those personal bonds are perceived as situational and dynamic rather than static.

What does the part that I've put in bold mean? Is it saying that with Fi demonstrative, your feelings towards a person depend on the situation? And are always changing?

Well, personally I find that sentence incredibly true. To put it simply, out of sigh out of mind. For example, if I move away I forget "the friends I left behind". Now you could say that I never cared for them in the first place, in order to forget about them so quickly, but I see it as the bonds we had were situational. Now we've moved and now there is no point in having those bonds. The same is when people assume they can depend on me, as if we have some bond, as if I am bound by some obligation. They get a rude awakening when that happens as I tend to just walk away if I do not want to do what they want me to do. I don't do this if I will harm or hurt them in some way, then I do it this one time but never again, but in everyday situations, like say sport events, social events, I just walk away if I do not want to be there.

[redbaron]

Well, personally I find that sentence incredibly true. To put it simply, out of sigh out of mind. For example, if I move away I forget "the friends I left behind". Now you could say that I never cared for them in the first place, in order to forget about them so quickly, but I see it as the bonds we had were situational. Now we've moved and now there is no point in having those bonds. The same is when people assume they can depend on me, as if we have some bond, as if I am bound by some obligation. They get a rude awakening when that happens as I tend to just walk away if I do not want to do what they want me to do. I don't do this if I will harm or hurt them in some way, then I do it this one time but never again, but in everyday situations, like say sport events, social events, I just walk away if I do not want to be there.

Remind me what type you are, snegledmaca?

[snegledmaca]

Remind me what type you are, snegledmaca?

IEI, though some thing don't seem to match.

[redbaron]

IEI, though some thing don't seem to match.

Hmmm. SEI? SLI? I do think the out of sight, out of mind thing isn't so much IEI. ;-)

[Blaze]

More or less.

I explained my views of Fi and Fe elsewhere:


Fi

Fi is not necessarily just about judgements regarding people but that is where Fi is most characteristic.

Fi types are most confident in evaluating reality in terms of connections between specific people - like laser beams connecting them.

Let us imagine that there are indeed laser beams connecting individuals. Everyone posses both a laser projector and a detector of other people's beams.

When a laser beam is established between two individuals, information between them is exchanged. If there is agreement on a set of criteria between the two individuals, the laser beam will turn, let us say, blue. And if there is a great lack of agreement on such criteria, the laser beam will turn red. Intermediate levels of agreement lead to intermediate colors (yellow, green, etc). The color of the laser beams connecting them to other people is the most important reality of all for Fi types.

Fi types are static. Perhaps the beam connecting them to a specific person will "flicker" a bit before settling on a specific color, but, once it does settle, Fi types prefer, and expect, that the color remains unchanged - and all things being equal, it will remain unchanged. Since Fi's own detector-criteria do not change easily, neither will the color of the beam connecting it to another person's, since Fi types tend to assume that others' color criteria are also fixed. It takes some major upheaval to make Fi reboot its laser-beam color for an specific person, and once it has changed, another, perhaps even greater, upheaval to make the color change again or change back.

Fi types prefer to surround themselves with those people with whom they share a blue laser beam, that's when they feel most comfortable. They prefer to isolate themselves from those with whom they share a red laser beam - and once it's red, it's not impossible for it to change, even to blue, but it's not something that the Fi types expect to happen very frequently. A constant change of color would leave them confused and mistrustful of the quality of their detectors.

The color can be established, of course, even with someone the Fi type never met personally, and up to a point, with people they don't really know, such as public figures - whereas in that case the color is more easily rebooted when new information is received.

The Fi types' own sense of identity, however, is not determined by how many people they can connect with in blue: rather, their sense of identity is determined by the solidity of their own detector-criteria that establish the color. Those criteria are the essence of the Fi type's willingness to establish a blue laser beam with someone, they are based on the Fi type's idea of which kind of people they would like to have a green beam to begin with. Should those criteria change and the Fi type suddenly have red beams which previously were blue, the Fi type will sense that reality itself, the own self of being, has been violated.

We can refine this image further by adding that deep romantic feelings are blue with silver stripes, for instance.

The difference between the ISFj and the INFj lies essentially on which kind of software feeds their laser beam detectors. The ISFj's is fed by an observation, and memory, of real events and real actions as perceived by the ISFj. The INFj's is fed rather by the INFj's perception of potential qualities and alternative possibilities regarding the specific person. Both are static, not easily changing; however, since the INFj's criteria are based on a potentials as perceived by the INFj, they can "jump" from one static state to another with less trauma than for the ISFj, for whom reality should be more fixed.

Fe

You know how laser beams are more easily visible when projected through some fog, some mist? Fe is like a colored fog; it can hang between two people, like the laser beams, or it can hang in the atmosphere of a group of people. And its color is influenced by the people there. People give off the fog, they contribute to it -- as if they were smoking.

Fe people pay more attention to the color of the fog, which is more variable, it changes all the time, it's dynamic. The colors of the fog and that of the laser beams are independent from each other; the laser beams have in principle nothing to do with the fog. But the Fe fog can both make the Fi beams more visible and mask their color - like a true laser beam.

Fe people - even Fe dominants with strong Fi - tend to use the color of the beams as enhanced by the color of the fog; Fi people - even with strong Fe - dislike it when the color of the fog flatly contradicts the color of the beam, when they are sure of it. They like to see the color of the beam without interference by the fog, so they prefer that the fog merely enhances the beam.

Fi PoLR people are color blind with regard to the laser beams, so they tend to rely on the fog's color. Fe PoLR are sort of color blind to the fog, and they don't contribute to it, either - they don't smoke, let us say. Fe PoLR people see the beams, but since they are blind to the fog, they are unsure if they are really seeing the beams correctly, too.

Since the fog also facilitates the visibility of the beams, a fog-poor person (or non-smoker) like an IXTp makes it difficult also for Fi types to see the correct beams between themselves and the Fe PoLR types, too. They know the beams are there, but a big of fog would be useful.

Fi-dual seeking with Fe role is different: they prefer to focus on the laser beams, and dislike the fog's "masking" effect if it contradicts the color; Fi-dual-seeking searches for "blue" people, but they are sort of afraid of seeing blue when it isn't blue. So they are relieved when the other person is more certain that it's blue than they are themselves.

these are not bad metaphors....helps to understand the difference. but it kind of puts Fe in a worse light in a way. it makes it seem like Fe obscures reality or something.

[snegledmaca]

Hmmm. SEI? SLI? I do think the out of sight, out of mind thing isn't so much IEI. ;-)

That's why I'm reluctant to speak on behalf of IEI-s and pointed it out as a personal thing. I don't know how it is for other IEI-s but that's how it is for me. How would you put it? Do you even think the sentence is right to begin with? I for one identify with it.

[redbaron]

That's why I'm reluctant to speak on behalf of IEI-s and pointed it out as a personal thing. I don't know how it is for other IEI-s but that's how it is for me. How would you put it? Do you even think the sentence is right to begin with? I for one identify with it.

Out of sight, out of mind. Let's see....you're right that if the friend moves far away and they don't make the effort to contact me part of the time, they definitely fall off the face of the earth since I cannot make 100% of the effort. But I think that's true of other introverted types also. That's the only time I would consider "out of sight, out of mind" to be true of me. But if I'm in a relationship with someone currently (any friendship, I'm not talking romantically although that would also apply) of course I have and feel and act on my obligations to them. I wouldn't walk away. I like to think people can depend on me. But then again, I'm a mother of three so that could affect my view somewhat! LOL

[Expat]

these are not bad metaphors....helps to understand the difference. but it kind of puts Fe in a worse light in a way. it makes it seem like Fe obscures reality or something.

It really wasn't my intention; I tried to contrast the static Fi with the dynamic Fe.

And since I speak from a Fi perspective, I really don't know how to describe Fe in a way I agree with and that will make Fe quadra types happy.

[snegledmaca]

But if I'm in a relationship with someone currently (any friendship, I'm not talking romantically although that would also apply) of course I have and feel and act on my obligations to them. I wouldn't walk away. I like to think people can depend on me.

I'm the opposite. I like to think that people can't, and shouldn't, depend on me. I know very well that I will not live up to their expectations so why perpetuate a lie. I have a habit of forgetting and not caring about people and walking away in such states. I do not really care what people think of me but still I do not want to hurt them with my actions. But regardless, my wishes come first and if they cannot accept this they will get hurt by me. Hmm, I guess I'm not really a "family man". Yes, for me the out of sigh out of mind is very true.

[redbaron]

I'm the opposite. I like to think that people can't, and shouldn't, depend on me. I know very well that I will not live up to their expectations so why perpetuate a lie. I have a habit of forgetting and not caring about people and walking away in such states. I do not really care what people think of me but still I do not want to hurt them with my actions. But regardless, my wishes come first and if they cannot accept this they will get hurt by me. Hmm, I guess I'm not really a "family man". Yes, for me the out of sigh out of mind is very true.

Well, it's good that you know this about yourself.

[Blaze]

It really wasn't my intention; I tried to contrast the static Fi with the dynamic Fe.

And since I speak from a Fi perspective, I really don't know how to describe Fe in a way I agree with and that will make Fe quadra types happy.

yes i know it was not your intention...but i did want to point it out. dunno perhaps Fe is more like music or aromas?

[redbaron]

yes i know it was not your intention...but i did want to point it out. dunno perhaps Fe is more like music or aromas?

Music, aromas, smoke....it's all the same;-) Just kidding. Yeah I thought it was a pretty good analogy. Maybe instead of smoke, they are more like softer spotlights. Not *quite* as loose as smoke or as strong as beams. I dunno. Or maybe that just describes me, somewhere in between.

[Blaze]

Music, aromas, smoke....it's all the same;-) Just kidding. Yeah I thought it was a pretty good analogy. Maybe instead of smoke, they are more like softer spotlights. Not *quite* as loose as smoke or as strong as beams. I dunno. Or maybe that just describes me, somewhere in between.

lol yeah they're all the same i guess...atmosphere is the main thing. i spose music and aroma gets into the Si realm a little bit more.

[redbaron]

lol yeah they're all the same i guess...atmosphere is the main thing. i spose music and aroma gets into the Si realm a little bit more.

Yeah baby, bring on the Si.....I love it.

[Blaze]

Yeah baby, bring on the Si.....I love it.

[tcaudilllg]

@Expat: what you described was not Fi at all; it was Te. Te traffics Fi: bonds are made on the basis of polarity.

[Logos]

these are not bad metaphors....helps to understand the difference. but it kind of puts Fe in a worse light in a way. it makes it seem like Fe obscures reality or something.

I agree in that in some ways it makes Fi appear a bit more of a superior quality than Fe. The benefits of the greatness of Te could very much be applied to Fe as well in that it is a dynamic reflection of a reality that is constantly changing and perhaps even leaving behind the static and inflexible Fi bonds. Or conversely, you could take the benefits of Fi in this "Fog and Laser Beam" System and then apply it to Ti and Te and change the talk of relationships between people and emotional states into the relationships between external objects.

Fe assumes to some extent that the bonds between people are constantly shifting and changing and uses a reading of a person's emotional state to address other issues and facets of reality (namely dealing with Si and Ni) while using an under-valued Fi to establish a rapport with others. But the benefits of Fi is that it is able to generally gauge and structure their relationships fairly well (though just like Ti, it can be a bit detached from the "reality" of the Fe in this case or by no means does it mean that Fi-dominants are better at relationships).

[hellothere]

Fe people pay more attention to the color of the fog, which is more variable, it changes all the time, it's dynamic. The colors of the fog and that of the laser beams are independent from each other; the laser beams have in principle nothing to do with the fog. But the Fe fog can both make the Fi beams more visible and mask their color - like a true laser beam.

Fe people - even Fe dominants with strong Fi - tend to use the color of the beams as enhanced by the color of the fog; Fi people - even with strong Fe - dislike it when the color of the fog flatly contradicts the color of the beam, when they are sure of it. They like to see the color of the beam without interference by the fog, so they prefer that the fog merely enhances the beam.

Okay had a second read of this - how are the colours of the fog and the laser beams independent? At the risk of taking the analogy too far - the color of the fog is influenced by the laser beams - how is the emotional atmosphere independent of the connection between the people involved?

Can the colour of the fog flatly contradict the colour of the beam when there are only two people involved?

And what exactly is the origin of the fog? You say the Fi bonds are determined by the level of agreement regarding the information being exchanged between two individuals. Can the "fog" exist when an individual is alone?

[Expat]

@Logos: all good points. I'm always pleased (seriously) when an Alpha sees what I'm trying to say.

Okay had a second read of this - how are the colours of the fog and the laser beams independent? At the risk of taking the analogy too far - the color of the fog is influenced by the laser beams - how is the emotional atmosphere independent of the connection between the people involved?

Can the colour of the fog flatly contradict the colour of the beam when there are only two people involved?

Well, first, as in everything in socionics -- there is never just Fi or just Fe, just like there is never just Ti or just Te. I find myself continuously repeating this point, because whenever I try to describe functions, in a way to underline their differences, inevitably someone will say "I am a Fi type and I am nothing like your description". The answer is always the same: because you are a Fi type, you are not the living incarnation of Fi. Duh.

Now to the first question --a good example is a situation where you go to a party (or whatever) and have a lot of genuine fun with two people you actually don't like or trust much, when you think about it, but you do see them as ideas companions of a night out. The positive Fe of the "party fog" masks, in that moment, but not totally, the not-so-positive laser beams.

Now, of course, if the laser beams are really really bad, that is, if you love parties but you absolutely can't stand those people, because you think they are bad people, then it won't work so well or at all.

Another situation is the opposite -- you totally trust and even admire a particular person, you'd do all you could for the person, but when you want to do some things that person is simply boring, or depressing, or whatever, so you avoid spending time with that person in those situations.

And what exactly is the origin of the fog? You say the Fi bonds are determined by the level of agreement regarding the information being exchanged between two individuals. Can the "fog" exist when an individual is alone?

If you are alone in a forest and you feel your spirits lifted by the landscape, the sounds, smells, etc, then that is also a fog.

[UDP]

Another Fi question(s)


What is it about Fi that reassures Te people? Particularly Fi and Te dominants. What do the two things take away from each other - why do they need each other? But more so, what is it that Fi has that Te types want/need? And how does the Fi type "give it" to them, etc?

[Expat]

Another Fi question(s)


What is it about Fi that reassures Te people? Particularly Fi and Te dominants. What do the two things take away from each other - why do they need each other? But more so, what is it that Fi has that Te types want/need? And how does the Fi type "give it" to them, etc?

Te: External Dynamics of Objects
Fi: Internal Statics of Fields

They complement each other perfectly.

[snegledmaca]

Another Fi question(s)


What is it about Fi that reassures Te people? Particularly Fi and Te dominants. What do the two things take away from each other - why do they need each other? But more so, what is it that Fi has that Te types want/need? And how does the Fi type "give it" to them, etc?

Te: External Dynamics of Objects
Fi: Internal Statics of Fields

They complement each other perfectly.

Ha, this amuses me, nothing to do with the topic, but if I was UDP and asked that question your answer would be this to me, the part about inexperienced reaction in that table. In essence, to me your response is void. I presume you now think the matter is closed, but to me it's just like you said nothing. I get this from you sometimes especially if I ask you things that require direct answers. It's like you give me nothing and behave as if you've given me everything I need. For example, how have you answered the question? There is no explanation of anything. You just presented some information, superficial if I may add, the he most likely already knows. There is no substance in that response. From my point of view that is. Well anyway, found it amusing as I was reminded of that type of situation where the otehr person misses the ball completely. Something I've recently been exposed to in an excessive manner.

[Expat]

In essence, to me your response is void. I presume you now think the matter is closed, but to me it's just like you said nothing.

That response was satyrical, I knew that I was saying nothing (sorry UDP). I know it's almost totally bullshit, the way it was posted.

I will get into "unhealthy Si" rant and confess that I'm very ill today, so I'm probably writing some nonsense, too.

@UDP: I will get to you, I promise.

[UDP]

That response was satyrical, I knew that I was saying nothing (sorry UDP). I know it's almost totally bullshit, the way it was posted.

I will get into "unhealthy Si" rant and confess that I'm very ill today, so I'm probably writing some nonsense, too.

@UDP: I will get to you, I promise.

Don't worry about it.
It is tedious to address the same thing over and over again...
(And in general, there seems to be a sense if dis-ease on the forum as of late)

[tcaudilllg]

@Expat: my experience of Fi is different than yours. You say that the bonds exist due to Fi, and further, that they are always there whether you pay attention to them or not. I would argue that your laser beam analogy is correct... but you don't just accept the beams outright; rather, it is the function of Te to CHOOSE from the available beams which to accept and which not to. (thus Te's role as the sealer of relationships) Now as a Te dominant type, you would argue that one should always accept the beams, whatever their flavor... but as a Te id type, I would argue that the beams should be accepted or denied based on their quality. Even if their quality is good, the beams themselves may not be relevant to your person because their color is irrelevant to yours. (though I certainly will keep their availability in mind; this is ideosyncracy.) Sometimes, though, the beams are in fact, already taken. This is what makes finding a good match so difficult for LIIs. ESEs are our perfect complement for that reason, because they are always on the lookout for a relationship that matches their Fi just so.

("Beam color"? My god, I'm sounding like Olga.... Well I suspected she was onto something somehow or another.)

[aka-kitsune]

When a laser beam is established between two individuals, information between them is exchanged. If there is agreement on a set of criteria between the two individuals, the laser beam will turn, let us say, blue. And if there is a great lack of agreement on such criteria, the laser beam will turn red. Intermediate levels of agreement lead to intermediate colors (yellow, green, etc). The color of the laser beams connecting them to other people is the most important reality of all for Fi types.

Q: Still a bit fuzzy on the "laser beam" analogy. What constitutes agreement on a "set of criteria" for an type? What kind of information exchange establishes criteria? Say you have an Fi creative and an Fe creative. How would these two individuals "agree" to produce a laser beam? Does the type determine the color of the laser beam on their own? It would seem to me that an type would keep looking for reassurance that things have not changed in a relationship. Therefore, they wouldn't ever assume the staticness of the bond especially lacking updated evidence.

[Expat]

Q: Still a bit fuzzy on the "laser beam" analogy. What constitutes agreement on a "set of criteria" for an type? What kind of information exchange establishes criteria?

For instance, when you agree on what makes a person loyal or disloyal, what means an unforgivable breach of trust and what means a minor mishap. What is "relatively harmless, social bullshit" and what is a blatant lie.

When you see the other person reacting so outraged at what someone else did, that the person says "I would kill him on the spot if I could get away with it" and you fully understand why. Or, less dramatically, the person totally cuts relations with someone else because of what the someone else did, and again, you fully understand why.

Or, on the contrary, you understand why the other person is forgiving and/or accepting of some actions by others.

Basically, it's about your criteria for defining whether a person is good or bad (or evil).

The criteria receive input from or , when it's about deciding whether the other person deserves a positive or negative laser beam.

Most typically - although not necessarily so - will tell that "oh there's a good heart inside him, I can bring it out - sort of Lisa with Nelson in the Simpsons. will give the harsh reality, as in "that Nelson is an asshole, nothing to be done with him".

Say you have an Fi creative and an Fe creative. How would these two individuals "agree" to produce a laser beam? Does the type determine the color of the laser beam on their own? It would seem to me that an type would keep looking for reassurance that things have not changed in a relationship. Therefore, they wouldn't ever assume the staticness of the bond especially lacking updated evidence.

My metaphor is about functions, not individuals. Individuals have both and .

But, having said that, I think your comments are on the right track.

[aka-kitsune]

Basically, it's about your criteria for defining whether a person is good or bad (or evil).

Ah... so what I'd generally refer to as shared "values".

Most typically - although not necessarily so - will tell that "oh there's a good heart inside him, I can bring it out - sort of Lisa with Nelson in the Simpsons. will give the harsh reality, as in "that Nelson is an asshole, nothing to be done with him".

Would this tendency go far as to prompt to ever attempt to overlook even what they themselves consider glaring violations of trust by another? ie: "This person just needs me to care about them more... they did X because they were hurting/insecure/etc."

My metaphor is about functions, not individuals. Individuals have both and .

But, having said that, I think your comments are on the right track.

Sorry, I meant to refer to individuals preferring one or the other function.

[Expat]

Would this tendency go far as to prompt to ever attempt to overlook even what they themselves consider glaring violations of trust by another? ie: "This person just needs me to care about them more... they did X because they were hurting/insecure/etc." .

I wouldn't phrase it like that, exactly, but broadly speaking, yes: this kind of thing is the sad side of Delta, which tends to bring them down. The unwillingness to acknowledge that some people deserve destruction, rather than an extended hand. Delta will often extend its hand just to have its arm pulled out of its socket.

But, in the precise way you phrased it, I could see it happening due to and , too. For different reasons, but with similar results.

[hellothere]

The unwillingness to acknowledge that some people deserve destruction, rather than an extended hand.

I don't think anyone "deserves destruction".

[Expat]

@Expat: my experience of Fi is different than yours. You say that the bonds exist due to Fi, and further, that they are always there whether you pay attention to them or not. I would argue that your laser beam analogy is correct... but you don't just accept the beams outright; rather, it is the function of Te to CHOOSE from the available beams which to accept and which not to. (thus Te's role as the sealer of relationships) Now as a Te dominant type, you would argue that one should always accept the beams, whatever their flavor... but as a Te id type, I would argue that the beams should be accepted or denied based on their quality. Even if their quality is good, the beams themselves may not be relevant to your person because their color is irrelevant to yours. (though I certainly will keep their availability in mind; this is ideosyncracy.) Sometimes, though, the beams are in fact, already taken. This is what makes finding a good match so difficult for LIIs. ESEs are our perfect complement for that reason, because they are always on the lookout for a relationship that matches their Fi just so.

Well, maybe; since Te and Fi always go together, what are you attributing to "dominant Te should always accept the beams" could be equally explained as Fi dual-seeking - or, perhaps more to the point, Te dominant and Fi dual-seeking are two sides of the same coin.

[Sabo]

Hmm... so would it be safe to say that Fi judges people based on ideals? In the case of + , how they should be, and in the case of + , how they could be? Trying to understand my PoLR better here...

[redbaron]

The unwillingness to acknowledge that some people deserve destruction, rather than an extended hand. Delta will often extend its hand just to have its arm pulled out of its socket.

But, in the precise way you phrased it, I could see it happening due to and , too. For different reasons, but with similar results.

Um yeah. that sounds like me. Like hellothere, I tend to think no one deserves destruction (yikes).

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[aut0]

I wouldn't phrase it like that, exactly, but broadly speaking, yes: this kind of thing is the sad side of Delta, which tends to bring them down. The unwillingness to acknowledge that some people deserve destruction, rather than an extended hand. Delta will often extend its hand just to have its arm pulled out of its socket.

But, in the precise way you phrased it, I could see it happening due to and , too. For different reasons, but with similar results.

By Delta do you just mean the NFs or do you mean the whole quadra? 'Cause I'll gladly acknowledge that there are some people who aren't worth saving, and I'm sure quite a few of my fellow cynical ISTp friends would agree.

[tcaudilllg]

From what I can tell, -Fi is very adept with socionics. Particularly, -Fi sees (I'm using Hitta's definition) the bad sides in other and in onself, and asks what can be done about it. (ESI) -Fi people try to overcome their own weaknesses by reaching out to others. What I think is interesting, is that thanks to socionics a -Ti person can appraise their own weaknesses scientifically, and consciously counter them. However, a -Ti model will never quite match the fullness of what -Fi sees: the socionics-aware alpha rational will attempt to better themselves, only to fall prey to deeper vices that no one has yet imagined.

[Expat]

Hmm... so would it be safe to say that Fi judges people based on ideals? In the case of + , how they should be, and in the case of + , how they could be? Trying to understand my PoLR better here...

You're trying to understand it by over-simplifying it (which is often the case when dealing with PoLRs). I think is always about "how they should be", but is about "and they have the potential to get there" and is about "I see them as they are".

By Delta do you just mean the NFs or do you mean the whole quadra? 'Cause I'll gladly acknowledge that there are some people who aren't worth saving, and I'm sure quite a few of my fellow cynical ISTp friends would agree.

And I'm quite sure a few INFjs would agree, too. Socionics is not even supposed to be so black-and-white. Especially when we start to talk about 4 quadras, rather than 16 types.

As everything in socionics, it's about relative inclinations, especially in comparison to other quadras.