I need someone to set the record straight for me on Fe vs Fi

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritsa

Even when Delta NF can not help we turn to each other and express our sympathies We say "I feel so bad about him. Look at his condition. What can be done?" I'm feeling so much pain from what I'm seeing." Because of values "no one human should be in that condition"

---

I feel it is very human to feel that way and not only NFs can feel it. I would probably express it differently if asked how I really feel. Most people can relate to, "I feel so bad about their situation". I can say that and be understood. If I say something like, "I feel this person is here to teach me something about compassion and how we are all connected in energy." some people will dismiss it as nonsense right away.

I might feel some sadness for the person but I do not pity them. I see them as another expression of energy manifest to experience itself in a human form. That does not go over well with everyone. It is a choice whether I help them or not. I do choose to help, in most cases, because I put myself in their place and remember the times someone reached out and helped me when I was in a "bad" place. A stranger who just walked up to me and gave me something that made a difference. They didn't know me so how did they know to give me "that". The boy who saved me when no one else noticed I was drowning in a pool filled with people. How he disappeared back into the water and didn't seek any recognition for saving my life.

All these things flood my mind when I see someone who I just know is in need of something that, in that moment, I can easily provide. I will not turn my back when I get a strong impulse to do something. Maybe it is intuition. Maybe it is something else but I cannot ignore the call to do it. The times I did ignore it, I had a sick feeling that I may have done the wrong thing. I am trying to pay attention to that inner voice that guides me. I spent too many years trying to find ways to turn it off. It is part of my conscience/consciousness and it will nag at me if I do not listen. It does not guilt me though. It is gentle. I can guilt myself enough and somehow it is the voice of reason when I am being too hard on myself. I am not even sure why I tried to drown it out for so long. Things go way more smoothly when I just listen to my intuition, like with my ionizer disaster. I should always be trusting it unless someone gives me good reason not to. Then I can get a better sense of what is based on intuition and what is just based on pure unfiltered feelings. I do not always trust my feelings to be the best judge in most situations. Feelings can be tricksters, in my experience. :content:

Oh, and I actually prefer it when this stuff happens with strangers sometimes. I get a sense of something greater than all its parts. It is an in the moment thing and I need to be more in the moment sometimes. It is harder than it looks, for me. That is why I am drawn to in the moment people. They act fast and with purpose. I look for meaning sometimes before acting which can make me miss the moment entirely.

Hillman, a once-Jungian, wrote something that is similar to a socionics assumption, namely that usually the Fe-type has a good Fi command and vice versa.

I agree a lot with defining Fe/Fi as ethics of emotion and ethics of relation, but I tend to share your OP's attitude towards the problems in how ethics of relation is often characterized, in that it is quite artificial often, since how does "maintaining good relations" or whatever really differ from "maintaining a good atmosphere" or whatever.

My view tends to be that, to the extent we are viewing them solely through the lens of ethics, the differences aren't going to show as much (duh, because ethical judgment is what they have in common, and strong ethical orientation, aka being an F type, is what forces one to be strong if the other is strong).
The more holistic we are, including things like the Te-Fi complementary nature, the static-ness of say, Ne+Fi, and so on, the more you get a picture for how Fi types look different.

One simple way of just reminding oneself of the difference is that F is involved and judgment-oriented, and because Fe is meant to stand in positive relation with objects, it is characterized as ethics of emotions (that is, emphasizing the evaluative valence associated to an object having capacity to affect/change emotive arousal, as opposed to an ethics of constraint on the ways/framework within which one can process such valence, which would be closer to "how I relate to things" and so on). Roughly Fi is responsible for defining the framework/coherency constraints for processing involvement in the same spirit Ti is outside the ethical sphere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritsa

That's the same with my EIE friend. She will never see the opportunity to help. But compared to me when I cat sat for her I saw how bare her couches were and I gave her two blue and cream colored pillows to accent them I told her "these will make your couch comfortable and warm." She thanked me, was very polite but not empathetic in the same manner as I am. When I told her I had to walk to her house in monsoon like rain for a week twice a day to care for her kitties she gave no response. No warmth and said nothing. I would have expected something like a hug and "Oh. I'm so sorry, Maritsa. I didn't know." But she is a nice person in her own way.

Later on she asked me if I wanted the pillows back. I thought that was so strange because I didn't give them with that intention, why would I or anyone do that. I gave them because it would make her, her husband, her home, her friends, family, company, inviting and comfortable.

---

Too bad you don't live closer Mari, you would make a perfect babysitter for my cat this summer ; )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msnobody

isnt being pleasant fitting to social standards :D

---

Good remark, as the definitions by Sol are too simple to be meaningful. In fact, one could easy argue the orher way around, i.e. Fi = to be worthy and Fe= to be pleasant. It all depends on what it means to be pleasant or worthy. E.g. I've said in my own blog that Fe types judge emotions (pleasant?), whereas Fi types judge people (=worthy?).

I've been for a while now trying to reconcile the institutional aspects of Socionics with institutional theories of sociology, but so far have not arrived yet at something satisfactory. Fe and Fi should not be seen seperate from Ti and Te respectively, and I think that Fi/Te and Fe/Ti have important sociological implications for theories on institutions. If we are to understand the differences between Fi and Fe, we need to start thinking into that direction.

I've noticed that Fi valuing people are constantly going on about how you should and shouldn't treat people universally. Fi seems unwilling to meet the emotional energy where Fe will. If you yell at Fi (dom especially), they won't yell back but remain calm. Fe will yell right back i.e. meet your emotional energy. For example, I'm riding in the car with an EII and this older guy on a motorized bike is on the wrong side of the road coming towards us. She stops and he yells "go around me, get the fuck out of the way!". She says to me very calmly, "I'm pretty sure I'm on the right side of the road". My reply in that situation would've been me yelling out the window at him "you get out of the fucking way asshole. You're the dumbass on the wrong side of the road." I would've met his emotional energy whereas the EII would consciously feel an emotion or feeling about what he said and how he said it and make a universal moral statement 'you don't talk to people that way'.

They, Fi, seem to take everything personally, which seems arrogant to me. Maybe Fe has a way of justifying and rationalizing emotionally charged behaviors. Another example with the same EII. She had emailed a woman in charge of a neurological group she was interested in attending. Nearly a year later, the woman still hadn't replied back. She says to me very calmly, "you don't treat people like that". Me, however, I'm thinking 'obviously this woman (in charge of the group) needs an assistant if it's taking this long to reply to emails. Either that or the email never made it to her.' Personally, I wouldn't have waited a year for a reply. I would've emailed her again or tried to find another contact method. I wouldn't take her not replying personal as I have no concrete way of knowing whether or not that's true. For all I know the woman could've died.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weirdleftovers

I've noticed that Fi valuing people are constantly going on about how you should and shouldn't treat people universally. Fi seems unwilling to meet the emotional energy where Fe will. If you yell at Fi (dom especially), they won't yell back but remain calm. Fe will yell right back i.e. meet your emotional energy. For example, I'm riding in the car with an EII and this older guy on a motorized bike is on the wrong side of the road coming towards us. She stops and he yells "go around me, get the fuck out of the way!". She says to me very calmly, "I'm pretty sure I'm on the right side of the road". My reply in that situation would've been me yelling out the window at him "you get out of the fucking way asshole. You're the dumbass on the wrong side of the road." I would've met his emotional energy whereas the EII would consciously feel an emotion or feeling about what he said and how he said it and make a universal moral statement 'you don't talk to people that way'.

They, Fi, seem to take everything personally, which seems arrogant to me. Maybe Fe has a way of justifying and rationalizing emotionally charged behaviors. Another example with the same EII. She had emailed a woman in charge of a neurological group she was interested in attending. Nearly a year later, the woman still hadn't replied back. She says to me very calmly, "you don't treat people like that". Me, however, I'm thinking 'obviously this woman (in charge of the group) needs an assistant if it's taking this long to reply to emails. Either that or the email never made it to her.' Personally, I wouldn't have waited a year for a reply. I would've emailed her again or tried to find another contact method. I wouldn't take her not replying personal as I have no concrete way of knowing whether or not that's true. For all I know the woman could've died.

---

I think this is pretty much all true. However, I do think Fe egos make normative statements as well especially considering they value Ti. Many of them seem to have strong opinions as to what is and is not proper conduct in a situation e.g. "Don't say that because it will make the person feel bad". It does tend to center around how the person 'feels' in that moment though. The only reason i'm so confident of this is due to the few times i was chastised by at least one EIE in high school and before.

I have read through most of this thread and the record isn't getting any straighter. Most of the behaviors described, I have seen in many different types, while not even contradicting their types. I have been through this Fi vs Fe kind of thing before, in another thread. For me, it is kind of like, I know it when I see it. Describing it is a whole different matter. Maybe we need more Fi and Fe doms to share their perspective. :indifferent:

http://vinylgif.com/gifs/201411/spinning-blue-vinyl.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Contra

I think this is pretty much all true. However, I do think Fe egos make normative statements as well especially considering they value Ti. Many of them seem to have strong opinions as to what is and is not proper conduct in a situation e.g. "Don't say that because it will make the person feel bad". It does tend to center around how the person 'feels' in that moment though. The only reason i'm so confident of this is due to the few times i was chastised by at least one EIE in high school and before.

---

I agree. Fe/Ti seems to produce situational ethics (there is a personal motive behind it) with Fi/Te producing universal ethics (more altruistic). Given the right situation, both may come to the same conclusion for behavior but for different reasons, as you stated.

My Fe EIE mother can appear VERY generous and charitable, but it's because she's trying to buy friends, impress people or appear wealthy. She's the type who only gives if there's a crowd. If she can't brag about helping, she's usually not interested. She has a selfish, personal motive. My Fi dom friend is charitable because she believes in helping those in need if you can help. She doesn't brag about her charity. However, these aren't really examples of Fe/Fi, but more enneagram.

Absurdly general examples of Fe vs Fi helped me distinguish the two, but I think it's because I'm a subconscious thinker. What I'm noticing about typology is sensors and intuitives need information explained differently. I've noticed a lot of sensors able to clearly pick up on nuance in dichotomies where intuitives need the dichotomies explained with less subtly and more black/white. This has become truly noticeable in type testing. All my sensor friends test correctly first try. All my intuitive friends test several times, mistype and struggle typing.

*Disclaimer I am speaking only to my observations from both real life and online encounters with people. What I notice is specific only to myself and is not intended as a universal truth*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weirdleftovers

I agree. Fe/Ti seems to produce situational ethics (there is a personal motive behind it) with Fi/Te producing universal ethics (more altruistic). Given the right situation, both may come to the same conclusion for behavior but for different reasons, as you stated.

My Fe EIE mother can appear VERY generous and charitable, but it's because she's trying to buy friends, impress people or appear wealthy. She's the type who only gives if there's a crowd. If she can't brag about helping, she's usually not interested. She has a selfish, personal motive. My Fi dom friend is charitable because she believes in helping those in need if you can help. She doesn't brag about her charity. However, these aren't really examples of Fe/Fi, but more enneagram.

---

Do you pick up on the universal ethics in my writing?

So what I'm thinking at this point is that Fe types prefer an atmosphere where they can be outspoken about their opinions and judgments regardless of the impact they may have on others feelings, while Fi types prefer to suppress attitudes and judgments towards people that they think will be detrimental to their relationships with others. Make sense given how Fe is an extroverted elements and therefore the one's ethical judgments are pushed outwards toward the environment, while Fi is an introverted function and therefore ethical judgments are kept within.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddytextures

So what I'm thinking at this point is that Fe types prefer an atmosphere where they can be outspoken about their opinions and judgments regardless of the impact they may have on others feelings, while Fi types prefer to suppress attitudes and judgments towards people that they think will be detrimental to their relationships with others. Make sense given how Fe is an extroverted elements and therefore the one's ethical judgments are pushed outwards toward the environment, while Fi is an introverted function and therefore ethical judgments are kept within.

---

Fe "Motive" - FeNi, FeSi
External behavior or cues belie the inner disposition or motive.


Motive for Fe type would be to appear prestigious, belong to the group, they may give to a cause that they care about but as a reflection of the society of membership or membership to that society.


Fi "Relation" - FiNe, FiSe
Relations exist between people and things of differing bonds of attraction or repulsion
ethical interconnections changed between individuals

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weirdleftovers

I agree. Fe/Ti seems to produce situational ethics (there is a personal motive behind it) with Fi/Te producing universal ethics (more altruistic). Given the right situation, both may come to the same conclusion for behavior but for different reasons, as you stated.

My Fe EIE mother can appear VERY generous and charitable, but it's because she's trying to buy friends, impress people or appear wealthy. She's the type who only gives if there's a crowd. If she can't brag about helping, she's usually not interested. She has a selfish, personal motive. My Fi dom friend is charitable because she believes in helping those in need if you can help. She doesn't brag about her charity. However, these aren't really examples of Fe/Fi, but more enneagram.

---

My relationship with other people may be personal. When I see someone suffer I see that person as a member of my team, my person, it's personal and not a part of a society.

I often argue with ESE that I care about people while they say they can live in a planet where there are 7 billion fewer people.

ESE: "I will donate to a cause or organization that has nothing to do with people."
Me: "but you are a person"
ESE: "I know. I'm ashamed of myself"


In my cat example with EIE; the simple interconnected rules are I take care of your cat and you show some appreciation. :) Otherwise I read that as ungratefulness.

I believe that :Fe:-types have higher levels of Agreeableness than :Fi:-types, and that :Fi:-types are more likely to show their affection or charity through consistent displays, and being "cold" rather than "hot" in terms of their action. They are more likely to pick their moment to act (and seemingly be choosy), and there will be a degree of energy conservation by comparison.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritsa

True but Jung explained this humanitarian tendencies in Te types

I asked my ESE sister "would you give money to a family member for food and how does this make you feel?"

She said "always give money for food" again I asked how it made her feel and after thinking about it she gave a very Fe response which it "it always feels good to give"

My response would have been personal, like "I (the "I") felt good about myself when I gave"

---

I don't see why either of those responses would be more personal than the other: both refer to how the individual "feels". I think on the surface, "it always feels good to give" seems less self-centred than "I felt good about myself when I gave", although both are self-referential (I think it is a question of how abstract you see each example).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddytextures

So what I'm thinking at this point is that Fe types prefer an atmosphere where they can be outspoken about their opinions and judgments regardless of the impact they may have on others feelings, while Fi types prefer to suppress attitudes and judgments towards people that they think will be detrimental to their relationships with others. Make sense given how Fe is an extroverted elements and therefore the one's ethical judgments are pushed outwards toward the environment, while Fi is an introverted function and therefore ethical judgments are kept within.

---

I don't think this is true: The thing with Fe valuing types is that they try to synchronize their feelings in a process of group creation and maintenance. Think of Durkheim's concept of social currents. Within such an understanding of Fe, certain types of expression, including emotional expression, must be repressed. Look at today's social media, where persons with unwelcome opinions, are emotionally lynched by group formed indignation. An Fe type that wants to express a particular opinion on an emotional carrier-wave, will not do so if they expect mass resistance to their ideas, especially if this resistance comes from other Fe types or an Fe based group (yes, Fe valuing types do not always automatically like each other if they belong to different groups).

I've wrote about the social purpose of Fe in this blog:

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...n-eie-lsi.html

Likewise, Fi types will voice their ethical judgements when they feel safe to do so.

Fe is more about creating relationships, it is more inclusive, whereas Fi is about selecting relationships, more aimed at the distinctive. A subtle but important difference. To put it differently: an Fe type forcing their emotions on you does so to make you toe the line, an Fi type who forces their emotions on you does so to make you feel bad and drive you away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weirdleftovers

I've noticed that Fi valuing people are constantly going on about how you should and shouldn't treat people universally. Fi seems unwilling to meet the emotional energy where Fe will. If you yell at Fi (dom especially), they won't yell back but remain calm. Fe will yell right back i.e. meet your emotional energy. For example, I'm riding in the car with an EII and this older guy on a motorized bike is on the wrong side of the road coming towards us. She stops and he yells "go around me, get the fuck out of the way!". She says to me very calmly, "I'm pretty sure I'm on the right side of the road". My reply in that situation would've been me yelling out the window at him "you get out of the fucking way asshole. You're the dumbass on the wrong side of the road." I would've met his emotional energy whereas the EII would consciously feel an emotion or feeling about what he said and how he said it and make a universal moral statement 'you don't talk to people that way'.

They, Fi, seem to take everything personally, which seems arrogant to me. Maybe Fe has a way of justifying and rationalizing emotionally charged behaviors. Another example with the same EII. She had emailed a woman in charge of a neurological group she was interested in attending. Nearly a year later, the woman still hadn't replied back. She says to me very calmly, "you don't treat people like that". Me, however, I'm thinking 'obviously this woman (in charge of the group) needs an assistant if it's taking this long to reply to emails. Either that or the email never made it to her.' Personally, I wouldn't have waited a year for a reply. I would've emailed her again or tried to find another contact method. I wouldn't take her not replying personal as I have no concrete way of knowing whether or not that's true. For all I know the woman could've died.

---

Fwiw...I don't relate to the Fi description & I'm Fi lead.

I absolutely yell back if someone yells & I'm persistent with asking for follow-up should something I deem important not be answered.

Dunno.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackburry

Fwiw...I don't relate to the Fi description & I'm Fi lead.

I absolutely yell back if someone yells & I'm persistent with asking for follow-up should something I deem important not be answered.

Dunno.

---

What you probably need to realize here is that this is how weirdleftovers perceives Fi in general. Just like how Fi types are inclined to interpret Fe from an Fi perspective. I don't see Fi they way weirdleftover does either, but I can certainly imagine that this is how it looks to her. Between the lines of her interpretation, I can see that the underlying facts actually make sense. (I hope this is not a PoLR hit ;-) )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackburry

Fwiw...I don't relate to the Fi description & I'm Fi lead.

I absolutely yell back if someone yells & I'm persistent with asking for follow-up should something I deem important not be answered.

Dunno.

---

Yes, this is kind of what I was waiting for. More Fi (and Fe) doms. My experience with ESI, with their creative Se, is that they will meet you on your level, whatever it may be. Even the most "high minded" ESI will not let you insult them and get away with it, unless they are depressed or something else is going on and they can't be bothered to respond. An EII I know will as well, if she is in a particularly bad mood or you threaten her family. Otherwise she tries to maintain calm and use a soft voice at all times. She is a 9.

My ESI, ex roommate, (I was maybe 20 at the time) was once described as bull in a china shop if you made her angry. She was great to have around when I was being more diplomatic and playful (read intoxicated and silly) when trying to deal with obnoxious jerks in a club. She would basically step in and tell them to fuck off me. Pulling me away or even pushing them away if she had to. I was pretty relieved when she did. She never let people take advantage of me when we were young, even though she was a couple years younger than me. I was basically raising her. We actually worked well together before I got a bf who came between us. With some people she would tell me, "you handle this".

My ESI aunt would absolutely yell back and then continue to rant about the person for a long time after.

If someone yells at me when I am driving I will also match their energy, if I'm in a bad mood. I don't yell though. I get self conscious when I yell because my mom was a yeller when we were kids. I didn't like it when she did it so I try not to do it. I will respond to them with gestures, facial expressions and some driving maneuvers of my own.

I probably get a bit more stubborn and refuse to meet their request right away. I take my time. If I am in a good mood I make fun of them and make a bit of a a show laughing at them then shrugging my shoulders. Thing is, it is likely that they will ruin my mood if I am alone in the car. If someone else is with me, and they are a chill or upbeat person, I don't get so irritated and my Fi stays in check. I will maintain the energy in the car rather than let an idiot driver ruin it for those with me. I have also been the one to calm down someone in my car when I thought it would escalate while we were trapped in traffic or something. I didn't want my friends going to jail or getting shot over something stupid.

My IEI brother is a bit different than me. He will say something goofy like, "oh yeah, fuck you too buddy". I am more likely call the an idiot, if I actually have an opportunity to say something to them (windows already down).

An EIE-Ni I know is more likely to yell back but not exactly match the other person's energy. They can sort of dominate it. They do it with a flare that I can't. It has some force behind it too but they do it in a more playful way. Like asking the person "what's the matter, baby, you got a stick up your ass?" I don't have much experience with EIE-Fe.

My ESE sister is probably the one pissing off other drivers but not intentionally, usually. :shifty: It is the way she drives sometimes. She is pretty good at handling drunk people since she is a bartender and her Fe is very useful there.

So many different ways Fi and Fe can be expressed.

I found this yesterday and it seemed like it was a pretty good description of how Fi and Fe might manifest. It is not from an MBTI site. I am going to post their link and test in another thread.

Quote:

---

Feeling


Feeling is an affective, sentimental function. It involves judging the value of things or having an opinion about them on the basis of our likes and dislikes. Experiences are therefore evaluated in terms of good and bad, pleasant or unpleasant, acceptable or unacceptable.

The Extraverted Feeling Type

Extraverted feeling is based upon accepted or traditional social values and opinions. It involves a conforming, adjusting response to objective circumstances that strives for harmonious relations with the world. Because it depends so much on external stimuli rather than upon true subjective preferences, such feeling can sometimes seem cold, 'unfeeling', artificial or put on for effect.

The extraverted feeling type follows fashion and seeks to harmonize personal feelings with general social values. Thinking is always subordinate to feeling and is ignored or repressed if intellectual conclusions fail to confirm the convictions of the heart. When this type is extreme or neurotic, feeling may become gushing or extravagant and dependent upon momentary enthusiasms that may quickly turn about with changing circumstances. Such a person may therefore seem hysterical, fickle, moody or even to be suffering from multiple personality. Repressed thinking may also erupt in infantile, negative, obsessive ways. This can lead to the attribution of dreaded characteristics to the very objects or people that are most loved and valued.

The Introverted Feeling Type

Introverted feeling strives for an inner intensity that is unrelated to any external object. It devalues objective reality and is rarely displayed openly. When it does appear on the surface, it generally seems negative or indifferent. The focus of such feeling is upon inner processes and latent, primordial images. At its extreme, it may develop into mystical ecstasy.

The introverted feeling type is brooding and inaccessible, although may also hide behind a childish mask. Such a person aims to be inconspicuous, makes little attempt to impress and generally fails to respond to the feelings of others. The outer, surface appearance is often neutral, cold and dismissive. Inwardly, however, feelings are deep, passionately intense, and may accompany secret religious or poetic tendencies. The effect of all this on other people can be stifling and oppressive. When extreme or neurotic, this type may become domineering and vain. Negative repressed thinking may also be projected so that these persons may imagine they can know what others are thinking. This may develop into paranoia and into secret scheming rivalries.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackburry

Fwiw...I don't relate to the Fi description & I'm Fi lead.

I absolutely yell back if someone yells & I'm persistent with asking for follow-up should something I deem important not be answered.

Dunno.

---

I wouldn't yell back because I feel like someone yelling something is very concerned about something and really wants you to get mobilized and listen up. I'm more likely to listen more attentively and carefully to someone who yells abruptly and mobilize for action or take action than to freeze and do nothing. I know SEE who just freeze and are puzzled or taken aback by other's screaming at them.

But then yelling is not Se and response or no response to it doesn't indicate weak or devalued Se either.

Everyone can be brought to yell depending upon their mood, extenuating circumstances, their health and other factors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by consentingadult

What you probably need to realize here is that this is how weirdleftovers perceives Fi in general. Just like how Fi types are inclined to interpret Fe from an Fi perspective. I don't see Fi they way weirdleftover does either, but I can certainly imagine that this is how it looks to her. Between the lines of her interpretation, I can see that the underlying facts actually make sense. (I hope this is not a PoLR hit ;-) )

---

This is probably true. My own view of Fi, for the longest, was that it was overly judgmental and not as accepting as Fe. I have also started noticing when I use my demonstrative function since joining this site. I didn't realize how judgy I could also be. I just voiced it differently or not at all. :indifferent:

I tend to use it just as predicted by socionics in the demonstrative way which is why I have not totally dismissed this theory and walked away.

Quote:

---

Fi as Demonstrative Function

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.

---

rather than:

Quote:

---

Fi as Leading Function

The individual sees reality primarily through static personal ethics and stable interpersonal bonds between individuals, including himself, where the status of such interpersonal bonds is determined by his personal ethics. The individual is very confident in evaluating the ethical or moral qualities, and their consistency, of other people. This makes the individual seem "judgemental" or "self-righteous" to people less so inclined. If he has difficulty in deciding the status of a personal relationship, he will take action to try to reach a conclusion but if that continues to elude him, he will regard the relationship as not worth it. His own sense of constancy in personal ethics and in his relationships with others is a very strong factor in his sense of self-worth. Fi in this position implies the ability to almost instantly recognize whether someone is a friend or an enemy, whether they are demonstrating good will or ill will, and whether they are drawn to or repelled by the individual.

---

My perception of Fi is primarily based on my sister and my aunt, both seemed very judgemental and self righteous to me, in very different ways, even as a child. My sister was gentler about it or maybe more passive aggressive. When I first read about Fi doms (when I joined the forum) I was like, "whoah, that pretty much explains it". I started feeling more remorse for the times I dismissed their feelings, especially in my teens. I wanted to tell them about this. I did tell my sister many times I was sorry even before socionics and we had a great discussion of this when she was here last. I got to talk to my aunt about things before she died and we parted on very good terms. I just didn't have any socionics knowledge then. <-- [Edit: seems I didn't even need it.]

I have reminded myself of this every time I view my sister as being morally/ethically self righteous or preachy. She is actually getting better at it too, using whatever method or tools she is learning. I use socionics and she uses a lot of the methods suggested by the self help gurus. I did not hold the view that she was all self righteous and judgmental, all the time though. Only when she did things like stop eating meat and then guilting the rest of us when we didn't. Sending me articles on animal cruelty and whatnot. I feel like I understand her more now, than ever. I don't get the same twinges I used to get from Fi doms, when I first joined. I am way more understanding of them in those moments where I used to just feel twinges of annoyance. Not that I don't get them anymore because I still do but they are more fleeting than ever. I feel this is progress.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Person

Thank you Aylen. These definitions of Fi and Fe have already been described in psychology, whether it is Jung, Aushra or Reinin (which I posted here,) they are each meeting the similar phenomenon.

:Fi: the relation, the resonance and connection to things/people, the true attraction/repulsion. Aylen's description "This feeling (at the core) is actually unrelated to any external object. The focus of such feeling is on the inner processes and latent, primordial images. In other words, it externally appears to be focused on finding the ideal image or thing with which to connect, but in reality it is focused internally on them." Jung's real description and point: seeking a connection/relation with the authentic likes/dislikes of oneself, while devaluing most other externals, is the full realm of Fi. "It devalues objective reality and is rarely displayed openly." -Jung

:Fe: the gauging and connection to the emotions of others, their values and objective feeling values, the attention to the external realm of feeling. Aylen's description: "This feeling is based upon either accepted or traditional social values. It involves an adjusting response to objective circumstances that strives for harmonious relations with the world. It depends much on external stimuli rather than upon true subjective preferences." -Jung

---

Something has finally clicked for me and I can now express it in words. I went to bed thinking about this thread and woke up with some clarity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDSPwexlyTo

I am not sure if it will last because just when I think I got it, life has a way of saying, "nope, not yet but you're closer". I have probably cycled through these same conclusions (in different terms) so many times but each time I learn a bit more. I think I arrogantly stated I knew my socionics a few months after joining this site. I didn't but I did get some insights.

:lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by consentingadult

What you probably need to realize here is that this is how weirdleftovers perceives Fi in general. Just like how Fi types are inclined to interpret Fe from an Fi perspective. I don't see Fi they way weirdleftover does either, but I can certainly imagine that this is how it looks to her. Between the lines of her interpretation, I can see that the underlying facts actually make sense. (I hope this is not a PoLR hit ;-) )

---

"Underlying facts." Using the words "facts" loosely, I see.
http://static1.gamespot.com/uploads/...1997-40683.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackburry

"Underlying facts." Using the words "facts" loosely, I see.
http://static1.gamespot.com/uploads/...1997-40683.jpg

---

Obviously: we can all perceive 'facts', but they are meaningless without interpretation. And that's where all of us make serious mistakes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackburry

Fwiw...I don't relate to the Fi description & I'm Fi lead.

I absolutely yell back if someone yells & I'm persistent with asking for follow-up should something I deem important not be answered.

Dunno.

---

I don't think you're suppose to relate to this example. This is specific to her and me. Not yelling and being rude is her universal truth regarding how one should respond to another. I don't have such reality. I respond to others on a situational, case by case basis. I'm showing Fi vs Fe only within the example as it pertains to the individuals in the example.

Gamma and Delta Fis are also different due to other valued functions. Delta's Fi and Ne work together and Gammas Fi works with Se. This particular EII is married to an ILI and their response to things is very interesting and causes constant bickering. He would and has met people's emotional level of aggression. Whenever he does this, though, she quickly tells him 'you shouldn't talk that way. that's not nice.' etc.

To me, Deltas have a policing nature whether they're telling others what to do in general (STs) or morally (NFs). Gammas are more focused on intelligence/status/money and become aggressive when those aspects are involved.

Also, when I speak of types, I am ONLY speaking about people I actually known and interact with. I'm generalizing and coming to conclusions about my personal experiences only. I don't expect others to fit into my construct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritsa

In my cat example with EIE; the simple interconnected rules are I take care of your cat and you show some appreciation. :) Otherwise I read that as ungratefulness.

---

I had to find that post first. It seems to me that you and a few other EIIs I know recognize appreciation and gratefulness in verbal and physical forms. You want the person to verbally express how they feel about what you've done 'thank you so much for thinking of my well-being, it makes me feel loved'. Not sure if that's accurate?

I and other Betas I know, we recognize appreciation by action since "you can make your mouth say anything". For example, if I organize 5yrs worth of a friend's bills and important documents, them saying "thank you so much" means nothing to me. However, if they maintain the organization I've started, I feel they are showing appreciation. To not do so is a slap in the face to me since to me it shows I wasted my time. Not sure if you've seen the show Hoarders, but it's similar to the crew who spends time, money and effort cleaning these people's homes only to return 6 months later to a new hoarding mess.

With the EIE, I could see her feeling offended by you decorating her home without permission as it infers you thought her space wasn't adequate to begin since Fe/Ni are subconscious thinking and valuing people. Or, she could find your efforts over-reaching to decorate her home according to your tastes. It's not about the surface but all the implications. I recall a post of yours regarding giving an SLE a compliment and him not seeming to take it well. I can see that. It's like when my EII friend discovered that I could not only knit but taught myself in a few days, she said "wow, that's amazing! You're an incredible woman". I understood she was being kind, but to my ego, it's mildly inferring that she didn't already know I was incredible. Us betas are fairly to very arrogant in general, so to infer you're just now realizing how amazing we are (aristocracy: the rule of the best) is offensive even when it's not intended.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weirdleftovers

I had to find that post first. It seems to me that you and a few other EIIs I know recognize appreciation and gratefulness in verbal and physical forms. You want the person to verbally express how they feel about what you've done 'thank you so much for thinking of my well-being, it makes me feel loved'. Not sure if that's accurate?

I and other Betas I know, we recognize appreciation by action since "you can make your mouth say anything". For example, if I organize 5yrs worth of a friend's bills and important documents, them saying "thank you so much" means nothing to me. However, if they maintain the organization I've started, I feel they are showing appreciation. To not do so is a slap in the face to me since to me it shows I wasted my time. Not sure if you've seen the show Hoarders, but it's similar to the crew who spends time, money and effort cleaning these people's homes only to return 6 months later to a new hoarding mess.

With the EIE, I could see her feeling offended by you decorating her home without permission as it infers you thought her space wasn't adequate to begin since Fe/Ni are subconscious thinking and valuing people. Or, she could find your efforts over-reaching to decorate her home according to your tastes. It's not about the surface but all the implications. I recall a post of yours regarding giving an SLE a compliment and him not seeming to take it well. I can see that. It's like when my EII friend discovered that I could not only knit but taught myself in a few days, she said "wow, that's amazing! You're an incredible woman". I understood she was being kind, but to my ego, it's mildly inferring that she didn't already know I was incredible. Us betas are fairly to very arrogant in general, so to infer you're just now realizing how amazing we are (aristocracy: the rule of the best) is offensive even when it's not intended.

---

This is a very valuable post.

I was talking to an IEI the other day about her dating experiences (or lack thereof), and I told her that I thought she shouldn't have any trouble, since she is intelligent, talented, and has a good job. She thanked me for the compliment in a completely dismissive way, as if it meant nothing. I now see why she did that. Personally, being an Fi-valuer myself, I never say something if I don't believe it is true. But, apparently, Betas can do that and do.

I once asked my LII sister what she thought was the worst characteristic of our IEI cousin, and she said it was her lying. This puzzled me at the time, but I can now see how "Fe going along to get along" could sometimes be interpreted as lying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adam Strange

I once asked my LII sister what she thought was the worst characteristic of our IEI cousin, and she said it was her lying. This puzzled me at the time, but I can now see how "Fe going along to get along" could sometimes be interpreted as lying.

---

IEIs and SEIs are, like any type, capable of lying, but more in general they are simply "lying the truth". AKA Mobilizing-Ti. Memory is not their strongest point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by consentingadult

IEIs and SEIs are, like any type, capable of lying, but more in general they are simply "lying the truth". AKA Mobilizing-Ti. Memory is not their strongest point.

---

This made me laugh.

This reminded me that know an EII and an SEI, who I often thought were on the border of pathological lying. Both have completely outgrown it. It was mostly teen girl stuff for the EII (who was going through some really rough times) and for the SEI, into her mid 20s.

Anyway, I can't count how many times I thought I did or said something that I promised to do but only to find out later that I only imagined it. In certain situations arguing my side of it and getting indignant, until I realized I was wrong. Then making a "space cadet" joke about myself to smooth it over. :doh:

Meaning: my imagination is pretty powerful and sometimes the line of what I thought I did or said is often blurred. It literally feels like it happened in an objective way and not just subjectively.

An example of this is, I might say I am going to send you some information. I am focused on the information. I might even read it over myself, again, to refresh my memory and see if it is really relevant. I get distracted by something else. Some time passes and the person asks, "hey did you forget you were sending me something?" I might say that I did send it. In my mind I sent it. I went through all the steps involved but only in my mind. This has happened mostly in times of stress or when I am really busy.

I didn't mean to break a promise or not follow through. The line was blurred. If they remind me again, I will make sure I follow through. Sometimes all it takes is one reminder for me to follow through on stuff like that. If they even suggest I am lying though, I will not follow through. People who know me already expect there might be times that this will happen and they are cool with it. They will just send me a text or something if they are still interested in whatever I said I was going to send. Any accusation that I am lying, when I sincerely believe I did it, will not be taken well.

I aim for truthfulness and consistency when it comes to my beliefs and actions, which is strongly connected to authentic expression. I don't particularly see it as a lie when you omit information that would intentionally hurt someone's feelings and nothing good would come of it. If my friend loves some inanimate object, and I hate it, I will probably just say something about it without actually saying I hate it. A work of art is not going to hurt them but me insulting their taste might.

I usually know when someone is lying to me and have learned to accept that that is where they are at in that timeframe, most likely due to fear. I already know the truth and probably did my research to confirm it, if I think it is something important and impacts me or my family directly. I don't want to accuse someone of lying without back up to support it. I might just let them have their lie, if it harms no one, or make fun of it and let them know it's ok, I won't be mad, if I think it is silly that they even think they have to lie to me about something so trivial. People do not have to lie to me to break plans. Just do it. I will probably be relieved.

I am not so accepting if it involves someone cheating on me though. That will not fly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by consentingadult

IEIs and SEIs are, like any type, capable of lying, but more in general they are simply "lying the truth". AKA Mobilizing-Ti. Memory is not their strongest point.

---

I think what my sister meant when she said our IEI cousin sometimes lies is that our cousin would be with a group of friends and would get carried away with the atmosphere and tell some girl that she loved her hair, and would later tell my sister that she thought it looked like birds were nesting in it.

This is not forgetting, this is a case of telling little white lies to maintain the cohesion and mood of the social group. This is not a big deal in my book, but LII's like facts. Real, verifiable facts. So white lies might have offended my sister.

To be balanced, I have also heard my cousin say incredibly blunt and offensive things to people sometimes. So she's not always trying to be nice.

I think the whole "Fi is harshly judgmental/Fe not" is one of the things I've most tried to present cases for getting away from. That is, this essentially identifies e with accomodating and i with being less interested in accommodating (since hey, to be accommodating is to consider external parties in your decision-making right?)
To me, accommodating/not is more of an independent trait, related more to MBTI concepts of F than to the ethics/logic divide or the Fe/Fi one.

I think Fi's criterion for judgment is more inaccessible to external factors, more unmoved by them, but that's a separate story.

The very first thing to eject from MBTI's version of functions theory is the idea that Te and Fe are more conventionally inclined or whatever (too many accounts of Te make it sound like a boring fact-machine), and too many accounts of Fe make it sound like going-with-tradition/convention...the latter has been lessened in socionics presentations of Fe, and is mostly an MBTI-carry-on of Jung's original ideas, but the former kind of persists even in socionics descriptions.

ti and fi are both very "judgemental" to me... every quadra has one or the other

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by consentingadult

I don't think this is true: The thing with Fe valuing types is that they try to synchronize their feelings in a process of group creation and maintenance. Think of Durkheim's concept of social currents. Within such an understanding of Fe, certain types of expression, including emotional expression, must be repressed. Look at today's social media, where persons with unwelcome opinions, are emotionally lynched by group formed indignation. An Fe type that wants to express a particular opinion on an emotional carrier-wave, will not do so if they expect mass resistance to their ideas, especially if this resistance comes from other Fe types or an Fe based group (yes, Fe valuing types do not always automatically like each other if they belong to different groups).

I've wrote about the social purpose of Fe in this blog:

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...n-eie-lsi.html

Likewise, Fi types will voice their ethical judgements when they feel safe to do so.

Fe is more about creating relationships, it is more inclusive, whereas Fi is about selecting relationships, more aimed at the distinctive. A subtle but important difference. To put it differently: an Fe type forcing their emotions on you does so to make you toe the line, an Fi type who forces their emotions on you does so to make you feel bad and drive you away.

---

The thing is I'm having problems seeing how I fit into either catergory. On one hand I'm a loner type with a strong disdain for social structures, especially towards the more bureaucratic ones, but I also try to be accommodating enough to get along with those in my immediate vicinity and I look down on the idea of using emotions to drive others away. I don't go out of my way to be friends with everyone but I also don't put people through some "filter" when deciding if I can be friends with them or not. I just take a passive approach where if someone wants to be friends they I'll be there friend and if not then not. It is not something I put effort into either way, which probably has something to do with my weak ethics.

Not going to say anything about judgmental, but what I've noticed is that Fi egos on here seem to have a strange autoerotic relationship with their Fi.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by darya

Not going to say anything about judgmental, but what I've noticed is that Fi egos on here seem to have a strange autoerotic relationship with their Fi.

---

The only thing better is having a functioning penis ;-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muddytextures

The thing is I'm having problems seeing how I fit into either catergory. On one hand I'm a loner type with a strong disdain for social structures, especially towards the more bureaucratic ones, but I also try to be accommodating enough to get along with those in my immediate vicinity and I look down on the idea of using emotions to drive others away. I don't go out of my way to be friends with everyone but I also don't put people through some "filter" when deciding if I can be friends with them or not. I just take a passive approach where if someone wants to be friends they I'll be there friend and if not then not. It is not something I put effort into either way, which probably has something to do with my weak ethics.

---

The question here is: what is the problem you are actually trying to solve? In your original post you were giving a couple of examples, but it now seems like you are trying to get an answer for more personal reasons. If we know what is really troubling you, we might be more able to help out.

Going back to your OP, I van only say that Fi/Fe have nothing to do with such things helping starving people in Africa. It ain't what you do, it's the way that you do it. basically, all judging functions are about how we create institutional foundations. Not just relationships, but complete frameworks that guide our social behaviors. You seem to be stuck in your capacity to decide between Fi and Fe. This is not just because of your weak ethics (which hinders your capacity to detect these), but also of your inclination to view the problem from a modern, individualistic perspective, i.e. how you relate to other individual persons. Perhaps it would help you to transcend beyond the mere psychological level into the sociological and anthropological level, i.e. taking a bird's eye perspective at groups of people, look at the forest, not at the trees. The forest is not just a collection of individual trees, it is an entity in its own right. Start looking at people that way and you'll start seeing how the judging functions affect groups of people. Then it will be easier to decide where you fit in best, and work your way back to the individual level and start discovering the pattern that manifest themselves there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by darya

Too bad you don't live closer Mari, you would make a perfect babysitter for my cat this summer ; )

---

I wouldn't mind Darya

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aylen

I feel more like Darya. I see the homeless and all I want to do is help them. I want to make their lives better in some small way. I don't really walk away from it feeling good about myself. I walk away from it feeling grateful for what I have and that I am able to give. I also hope that they feel like life gave them a little break from the struggle. I usually end up talking to them for a bit and taking their words to heart, whatever they may be. I still think about some homeless people I feel I bonded with years ago. I smile when I think about our interactions and how we seemed to always walk away from them feeling better about the world, in general.

When I give gifts to friends and family I do kind of feel good just by the act of giving but that is very different from the feelings I get from the homeless. I live a life that values some sort of karma, not as retribution or reward exactly. It's just that what you give always comes back to you in some form, whether good or bad. Energy is funny like that. The universe tends to balance the scales one way or another. :yup:

I should add that sometimes shopping gets me high. I feel very open and expansive when I buy stuff for my friends and family. It is like an energy exchange.

---

IDK if it means anything wrt my socionic preferences, but I'm sort of with @Jarno in that I hesitate to give money to panhandlers, but would instead be glad to give some in-kind tangible goods to them (e.g. food, clothing). My reason is that I have no way of knowing if they will be spending that money to buy drugs, and if so, i dont want to be supporting their drug habit, since that will continue to harm them and i dont want to play a part in their harming themselves. The fact that the guy jarno came across got upset about being offered a meal (as opposed to money), kind of suggests most strongly that he hoped to get money (for drugs or something). I've run into those kinds of reactions as well, and opposite reactions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weirdleftovers

To me, Deltas have a policing nature whether they're telling others what to do in general (STs) or morally (NFs). Gammas are more focused on intelligence/status/money and become aggressive when those aspects are involved.

---

yes

Also @lungs said something in the chat box this morning which reminded me of Fi and how Gamma Fi differed from Delta Fi

She said "He went to his families for father's day and they didn't set a place for him or tell him when it was ready. They're assholes"

@lungs what would be your Fi rule here that causes the determination that "they are assholes"? The action is wrong based on morals and ethics of conduct. The determination is therefore they are "assholes"

To me, it would be "they should have done this" It was the most proper action because that is what the universal "ONE" should do

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weirdleftovers

I had to find that post first. It seems to me that you and a few other EIIs I know recognize appreciation and gratefulness in verbal and physical forms. You want the person to verbally express how they feel about what you've done 'thank you so much for thinking of my well-being, it makes me feel loved'. Not sure if that's accurate?

I and other Betas I know, we recognize appreciation by action since "you can make your mouth say anything". For example, if I organize 5yrs worth of a friend's bills and important documents, them saying "thank you so much" means nothing to me. However, if they maintain the organization I've started, I feel they are showing appreciation. To not do so is a slap in the face to me since to me it shows I wasted my time. Not sure if you've seen the show Hoarders, but it's similar to the crew who spends time, money and effort cleaning these people's homes only to return 6 months later to a new hoarding mess.

With the EIE, I could see her feeling offended by you decorating her home without permission as it infers you thought her space wasn't adequate to begin since Fe/Ni are subconscious thinking and valuing people. Or, she could find your efforts over-reaching to decorate her home according to your tastes. It's not about the surface but all the implications. I recall a post of yours regarding giving an SLE a compliment and him not seeming to take it well. I can see that. It's like when my EII friend discovered that I could not only knit but taught myself in a few days, she said "wow, that's amazing! You're an incredible woman". I understood she was being kind, but to my ego, it's mildly inferring that she didn't already know I was incredible. Us betas are fairly to very arrogant in general, so to infer you're just now realizing how amazing we are (aristocracy: the rule of the best) is offensive even when it's not intended.

---

I think verbal expression is important to me and other Delta NF. But I think Delta ST show things in action.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suz

IDK if it means anything wrt my socionic preferences, but I'm sort of with @Jarno in that I hesitate to give money to panhandlers, but would instead be glad to give some in-kind tangible goods to them (e.g. food, clothing). My reason is that I have no way of knowing if they will be spending that money to buy drugs, and if so, i dont want to be supporting their drug habit, since that will continue to harm them and i dont want to play a part in their harming themselves. The fact that the guy jarno came across got upset about being offered a meal (as opposed to money), kind of suggests most strongly that he hoped to get money (for drugs or something). I've run into those kinds of reactions as well, and opposite reactions.

---

First let me say I don't think any less of people who think like you or Jarno. You guys give according to your conscience, as I do. I don't think it has much to do with cognition. I think it has more to do with experience and being educated on the problem.

I have no problem giving them money and letting go of it. Once I give it is no longer mine. Same when I give someone a gift. I don't care if you throw it in the trash or give it away. I give whatever I feel the impulse to give in the moment. I may be a little hurt if I give someone a gift that was sentimental, for me, and they threw it away. I would rather they give it to someone who appreciates it.

I have given the homeless money for alcohol and probably drugs. Some were honest about it. I have also bought liquor for older homeless men before. The reason is that I have seen someone go into DTs and it was not pretty. They almost died. They were not close to me but it still made an impact. If a bottle of liquor or a 6 pack of beer keeps that person alive one more day then I feel fine about it. Maybe tomorrow someone else will come along and really change their life. I know my limitations. I can't walk the streets getting people treatment for whatever addiction they may have. I can provide them the one thing that gets them through another day. Buy them a little more time to find a way through.

I am not naive about this stuff and I have friends who laugh at me for doing it. I don't care. If they ever found themselves in a similar situation they would be hoping someone like me comes along rather than you or Jarno. :lol: Of course their response is, "I would never end up a bum". Famous last words of many homeless people. I know this because I have actually talked to many. You would be surprised at how low the mighty can fall just by making a few wrong choices.

Not all homeless people are addicts though. Many have mental illness that led to homelessness and for some addiction. It is self medicating. I have pulled out of the drive-thru of a restaurant and by the time I got to the end of the parking lot, had a homeless person ask me for money. I have handed them my food after assuring them I did nothing to poison them. Yes this is a big fear for the homeless especially when coupled with paranoia prone, mental illness. This is why many, without addictions, will refuse food, even if you go in the shop with them. The paranoia tells them that you are going to poison them or even worse taking them somewhere to kill them. That is how their minds work.

Anyway, I have given them food and they trusted me enough to be eating it by the time I got through the drive-thru again. I also give clothes, blankets, and other stuff. If I am in the right place at the right time, directly, if not, to a shelter. I prefer giving directly when I can because a lot of the same paranoid mentally ill will not go to shelters for the same reasons they won't take your food.

I am not saying you guys do anything wrong but I don't feel I am either. I can buy a bottle of liquor for a homeless person and my conscience is clear. Like I said I have spent a lot of time talking to them. Especially when I lived in NYC, which is where I got a real education on the homeless. I hate when people tell me I am gullible or a sucker for giving money to the homeless. I am not. I am aware of what they may use it for and I just don't care. Again, like I said, one more day to sort it out for themselves or find someone else who knows better than I how to really help. I will buy them some food too while I'm at it. You shouldn't drink on an empty stomach.

Quote:

---

Delirium tremens

This is a medical emergency. A hyperadrenergic state is present.
PatientPlus

• Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse - Management
• Alcohol-related Problems
• Benzodiazepine Dependence
• Assessment of Drug Dependence
• Read more articles

Clinical features

• Delirium tremens usually begins 24-72 hours after alcohol consumption has been reduced or stopped.[11]
• The symptoms/signs differ from usual withdrawal symptoms in that there are signs of altered mental status. These can include:[12]
  
  • Hallucinations (auditory, visual, or olfactory).
  • Confusion.
  • Delusions.
  • Severe agitation.
  
  
• Seizures can also occur.
• Examination may reveal signs of chronic alcohol abuse/stigmata of chronic liver disease. There may also be:
  
  • Tachycardia.
  • Hyperthermia and excessive sweating.
  • Hypertension.
  • Tachypnoea.
  • Tremor.
  • Mydriasis.
  • Ataxia.
  • Altered mental status.
  • Cardiovascular collapse.

Risk factors[6]

• Previous history of delirium tremens.
• Previous history of alcohol withdrawal seizures.
• Co-existing infection or medical problems including pancreatitis or hepatitis.
• Recent higher-than-normal levels of alcohol intake.
• Older age.
• Abnormal liver function.
• More severe withdrawal symptoms on presentation.

---

lewl "black people in africa". What a shitty sentence to put in there. I think he reference to genuine helpfulness when you help directly and not indirectly.