Fe-Ti vs. Fi-Te and filtering sources of information

[Logos]

I think I did, this is text only.

But out of context in what we are discussing, which pertains to situations where there can be an interplay of body language, words, and tone of voice. Obviously, you can not see my body language now. But think of how many posts seem to note how tone of voice to indicate how the content of what they say should be taken to mean does not always carry well on message boards.

Not really. You can't make your subconscious to read more or less, or display more or less body language.

Sorry, but that was not what I was saying at all. I never said that you could get your subconscious to read more or less or display more or less body language, but merely that most of the interpretation of body language occurs in the subconscious. Yes, you can control the conscious part of it, but most is indeed in the subconscious.

He could be either way.

He's my example, I think I should know.

I'm down-emphasizing your over-emphasis. And trying to find out makes you think it's so important that it would require your initial reaction to Winterpark.

But I'm not over-emphasizing it, just pointing out that it is more important than Winterpark is downplaying. And I'm curious as to what about what I wrote in my initial reaction you find puzzling.

[Expat]

I see the Logos-Winterpark discussion as a good illustration of precisely what I tried to convey.

[Expat]

I see from Ezra's post that Phaedrus is saying that this "confirms" that he's a Fi-Te type -- it's amusing that he doesn't realize that his saying it, in the context of this thread, proves the precise opposite. He's behaving in a Fe-Ti way even as he says "I am Fi-Te".

[Logos]

I see the Logos-Winterpark discussion as a good illustration of precisely what I tried to convey.

I'm glad to be of service to you then.

[hellothere]

He's behaving in a Fe-Ti way even as he says "I am Fi-Te".

I'm a bit slow, I wonder if you could explain this? Though I understand why you might not want to, so its okay if you don't.

Anyway what you've described as the Fe-Ti way bugs me, in fact its exactly what my SEI friend does and its exactly what annoys me about him.

[Warlord]

But out of context in what we are discussing, which pertains to situations where there can be an interplay of body language, words, and tone of voice. Obviously, you can not see my body language now. But think of how many posts seem to note how tone of voice to indicate how the content of what they say should be taken to mean does not always carry well on message boards.

I think that, not having to deal with the people irl and therefore having influence in your relationships etc. has stronger effect on the way and content of what people write. So most the strain in communication comes from that. Rather than not seeing their body language and hearing their intonation. But sure that has some effect also. But I don't have the feel that I would need that extra information to increase understanding. Some jokes are lost, that's about it.

Sorry, but that was not what I was saying at all. I never said that you could get your subconscious to read more or less or display more or less body language, but merely that most of the interpretation of body language occurs in the subconscious. Yes, you can control the conscious part of it, but most is indeed in the subconscious.

Well, that was your reply to what started out as someone placing a conscious effort to reading more information about body language. That is, trying to read more than you subconsciously do. So it wasn't even about subconsious interpretation.

just pointing out that it is more important than Winterpark is downplaying. And I'm curious as to what about what I wrote in my initial reaction you find puzzling.

The wording how you said it seemed condescending. Comparing that to you not having said any relevant information. Just that it's considered to be statistically important part of communication. But if someone doesn't find any use in reading non-verbal communication, what's the big deal? The reason is that they find it to be unrealiable information, like it often is.

[Phaedrus]

I am having serious trouble explaining my point to a person who watches and mainly responds to my gestures or goes into "aha, so you mean that and that or that..." mode. I say what I mean. Most of the time there's no reason to search for hidden meanings in my verbal output (or try to find them in my physical appearance and outward emotional expression) in order to understand me. And I think this is related to Te/Fe.

Maybe it is also related to PoLR. I have the same attitude and the same problem(s) as you have described here.

[Phaedrus]

One of the things I have learned in life is that people rarely if ever say what they truly mean. And I do think that you are understating how importance body language (roughly 80-90 percent of the human language) is when saying what you mean. So while you may say what you mean, saying what you mean involves far more than just the content of your words.

That's what many people like to think, but it is nearly always not true in my case. My body language is very often misleading (= people draw incorrect conclusions based upon it) without me knowing it and in what way. So, I have very little control over how I come across ( PoLR again, I suppose), and people mistakenly believe that I am trying to say something I have not literally said. That's a really annoying problem.

[Phaedrus]

Then you would seem to have a lot to learn still of the world.

But what if you can't learn it, because you are born with PoLR (and maybe something else that might be relevant too)?

[Phaedrus]

No, it would seem that you will have to do a lot of accepting and adjusting to things that don't fit your viewpoint.

That's my attitude too.

[Phaedrus]

I see the Logos-Winterpark discussion as a good illustration of precisely what I tried to convey.

Exactly.

I see from Ezra's post that Phaedrus is saying that this "confirms" that he's a Fi-Te type -- it's amusing that he doesn't realize that his saying it, in the context of this thread, proves the precise opposite. He's behaving in a Fe-Ti way even as he says "I am Fi-Te".

I am certainly not. What we should try to understand is why you continue to misinterpret what I am saying and why I am saying it. You seem to be making the same kind of mistake as some of those Fe-Ti types are making when they try to interpret what I am not saying. They mistakenly believe that they can interpret my actions and the way I am saying things in the same way they interpret other people's actions and statements. But the truth is that they can't in my case, because I don't have a normal body language, and I don't have hidden motives, and I don't lie. I am much more open and honest than they imagine, and that leads to misunderstandings.

[Expat]

I'm glad to be of service to you then.

An illustration of my inability to read between the lines - I have no idea how seriously I'm supposed to take that

[Phaedrus]

An illustration of my inability to read between the lines - I have no idea how seriously I'm supposed to take that.

Then learn from that, and stop trying to read between the lines in my posts. If you used other typing methods that are not based on your (in)ability to read between the lines, your would decrease your number of mistypings.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Then learn from that, and stop trying to read between the lines in my posts. If you used other typing methods that are not based on your (in)ability to read between the lines, your would decrease your number of mistypings.

You have as much to learn as anyone

[Phaedrus]

You have as much to learn as anyone

No.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

No.

It depends on what you want to learn of course, but as a look-a-like relation to you, I think I can understand some of your shortcomings. But in saying that I wonder if you are happy with what you currently know, you might be, but I get the impression you probably are not. This is my observation is all.

[Phaedrus]

It depends on what you want to learn of course, but as a look-a-like relation to you, I think I can understand some of your shortcomings. But in saying that I wonder if you are happy with what you currently know, you might be, but I get the impression you probably are not. This is my observation is all.

I am more unhappy with what others don't know. The discussions tend to get stuck in the mud because of it.

[Ezra]

No.

Haha! He's right, you arrogant fuck.

I'm reconsidering this now. I think I might be Te/Fi.

[snegledmaca]

God, you sound like my mother. And you're both wrong. Like I constantly say to her I will say to you, stop projecting, just because you're like that doesn't make everybody like that.

And how do you know this?

The same way you know people rarely if ever say what they truly mean.

[Park]

I would be angry if someone discounted what I said because of tone/body language/etc.. Obviously I don't expect them to ignore the other information, but there is little that is more infuriating than being told that "you're only saying that because you're upset" or some other bullshit (from my perspective) like that. I thought that was what Winterpark was trying to get at, he may correct me if I'm wrong.

That's exactly what I was getting at.

[Logos]

Well, that was your reply to what started out as someone placing a conscious effort to reading more information about body language.

Was it?

That is, trying to read more than you subconsciously do. So it wasn't even about subconsious interpretation.

But the overall point that you seem to be ignoring is me repeatedly pointing out the evidential importance that body language and tone of voice play in communication.

The wording how you said it seemed condescending.

Then I'm afraid that you misread me and read between the lines what was not there.

Comparing that to you not having said any relevant information.

That's quite the accusation. I may not have in the ego or be -valuing, but that does not mean that what I say should be discounted because I am the only Alpha here, which is the feeling I am increasingly gaining here.

Just that it's considered to be statistically important part of communication. But if someone doesn't find any use in reading non-verbal communication, what's the big deal? The reason is that they find it to be unrealiable information, like it often is.

I suppose people are welcome not to read into non-verbal communication, but to quote a page on body language: "Some researchers put the level of nonverbal communication as high as 80 percent of all communication. More reasonably it could be at around 50-65 percent. That’s exactly what Mehrabian discovered in his communication study. He found that only 7 percent of communication comes from spoken words, 38 percent is from the tone of the voice, and 55 percent comes from body language. In basic terms, if you aren’t conscious of what is happening nonverbally, then you are missing out on the vast majority of what is going on during a typical conversation." Obviously verbal content does play a big role in communication, every ESE knows that probably better than the ILI and LIE, but they also know that the non-verbal also plays an essential part in interpersonal communication.

That's what many people like to think, but it is nearly always not true in my case. My body language is very often misleading (= people draw incorrect conclusions based upon it) without me knowing it and in what way. So, I have very little control over how I come across ( PoLR again, I suppose), and people mistakenly believe that I am trying to say something I have not literally said. That's a really annoying problem.

Or is it simply misleading because it is learning an individual's specific patterns of body language? Body language is also cultural and individualistic, much like language in general.

But what if you can't learn it, because you are born with PoLR (and maybe something else that might be relevant too)?

would be weak and conscious, but not non-existent. Just because I have a PoLR does not mean that I'm naturally colorblind or that I can't be confrontational.

An illustration of my inability to read between the lines - I have no idea how seriously I'm supposed to take that

I'm serious, but saying it in a friendly nonchalant manner.

[Park]

The same way you know people rarely if ever say what they truly mean.

Haha, good answer.

[Logos]

The same way you know people rarely if ever say what they truly mean.

Psycho-Linguistics?

[Logos]

I would be angry if someone discounted what I said because of tone/body language/etc.. Obviously I don't expect them to ignore the other information, but there is little that is more infuriating than being told that "you're only saying that because you're upset" or some other bullshit (from my perspective) like that. I thought that was what Winterpark was trying to get at, he may correct me if I'm wrong.

And I would be angry if all of my content was dismissed based on me not being the right person. Yet that seems to be happening as we speak.

[Park]

And I would be angry if all of my content was dismissed based on me not being the right person. Yet that seems to be happening as we speak.

wtf man? If you think your signature, or you being Alpha, or any of that would interfere in my (or Salawa's) interpretation of your posts, then you are utterly wrong.

[Warlord]

Was it?

Of course, follow sequentially backwards what was said before that.

But the overall point that you seem to be ignoring is me repeatedly pointing out the evidential importance that body language and tone of voice play in communication.

I haven't been ignoring that.

Then I'm afraid that you misread me and read between the lines what was not there.

"Then you would seem to have a lot to learn still of the world." That's condescending, there's no need to even read between the lines.

That's quite the accusation. I may not have in the ego or be -valuing, but that does not mean that what I say should be discounted because I am the only Alpha here, which is the feeling I am increasingly gaining here.

Now you are being paranoid. You haven't said what makes it so important, what's the gain? Because it's not that it really improves understandability.

In basic terms, if you aren’t conscious of what is happening nonverbally, then you are missing out on the vast majority of what is going on during a typical conversation.

Sure probably a whole lot. But weak Fe makes you miss it anyway. If you start paying attention to it. You just get confused, because you can't be sure about your interpretation. It could be a real gesture, faked, related to some "body condition" like itching, sore neck etc. or the person could be sending messages for no apparent real reason, or the person could be not sending anything at all when he should, or you could still be missing relevant cues or they could just have poor skills in that type communication and therefore sending wrong messages.

If you mostly ignore it, then you can concentrate on the information that you can process better.

It shouldn't be that important. It's primitive and has been outdated since humans developed speech, even more so after writing was developed. Everything that can be signaled non-verbally, can also be said or written. It's redundant. (now is the time for anti-Fe paranoia haha). Fe still isn't entirely about that.

would be weak and conscious, but not non-existent. Just because I have a PoLR does not mean that I'm naturally colorblind or that I can't be confrontational.

True.

[Logos]

wtf man? If you think your signature, or you being Alpha, or any of that would interfere in my (or Salawa's) interpretation of your posts, then you are utterly wrong.

Am I? When Expat talks about the importance of the individual itself in Te-Fi communication, am I really that wrong to possibly see that happening? If Expat were telling you the same thing that I am now, would you be insisting that he is wrong?

Of course, follow sequentially backwards what was said before that.

Would you mind showing me more explicitly to what you were referring? I am was not trying to be smart with the "was it?" comment, but I was honestly unsure what you were referring to, because I could think of several possible back links.

I haven't been ignoring that.

Okay.

"Then you would seem to have a lot to learn still of the world." That's condescending, there's no need to even read between the lines.

And that is truth. If you ignore that aspect of the world, then you are blinding yourself to a crucial part of reality. But even there I was not being condescending, though I can see why you would interpret it as such.

Now you are being paranoid. You haven't said what makes it so important, what's the gain? Because it's not that it really improves understandability.

Implicit content within 93 percent of communication in an interpersonal conversation is not a gain?

Sure probably a whole lot. But weak Fe makes you miss it anyway. If you start paying attention to it. You just get confused, because you can't be sure about your interpretation. It could be a real gesture, faked, related to some "body condition" like itching, sore neck etc. or the person could be sending messages for no apparent real reason, or the person could be not sending anything at all when he should, or you could still be missing relevant cues or they could just have poor skills in that type communication and therefore sending wrong messages.

If you mostly ignore it, then you can concentrate on the information that you can process better.

But not to the extent that either you or Winterpark make it out to be. I can understand if you had weak- (weak interpretation skills) you would not want to rely on it to heavily, but that does not make it meaningless, valueless, or something that should so readily be ignored or downplayed.

It shouldn't be that important. It's primitive and has been outdated since humans developed speech, even more so after writing was developed. Everything that can be signaled non-verbally, can also be said or written. It's redundant. (now is the time for anti-Fe paranoia haha). Fe still isn't entirely about that.

But it is that important. Our bodies transmit signals that sometimes we are not even aware of. How is this evolutionary mechanism outdated? Of course Fe is not entirely about that; I said as much in my first reply to Winterpark.

[Expat]

Am I? When Expat talks about the importance of the individual itself in Te-Fi communication, am I really that wrong to possibly see that happening? If Expat were telling you the same thing that I am now, would you be insisting that he is wrong?

I can't speak for anyone else directly, but personally I have a "Fi-filtered view" (or whatever) of a particular person called Logos; and the Alpha, LII etc thing comes into play later, if interactions need to be explained or I make a point in socionics referring to Alpha or LIIs.

[Warlord]

Would you mind showing me more explicitly to what you were referring? I am was not trying to be smart with the "was it?" comment, but I was honestly unsure what you were referring to, because I could think of several possible back links.

Body languages importance diminishes when it doesn't convey any meaningful message. Over-emphasizing it's importance means that you get lot of meaningless information, that you interpret as somehow relevant.

That chain started from that one. If it's even important anymore.

Implicit content within 93 percent of communication in an interpersonal conversation is not a gain?

Nope. If you get 93% more e-mail but it's spam mail. It doesn't improve your e-mail communication.

If the people who send you spam mail, start instead sending you useful information in clear language, instead of concentrating on spamming you. It's more useful to you.

But it is that important. Our bodies transmit signals that sometimes we are not even aware of. How is this evolutionary mechanism outdated?

We could like replace them with pie charts over heads, that say:" you have now 0.0000495% chance to get laid". Or: "I dislike you 43.4%". Now that would be progress

But seriously, why retort to a communication system that's based on sending vague multi-interpretative cues, that you are supposed "to get". When there's far superior system available. People could just state the same messages. Speech & writing etc. should be the primary system of communication for everyone.

[Expat]

any particular reason this is posted in gamma and not in general discussion?

I am gamma, and I wish it so.

[xyz]

You're all talking out of your ass, we see what we want to see, and hear what we want to hear.

[marooned]

But seriously, why retort to a communication system that's based on sending vague multi-interpretative cues, that you are supposed "to get". When there's far superior system available. People could just state the same messages.

Lol. These “vague multi-interpretative cues that you are supposed to get” are not seen as this fuzzy or vague or arbitrary by Fe/Ti valuing types. Just because you’re better at Fi/Te interpretations and don’t care about Fe does not make Fe/Ti interpretations inferior.

Speech & writing etc. should be the primary system of communication for everyone.

You can’t escape Fe so easily! For instance, I can read between the lines with content alone without even seeing another person... like on this forum (it’s all written communication… aside from the images and youtube videos). And I think it still has a lot to do with Fe. Every post I read, information about its tone, possible hidden meanings, attitude of the poster, possible feelings behind the post, etc. naturally just pop into my mind. It's not that I try to do this. I can't help it. I analyze what comes into my head and try to sort out what it likely is from what it likely is not (something that can be difficult online at times because I can't see the person's face, hear their voice, etc.). This becomes more automatic with the more I know about the person posting, and the more I start to see trends in what they say/express, and other connections. I feel that sometimes Fi/Te logical types discount this sort of information as meaningless or irrelevant, which is essentially like telling me that my perception is invalid. I think that Fi/Te logical types don’t trust information about the Fe aspect of reality as much (because Fe is not one of their strong suits). And that is perfectly understandable. But that doesn’t mean Fe information is in any way irrelevant, or that there aren’t Fe/Ti valuing sorts that are good at interpreting it.

It seems that Fi/Te types are more likely to directly say what they mean and go for direct, literal interpretations. This may be rather central to how they communicate. So maybe most of their meaning is already present in the words they say. I think that Fe/Ti types may communicate somewhat differently… I generally like it when people read between the lines of what I say. In person my way of communicating is less direct… I don’t generally care as much about which words I use as long as the meaning gets communicated… When I care to, I do try to say what I mean, but sometimes I can’t seem to express it adequately. When someone else tries to read between the lines of what I say (or analyze it) and find my meaning, this is extremely helpful to me. Fe/Ti logical types tend to be more sensitive to the meaning behind your words, and won’t discount what you’re trying to say because you haven’t been able to precisely state it in the precisely correct words. They don’t invalidate your Fe perception and I find this very helpful. If their analysis of your Fe perception informs them that it’s way off the mark, they’ll explain why. I don’t expect people to do this—the burden of expressing what I mean when I care to fully rests on me. It just takes more effort to get it across to some people than it does to others (which probably happens with everyone).

That said, I wouldn’t want someone else to entirely ignore the content of what I say (who would?) or obnoxiously try to keep putting words into my mouth… that would bug me a lot, and I’d probably just explain that what I said happened to be exactly what I meant. If they continued to try to read things into it, I’d probably repeat myself and say something like “what part of <repeat what I said before word-for-word> do you not understand?”

~~~~~~~~~~~~

The point of “reading between the lines” is not to invent things that you don’t mean and annoy you by pointing these things out. The aim is the same as it is for any communication: to understand what you actually do mean as precisely as possible. For instance if I say “ah ha! so you mean… x, y and z!” (borrowing from Winterpark), this doesn’t mean that I’m trying to read things into what you said or make things up… it means I’m trying to get on the same page with you, to confirm that my understanding matches yours. I’m trying to connect. Unfortunately what you say is pulled in by Ni(/Se) and Fe, and analyzed with Ti. I can’t help that, you’ll just have to deal with it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

But at the same time if you say “I love you” when everything inside your head and heart is saying “I hate you” and is evident in the way that you’ve been expressing yourself around me for the past 8 weeks… yes you may have meant for me to hear “I love you” but it doesn’t seem that’s how you honestly feel. Should you be believed word-for-word when everything else about you is saying the exact opposite?

~~~~~~~~~~~~

I said all of this because I'm trying to defend Fe/Ti more... I don't quite know why I feel inclined to...

[Phaedrus]

I'm reconsidering this now. I think I might be Te/Fi.

As most of your test results and type profile identifications also indicate ... What can you learn from that?

[Phaedrus]

It seems that Fi/Te types are more likely to directly say what they mean and go for direct, literal interpretations. This may be rather central to how they communicate.

I'm an extreme example of that, but it is probably not necessarily related to Fi-Te.

So maybe most of their meaning is already present in the words they say.

Definitely so in my case.

I generally like it when people read between the lines of what I say.

And I literally hate it.

[marooned]

I generally like it when people read between the lines of what I say.

And I literally hate it.

You do seem to hate that.

[Phaedrus]

You do seem to hate that.

Yes, but only because people so extremely often misinterpret what I am trying to say and also my motives for saying it. If they were better at it, I wouldn't have any reason to complain. They might be better at reading correctly between the lines of what others are saying, because normally people probably tend to be "readable" in that sense. But I am not a normal person, and since people as a matter of fact tend to misinterpret me, I want to be treated as an individual. The method doesn't work on me, and therefore it should not be used.

[FDG]

For instance, I can read between the lines with content alone without even seeing another person... like on this forum (it’s all written communication… aside from the images and youtube videos).

You do imply, though, that there is always something between the lines that the person is trying to convey. Believe me if I say that the majority of - for example - my posts do not have this as a component.

I generally like it when people read between the lines of what I say.

Similarly to Phaedrus, I do not necessarily like it. I do not dislike it either, at least if the person makes it clear and thus we can reach an agreement on the way we tend to converse. However, such an unspoken assumption would tend more often than not to get in the way of conversation and (for me) building of trust.

Reading between the lines is something that is very different from reading body language, though, give that one is rooted on an interpretation of what is being said, whereas the other stems from an interpretation of what is not being side (which, given its not-well-defined nature, is by composition necessarily object of a meaning assignment).

This is starting to irk me. The way people says things, their gestures, their expressions (body language), their intonations, the way they organize and present their information, how their presentation of information relates to previous ways they have presented information, the trend of how they've been expressing themselves in general, things you know about them from memory, when they pause in their speech or not, when they look at you or not, how they attempt to affect the flow of conversation, etc. All of these things speak volumes about what they mean. This cannot be denied. The content of what they say *also* speaks volumes about what they mean.

I think it does speak volumes, however I would hesitate to say it speaks volumes about what they mean. I will give you an example related to myself (hoping not to appear too boastful): most of the times my intonation, my gestures, my expressions and how many pauses I make while speaking are related to only one variable: how tired I am. By no means this reveals my attitude towards the person I'm speaking to - sometimes I might be slightly indifferent when speaking to a good friend of mine simply because I biked 150 kms the same day.

[Expat]

One of the things I have learned in life is that people rarely if ever say what they truly mean.

One of the things that got me thinking about this is that, according to my observations, the Gamma/Delta dualities develop precisely towards the direction of increasingly saying what you mean and meaning what you say, and becoming increasingly "robotic" to outside observers. Those types see having to "read between the lines" as a concession, and are glad when an interaction does not require that.

It may be less so with irrationals, and/or Deltas, perhaps Slacker Mom could comment.

My own observations of my Alpha parents, SEI and ESE, was that after decades of marriage, they still, indeed, did not say what they meant to one another.

[Park]

Am I? When Expat talks about the importance of the individual itself in Te-Fi communication, am I really that wrong to possibly see that happening?

No, you're not (wrong to see it), but you would be wrong if you actually believe it. I will tell you this; Even though I might disagree with you on many things, I still respect you very much, admire your intelligence and you're definitely not (yet) 'filtered out' as some others are.

If Expat were telling you the same thing that I am now, would you be insisting that he is wrong?

The thing is that I know that Expat would never do that. But if, as you say, (for whatever reason) he did, then yes, I would disagree with him, but I know I would not need to insist because he wouldn't be so stubborn in defending his view like you are here. Hell, he might even agree with me, if I have some valid arguments.

[Park]

My own observations of my Alpha parents, SEI and ESE, was that after decades of marriage, they still, indeed, did not say what they meant to one another.

Haha, how can you NOT find that absurd.