One more thing: I’ve seen it said (well, in a psychology course) that EQ and IQ are correlated...
One more thing: I’ve seen it said (well, in a psychology course) that EQ and IQ are correlated...
I wasn’t bashing either pathway and explained how it works. Stop trying so hard to defend Fi so you can suck their dicks.Originally Posted by Duschia
Ehhhh, you just skipped (again) on how /both/ have subjective /and/ objective elements just to bash on Fi/Te
Basically what’s “good” and “bad” behavior.
Good or bad to society, me or both? Acceptable behaviour or made up behaviour?
This is pretty accurate and can explain most of the fighting that happens here on this forum, politicians on television, and even the ones close to us - I see it time and time again.Fi-Te:
Fi-Te quadra types - in a "pure", "unrealistic" situation - would prefer to communicate in ways that avoid any selection or interpretation of information - in a "robotic" way even. Which is why, by the way, at least the rational Gamma/Delta dual couples become increasingly "unemotional" with time, at least to outsiders -- they find comfort precisely in the reassurance that there is no need to select information with that particular person, no need to "read between the lines".
So, Fi-Te's way of getting "correct" information is to choose the specific sources of information (not necessarily human beings, but it's more illustrative if we think of it that way) that they can trust, and then in principle take all the information from those sources at face value.
The downfall of doing this: if you choose badly those specific sources of information (or individuals), because then you're vulnerable to all sorts of misinformation.
That's what makes Fi-Te types so sensitive to being lied to, or to any other breach of trust, or even to receiving "softened" information even with good intentions.
Fe-Ti
Fe-Ti quadra types are far more "open" to the specific sources of information, that is, they are not selecting information based on their sources -- they get it from everyone; however, rather than "filter" it through Fi by selecting the sources carefully, they "filter" it through Fe (which already reads between the lines) and Ti (which sees what really makes sense and what is just, uh, padding or make-up etc).
The downfall of doing this: your "filter" may lead you to be "biased" towards information that already fits certain already accepted notions; or be open to information that is factually unsustainable, but makes sense according to Fe and Ti.
That's what makes Fe-Ti types so sensitive to "accusations" that the ideas they most deeply believe in are wrong.
In both cases, what they are reacting against is anything exposing the vulnerability of their filters.
Hence the mutual accusations between Fe-Ti and Fi-Te of "narrow-mindedness".
To Fe-Ti, it looks like Fi-Te will only listen to specific sources or individuals, so "biased" towards them, or "narrow-minded" or "naive".
To Fi-Te, it looks like Fe-Ti will only listen to what confirms what they already think - so, again "narrow-minded", or "circular thinking".
Funny how the essence can be boiled down to cognition.
Can Ti/Fe, Te/Fi ever coexist peacefully?
I partly agree with this and partly disagree.
Fe valuers (or types with "high Fe") are more open to communicating with a wider range of people - Fe "expands communication." But it doesn't mean that they necessarily see them as sources of "true" information. Do they just take info from wherever and reject the parts that don't make sense? That doesn't seem particularly type-related.
Similarly types with high Fi do more selectively communicate (Fi "focuses communication"), but while the idea of trust is important it is again not only about acquiring true information from these sources and these alone. The idea that, for example, Fi lead types think of their close relations primarily as sources of information makes little sense, and in fact they are not prone to evaluating the factual information they receive for accuracy much at all, regardless of source. Trustworthiness can be defined as "doing what you say you will do." In this narrow sense yes, they care about "accuracy" but it seems more difficult to relate to the other rational IMEs systematically as is done here.
It is also true that Te valuers prefer a more plain-spoken communication style that minimizes interpretation.
But the implication that Fi valuers somehow don't care whether information fits certain already accepted notions, especially Gammas who value Ni, is just flat-out wrong.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
