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

[Expat]

Disclaimer: these are indeed my views, that is, it's not something that I can say anyone else in socionics has said in quite that fashion. Although my present view is that it's correct, it's possible that others could make a good case that it's not.

However, personally I wouldn't consider "I am of type bla-bla, and I don't identify with it" a good case.

Where I'm coming from:

It is self-evident that (1) any healthy person, extrovert or introvert, needs the input of external information and (2) no healthy person accepts every external information uncritically. Everyone has what I will call "internal filters" that help them pick up, from external information, what is "useful" or "useless", what "rings true" and what "sounds like nonsense". We all have observed cases - here or IRL - of equally clever individuals saying things to each other like "you're so naive to believe that" or "isn't it obvious?" etc. This happens because people have different "filters". When the "filters" are, say, "calibrated differently", then of course you have different views on what is obvious or not, or on what you should believe or not.


On the Fe-Ti and Fi-Te divide

So, everyone is "subjective" at one level regarding external information. However, in different ways.

One imperfect way of putting it is this:

Fi-Te: "liking or disliking" (ie being "subective" with regards to) a kind of source of input, "source" also being "individuals"
Fe-Ti: "liking or dislikng" a kind of input

Te: takes any input "as it is given" as long as it is from a reliable source (or person)
Fi: tells you which sources are reliable (or which people to trust)

Fi is here the filter.

Fe: takes the input not "as it is given" but "reading between the lines"
Ti: organizes such input logically, rejecting the bits that do not fit logically.

Ti is here the filter.

In both cases, Fe and Te get the external, dynamic, input - they are the "antennae" - and Fi and Ti select what is "correct" according to "static" criteria of how things, or people, connect - they are the "filters".

Consequences:

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".

Unnecessary disclaimer: as in anything in socionics, these are trends, not absolutes; obviously Fe-Ti quadra types will also develop preferences for one source over others, if it turns out to be consistently reliable; and the other way around for Fi-Te. But I think that when there are moments of mutual incomprehension and accusations, that's how it tends to happen.

[Ezra]

This makes me think I am Fe/Ti more now.

[implied]

eh, it made me think i'm Fi/Te, actually probably solidified that position.

[Phaedrus]

Expat's interpretation makes quite a lot of sense, especially if we look at the behaviour of some clear Fe-Ti types, like for example Sergei Ganin. I have seen these tendencies in other real life INTjs and also in ENTps. I haven't really thought about how much of it I have seen in other Fe-Ti types, but I would not be surprised if I found it there too.

And if the interpretation is correct, then I am without doubt a Fi-Te type as I have claimed for years now. According to every criteria or test that Expat has ever produced, I am unquestionably an Fi-Te Gamma type, and therefore an ILI. Can we settle on that and move on now to more interesting subjects?

[BLauritson]

This makes a lot of sense IMO. It explains why when I was younger I seemed to be so gullible, since I tend to trust people as being knowledgeable unless they prove to me otherwise and so, since I trusted them, I took what they said to be true without really questioning it. I suppose this still happens to an extent actually. I end up getting confused if two people that I trust to be knowledgeable on a subject end up giving me different information, because then I don't know who's correct and who isn't (provided that I'm not knowledgeable on said subject, that is).

[discojoe]

Interesting.

My elder brother used to play adolescent pranks on me, using the reverence I had for him at the time to deceive me into doing stupid things for his amusement (and I don't begrudge him of this in hindsight). After a short while of this I decided I wouldn't trust him any longer, and any future attempt of his -- malicious or benign -- fell on totally deaf ears. This might sound typically like an instance of response training, but I think this differs because I literally would not listen to him *at all* for days at a time.

I think now that this infuriated him because he was expecting me to have his very same Ti filter, and approach his schemes with the idea of "reading between the lines", assuming I would listen if he made himself sound plausible enough, and not simply write him off after deciding he was a "bad source".

[Expat]

If Fe-Ti people do not equally see the point, then I will have failed, although a couple had told me over PM that they did agree with it.

I'd like to add that types with Ti in super-id will probably also say that they relate to "needing information from others", but I disagree, what they need from others is help with their filter, as in, "this is what I'm thinking, is that correct?" or "I know everything else, I just need input on this precise bit". What they don't want to hear is suggestions that their filter has got it all wrong so far.

But, of course, everyone will (say) more or less trust a random stranger on the street when asking for directions, although they will use their filters, in some way, when deciding whom exactly to ask for directions.

[Ezra]

Expat's interpretation makes quite a lot of sense, especially if we look at the behaviour of some clear Fe-Ti types, like for example Sergei Ganin. I have seen these tendencies in other real life INTjs and also in ENTps. I haven't really thought about how much of it I have seen in other Fe-Ti types, but I would not be surprised if I found it there too.

And if the interpretation is correct, then I am without doubt a Fi-Te type as I have claimed for years now. According to every criteria or test that Expat has ever produced, I am unquestionably an Fi-Te Gamma type, and therefore an ILI. Can we settle on that and move on now to more interesting subjects?

Oxford Legal Studies Research Paper No. 14

LIS. You're not the only person who matters, Phaedrus.

[Phaedrus]

You're not the only person who matters, Phaedrus.

That's exactly my point. So it's time for you and others to move on to more interesting problems -- just like I said.

[marooned]

(in response to initial post)

This is very good imo. Thank you for sharing.

I very much relate to the Fe-Ti one.

[DirectorAbbie]

Woah, I am definately an Fi-Te. That describes me perfectly! If you're not one of the sources I trust, I won't even believe you if you say the sky is blue. (I still haven't decided whether the sky exists. I'll ask Brilliand.)

[Steve]

I just read Expat's post and I actually like it a lot. See, Expat? When you let yourself draw from the ream of subjectivity, good, encompassing rich insight emerges

[Warlord]

I agree on everything else, but there seems to be something fishy about this part:

(a) 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".

(b) 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".

To me it would usually appear to be people who are weak at Te or are Fe-Ti, who are using Fi-Te at the moment, that are "guilty" of (a). While Te-ego-block Te-Fi, has the downfall of wanting excessive proof, because of lack of trust to external sources (unfulfilled Fi).

[Joy]

To tell you the truth, I don't identify more strongly with the Te/Fi "filter" than the Fe/Ti "filter" (or vice versa). Good information and ideas can come from any source, as can bad information and ideas. It's the individual's job to figure out what makes the most sense based on all of the information available. A source's source matters more than the source itself (I want to know where the information originated, such as what studies were done, etc.).

There's also an aspect of it which involves finding a lot of information on a subject and sorting through it relatively quickly to determine which information is most useful for the purpose of effectively accomplishing whatever it is a person is trying to accomplish. If nothing else I can usually make recommendations regarding which information a person should obtain and the best places to start looking for that information.

When I do this, I scan for information from many sources, some of them reliable, some unreliable, and piece together the bits that make the most sense and filter out the bits that don't make sense. Sometimes the information that doesn't make sense comes from the most reputable sources. Granted, I do look for which sources are most likely to have gotten their information from valuable sources and which are most likely to have gotten inaccurate information, and I certainly look at who's making money off of the information (helps to distinguish bullshit from what's accurate).

When I report the information to someone I'll say something like "I once read that *insert information here*, but I'm not sure how reliable the source was" or "according to a researcher who's at the top of his specialty field, *insert information here*" or something along those lines.

I guess I use a combination of these "filters". I think I use Ni as much as I do Ti to determine which bits of information "fit" (and which don't) though.

[Warlord]

When I do this, I scan for information from many sources, some of them reliable, some unreliable, and piece together the bits that make the most sense and filter out the bits that don't make sense. Sometimes the information that doesn't make sense comes from the most reputable sources. Granted, I do look for which sources are most likely to have gotten their information from valuable sources and which are most likely to have gotten inaccurate information, and I certainly look at who's making money off of the information (helps to distinguish bullshit from what's accurate).

This would make sense based on what I just said above.

[discojoe]

Well what the fuck happened here.

[Logos]

Well what the fuck happened here.

I happened.

[Phaedrus]

According to Julian Barbour, nothing happened.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Na Expat just reacts that way because he's insecure. It doesn't matter if Jonathan is or

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Danielle]

I am just reading this thread, but I wanted to say that this explanation of the interactions between Fe-Ti and Fi-Te really make a lot of sense to me.

I am curious as to how Te-ego types ascertain what sources are trustworthy when they don't have any Fi-ego feedback around. I have some ideas based on past observations, but they're not really solid and I'd rather hear from people who identify with the actual types.

One of the things that drives me ABSOLUTELY CRAZY about Fe-Ti is valuers and ego-types say "this is this" or "that is that" without explanations and evidence. On another forum, there is a guy who is a guru in a field of mutual interest. He literally wrote the book on that subject. So when he deigns to come into the forum in between his busy schedule, everyone pays attention. Also, people are constantly quoting what he had to say on a topic as if it is the final word.

But my problem is that he always says precious little (or so it seems to me). Everything is a conclusion and not an explanation. He dismisses that which he thinks is wrong or illogical, but I have no reason to trust him just because he speaks "authoritatively" (which to me comes across as simply blunt). It really irritates me actually and makes me think less of him than a lot of the other people on that forum.

I know that I crave explanations from trustworthy sources. This might sound bad, but I am always looking to replace my thinking with someone else's, if it is a subject I know I could know more about (such as Socionics). I would NEVER replace my values with someone else's, but logic and thinking, yes. If someone can explain things in such a way that my mind starts understanding it in the same rhythm as they are explaining it, so that I can then feel like that knowledge is now my own, I really appreciate that. When people just state their knowledge without giving me a chance to see the process and understand how it works, then I will often forget it.

I must stress that I speak only for myself here.

[Erk]

I would think that they either base it on some generilzed rules that they have ascertained, or try to weed through it comparing to other types of knowledge they are verified. You do not need your dual to survive so there has to be some reasonable explaination to how people handle the abscence of their Super-id.

[Beautiful sky]

Why so much nonsense?

[Psyhence]

Hmm this is a pretty decent way of portraiting merry vs serious.
at this point it got me to reflect the following:

1) a constant need for people to ask about what is implied/meant, could be the result of opposition in this dichotomy. I.e lack of evident path for the interpretation of an object oriented critic (Te) to take place [ ... A) OMG i'm totally having an existential crisis! ... B)What do you mean by that, what happened to you?...] vs lack of space to maneuver interpretation for a discrete analysis to be made (Ti) [ ... B) so at that point he turned around and picked up the one on the left without flinching...1) are you implying he actually had no fear or doubt at all?]

2) An INxP independently of this dichotomy, should be very conscientious about the internal dynamics of an interaction. I.e how one's relationship with the object will be changing in function of the interpretation revealed through the object [Te+Fi vs Ti+Fe]
Ni+Fe Is aware of how the interaction with the other (conversation) could produce subtle changes of attitude in the self and other, which can be interpreted in a discrete consistent manner [...I feel weird, I'm coming up as an idiot, i almost can see how he's making fun of me with that cynical smile... That's making me feel anxious, if we should change themes to lighten the mood I might feel more confident in time ... It would be fun if... ].
Ni+Te notices how the exchange with the object (conversation) might produce evident reactions in the self and the object, which can be interpreted in a discrete ambiguous manner [... I think this guy is an idiot, he keeps on just smiling whenever he doesn't have a clue about what to say, this is a drag, there is no use to this, if he should shoot himself at least I wouldn't have to endure staring at his face forever ... How can I... ].

[yeves]

Consequences:

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.

this is very interesting. i've noticed with this an EII and a SLI. they filter information in how it was described above - by establishing a personal bond with someone they feel they can trust and relate to, then absorbing everything that person tell them. the stronger the bond, the less selective they are with what's coming from that person.

it does have that particular flaw that if the entire relationship was a delusion and the person they became close with was lying, concocting something that merely sounds factual and intelligent, and purposefully distorting facts for some kind of scheme, they are easily caught up in this kind of misdirection and gullibly mislead. EII with suggestive Te suffers from this more severely than the SLI, but the SLI also becomes too undiscriminating if the bonds of trust run deep enough.

[Lolita]

Fe-Ti gathers objective information from the emotional atmosphere and analyzes the whys/origins of that atmosphere.

Fi-Te already formulated subjective judgement based on internal emotional values and solicit external evidence to validate their moral judgement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DEAD]

Fe-Ti gathers objective information from the emotional atmosphere and analyzes the whys/origins of that atmosphere.

Fi-Te already formulated subjective judgement based on internal emotional values and solicit external evidence to validate their moral judgement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ehhhh, you just skipped (again) on how /both/ have subjective /and/ objective elements just to bash on Fi/Te

What are morals?

[Lolita]

What are morals?

Basically what’s “good” and “bad” behavior.

[DEAD]

Basically what’s “good” and “bad” behavior.

Good or bad to society, me or both? Acceptable behaviour or made up behaviour?

[Lolita]

Ehhhh, you just skipped (again) on how /both/ have subjective /and/ objective elements just to bash on Fi/Te

I wasn’t bashing either pathway and explained how it works. Stop trying so hard to defend Fi so you can suck their dicks.

[Rebelondeck]

I doubt that F- or T-processes actually filter data, which is likely reserved for input processes; they rationalize it so as to later dismiss or accept it but that isn't filtering in the information-control-system sense. Filtering implies an automatic elimination or passing of certain data at acquisition time, a process which doesn't normally permit time for rationalization. Now, rationalization may lead to some later filtering refinements, but, for example, if one is S-oriented then no amount of rationalization is going to cause a transformation to N-input.

a.k.a. I/O

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Whoah this is so old and y'all keep Necro'ing threads but I do really see what Expat meant.

I don't like being taken so literally all the time, it's awkward and invasive or something. For example, I obviously don't want to tear off Anderson Cooper's nipples just because I did it in a fan fiction but to me, a strong Fi valuer would think I would want to do those things 'for real' just because I said I did and it's bizarre to me, being treated that way lol. And it's stifling/weird-in-the-bad-way to me if people talk ultra literal and "straight" and with no creativity to their voice. That's why I probably will never be a Fi/Te valuer.

(I do appreciate/can usually tolerate SEE and ESI's Fi/Te speak for some reason though- because they are my benefactor and semi-dual respectively, but most of the time I loathe it, especially probably if it's coming from str8 ppl Deltas- as to be expected I guess.) I can tolerate some IEE crap as well but only in small doses I think. Interacting with most EIIs/LSEs especially have been the most clash-y, I think over all. But it depends, I know that's too vague - socionics is complicated, there are all sorts of variations and nuances. There are INFjs/even a few LSEs that at least understand INFps a bit- it depends.

[sbbds]

- I don’t care about authority. Even a genius can shit the bed sometimes. Those who are elevated on an academic/intellectual pedestal are usually given a bedpan—expect them to be insane or unreasonable at times.
- Broken clocks are correct once in a while. Don’t dismiss them totally.
- It has to make sense to me. God or the Queen or someone with a gun to my head can make me lie through my teeth to them. It won’t change what I think internally.
- I don’t judge knowledge by how much I like or love them or whether or not they are my friend or a psychopath (although, I do think most of my friends are pretty smart and capable). I can hold my tongue to avoid escalating conflict if I really care about them or if I need to in order to make a good impression, but that’s about it.
- The way I determine whether or not things are likely to be true is based on the known existence of occurrences that are dependent on those things being true. I utilize all obvious known indisputable facts.
- Due to the above, the more detail and cross-references to other topics something has or that a person is able to provide, the more likely it is to be true.
- Actions are the final word.

[sbbds]

One more thing: I’ve seen it said (well, in a psychology course) that EQ and IQ are correlated...

[Computer Loser]

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".

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.

Funny how the essence can be boiled down to cognition.

Can Ti/Fe, Te/Fi ever coexist peacefully?

[Exodus]

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.

[Expat]

as for Ti "narrow-minding" "chaotic" or perhaps "cunning" (as i thought you put it) information intake is quite unclear. i think it's better to say: Ti narrow-minding Te rather. if to symmetrize with the Fi-Te bit of yours, maybe it would look something like: Ti sort of zooms in according to some pre-set formally logical reason or order, on a chaotic dynamics, e.g. someone's emotional behavior, to then extract a behavioral model out of it or smth.

I think that's a very specific use, or manifestation, of Fe.

If you say that it is Ti that "narrow-minds Te", so Te would be the main source of external input for Fe-Ti types, then what about the Te PoLR types, SEI and IEI? They'd be close to "pure introverts", that is, their Ti - also not a strong function - would "zoom in" input from an even weaker function, Te? That doesn't seem to make sense to me.

[mm]

Thanks. For the record, I agree with what Expat has written too. But I was sort of taken by surprise when he corrected my view on Te/Fi, which was only wrong I think because I was too biased towards Irrational. So now I want to clear this up and figure out the little details I have no problem with splitting this off into a new thread if that would be better.

Anyway, as I understand Expat, he seems to want Fi to tell him which are good Te sources. I figure he needs the good Te to take the best actions and keep control over where things are going (Ni/Se). It's as if the world would be Te/Fi and he sees Te sources here and there, some good, some bad, but each with certain (hidden) traits that Fi tries to get a taste for and map to for instance reliability. What he wants from his dual is some help in picking up the Fi in that world, especially in places where he has no experience and doesn't know what to expect from someone for instance. Without his dual he'll want to aggregate lots of Te from many different sources to get a feel for what is reliable. With his dual he'd feel more comfortable skipping some sources thereby going a lot faster. It's a more passive (accepting) kind of attitude towards Te/Fi. His Te/Fi perception is like a compass he uses to orient himself, i.e. to guide his actions in an essentially Te/Fi world. (Is that at all correct?)

I would expect Niffweed to see Te/Fi somewhat differently, in the same way that I see Fe/Ti differently from an EIE. An EIE's strength is in seeing what kind of effects individual actions (Ni/Se), including their own, have on the emotional atmosphere, i.e. for them the world itself is Fe/Ti and their actions have longlasting effects on it. My IEI world on the other hand is Ni/Se, a world of impacts, tendencies and potential consequences. The strength of my Fe is therefore not in picking up *the* emotional atmosphere, but in picking up how everyone is individually impacted by it, that is how everybody personally interprets and responds to it. Or in this thread's terminology, my Fe's primary focus is not on what can generally be read between the lines of some message to get a feel of the emotional atmosphere, but rather on what everybody else individually tends to read between the lines in that message. The better I get to know someone, the better I can start to predict and anticipate their response (Ti comes into play here). And more, by talking in on them, I can have an effect on their disposition in a particular situation, without the situation itself, its emotional atmosphere, changing at all. So, Fe/Ti for me is not out there in the world, but exists only in my own and other people's heads.

Likewise, I think Niffweed would see Te/Fi more as personal interpretation too, but I don't fully get the Te/Fi combo yet apparently to see how exactly. I think he does see it that way though, because there's a subtle difference in the way the two of you express yourself. Expat seems to say "that other guy is an asshole". And Niffweed seems more inclined to say "I consider him an asshole". Another thing maybe is that he probably doesn't want his dual to pick up Fi for him, but rather wants him to double-check his Fi, keep an eye on it, maybe fill-in missing bits, in other words more of a teaching kind of attitude towards an Fi that wants to learn. (How high does this fly?)


If this sounds too much like gibberish, maybe I should try a different approach like, can you explain why LIE and ILI have a mirror relationship? Why does this happen:

They always have things to say on the same topics and easily come to a consensus, but at the same time put opposite emphasis on things, creating a revisionary effect. These relations are highly verbally oriented, with partners discussing their hobby topics (and avoiding most others) and revising and adding to each other's views. Partners tire from the discussionary nature of the relationship and try to separate for work and rest.

I'd say the revising nature is related to what I said above. LIE and ILI make different assumptions on what can be taken as a given in the world versus what is individual interpretation. They each have a different attitude towards Ni/Se and Te/Fi. So, when one speaks from his base function, the other is going to want to double-check and perhaps revise that since he assumes it's a potentially biased personal interpretation, which is basically what happened in Expat's reply above to Niffweed who's talking from Ni (?).

[aestrivex]

Thanks. For the record, I agree with what Expat has written too. But I was sort of taken by surprise when he corrected my view on Te/Fi, which was only wrong I think because I was too biased towards Irrational. So now I want to clear this up and figure out the little details I have no problem with splitting this off into a new thread if that would be better.

Anyway, as I understand Expat, he seems to want Fi to tell him which are good Te sources. I figure he needs the good Te to take the best actions and keep control over where things are going (Ni/Se). It's as if the world would be Te/Fi and he sees Te sources here and there, some good, some bad, but each with certain (hidden) traits that Fi tries to get a taste for and map to for instance reliability. What he wants from his dual is some help in picking up the Fi in that world, especially in places where he has no experience and doesn't know what to expect from someone for instance. Without his dual he'll want to aggregate lots of Te from many different sources to get a feel for what is reliable. With his dual he'd feel more comfortable skipping some sources thereby going a lot faster. It's a more passive (accepting) kind of attitude towards Te/Fi. His Te/Fi perception is like a compass he uses to orient himself, i.e. to guide his actions in an essentially Te/Fi world. (Is that at all correct?)

I would expect Niffweed to see Te/Fi somewhat differently, in the same way that I see Fe/Ti differently from an EIE. An EIE's strength is in seeing what kind of effects individual actions (Ni/Se), including their own, have on the emotional atmosphere, i.e. for them the world itself is Fe/Ti and their actions have longlasting effects on it. My IEI world on the other hand is Ni/Se, a world of impacts, tendencies and potential consequences. The strength of my Fe is therefore not in picking up *the* emotional atmosphere, but in picking up how everyone is individually impacted by it, that is how everybody personally interprets and responds to it. Or in this thread's terminology, my Fe's primary focus is not on what can generally be read between the lines of some message to get a feel of the emotional atmosphere, but rather on what everybody else individually tends to read between the lines in that message. The better I get to know someone, the better I can start to predict and anticipate their response (Ti comes into play here). And more, by talking in on them, I can have an effect on their disposition in a particular situation, without the situation itself, its emotional atmosphere, changing at all. So, Fe/Ti for me is not out there in the world, but exists only in my own and other people's heads.

Likewise, I think Niffweed would see Te/Fi more as personal interpretation too, but I don't fully get the Te/Fi combo yet apparently to see how exactly. I think he does see it that way though, because there's a subtle difference in the way the two of you express yourself. Expat seems to say "that other guy is an asshole". And Niffweed seems more inclined to say "I consider him an asshole". Another thing maybe is that he probably doesn't want his dual to pick up Fi for him, but rather wants him to double-check his Fi, keep an eye on it, maybe fill-in missing bits, in other words more of a teaching kind of attitude towards an Fi that wants to learn. (How high does this fly?)


If this sounds too much like gibberish, maybe I should try a different approach like, can you explain why LIE and ILI have a mirror relationship? Why does this happen:

I'd say the revising nature is related to what I said above. LIE and ILI make different assumptions on what can be taken as a given in the world versus what is individual interpretation. They each have a different attitude towards Ni/Se and Te/Fi. So, when one speaks from his base function, the other is going to want to double-check and perhaps revise that since he assumes it's a potentially biased personal interpretation, which is basically what happened in Expat's reply above to Niffweed who's talking from Ni (?).

IMO -- everything tangible that you actually pointed out represents a differences that appears pretty inconsequential from a perspective of how information manifests itself differently. like "i consider him an asshole" vs "he's an asshole" ... if anything, this might be reflective of differences in the way we communicate; i might not tend to talk in absolutes. it says nothing about the way that we really perceive it.

i think most of it looks speculative and contrived.

[Expat]

Anyway, as I understand Expat, he seems to want Fi to tell him which are good Te sources. I figure he needs the good Te to take the best actions and keep control over where things are going (Ni/Se). It's as if the world would be Te/Fi and he sees Te sources here and there, some good, some bad, but each with certain (hidden) traits that Fi tries to get a taste for and map to for instance reliability. What he wants from his dual is some help in picking up the Fi in that world, especially in places where he has no experience and doesn't know what to expect from someone for instance. Without his dual he'll want to aggregate lots of Te from many different sources to get a feel for what is reliable. With his dual he'd feel more comfortable skipping some sources thereby going a lot faster. It's a more passive (accepting) kind of attitude towards Te/Fi. His Te/Fi perception is like a compass he uses to orient himself, i.e. to guide his actions in an essentially Te/Fi world. (Is that at all correct?)

It's close. I'd say Te is not only my primary window to the world, is the foundation of my thinking. But with that there is an awareness that I get "bad Te" from a lot of sources (ie individuals). Often my own Te is enough to recognize bad Te for what it is; the bolded sentence is indeed close to it as Fi would then tell me whether or not the source (individual) is reliable, and a Fi-strong dual helps with that.

Also, in such situations: my Te will say "what he's telling me is nonsense; I'm surprised he doesn't know better". My dual's Fi might say, "no. It's not an honest mistake, he's lying".

I'd say the revising nature is related to what I said above. LIE and ILI make different assumptions on what can be taken as a given in the world versus what is individual interpretation. They each have a different attitude towards Ni/Se and Te/Fi. So, when one speaks from his base function, the other is going to want to double-check and perhaps revise that since he assumes it's a potentially biased personal interpretation, which is basically what happened in Expat's reply above to Niffweed who's talking from Ni (?).

I essentially agree with niffweed's reply, but I will add this -- in the cases relevant to this thread, I think the difference is the ILI's stronger confidence on Fi. The ILI is generally more "independent" than the LIE in terms of using his Fi filter to obtain his Te information; where he is more "dependent" on the dual is in terms of Se, that is, of actually doing something to "fulfull" Ni.


@niffweed: on this, I agree that my my Ni-Se "description" did not convey well what Ni and Se are as functions; but that wasn't the purpose of that thread since they have been described elsewhere. The purpose was to draw the line, even a simplistic one, into what divides Ne-Si and Se-Ni into two sides, just like Fe-Ti and Fi-Te here.