But ESEs are rationals!Originally Posted by Logos
I'll leave the extermination of ESEs to their conflictors.
But ESEs are rationals!
Why?This comparison makes me sad.
But ESEs are rationals!I suppose I am just confused by this. What should have been the proper response by your mother after saying these things? Should she have brooded for a few days? Should she have cut you out of her life? What did you want her to do?
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
If someone says something mean and hurtful, that person should apologize. And stop doing it.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
Yes. Not pretend it isn't a big deal.
Do Fe-egos not apologize? If that is how they felt in that moment, should they not have said that? Is it really as easy as "stop doing it" to an Fe ego as it is to an Fi ego?
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
I don't think people with Fe in their ego block always see a need to apologize. Like, this is what happens and it's no big deal, we're still friends, so let's get on with things. Which I think my dad anyway (ENFj) sees as the more healthy way to deal with it, and perhaps all Fe-ego types see it as more healthy. No one is perfect, everyone blows up, it's water under the bridge, tomorrow is another day, no big deal. If someone blows up and says mean things to me, I can't just move on without dealing with it, which involves apologies. If I get mean with someone, I always apologize, and I expect the same from others. I have plenty of friends with Fe in their ego block, but that's certainly my biggest issue with them.
It has nothing to do with "shoulds". People are different and deal with things differently. It's just an observation about Socionic type differences. Personally, even when I'm upset, I have a pretty good ability to not say hurtful things to people. I yell about something someone did, but I don't yell and say things about the person. Only about the action. And if I slip, I apologize for it. I usually apologize for losing my cool regardless, really.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
I have yet to meet an Fe ego who has not apologized from such outbursts when they sincerely felt sorry for what they said. If I ever meet the one who does not, you will be the first to know.
And do you think that this negative behavior is more likely in Fe egos?It has nothing to do with "shoulds". People are different and deal with things differently. It's just an observation about Socionic type differences. Personally, even when I'm upset, I have a pretty good ability to not say hurtful things to people. I yell about something someone did, but I don't yell and say things about the person. Only about the action. And if I slip, I apologize for it. I usually apologize for losing my cool regardless, really.
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
The Fi one being illustrated as black and white.
Moonlight will fall
Winter will end
Harvest will come
Your heart will mend
Why are you so defensive? My goodness. My perspective is of someone who is not an Fe ego and my view will be skewed based on that. You can not say that either way of interacting is more negative or positive. They are different based on our functional preferences.
I've known plenty of Fe ego types who don't regularly apologize when they say something hurtful. But you and I might have different opinions about what is hurtful and what would require an apology based on our functional preferences.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
If I said that I've also known Fi egos who have said hurtful things without apologizing, does that make it the norm? I'm sorry if I seem defensive, but considering that the majority of the perspectives offered in this thread have been from Fi egos or valuers, my posts are designed to provide a more balanced perspective. But as I have no Fe ego of my own, I have to provide this perspective in a Ti manner.
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
Why do you feel the need to dissect everything we say though? Those that have posted here that either have Fe ego or value Fe have agreed that they have a more outwardly explosive way of expressing themselves. They don't have to like "our" way and we don't have to like "theirs." We have different preferences.
I am not dissecting anything. So stop being defensive. I am simply asking questions. I understand that there are differences in preferences. While Fe egos have agreed that they have a more outwardly explosive way of expressing themselves, the contention lies in determining what that entails and preventing the spreading of myths. I am not telling you to like the Fe way either. I am merely trying to help you understand what is going on with Fe egos and their way of dealing with confrontation. Believe it...or not.
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
LOL
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
AGAIN, it isn't that Fe-ego types are more explosive, because I am explosive so I absolutely couldn't say that. It's that they have a more laid-back or accepting view of different emotional states, including explosiveness. It's more that they see it as not a big thing to get upset about, or just normal. If I get upset at someone, I beat myself up about it and probably go overboard trying to set things right again. If someone gets upset with me, I have (possibly unfair) expectations about what should happen afterward. And I've been told by people with Fe in their ego type at times like that that I'm making too big a deal out of things. From what I've seen, people with Fe in their ego type just don't seem to be bothered by this. If someone gets upset with them, and/or if they get upset with someone, once the moment of dispute has passed, they're quite relaxed about it and continue on as if nothing happened between them.
I've never even made a value judgment that it's bad, just that it makes me, as an Fi-ego type, uncomfortable. I can't just move on. I don't even see why it would be interpreted as a negative statement about Fe more than a negative statement about Fi. The other side of this would be that Fi types hold grudges, can't get over even minor issues without big overtures of regret, etc. Either side can be viewed as negative or positive, and neither side is objectively either positive or negative. It's all based on who we are and how we react.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
Yeah, me too. I could count the times I've "exploded" on one hand. It only happens when I'm absolutely pushed to the limit, extremely frustrated in my dealings with someone. Would I apologise then? Not for my reaction. If I said something in anger I didn't mean - yeah. But it wouldn't make sense to apologise for an emotional reaction, because I'd do it again in the same circumstance. "Oh, I'm sorry for calling you such-and-such. I meant it, but I shouldn't have said it." Oh, that's good to know. What good is an apology then? It's an utterly meaningless formality. All you'd be apologising for is letting your mask slip and letting your true thoughts and feelings show. Not to say that I'd expect us to go on like nothing had happened. I'd take the attitude of explaining myself though - rather than saying I'm sorry for things that came from my heart.
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
Both of you are continuing to dissect my words. Honestly, all I did here was state my experience and opinion. I never said I was an expert on Fi or anything in the matter. It is just my experience. Why can't you accept that? I have no interest in continuing to defend my words. If you can't seem to accept another point of view or even try to understand where I'm coming from without turning this into some kind of Fi/Fe war, that's your problem, not mine. My god! I said "ours" and "theirs" for the sake of clarity. I didn't mean anything negative by it, just to point out that we are different. Why is that such a bad thing? Last time I checked there was nothing wrong with diversity. And I'm the one being defensive?
Dolphin, you are blowing this whole thing way out of proportion. I never said that my definition, or rather my "experience" should be applied universally. I'm not that presumptuous. It is just my experience! Do with it what you like. If you think it's crap, dismiss it. Neither did I say that individual differences don't come into play here. I would think that anyone with half a brain would assume that. So please, stop putting words in my mouth. My intent is not to perpetuate any kind of stereotypes. I am simply pointing out how in my experience, Fi and Fe egos have a different attitude about conflict. I am not saying that one is wrong and the other is right. I also realize it's not black and white, but for the sake of this argument, it is necessary to point out the differences (from my perspective). Isn't that what this thread is about? How would you describe the differences? Or would you say there are no differences, since you seem to be so opposed to generalizations? Everything you've said here shows that you still don't understand where I'm coming from and since I have done my best to describe it and still not getting the point across to you after several posts, I don't see how continuing to repeat myself will do anything but take up space.
Despite what you may feel, I am definitely not dissecting your words. And yes, it is plain to see that you are being incredibly defensive.
Everytime you pound in the AGAIN, you are refining your answer like a fine gem. Your explanations are improving and getting closer to the truth.
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
But what happens when they don't sincerely feel sorry for what they said and have still hurt someone else?
I don't think Sirena and Slacker Mom are expecting or wanting Fe egos to stop behaving as Fe egos when frustrated or 'blowing up.' But rather offer some form of acknowledgement that they realize their words, even if justified from their point of view, are perceived as harsh and are genuinely hurtful to others.
I think some acknowledgement of that, regardless of whether the Fe ego meant it or was just 'venting,' would have been the "proper response" Sirena would have prefered from her mother. Instead of feeling that the conflict had been resolved, as her mother probably did after getting her chance to 'explode,' Sirena had just felt insulted. Possibly with even more uncertainty in the air about their relationship after receiving such 'harsh' criticism.
When Fi egos/valuers feel they've just had a barrage of verbal daggers stabbed in their chest, the last thing they want to be told (or automatically expected to do) is to just take it. Forget about it. And resume the interaction as if nothing had ever happened.
Not the idea of a satisfactory relationship from a Fi perspective or a good way of resolving disputes/misunderstandings.
I don't know why I'm in this thread.
Last edited by duality is cringe; 08-05-2008 at 01:13 PM.
I just realized that part of what may have contributed to this whole thing is that I said that Fe egos are more "outwardly explosive" and apparently hit a sore spot by using those words. To clarify, what I meant by that is that Fe egos seem more comfortable and accepting of expressing their emotions in an outwardly intense way and can even do it purposely "to get their point across." Dolphin and Jem have both said they do this, however rare it might be. I never spoke to the frequency of it. I was merely pointing out how this differs from me.
I'm gonna give it another shot. Sorry if I'm just repeating myself here. I feel that showing intense emotion when trying to express myself will take away from getting my point across rather than enhance it. Because I don't appreciate this, when someone gets overly emotional with me, I tend to shut down and feel incapable of seeing a point past all the words and displays. To me, it is completely unproductive and we shouldn't proceed until we are calm. I'm not saying I don't explode sometimes, but it is never intentional. It always feels wrong and that I ruined any potential to make myself understood by doing so.
So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that for those that value Fe, showing an intense emotional reaction can be seen as an aid in the process of explaining yourself, while those who value Fi seem to view it as a detractor. Individual differences as well as experiences do come into play in all this, of course.
I know this wasn't directed at me, but I found it funny that you perceive yourself as the authority to determine what the "truth" is.
Thanks for putting some clarity behind my words. I tend to ramble. You explained my feelings very well here. Thanks.
I also agree with the rest of your post.
"Purposely" in terms of simply allowing myself to show the intensity of my feelings. Not in a "I think an emotional response would be most effective here excuse me while I put on my angry mask" way. (c:
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
Don't worry Sirena. I'll protect you from teh ugly Alpha Ti!!Thanks for putting some clarity behind my words. I tend to ramble. You explained my feelings very well here. Thanks.
<3<3I'm counting on that big rifle you're holding!
Some general takes on the Fi-Fe situation..
I think it's reasonably fair to say Fe concerns itself with frequency of external emotional ques. For instance..a grin of jollity upon face, followed by a distant melancholy look then perhaps by some form of glare..that's Fe. Fe is often used to reveal existing emotional states. Fe concerns itself with external emotional expression ... therefore arguments of external emotional expression could well be equated to the Fe function being utilised.
This is pretty much covered in this article http://www.socionics.us/theory/be.shtml
If an argument is being used to bring out external emotional expressions and therefore actions, it's reaonable to think Fe could and probably is the catalyst or the "function" being used to demonstrate these...ie the stronger the external response..the more the emotion is being displayed.Their feelings of love and admiration, and of disgust and hatred, are "full-blown
Each of us constantly sends out information of an Fe nature. Each unusual intonation or gesture, each hint of irritation in our voice, each awkward pause, each chuckle or sudden change of expression sends a Fe signal to other people. Some types — particularly ILI and SLI (with emotive ethics as their fourth function) consciously try to send as few signals of this kind as possible — and are usually successful. This makes ESEs and EIEs (with emotive ethics as their first function) mistrustful and unsure of themselves, since they have too little information to go by in their interaction with such people.
Fi would be more concerned with what's going on "inside" and find out that way...it doesn't necessarily look for "it" to be expressed in such external "emotive" type of manner.
Some typical semantics of Fi and Fe behaviour
Fi:
relationships between people
evaluating people (personality and character traits) and their deeds and conduct
evaluating the motives behind behavior
empathy; the ability to feel what others feel and understand their motives
Fe:
frequent use of emotionally charged adjectives
combining emotional adjectives and adverbs that are opposite in meaning
quoting poems, songs, etc. that reflect their current emotional situation
informal, colloquial, "non-dictionary" vocabulary
intentionally violating the stylistic flow with words that are either highly colloquial or archaic
intonationally conveying emotional states
personification of inanimate objects; increasing the number of actors involved in each story
I don't think it's therefore unreasonable to expect different approaches to discussions with this in mind for instance, and conveying and understanding any emotions (and including) other information involved.
.
I am not the authority in the matter of truth, but as Spinoza says, "He, who knows how to distinguish between true and false, must have an adequate idea of true and false." I merely view my own sense of Socionics as being adequate enough to assess what is closer to being to the theory and in behavior. So I find it funny that you misread what I was saying.
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
Well, it just sounds like you and I are having a blast today!!!
But Fe egos usually offer acknowledgment of their own stirring of negative Fe in others, which is the point I am trying to get across! You are making Fe egos sound psychotic. Fe egos do not pretend that the conflict did not happen or sweep it all entirely under the rug. This is the myth that needs to be slain!
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
There is no smoke without fire... it may be that the "Fe" ego would have got what they required out of the emotional expressiveness of the argument in question. One point of Fe is to extract the emotions from an external emotional response...this is not always sufficient to an "Fi" valuer...who would prefer it to be discussed without the need to express it in face, tone and intonation. The Fi type may walk away from such a thing unsatisfied, and the Fe type satiated. Due to different interpretations of how information should be conveyed.
And so the myth continues to thrive that the Fe ego is an insensitive bitch.
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
I think that types that have a 'rational' attitude towards emotions hate 'irrational' emotional outbursts. Eg, INFx hate temper tantrums (they see it as counterproductive, to them it is 'irrational'), while other types use temper tantrums to try to get a point across.
Different types have a different approach and outlook on basic values which makes it very hard for some types to understand each other when they are using the same word in an argument but have a profoundly different interpretation/ideal how that concept works.
I don't think Fe or Fi valuers as such are more prone to emotional outbursts because of their 'ethical' elements, I think that has more to do with types and situations.
Personally I cannot recall a time I truly 'lost my temper' in an argument and I value both Fe and Fi.
INFp
If your sea chart does not match reality, go with reality (Old mariner saying)
Who is saying that Fe egos are insensitive???
This is a silly post. Your being irrational, and not in the socionic sense. No one said that, your insistence of putting words in peoples mouths is not conducive to a conversation.
Or perhaps you are seeing things that are not there for some sort of Fe crusade.
Everything I have said makes perfect sense. And I have not accused any function of being what you say here.
Feel free to post your own views on Fe and Fi, and we can examine your credibility on this matter.
Two personal examples which illustrate Fe/Fi differences as I see them:
My grandmother's ESE. So a while ago when I was living at home, she had some minor accident. I'm from a big family, and it's easy to see yourself as just one of the group. So of course Mum and Dad kept in contact with her, keeping the rest of us up to date, so I didn't ring her myself and talk to her. Anyway, she rang one day - not to speak to me - but I answered and asked how she was - and she started yelling at me. It completely took me by surprise because I don't think she'd ever been mad at me before that. She was saying that I was the only one who hadn't rung to ask how she was - that she was hurt by that ... then she hung up on me. I was very upset about it - not because she'd yelled at me, but because I knew she was right and I was sorry that I'd hurt her. The next time I saw her, neither of us brought it up, but we hugged each other, and she knew I was sorry and it was all good. And it brought us closer.
So my Dad's LSE - and eh - I don't want to go into details- but I annoyed him in some way. And sometimes I can be so involved with my feelings of being upset that I've hurt the other person that I forget to say I'm sorry. Not so much now, but when I was younger. It just seems sort of superfluous in most cases, like of course I'm sorry. They're just words. So anyway, for days afterwards, I was trying to show Dad I was sorry, and it was frustrating because nothing seemed to be working. Then one day he says "So I'm waiting for you to say you're sorry. When are you going to say you're sorry?" Here I was trying so hard, and he was just wanting to hear from me that I was sorry. lol I guess I tend to devalue words because I look at the intent behind them and expect others to do the same.
I'm not sure if the 2nd example is strictly Fi ... Fi people, do you relate? That's just been my experience with Fi egos - that they need to formally clear the air before they can get back to business.
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
to me, this is all very confusing because i would have been like your dad. i need to clear the air before getting back to business...Two personal examples which illustrate Fe/Fi differences as I see them:
My grandmother's ESE. So a while ago when I was living at home, she had some minor accident. I'm from a big family, and it's easy to see yourself as just one of the group. So of course Mum and Dad kept in contact with her, keeping the rest of us up to date, so I didn't ring her myself and talk to her. Anyway, she rang one day - not to speak to me - but I answered and asked how she was - and she started yelling at me. It completely took me by surprise because I don't think she'd ever been mad at me before that. She was saying that I was the only one who hadn't rung to ask how she was - that she was hurt by that ... then she hung up on me. I was very upset about it - not because she'd yelled at me, but because I knew she was right and I was sorry that I'd hurt her. The next time I saw her, neither of us brought it up, but we hugged each other, and she knew I was sorry and it was all good. And it brought us closer.
So my Dad's LSE - and eh - I don't want to go into details
I'm not sure if the 2nd example is strictly Fi ... Fi people, do you relate? That's just been my experience with Fi egos - that they need to formally clear the air before they can get back to business.
Fe egos use negative Fe in others to acknowledge what exactly? That they are bothered by something? That I understand. But how do Fe egos go about expressing knowledge of their own words (via emotional outburts) causing severe emotional pain in those to whom they direct their negative Fe?
I did not get the impression that Sirena's mother fully understood or even acknowledged that her outburst may have caused Sirena lingering emotional pain and doubts based soley on the manner in which she supposedly carried on as if "nothing ever happened."
Maybe in your life and in your experiences, Fe egos are prone to address the causes of their emotional outburts and perhaps offer reassurance of where they and the person to whom they directed their outbursts stand in their relation to one another (after the confrontation has taken place), but Sirena did not feel that her mother had offered such acknowledgement.
Some other Fi valuers may have already agreed to having had similiar experiences with Fe egos in this type of interaction. I know I have.
I do not believe I was doing that and was definitely not my intention. Though admittedly, I was arguing from a Fi 'heavy' perspective.
I didn't say that they did. But merely that's how it's perceived by a Fi ego/valuer.
When person A yells something incredibly emotional at person B and a few minutes later, carries on the interaction almost as if the outburst didn't occur and at least appears to expect person B to do the same, then person B (the Fi ego) will get the impression that person A wants or expects them to "sweep" the incident under the rug.
You wanted to know what kind of behavior Sirena would have prefered her mother to exhibit after the emotional confrontation. I told you and Sirena confirmed it. I made no assumtions or generalizations about how the Fe ego was perceiving the resolution of the conflict in their own mind nor stated or (intentionally) implied that no reasonable explaination for the Fe ego behavior exists.
This all reminds me of an old thread where Kristiniia posted that if she has an angry emotional outburst at someone she knows well and carries on the next day as if there is no apparant strain in the relationship, that she would naturally "assume correlation" and expect the other person to either know that it was just a passing phase and/or be able to tell the true feelings (positive aspects of their relationship) from the temporary/false/negative feelings (negative Fe outburts).
No one here has closed their minds to the possibility that perhaps there is a method to what a Fi ego/valuer may perceive as 'madness' coming from the Fe ego during these types of emotional interactions, but I do not think you have done an adequate job of expressing just what that is, being this thread's self appointed devil's advocate and all.
You may disagree, but you do appear (to me) to be twisting the statements presented in favor/explaination of the Fi point of view into being some sort of generalizations or definite conclusions about the Fe egos perspective and intentions.
Last edited by duality is cringe; 08-05-2008 at 05:20 PM.
That's what I'm talking about.
Perhaps for the Fe ego, the outburst itself is a manner in 'clearing the air?'
Pretty much my point also.
Yeah, I think so. To me, being in a heated argument with someone is somewhat refreshing
"Language is the Rubicon that divides man from beast."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
