Erm, okay. I don’t think that you’re following.
Everyone has the ability to experience all IEs and does experience them. 1D functions in fact are entirely based on experiential knowledge. You can check out the theory basics that I linked two posts before this one.
In addition, the PoLR function is a conscious one. So there’s really no reason I shouldn’t know what it is, even if I may not necessarily be that good at it.
Well I'd suppose having "4D Te" means blindly accepting something as true, just because a Socionist says so.
If being a "T type" means believing in Socionics, then it must be crap.
I have 1D Fi and I think I understand it; I’m just inept at using it.
I was on an elevator yesterday with an ESI-Fi, and the impression I got from just standing next to her was one of deep, deep feelings. But maybe this was inferred rather than real, IDK.
I relate my 1D Fi to 4D Fi by comparing my 4D Te to the Te of other people, where they almost always use it less well, almost like children in comparison.
I have no doubt that my Fi appears to be pretty childish to 4D Fi users.
I have 1 D Se and the more I use it, the more I realize how great its power is. Instinctual Intelligence. saves a lot of time.
We can only see things that we have expectations of:
"If we ask what really comes first, it is not an observation or even a hypothesis, but an entire organism in which there are built-in expectations and built-in ways of reacting. These expectations and ways of reacting are themselves a kind of built-in way of knowing. And our sensations and observations really have meaning only relative to them. Jet planes, for example, do not, as a rule, even disturb the birds. A human being might look up when he hears a plane, but a cat would not. This is because the plane lies outside of a cat’s framework of expectations. It just doesn’t ring a bell. And in order to observe something, it has to ring a bell, which means that you observe only those things that your organism is prepared to observe by your inborn reactions and earlier experiences."
- Karl Popper
http://www.the-rathouse.com/Intro-Ph...-Problems.html
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Well I think the main problem is that Socionics doesn't actually offer any explanations, it instead shuts off from giving explanations by labeling things.
So we may ask, "Why does this person do this?" and it answers with "Because of Fi" and we say "Ah... that's why". But that's not an explanation for that behavior, it's just about giving a label for that behavior.
So we may think that we have satisfied our curiosity of finding out the answer to the question of "why?", but it actually hasn't. Perhaps labeling things is a kind of an explanation, but that label itself remains unexplained.
What exactly is Fi, other than an observation? It's like saying "an apple drops to the ground of because of gravity", but there's no theory or an explanation for what that "gravity" is.
So I think that's one of the main reasons why Socionics remain unsatisfactory, because it doesn't enlighten us by explaining the things that it purports to explain, which are human behaviors, why do people do things the way they do, etc.
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Well that's true, but we'll need to come up with theories and explanations, instead of just kind of observing and describing things, which then the unexpressed theories and explanations just remain inside of our heads.
So if we were going to "type" then we'll need to explain how typing works, and if we want to know how typing works then we'll need to know how types work, and if we want to know how types work then we'll need to know how our brains or our psychology work. If we can put them into words and give them clarity, then people can objectively pick them apart. If we don't then all we can do is agree or disagree but give no explanation or rationale as to why.
Newton enlightened us by coming up with an explanation for what gravity is, which came in the form of the theory of universal gravitation. In the same way, someone needs to come up with a theory on what Fi or emotions are, or whatever.
Last edited by Singu; 04-28-2019 at 02:22 AM.
Fi is exactly what it says, the internalized feelings and sensations of attraction/repulsion, like or dislike. Four dimensional Fi/or mb valued Fi too, for example knows exactly why deep in its heart of hearts why it loathes a particular thing and can write a 50,000 page essay on it. It can do this with multiple topics many times. Fi is loving and sweet as it is harsh, unforgiving and brutal. But objectively speaking, it definitely lacks the diplomacy that Fe has because Fe is about creating a certain emotional atmosphere for others rather than 'I personally like/dislike this and here is a 50,000 page essay explaining why.'
My fi polr ILE buddy for example... accepts everybody equally even though he's a huge jerk at times that doesn't take people's own personal fields of like/dislike into account very well. It's because he isn't paying enough attention to this stuff, is why he can accept people better than an angry, self-righteous EII with a stick up their ass. So fi polr is also very ethical as it is non-ethical, just like Fi is loving/deep/moral/kind as it is harsh/brutal/unforgiving. Of course to a Fi valuer Fi polr its going to seem highly unethical.
Fi polr can also make you not judge situations accurately and then you can overreact the same way a Fi-ego would. The eighth function is probably the strongest we have.
lol that sort of thing is considered very strong, at least in 'Murica. The 4D ego function definitely has more finesse tho yeah. The pretentiousness of it is how we troll our supervisees with it.
Hurr-durr-reeeeeee-ca
“I have never tried that before, so I think I should definitely be able to do that.” --- Pippi Longstocking
Assuming that the entire motivation for their behavior is "like/dislike", "attraction/repulsion", or lack thereof.
Which I highly doubt is the case, since the the motivation can't be less complex than the observed behavior. It ignores the all sorts of complexities and logical chains of events that must lead to that certain kind of behavior, such as the creation of complex systems of morality or the managing of relationships.
It's basically the equivalent of "psychological reductionism". It's like saying that if we only managed to pinpoint and identify the "initial condition" of an atom or something, then we can predict the entire world. That may be true in principle, but that's hardly the point, because it requires all sorts of different levels of explanations to understand why things are the way they are, right now.
Socionics in practice is not about understanding, but creating a new, or alternative social order. It needs to be kept in check. Look how horribly people treat each other on this site. No one takes the time to understand one another. So many think they are the typist Supreme. Now extend this into a global context and it spells disaster.
Fi is feelings. another kind of them
It ignores the all sorts of complexities and logical chains of events that must lead to that certain kind of behavior, such as the creation of complex systems of morality or the managing of relationships.
Of course it does, but when you define something you have to ignore the complexities otherwise you talk in demonic babble-tongue. And of course people are going to have motivations beyond like/dislike, the point of Fi itself as a definition is not motivations though.
We're saying that Fi is likes/dislikes, attraction/repulsion etc, and therefore, this will lead to observed "Fi" behaviors in "Fi types".
The definition of Fi is simple, yet the resultant observed behavior of people are complex. They both don't jibe.
If we focus exclusively on likes/dislikes... then that must only lead to very simplistic behaviors. It can't possibly lead to complex ideas like interpersonal relationships or systems of morality.
@roger557 Also, do you put that derpy stuffed puppet up your anus and play with your prostrate with it?
Which personality types have introverted feeling?
If you need to buy an essay, visit https://writepaper.com/write-my-term-paper
That was almost OK response. Let's welcome our machine ovelords.
But yeah I'd say that Te types experience uncomfortable emotions [Fe] and needs good suppressor [via Fi] who tells them what they feel. Ti types probably find this intrusive on some level because it is like telling them what to be.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
I think Fi manifests itself more through acts of help/compassion and Fe through need for emotional purging/expression.
I think both tend to "feel" something in an emotional sense but Fi supports Te in constructive actions whereas Fe expands what it feels via expression.
Edit: but Fe leads can feel compelled to help others. Fe and Fi overlap in some ways in terms of their manifestation.
Join my Enneagram Discord: https://discord.gg/ND4jCAcs
I relate so much to this. I couldn't tell you why I dislike something and I really don't care to write an essay or explain why because to be honest, no one else cares and I could care less too. I'm actually not a very ethical person, despite having "strong opinions on society", and I could care less what anyone else does, and I'm not here to lecture people on why it's right/wrong to do something.
Yeah, I couldn't tell you what anyone else likes/dislikes are half of the time. I am pretty accepting, but mostly because I really don't care to form relationships in that way (as in the Fi way) with other people much, because I am not very good at it. I think that when I am very bitchy, I can overreact in situations and come across as a really unhealthy person. Since I have been stressed, I have been coming across as a bitch and harsh, but I'm not usually like that.
I think when we are stressed and we overthink things and try to use our PoLR, we end up becoming the worst version of ourselves. I agree that the strength of the PoLR is vastly underrated, even when we don't use it. I think because we don't use it, we end up succombing to its wrath when it comes out.
I have a standard set of ethics
1. Be kind and compassionate (I’m human too so I get upset) - It's an ideal. Nobody can really be kind and compassionate 24/7.
2. Don’t lie, have integrity - The truth often gets you killed or hurt, or ppl can twist the truth against you. Or not see the truth accurately because the truth is too polluted with their own version of 'truth' - which is just another lie that they cannot see. People can't handle the truth and everybody has to lie sometimes for their own protection.
3. Concentrate on your own work. Never mind what anybody else does - I agree in principal, but in reality people are hatefully nosy and people are not going to follow this.
4. Realize that some kinds of teasing is hurtful and offensive to others. - If somebody doesn't have sadistic or malicious intentions, people shouldn't really get so sensitive over teasing. And even if they do, maybe a better way to handle that is to punch a sadist in the mouth so they stop. 'That's hurtful!' - How weak and also unfair because it's too cruel to people who mean no harm and not cruel enough to those that do. Being made fun of can potentinally be somebody's way of trying to bond with u, anyway.
5. Love - What's love got to do- got to do with it. Who needs a heart when a heart can be broken.
6. Rescue puppies when you can - I hate this Delta virtue signaling BS to be honest. 'Oh look what a good person I am cuz I rescued this puppy from a shelter/donated soup cans to homeless people.' I don't care. Maybe Beta really is evil - but seriously I don't care. I don't want animals to be harmed, what kind of psychopath wants that- but I loathe virtue signaling.
Lol - Yeah you realize it's ridiculous right. =D
Ethics is such a funny thing I like this post cuz it probably really helped view how Beta and Delta values are different, so thank you.
If Fi is dissolved in the inner world where the subject of Fi is not haunting the INFJ then the INFJ comes off more of a thinker. But, if the Fi starts to surface and haunt the INFJ or ISFJ anxiety, depression and other moods start to grip the Fi base types. Then, repeat what your dual would tell you to do in that moment to get out of this Fi frenzy or just try other lesser successful methods and strategize trying all that you can from roominating and letting your feelings go into a black hole
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 02-21-2023 at 02:45 PM.
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html