*4 youOriginally Posted by Lord Pixel
*4 you
Hah, yu are right, 4 you it is 1D Fi. So you have no idea what we are talking about when we talk about Fi. No experiential knowledge at least.
The very definition of a 1D function is that it’s limited by experience, actually. https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...y-of-Functions
1D functions are the most experientially-based ones.
Soy you think you understand Fi? even on a 4D level? Yea I didn't think so either.
Nope. I’m glad I’ve got 4D Te and Se and 3D Ti to thoroughly understand it, and also dimensionality theory, on an experiential level with though.
<br>Nope. I’m glad I’ve got 4D Te and Se and 3D Ti to thoroughly understand it, and also dimensionality theory, on an experiential level with though. <img src="images/smilies/icon_smile.gif" border="0" alt="" title="
Yea but you don't got experiential knowlegde so your ur always a little left out. It's the difference between reading about it and living it. You have reading about it knowledge. So you never know what it is. You just know what ppl say it is.
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.
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.
Reply With Quote
