Fi and attraction

[thePirate]

how does Fi tell attraction and repulsion, like & dislike?

[Galen]

how does Fi tell attraction and repulsion, like & dislike?

It just does.

lol that was an awful answer, but that's really just how it goes, at least that's how it feels for me. I always simply know who or what I'm drawn to, repelled by, like or dislike. There's no real systematic course of thought I have to go through in order to determine or understand how I feel about the world. It's actually a really hard thing for me to talk about, because before Socionics I always just assumed that everybody else is the same way. Other Fi valuers I know have equated it to "breathing," and that's really the only way I can think of how it works. I may answer more if I'm asked more pointed questions.

[Galen]

I think in my brain is locked away the little mannerisms and characteristics of qualities of people or things that I have associated with a "bad" or "good" entity, and those are where I base my reactions to things. This could just be Fi and Ne working in tangent, but things like facial expressions, vocal intonation, body movement, as well as some less tangible qualities like friendliness, intrusiveness, etc, are all things that I see as manifestations of something much more inherent and solid about a person. Those qualities are used as cues that point to something essential about a person, and a sort of internal framework comes to light for me. None of this is particularly conscious in effort, rather it just happens naturally and I don't have to really think about it. But I thought everybody was like this? Someone Fe valuing give your reactions to this plx.

Ashton, gj predicting the future

[MatthewZ]

I think in my brain is locked away the little mannerisms and characteristics of qualities of people or things that I have associated with a "bad" or "good" entity, and those are where I base my reactions to things. This could just be Fi and Ne working in tangent, but things like facial expressions, vocal intonation, body movement, as well as some less tangible qualities like friendliness, intrusiveness, etc, are all things that I see as manifestations of something much more inherent and solid about a person. Those qualities are used as cues that point to something essential about a person, and a sort of internal framework comes to light for me. None of this is particularly conscious in effort, rather it just happens naturally and I don't have to really think about it. But I thought everybody was like this? Someone Fe valuing give your reactions to this plx.

The trick about -valuing (and, by consequence, -devaluing) is, frankly, to like everyone. No, really, it's something like that, and I'd explain it better if I wasn't about to fall out of my chair from exhaustion. It's about not having a "friend or foe" instinct, rather, but letting their behavior speak for itself. The trick is seeing the usefulness in each person and that interaction is most beneficial, in most cases, if they are treated as friends.

On second thought, I'm going to get some sleep and talk about how the 60s embodied Alpha in quadra progression with the values of "Peace; Love; Happiness" when I get up. After that, maybe I'll address the OP.

[squark]

The trick about -valuing (and, by consequence, -devaluing) is, frankly, to like everyone. No, really, it's something like that, and I'd explain it better if I wasn't about to fall out of my chair from exhaustion. It's about not having a "friend or foe" instinct, rather, but letting their behavior speak for itself. The trick is seeing the usefulness in each person and that interaction is most beneficial, in most cases, if they are treated as friends.

On second thought, I'm going to get some sleep and talk about how the 60s embodied Alpha in quadra progression with the values of "Peace; Love; Happiness" when I get up. After that, maybe I'll address the OP.

I think what you said before crossing it out was good. You just don't think about whether or not you like someone, and assume you like them unless you have a good reason not to. Even when someone bothers you somehow, you can be upset and then totally forget about it later, and figure that you like them. It just doesn't. . . stick. Even if you think it will. You deal with people how they are. You don't naively think they're all saints, but how you deal with them is less about some permanent judgement and more about how they treat you, or make you feel. . . and maybe how they treat others you know too.

Sometimes I get a sense of a person that tells me to avoid them, or not to trust them, or maybe they look approachable, or not. A lot of that is just noticing body language and recognizing what it means. Everyone does that - you don't have to be Fi-leading for that. Where I think Fi-leadings have an advantage is in knowing the strength of a connection between themself and others. They know how they feel, and what's there. I have a really hard time quantifying that myself. I don't know how to gauge it. How much do I like someone? How strong is the connection? I don't know. I don't know if I have an internal way to measure that. Instead I rely on clues like my own behavior and reactions to them. I've even done odd things like assume that I must like someone just because they're crazy about me. I match what I'm getting from them. In only very few cases has it been clear that the feelings were actually coming from me, that I felt something, and wasn't just going along with their feelings, convincing myself that I returned them.

[Beautiful sky]

Fi attraction and repulsion comes from observation of inner character of the individual and being correctly able to estimate their intentions, something that both INFp's and I are able to do using an extra sensory perception (perhapse beyond our basic 5 senses), a sense we have not yet identified. I estimate this sensory may exist in nature among other animals as well. When one animal is fiercly upset you can see that with absense of communication and information, that other animals tend to withdraw, or submit, hence sensing what is going on in the other person's general state of feeling, without use of words. Fi's and Fi activations, Fe's and Fe activations are especially more keen to these types of body language.

Feelings, we pick up on people's feelings. We perceive potential feelings of others from what we can see and sense.

[redbaron]

I think what you said before crossing it out was good. You just don't think about whether or not you like someone, and assume you like them unless you have a good reason not to. Even when someone bothers you somehow, you can be upset and then totally forget about it later, and figure that you like them. It just doesn't. . . stick. Even if you think it will. You deal with people how they are. You don't naively think they're all saints, but how you deal with them is less about some permanent judgement and more about how they treat you, or make you feel. . . and maybe how they treat others you know too.

Sometimes I get a sense of a person that tells me to avoid them, or not to trust them, or maybe they look approachable, or not. A lot of that is just noticing body language and recognizing what it means. Everyone does that - you don't have to be Fi-leading for that. Where I think Fi-leadings have an advantage is in knowing the strength of a connection between themself and others. They know how they feel, and what's there. I have a really hard time quantifying that myself. I don't know how to gauge it. How much do I like someone? How strong is the connection? I don't know. I don't know if I have an internal way to measure that. Instead I rely on clues like my own behavior and reactions to them. I've even done odd things like assume that I must like someone just because they're crazy about me. I match what I'm getting from them. In only very few cases has it been clear that the feelings were actually coming from me, that I felt something, and wasn't just going along with their feelings, convincing myself that I returned them.

this is good and makes all kinds of sense. I think it's true for beta STs that they don't know what they feel and they kind of look to the other person for clues as to how the other person is feeling about THEM. So... in those cases that you knew the feelings were coming from YOU, how did you realize this? Was it because they were different or stronger somehow?

I guess this is why you need beta NFs to determine how you feel and act accordingly.

[Simon Ssmall]

This is bizarre to even admit, but I've noticed sth along those same lines in myself, even though i'm not Fi-leading and maybe wouldn't put it in those same exact words. It is obv. not conscious, and I usually realize what's happened only later on or after the fact, but somehow judgment gets clouded. I find I'm only able to really, properly, assess my own judgment when in complete solitude for a while and w/no external influences whatsoever.

Def. wouldn't say it is as simple and clear-cut as breathing (like Arctures said). There's a platitude of factors that can influence.

cheers

PS: squark: even more bizarre that you self-type as TiSe and that I identify w/certain parts of what you wrote. weirdness unbound

Well I generally know very well if I like the person or not, I hardly if ever have trouble with that.

I readily notice when for example some girl I met is atracted to me. If I am atracted to her Ill just act as usual. If not then it depends on how drunk I am. If I am drunk Ill act as usual and if it gets too far Ill just say Im in a relationship(if i am) or that I am not intersted and apologise. And if Im not drunk ill act a bit akward trying not to show in any way I am interested and yet trying to still keep the conversation going as if I am unaware. This actually happens quite often as I generaly enjoy attention and harmless flirt, yet problem is that sometimes its not so harmless on the other end.

Another example would be in case I am in a relationship. Normally interest for me wades in time while women in general fall in love more and more (which is probably just male/female thing more than type) and in that case I can notice quite readily if my interest fades and I already know that it more or less will end. I still try to see if it will go away for a while but it never does and I have to end the relationship (im still not sure if it is actually the way to go). Point being my attraction does not depend on other persons atraction to me and yes it is easy for me to assess if I like the person or not and what kind of relationship we are having and where it most likely will go.

Another example could be when two people are akward with each other. Im not exactly sure which cues I use (probably just as everyone, body language etc.) but I actually feel the akwardness myself. So in a way its automatic, I dont think of it or analyse it at that point, I just feel it. Later on obviously I will ponder on the possible reasons in case I do not know them. Or I will ask them whats going on in case I know both of them well. Or I will feel it is best to ask them seperately in case I will think they would be unconfortable speaking their mind in front of the other person.

[Park]

The trick about -valuing (and, by consequence, -devaluing) is, frankly, to like everyone.

Yes, but that only goes for Fe types. Ti's dislike everyone equally, and are incapable of forming strong bonds.

[Rubicon]

I think in my brain is locked away the little mannerisms and characteristics of qualities of people or things that I have associated with a "bad" or "good" entity, and those are where I base my reactions to things. This could just be Fi and Ne working in tangent, but things like facial expressions, vocal intonation, body movement, as well as some less tangible qualities like friendliness, intrusiveness, etc, are all things that I see as manifestations of something much more inherent and solid about a person. Those qualities are used as cues that point to something essential about a person, and a sort of internal framework comes to light for me. None of this is particularly conscious in effort, rather it just happens naturally and I don't have to really think about it. But I thought everybody was like this? Someone Fe valuing give your reactions to this plx.

For me, everything is so heavily dependent on context that I couldn't begin to come up with things like facial expressions, movement, friendliness etc.. All those things are mostly irrelevant to me. If I was pressed, perhaps I would point to some of those things as reasons for disliking someone.. but then I could list the same things as reasons for liking another person. I guess it's just someone's uh essence that I'm attracted to or not attracted to. But my attraction to them is often dependent on context too. The people that supersede context over time are the people I tend to stay attracted to.

[Galen]

For me, everything is so heavily dependent on context that I couldn't begin to come up with things like facial expressions, movement, friendliness etc.. All those things are mostly irrelevant to me. If I was pressed, perhaps I would point to some of those things as reasons for disliking someone.. but then I could list the same things as reasons for liking another person. I guess it's just someone's uh essence that I'm attracted to or not attracted to. But my attraction to them is often dependent on context too. The people that supersede context over time are the people I tend to stay attracted to.

Well I look for someone's supposed "essence" as well, but it's kinda like I look for their essence via the subtle little mannerisms in the way they act. As far as I'm concerned though, those things don't require context in order to understand the person.

[Cyrano]

I think in my brain is locked away the little mannerisms and characteristics of qualities of people or things that I have associated with a "bad" or "good" entity, and those are where I base my reactions to things. This could just be Fi and Ne working in tangent, but things like facial expressions, vocal intonation, body movement, as well as some less tangible qualities like friendliness, intrusiveness, etc, are all things that I see as manifestations of something much more inherent and solid about a person. Those qualities are used as cues that point to something essential about a person, and a sort of internal framework comes to light for me. None of this is particularly conscious in effort, rather it just happens naturally and I don't have to really think about it. But I thought everybody was like this? Someone Fe valuing give your reactions to this plx.

Galen ...and yet you forgive the ISTp. We are so bad at this.

[Creepy-female]

lol I love how Arctures' post made the ISTps come out it's so cute.

[Cyrano]

lol I love how Arctures' post made the ISTps come out it's so cute.

He is the flame.

Moth

[The Greeter]

Although it is not the full breadth of how Fi functions, I tried to analyze this once and I think I got something.

To simply put it: one way I am able to identify a person's attraction and repulsion to an object is by detecting the flux in their behaviour. That is, how a person's general behaviour changes, even slightly, when interacting with the object of interest. Assessments like "good" and "bad" hardly come into play in this level of analysis; it actually enters the framework when the person and relationship are parametrized. When this has been identified, values, resources and effort are adjusted and used to either sustain, develop or disintegrate the relationship.

Maybe I'll give a more thorough analysis at a later time.

[Beautiful sky]

Although it is not the full breadth of how Fi functions, I tried to analyze this once and I think I got something.

To simply put it: one way I am able to identify a person's attraction and repulsion to an object is by detecting the flux in their behaviour. That is, how a person's general behaviour changes, even slightly, when interacting with the object of interest. Assessments like "good" and "bad" hardly come into play in this level of analysis; it actually enters the framework when the person and relationship are parametrized. When this has been identified, values, resources and effort are adjusted and used to either sustain, develop or disintegrate the relationship.

Maybe I'll give a more thorough analysis at a later time.

subject and object must not clash

But Fi is mostly through providing warm care and love.

[Marie84]

Although it is not the full breadth of how Fi functions, I tried to analyze this once and I think I got something.

To simply put it: one way I am able to identify a person's attraction and repulsion to an object is by detecting the flux in their behaviour. That is, how a person's general behaviour changes, even slightly, when interacting with the object of interest. Assessments like "good" and "bad" hardly come into play in this level of analysis; it actually enters the framework when the person and relationship are parametrized. When this has been identified, values, resources and effort are adjusted and used to either sustain, develop or disintegrate the relationship.

Maybe I'll give a more thorough analysis at a later time.

Pretty much this. I agree with Augusta's wording it as "kinetic energy" rather than good/bad, since it's hard to quantify it to such extremes
I think when it's blocked with Se those internal evaluations are more assured and with Ne more variable


This is rather informative description of how Fi works; I don't think I could have explained it any better http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tml#post136225

[xerx]

Pretty much this. I agree with Augusta's wording it as "kinetic energy" rather than good/bad, since it's hard to quantify it to such extremes
I think when it's blocked with Se those internal evaluations are more assured and with Ne more variable


This is rather informative description of how Fi works; I don't think I could have explained it any better http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tml#post136225

I liked Expat's description, especially the parallel universe bit.

[Marie84]

I liked Expat's description, especially the parallel universe bit.

same here, that guy wrote some of the best stuff on this site IMO

[The Greeter]

This is rather informative description of how Fi works; I don't think I could have explained it any better http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tml#post136225

I too enjoyed Expat's description of Fi.

The way he differentiates Fi(Se) and Fi(Ne) has got me thinking though.

If it is the creative function that acts as the "ambition" of a type, then I wonder if one of the ways that Ne blocked with Accepting Fi can manisfest as follows:

Since Ne is thought of as potentials, being blocked with Fi, it is constantly trying to reach a new "state" of a given relationship. I also realize that another way that Ne works is laterally. In other words, it searches for potential relationships.

I feel that both works hand-in-hand, since, once a potential relationship has been identified, a new state of the relationship is sought.

I also speculate that ESIs are "ultra" aware of reality. With Fi being able to detect slight emotional changes (which allows them to determine attraction/repulsion) and with the support of the information element with the most accurate perception of the physical world, it does not surprise me that they are often deemed the "moral enforcers". I've always had an admiration of ESIs for their strength, their ability to uphold high standards in themselves and, if circumstances deem it necessary, even demanding it in others.

Perhaps others can validate this, but I have witnessed this to be what the LIE type seeks. A rock, to say the least, or someone who isn't trying to "transform" the relationship, but solidifying it just as it is. Hence, an almost obsessive search for loyalty (of course, all types seek it, but I think LIEs are quite possibly the most hurt without it).

In contrast, where as LIEs search for loyalty, I think LSEs search for intimacy and closeness (hence, a new level). Again, every individual desires this, but the degree in which this is sought may peak with the LSE personality type.

Maybe I could graph all of this...

[Beautiful sky]

I too enjoyed Expat's description of Fi.

The way he differentiates Fi(Se) and Fi(Ne) has got me thinking though.

If it is the creative function that acts as the "ambition" of a type, then I wonder if one of the ways that Ne blocked with Accepting Fi can manisfest as follows:

Since Ne is thought of as potentials, being blocked with Fi, it is constantly trying to reach a new "state" of a given relationship. I also realize that another way that Ne works is laterally. In other words, it searches for potential relationships.

I feel that both works hand-in-hand, since, once a potential relationship has been identified, a new state of the relationship is sought.

I also speculate that ESIs are "ultra" aware of reality. With Fi being able to detect slight emotional changes (which allows them to determine attraction/repulsion) and with the support of the information element with the most accurate perception of the physical world, it does not surprise me that they are often deemed the "moral enforcers". I've always had an admiration of ESIs for their strength, their ability to uphold high standards in themselves and, if circumstances deem it necessary, even demanding it in others.

Perhaps others can validate this, but I have witnessed this to be what the LIE type seeks. A rock, to say the least, or someone who isn't trying to "transform" the relationship, but solidifying it just as it is. Hence, an almost obsessive search for loyalty (of course, all types seek it, but I think LIEs are quite possibly the most hurt without it).

In contrast, where as LIEs search for loyalty, I think LSEs search for intimacy and closeness (hence, a new level). Again, every individual desires this, but the degree in which this is sought may peak with the LSE personality type.

Maybe I could graph all of this...

They don't seem like they are looking for intimacy and closeness; every time I've shown them that, they turned around and slapped me with a closed door...that's not really a good interpretation. It would be nice if they showed me that what I've been offering (just being myself) is what they are looking for...just doesn't seem that way so far.

[Beautiful sky]

how does Fi tell attraction and repulsion, like & dislike?

by the impressions that the images produce in our brain; if an image we find is gross, then we won't be attracted to that particular object; but usually, with people, these repulsions have more to do with illness on a person, sadness, mood, etc.