I hate Fe properness

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

But Fe types do that as well. Everybody is like, paying attention to how their environments naturally clash with them or not. Stop acting like you're these pristine beautiful unique snowflakes with a 'higher moral purpose' or something and that only you as a Beautiful and Magestic Fi type can understand the truest most pure form of love. It's making me vomit. Can't you guys be clearer on what you really want from somebody, in a physical context? Jeesh. That's why I like estps. They are so direct and so clear on what they want. It seems like all fi types do is hold out for some 'deep and meaningful' thing THAT DOESN'T FUCKING EXIST. I mean jesus christ, what do you really want to do? Do you want to play video games together, do you want me to get a real job? Do you want to be nicer? Do you want others to be nicer? Do you want to go to the park and throw a ball around.

I'm only being like argumentative because it's like what you guys want. It's how you can relate to people. It brings out the fight in me.

[Words]

I guess you didn't understand the context I was using? I was speaking of being about relationships, not objective ethics. I don't know what's so hard to understand. I'll let people give their own experiences about it.

Yeah but you made the thread and I want to know what you mean by and examples pertaining to your life, because surely things must have happened to you to have formed an opinion.

[ashlesha]

@ashton: thanks for that quote, it matches my experience with Fi quite well. and, lol, the intangible things, ya

@poli: i think we have a similar view of the Fe/Fi difference, though i have a hard time following your wording (i'm going off the basic gist and feel i get from what youre saying). what is mostly confusing me is that i largely agree with what loki wrote, maybe not every detail, but nothing she said stood out to me as particularly egregious, idk. so i'm having trouble seeing where the Fe/Fi line is here.

@bnd: do you honestly not see any parallel between describing Fi as something all mystical or whatever when compared to the way you talk about Ni? i dont blame you for being annoyed, cos that annoys me too

i also feel like its probably important to clarify that its not as though im completely blind to behaviors...i have instinctual reactions to behaviors as well as to people, its that when it comes to putting the two together there isnt any kind of direct line or anything. its not like there is zero correlation between the person and what they do, just that they are very far from being one and the same. bleh, hard to explain.

[Sir Knight]

I had an experience with this once. I was listening to NPR and there was an interview with an author on his new book. They were talking about a specific set of side characters- Israel-born Jews who had emigrated to Britain and were very outraged at the actions Israel was taking. The author was very critical of these characters, saying that he found their outrage "arrogant" since they had removed themselves from that situation and, in doing that, given away any ability to change it.

And while I can understand that idea, it still completely bowls me over. How can one not get outraged at legitimate ethical violations happening in the world? When I read about stuff like that I, without any direct control over it, am immediately moved to rage, to sadness, to despair... The whole spectrum of emotions that man's inhumanity to man can cause in a person. It puzzles me that a person could see that as arrogant, when it's just my most natural response to something like that.

But I can see where that perception of "fakeness" comes in. I can be shaken to the core by an issue but, really, what can I do about it? When it gets right down to "So I'm angry, what am I going to do about it?" the answer is almost always, "Shit. Nothing I guess."

I mean, could I legitimately do something to change a situation? Not with my piss-poor resources. Then, if I had the resources could I change something? Well, certainly, but with all the effort involved in changing something far beyond your countries borders, couldn't those hard-earned resources be better spent on my own domain or on more immediate concerns?

It seems like the reason Fe could be perceived as fake is that I can get really god damned angry about something and, realistically, be able to do nothing about it. So what was the point of that anger in the first place? Just hollow ethical pride? I don't know.

/ types do seem to operate by much more explicit standards when evaluating others and their behavior. It's as if they have some amassed database compiled in their minds which correlate X behaviors with Y intentions. And because of that, can often readily explain how and why they deduced something about a given person.

I can definitely relate to this. I watched this video about Jeremy Irons decrying the death penalty. And while I can certainly agree that the death penalty should be abolished or at least significantly narrowed in the scope and scale of crimes for which it is applied, the reasons he gives for doing so make me want to scream, "BUT THAT'S WRONG!"

He talks about how, though they have tortured and murdered, the people we put on to death row are still human beings, and still deserve the same human rights that are given to all human beings. I would argue that, because they have tortured and murdered, they have demonstrated a complete lack of regard for the rights of other human beings, which is why it is perfectly ok for us to do the same for them. They've killed other people and, so, why should they be able to turn around and expect fair treatment in the context of innocent, law-abiding citizens, when "fair treatment" at this point would be karmatic retribution via electric chair?

[Sir Knight]

The video, by the way:

[golden]

I continue to be fascinated by how Fi-valuers' complaints about Fe-valuers sound an awful lot like whatever complaints I might deliver about Fi-valuers, lol. That is, sometimes Fi seems fake to me, especially if it is being offered repeatedly over time by someone who greatly dislikes my Fe.

But look, maybe sometimes my Fe is fake. It ranges from (1) Fe deployed in a situation where my feelings or ideas toward another person run very deep, to (2) an important social situation in which I might step in to provide some kind of smoothing or ease, to (3) one-off instances where some dose of Fe can get something accomplished.

In the above para, item 1 describes my relationships with close friends, partners, family. As in other threads on Fe versus Fi, it was implied here that that Fe-valuers don't make real friends? Please. Example of number 1, childhood friend who suffered from psychosis for years. She called me every three or four days at the height of her illness, and she could count on me any time, day or night. She really needed what I could call Fe--doses of surface-readable emotion where nothing feels hidden.

Item 2 examples: (a) Being the maid of honor at a wedding where the bride and groom's families were greatly at odds, for three days constantly smoothing over tense interactions, giving people ways to connect, etc. (b) Being the go-to person to put authors' minds at ease and iron out their issues and worries (back when I worked in-house for a book publisher).

Item 3 example, from last night: In an interminable line at a department store, people had to leave space for others to pass through, where two aisles intersected, and every so often someone would think the line ended at that space. Once that gap was just behind me, a couple of guys approached the line and cut in. I glanced behind them and saw that the guy in back of them was boiling mad but didn't seem to know how to handle the situation. So I smiled at the two men and politely, with a light laugh, pointed out the end of the line, about 20 people back. They laughed too, apologized, and found another line. I was able to do this in a cute-n-harmless way. The pissed-off guy clearly could not have.

Maybe in some of these situations I am quite fake? But really, doesn't fakery depend on the person? Generally, in the social sense I use Fe to be helpful, so even if it looks only skin-deep, I'm doing something with the Fe because I think something matters. My friends matter to me, potentially implosive social situations matter to me, people being wronged matter to me, and if Fe is something I can use to have a positive effect, then I'll use it.

In the negative, I might use Fe to "go off" on someone. And there, I admit my wrong. Occasionally it's called for; usually not.

[EyeSeeCold]

I guess it just depends on the language you speak. I don't speak emotion so obviously emotions directed at me don't register as valid feelings. Likewise, I understand feelings as psychological distance in the form of approach, comfort and mental ease and these tell me whether feelings are real or not. Trying to bring me out of my shell with surface emotions will not work as that is not where my authenticity lies, it is located deep down at the bottom of a pit, in which you must endure the skull crushing pressure of my silent presence.

[Morcheeba]

I continue to be fascinated by how Fi-valuers' complaints about Fe-valuers sound an awful lot like whatever complaints I might deliver about Fi-valuers, lol. That is, sometimes Fi seems fake to me, especially if it is being offered repeatedly over time by someone w ho greatly dislikes my Fe.

I am right there with ya on this quote. I'm sure this relates to the fact of unvalued but strong functions.

[ashlesha]

i personally wouldnt describe Fe egos as generally taking everything personally. that really is something ive seen more with Fi egos in my experience. but thats not what i think this thread is about. i think its more about whether assessment of people is based more on subjective versus "objective" criteria, or something like that.

when Fe egos have been offended by something i've said its been more along the lines of, "thats wrong" or "youre not supposed to say that." when Fi egos have been offended, its been more like, "that hurt me because..."

[golden]

i personally wouldnt describe Fe egos as generally taking everything personally. that really is something ive seen more with Fi egos in my experience. but thats not what i think this thread is about. i think its more about whether assessment of people is based more on subjective versus "objective" criteria, or something like that.

when Fe egos have been offended by something i've said its been more along the lines of, "thats wrong" or "youre not supposed to say that." when Fi egos have been offended, its been more like, "that hurt me because..."

Ok, I get you, then, I think.

Thinking of the last time I was truly, deeply hurt by someone, it was because I feel that person had violated some basic human principles in his dealings with me. I couldn't think of any justification under the sun for his behavior. I also saw a huge gap between his persona and stated values, on the one hand, and his cruelty, on the other.

My mind kept turning it around: how is this possible? Why would anyone do that?

Often, for me, these matters boil down to WHY. If I can't understand why someone is being hurtful, I find it almost impossible to overlook and forgive it.

In that "why," I feel pain.

Does that sound like an Fe-valuing reaction to you? Or is it better described in some other way?

[ashlesha]

Ok, I get you, then, I think.

Thinking of the last time I was truly, deeply hurt by someone, it was because I feel that person had violated some basic human principles in his dealings with me. I couldn't think of any justification under the sun for his behavior. I also saw a huge gap between his persona and stated values, on the one hand, and his cruelty, on the other.

My mind kept turning it around: how is this possible? Why would anyone do that?

Often, for me, these matters boil down to WHY. If I can't understand why someone is being hurtful, I find it almost impossible to overlook and forgive it.

In that "why," I feel pain.

Does that sound like an Fe-valuing reaction to you? Or is it better described in some other way?

idk, nothing you said stands out to me as being paticularly foreign to my way of thinking so i wonder how much of this is just human nature or if you didnt say anything glaringly Ti/Fe valuing or if i'm not reading it right...lol, i'm just wandering around in the dark waving my arms here, to be honest. i only know the sorts of reactions i've gotten from Fe valuers irl and people irl arent generally so forthcoming with their inner processes.

i too find a lot resting on the why. although knowing why doesnt neccessarily help. i dont know if i would focus as much on the difference between persona and character because i'm not sure it would feel as relevant to me as the offense itself. thats the only thing i can think of where i might be different, but without all the context and everything i'm basically just bullshitting. lol.

short answer: idk lol!!!! sorry!

[golden]

idk, nothing you said stands out to me as being paticularly foreign to my way of thinking so i wonder how much of this is just human nature or if you didnt say anything glaringly Ti/Fe valuing or if i'm not reading it right...lol, i'm just wandering around in the dark waving my arms here, to be honest. i only know the sorts of reactions i've gotten from Fe valuers irl and people irl arent generally so forthcoming with their inner processes.

i too find a lot resting on the why. although knowing why doesnt neccessarily help. i dont know if i would focus as much on the difference between persona and character because i'm not sure it would feel as relevant to me as the offense itself. thats the only thing i can think of where i might be different, but without all the context and everything i'm basically just bullshitting. lol.

short answer: idk lol!!!! sorry!

Heh. No worries. I will say that for me, if only someone will give me the "why," my bad feelings can almost always be resolved.

[717495]

Which I've seen frustrate / types, as it gives them the impression of something entirely baseless, arbitrary, or disconnected from reality (as B&D criticized).

Yeah this is quite true. I feel the same way when those same types give me logical input. I kind of feel inside "on what basis are you saying this"? It seems a lot more intuitive to them, I guess. But I don't feel compelled to question it, I just kind of nod my head and forget all about what they were talking about lol.

Yeah, I find most of his reasoning annoying. While I personally don't agree with the death penalty on grounds that I dislike the State having legal authority to kill, and while he's right to say it isn't an effective deterrent against crime… to say we shouldn't do it because "they're human beings!" undercuts the value of human life; killing those who dishonor it seems perfectly justifiable. If a man kills someone who murdered his family, is he wrong?

Hah, my valuing friend talked to me about the same thing months back, and we had this big disagreement, the same opinion difference which felt to me rather type-related in that instance.