Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 81 to 108 of 108

Thread: Fe and Fi Valuing: What do they look like?

  1. #81
    Imagine Timeless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    San Francisco, CA.
    TIM
    ILE/ENTp
    Posts
    817
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Lightbulb

    valuing looks like this:





    valuing looks like this:


  2. #82
    CILi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    624
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Am I getting the jist of this, Timeless?


    ________________________________________________

    More importantly, your VI system's complete!

    1) Temperament (16 --> 4)
    2) Romance Style (4 --> 2)
    3) Fi/Fe Valuing (2 --> 1)

    Congrats!

  3. #83
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,682
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hahaha
    (i)NTFS

    An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
    and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI

    31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
    My work on Inert/Contact subtypes

    Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
    Socionics Tests Database
    Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites


    Fidei Defensor

  4. #84
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,009
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Knight View Post
    Ideally, I'd like to. Going with the example of my dad, sometimes, when he does something I feel doesn't make sense or is inconsiderate I'll act condescendingly towards him, as a means of goading him into, like, "reconciling his ways" or something like that. And then he gets pissed at me for talking to him like that when he's my father and I'm his subordinate, which makes me pissed at him for even daring to think that he's immune to criticism just by virtue of the fact that he's my father, especially when he feels that he can talk condescendingly to me and I can't return the favor.

    Which is something I'd think would map out to Fe versus Fi: He feels that I've committed a Fi-transgression when I talk down to him even though he's above me. Ideally, I'd like to be able to treat a person how I feel they should be treated without regard to their station. I should be able to condescend and tell my boss or my dad when they're doing something wrong without it being seen as some kind of huge faux pas because I'm going "above my station."
    I had the same issues with my Fe-valuing parents. They expected asymmetry, I never put up with it. In my family, my sister (IEI) seems to have tolerated it best. I suspected she did so for the sake of emotional well-being or atmosphere, however, considering your experience, it might be that she was simply the only one sharing their values.

    I was thinking of it more in the way the two see relationships progressing. From what I've read, and what I've heard from my Fi-valuing sister and a co-worker, Fi-lers see relationships develop in discrete phases (we're interested in each other=>We're seeing each other=>We're dating=>We're boyfriend/girlfriend, etc.) of progressive intimacy whereas Fe-lers skip one or more of those steps and let the relationship progress in intimacy based on how they feel in the moment.
    That doesn't seem to make much sense. Fi is internal, it works with implicit relations, not explicit ones. I imagine Thinkers might be on average more comfortable with these labels than Feelers, simply because they had both F elements weak, but I don't see how it could work for Fi/Ti valuing.

    That's kind of what I was getting at. Fi-lers would try to empathize with you and understand and commiserate with you in order to help you work through those negative feelings and solve them and hopefully the problem causing those negative feelings in the first place, while a Fe-ler would try to improve your mood forcibly, essentially pulling you away from your negative emotions and making you feel good which, while it wouldn't actually help you solve your problem, it would put you in a healthier, more emotionally positive state of mind to deal with that problem, rather than letting you sulk and self-deprecate and hate yourself.
    I could see it work, but somehow I don't think it's this simple.

  5. #85
    wants to be a writer. silverchris9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,073
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Knight View Post
    Ideally, I'd like to. Going with the example of my dad, sometimes, when he does something I feel doesn't make sense or is inconsiderate I'll act condescendingly towards him, as a means of goading him into, like, "reconciling his ways" or something like that. And then he gets pissed at me for talking to him like that when he's my father and I'm his subordinate, which makes me pissed at him for even daring to think that he's immune to criticism just by virtue of the fact that he's my father, especially when he feels that he can talk condescendingly to me and I can't return the favor.

    Which is something I'd think would map out to Fe versus Fi: He feels that I've committed a Fi-transgression when I talk down to him even though he's above me. Ideally, I'd like to be able to treat a person how I feel they should be treated without regard to their station. I should be able to condescend and tell my boss or my dad when they're doing something wrong without it being seen as some kind of huge faux pas because I'm going "above my station."
    NTR. This is the sort of thing I used to think was type related when I first started socionics. And the conflict between you and your dad very well may be type related. But the bare bones "You expect me to treat you differently because of your status" thing is utterly non-type-related. I had the same issues with my dad, and I tried to come up with a socionics excuse for it, but there isn't one; we're activity partners, socionics-wise. On the other hand, I still think the issues I have with my stepmother for instance are type related. But we would conflict over the same type of thing as you described above (which caused conflict between me and my dad and me and my stepmother). What I'm saying is, there could very well be a type-related aspect, but it goes deeper than the literal behavior; it goes into how the behavior is done, little subtle things that are tricky to get at and describe.

    Like, LSEs and SLEs are both very commanding types. Both types have no qualms about issuing orders and directives as they see fit, both in professional and in private situations. However, if you're an IEI, one type is going to annoy the shit out of you when they tell you to do something, and then other is going to make you feel like you've gotten positive, helpful direction. It has something to do with how they behave, certainly. But the difference is more fine and subtle than the broad category of action ("unhesitatingly and frequently issuing commands").

    I was thinking of it more in the way the two see relationships progressing. From what I've read, and what I've heard from my Fi-valuing sister and a co-worker, Fi-lers see relationships develop in discrete phases (we're interested in each other=>We're seeing each other=>We're dating=>We're boyfriend/girlfriend, etc.) of progressive intimacy whereas Fe-lers skip one or more of those steps and let the relationship progress in intimacy based on how they feel in the moment.
    This seems more likely to be accurate to me, simply because it attempts to describe a thought process rather than a behavior...





    Quote Originally Posted by Galen View Post
    I think the bulk of people on here have the same frustrations about it all. I also wasn't aware that being so open to interpretation was a positive thing? (@silverchris)
    I'm having trouble describing this, but I think that if socionics were more straightforward, I would find it uninteresting. Because if we had straightforward behavioral correlations (this behavior is this type; this behavior is that type) then there would be no impetus to ask the more difficult questions: "what sort of outlook on life does Ni consist of? How does having Fi in your ego impact how you make decisions?" and "How do these thought patterns manifest in behavior?" Those are the interesting questions.

    Also, if we could just "solve" socionics, what would there be left to do? We'd just have great definitions for each type and each IM and then... we'd be done I guess. Close up shop.

    And I mean, what does this alternative version of socionics look like? This version where things aren't open to interpretation, where we have factual definitions of each IM?

    Also, on the question of the "use" of socionics, I find that I can use socionics quite well. I can generally spot certain IMs in people, and make fairly accurate predictions therefrom. I just can't describe what I see in absolute, concrete terms. So writing about socionics is designed to help you begin to see those IMs, accurately enough so that you can make predictions that will be right a good amount of the time (frequently enough to be useful).

    It's like how you learn what a poem means. You read a poem, and you get the language in your head, and you get the feeling communicated by them, but you don't really understand it until you see something similar in your life, and then you go "aha! I know what that poem means now." But you wouldn't have seen that thing in your life if you hadn't already seen it described in art.

    Socionics is the same way. You can't understand it 'til you see it in real life. But you can't see it in real life 'til someone describes it to you.

    ARGH. I don't know how to explain this. Fruitful uncertainty. Working productively in semiotic confusion. I had this same argument from the opposite angle with Mattie/look.to.the.sky. Why do people want to pin down socionics? You always lose bits when you pin something down to a fact, like compressing a file so that it will fit onto your hard drive. It's much better to just step into the middle of it, accept that you're only going to be able to communicate it tangentially (but you can communicate it nevertheless), and understand the much larger picture, even if you can't pin it down in words.
    Not a rule, just a trend.

    IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.

    Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...

    I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.

  6. #86
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,009
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silverchris9 View Post
    I'm having trouble describing this, but I think that if socionics were more straightforward, I would find it uninteresting. Because if we had straightforward behavioral correlations (this behavior is this type; this behavior is that type) then there would be no impetus to ask the more difficult questions: "what sort of outlook on life does Ni consist of? How does having Fi in your ego impact how you make decisions?" and "How do these thought patterns manifest in behavior?" Those are the interesting questions.
    Ultimately, the issue with making it all "clear" is that people's behaviours have a multitude of sources, there's no direct relation to how a person "works" inside, to what socionics calls information metabolism, they can only be indirectly traced to it and that's still unreliable. If we're focusing on that inner aspect, we need to leave the external aspects less specific, open to interpretation. This is true of typologies based on introspection, such as Jungian ones. The opposite approach is more objective and considered scientific - to observe the external characteristics and assume they're indicative of the unspecified "what's going on inside", in effect putting people who act similarly in the same groups on easy to follow, explicit criteria. That's better for some purposes and worse for others.

    The problem with making both explicit is exactly that there's no simple one-to-one relation between inner and outer qualities, it's affected by many other factors - it simply wouldn't match, wouldn't work. It's actually the same mechanism I was trying to describe in information aspects - focusing on one, making it explicit, necessitates the complementary one to be implicit, implied by it. I'm not going to compare psyche and behaviour to any concrete information aspects, but they're locked similarly to a matching piar of values.

  7. #87
    you can go to where your heart is Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    8,459
    Mentioned
    206 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silverchris9 View Post
    I'm having trouble describing this, but I think that if socionics were more straightforward, I would find it uninteresting. Because if we had straightforward behavioral correlations (this behavior is this type; this behavior is that type) then there would be no impetus to ask the more difficult questions: "what sort of outlook on life does Ni consist of? How does having Fi in your ego impact how you make decisions?" and "How do these thought patterns manifest in behavior?" Those are the interesting questions.
    Well think these are all questions that should be asked anyways. The problem is that when there are so many ambiguous ideas about the basics floating around, any attempts to answer them become muddled in semantics and different definitions. This lack of consensus about things destroys any impetus for asking those harder questions, from my perspective, and if we had some sort of agreement about the fundamentals then we'd have somewhere to go as a community.

    Quote Originally Posted by silverchris9 View Post
    Also, if we could just "solve" socionics, what would there be left to do? We'd just have great definitions for each type and each IM and then... we'd be done I guess. Close up shop.
    I agree, but I don't think anybody on here is remotely close to "solving" socionics. There's got to be lots of things about it that haven't even been looked at before, as with any field of study.

    And I mean, what does this alternative version of socionics look like? This version where things aren't open to interpretation, where we have factual definitions of each IM?

    Quote Originally Posted by silverchris9 View Post
    Also, on the question of the "use" of socionics, I find that I can use socionics quite well. I can generally spot certain IMs in people, and make fairly accurate predictions therefrom. I just can't describe what I see in absolute, concrete terms. So writing about socionics is designed to help you begin to see those IMs, accurately enough so that you can make predictions that will be right a good amount of the time (frequently enough to be useful).
    I agree here too, but again, the problem is a lack of consensus. You have your observations about IEs, other people have their observations about IEs, and you continue do develop your understanding of socionics based on your own observations. People could just as easily be looking aspects of the world that aren't all the same (as they probably are), and without any sort of collaboration the community won't learn anything as a whole.

    Quote Originally Posted by silverchris9 View Post
    ARGH. I don't know how to explain this. Fruitful uncertainty. Working productively in semiotic confusion. I had this same argument from the opposite angle with Mattie/look.to.the.sky. Why do people want to pin down socionics? You always lose bits when you pin something down to a fact, like compressing a file so that it will fit onto your hard drive. It's much better to just step into the middle of it, accept that you're only going to be able to communicate it tangentially (but you can communicate it nevertheless), and understand the much larger picture, even if you can't pin it down in words.
    If I can't pin something down into a concrete definition, then I can't really understand it. So far I've been defining socionics terminology is a more abstract, generalized manner, then gradually hardening my definitions into something more tangible the more I learn about it. My definitions are always open to change depending on what is being observed, so I never feel like I really "lose" anything by doing so.

  8. #88
    Imagine Timeless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    San Francisco, CA.
    TIM
    ILE/ENTp
    Posts
    817
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CILi View Post
    Am I getting the jist of this, Timeless?


    ________________________________________________

    More importantly, your VI system's complete!

    1) Temperament (16 --> 4)
    2) Romance Style (4 --> 2)
    3) Fi/Fe Valuing (2 --> 1)

    Congrats!
    Cool. That gave me an idea:

    Here's how to tell the difference between Ne/Ni valuing:



    Goes one way. Goes multiple ways.


  9. #89
    CILi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    624
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Aahhhh...



    Now is much better, no?

  10. #90
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,530
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Galen View Post
    OKAY
    HERE IT GOES AGAIN

    Fe: Internal Object Dynamics
    Fe is a perception of objective personal states of things. What I mean by that is that the feelings/whatever perceived by Fe valuers are viewed in the same light as objects, in that they are readily observable from any perspective. Fe information is one that is able to be separated from its original source and is able to exist in several different sources at once. By themselves, these objectivites have no inherent meaning, as they are simply content without context; the meaning must come from some sort of implied outside framework that allows for the subjectivity to exist (this part is more of a conjecture than actual observation, but I feel like something to this effect must be the case).

    Fi: Internal Field Statics
    The information perceived by Fi is that of a web of personal subjectivities. This basically means that the subjective/emotional/whatever information perceived by Fi can only make sense to the host of the feelings. As such, these feelings are unable to be separated from the original source, as any attempts to do so would completely ruin the continuity between the subjectivities. The only way for these feelings to be expressed is for there to be a sort of middle-man in play, some sort of external object that is capable of transporting these subjectivities to another host.

    GALEN WINS THE INTERNET

    GOOD WORK MIRITE

  11. #91
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,009
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Knight View Post
    I was thinking of it more in the way the two see relationships progressing. From what I've read, and what I've heard from my Fi-valuing sister and a co-worker, Fi-lers see relationships develop in discrete phases (we're interested in each other=>We're seeing each other=>We're dating=>We're boyfriend/girlfriend, etc.) of progressive intimacy whereas Fe-lers skip one or more of those steps and let the relationship progress in intimacy based on how they feel in the moment.
    Actually, it sounds similar to one of rational vs irrational traits from this site, although I don't know if it's really about rationality.

    (rational) sequential relationship development: “we're dating;” “we're together now;” “we're living together now;” etc.

    (irrational) nonsequential relationship development; structure emerges only in hindsight

  12. #92
    jughead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NC
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    893
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In reply to Slackermom. No shit....This is exactly what Ti valuers will laugh at. They are using heuristic thinking here when making this decision.

  13. #93
    Park's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beyond the blue horizon
    TIM
    SLI
    Posts
    13,258
    Mentioned
    177 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Timeless View Post
    valuing looks like this:





    valuing looks like this:

    I know this is an old thread... but good job posting a picture of probable ENFp for Fe valuing.
    “Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly
    You've done yourself a huge favor developmentally by mustering the balls to do something really fucking scary... in about the most vulnerable situation possible.

  14. #94
    you can go to where your heart is Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    8,459
    Mentioned
    206 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I made these a while back

    Fe Ego:


    Fi Ego:


    Fe/Ti Valuers:


    Fi/Te Valuers:

  15. #95
    Humanist Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    25,913
    Mentioned
    664 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    I didn't make the best example of Fe and Fi

    My friend Rod wrote it best ...

    Fe:
    Extraverted Emotional Conception compares new information to the accepted or traditional social values, opinions and morals. This objective information is used to form further objective values or to improve and correct the established ones. The major method of such comparison is emotional evaluation of objective facts. Personal emotional preferences do not matter as much as the values and beliefs of the society or the significant group. Everything is evaluated based on its emotional value in the eyes of the society. The views of primitive Extraverted Emotional Conception would be plainly reflecting the views of the society. The views of a sophisticated Extraverted Emotional Conception would reflect the best achievements of the culture. They would be formed by the best examples of music, poetry, religion, etc.

    Fi:

    Introverted Emotional Conception does not relate to the objective values and morals. It compares new information to its own values and morals that may be quite different from what other people use. Introverted Emotional Conception is not directed outward and therefore tends not to express itself openly. The major method of such comparison is emotional evaluation of subjective facts. The true feelings of such type are deep, intense and passionate. The emotional response of Introverted Emotional Conception is always unexpected; the subject is hidden and unobvious.
    -
    Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
    Enneagram 2w1sw(1w9) helps others to live up to their own standards of what a good person is and is very behind the scenes in the process.
    Tritype 1-2-6 stacking sp/sx


    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

  16. #96
    jessica129's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    10,136
    Mentioned
    77 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Lol such hostility I had, it's embarrassing.

  17. #97
    Breaking stereotypes Suz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    On a chatbox diet
    TIM
    ESI maybe
    Posts
    6,480
    Mentioned
    173 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jessica129 View Post
    Lol such hostility I had, it's embarrassing.
    glad ur feeling better now...
    Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx

  18. #98
    The Soul Happy-er JWC3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,801
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jessica129 View Post
    Lol such hostility I had, it's embarrassing.
    Had?
    Easy Day

  19. #99
    jessica129's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    10,136
    Mentioned
    77 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    True although I think I'm getting better with aggression

  20. #100
    both sides, now wacey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Canada
    TIM
    9w8
    Posts
    3,513
    Mentioned
    140 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Attachment 2751
    ^This.

    Look, it has nothing to do with one person being fake, or real. Both people are real. It has more to do with if you understand the socionics framework. If you have no idea about socionics, you may feel that the other person is undermining your attempts at connection. This was certainly the case between myself and this ESE. If we are to believe socionics at all, then everyone must agree that the information elements play a very apparent role in how people, personalities, interact with one another. The differences between Fe and Fi are as large as the differences between a Ford truck and a Smartcare. Sure, they are both vehicles, as both information elements are ethical in nature, but you could hardly call them similar. When found in two individuals who value either Fi, or Fe (and in this post I am just focusing on ego blocks), you are going to get a whole different personal perspective. So yeah, this part is obvious and I think everyone would agree.

    So what are the differences?

    I'm having trouble describing this, but I think that if socionics were more straightforward, I would find it uninteresting. Because if we had straightforward behavioral correlations (this behavior is this type; this behavior is that type) then there would be no impetus to ask the more difficult questions: "what sort of outlook on life does Ni consist of? How does having Fi in your ego impact how you make decisions?" and "How do these thought patterns manifest in behavior?" Those are the interesting questions.
    I will start here. I don't believe that having Fi in your ego affects how I make decisions when it comes to choices that I must make about life. For example, if I am looking for a job, I am not sitting here thinking, who will I get along with? Will I like who I work with? Will they like me? Can me and my coworkers have a meaningful connection? Maybe when I was younger I might have thought alone those lines. With age comes maturity and I have found that it is pointless to think about these types of things BEFORE I have the job. The thing about Fi is that it seems to happen in no matter what situation I find myself in. So whether I am working for a National park, for the ambulance service, or as a security guard, or at a busy lumber mill, or going to school, I always have Fi going on in the back burner. I say back burner because as far as Information Elements go, its is pretty useless. Who cares, in the short term, who is getting along with who in a work place where production is occurring, or "the job just needs to get done"? It doesn't and is not necessary. Especially in today's age where a work place may have people coming and going on a pretty regular basis, so the turn around causes people to have little obligations socially to the people around him and her. Now, I say short term, because after a certain point, Fi really becomes the solid foundation on which all productive relationships are formed. After a certain point, however, it does becomes vital to the work place that people have relationships that are amicable, amiable, and helpful, or at the very least not destructive. The only way this seems to happen in the long term is if you have some people around who are Fi valuing, and its for this reason that Fi valuers seem to become the heart of their companies, or causes.

    Fi as an ego block is flexible, it works in whatever scenario the person is in. It doesn't matter. In fact, as a young person it used to be a huge hindrance to me. No matter where I was, whether it was in a summer camp cabin, or a high school classroom, or at a family gathering, I become increasingly distracted by the interpersonal relationships going on around me, and in fact inside me as well. It's partly for this reason that I believe Fi valuers by nature seem to be so un-emotive even though the highly value the relationships they are forming in a given setting. The Fi ego is ALWAYS observing, even in ways that are not apparent to the outsider. Who are you? What do you you reveal about me? What do you think about such and such person, and what would your attitudes reveal about what you think of me? Do we think the same? Do we think differently? What about you would make me open up about? Endless questioning, mostly going on inside my head. It's a huge distraction and I have to actively concentrate on NOT doing it while at work. It is for this reason that Fi valuers would much rather have a formal system of interaction in the workplace, at least in the beginning. "Hello, how are you?" "Fine thank you, and how are you?". If you know you are working with an Fi valuer, know THIS: long before you may have ever thought about their character, they have already thought about yours a hundred times by now. They, over the long term have discovered who your parents were, how many children you have, how you felt about your cat dying 20 years ago, where you went to school, what your political views are, who you think are the better coworkers, how you act under stress, what you want out of life, what your values are. And you will have no idea they know all this stuff because they have only worked with you for such a short amount of time. They were sizing you up, not to hold a power over you, but in order to connect, which they feel they have, as soon as they started working with you. The trouble is, what does all that matter? For the sake of being productive it doesn't. For the sake of bringing meaning and fulfillment into the workplace, Fi valuers eventually do this, and over the long term those that feel more fulfilled in the workplace, will become more productive in the long run, as the job becomes more then just a pay cheque. Like I have said before I rarely make career decisions based on Fi information because I have learned that no matter where I am Fi is going to be playing inside my head regardless of outer circumstances.


    (god, what a bad hat)
    Last edited by wacey; 11-15-2013 at 08:36 PM.

  21. #101
    C-ESI-Se 6w7 sx/sp ashlesha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    the center of the universe
    Posts
    15,791
    Mentioned
    896 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wacey View Post
    The Fi ego is ALWAYS observing, even in ways that are not apparent to the outsider. Who are you? What do you you reveal about me? What do you think about such and such person, and what would your attitudes reveal about what you think of me? Do we think the same? Do we think differently? What about you would make me open up about? Endless questioning, mostly going on inside my head. It's a huge distraction and I have to actively concentrate on NOT doing it while at work.
    i hardly ever read long posts about socionics anymore but this caught my eye as being one of the more tangibly relatable Fi descriptions i've seen in awhile. nice.

  22. #102

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,091
    Mentioned
    107 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ooo-ooo! Wacey, is the guy on the left an ESE? I've been unsuccessfully trying to type my first boyfriend for years, and he appears to VI similarly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Wacey View Post
    Attachment 2751
    ^This.

    Look, it has nothing to do with one person being fake, or real. Both people are real. It has more to do with if you understand the socionics framework. If you have no idea about socionics, you may feel that the other person is undermining your attempts at connection. This was certainly the case between myself and this ESE. If we are to believe socionics at all, then everyone must agree that the information elements play a very apparent role in how people, personalities, interact with one another. The differences between Fe and Fi are as large as the differences between a Ford truck and a Smartcare. Sure, they are both vehicles, as both information elements are ethical in nature, but you could hardly call them similar. When found in two individuals who value either Fi, or Fe (and in this post I am just focusing on ego blocks), you are going to get a whole different personal perspective. So yeah, this part is obvious and I think everyone would agree.

    So what are the differences?



    I will start here. I don't believe that having Fi in your ego affects how I make decisions when it comes to choices that I must make about life. For example, if I am looking for a job, I am not sitting here thinking, who will I get along with? Will I like who I work with? Will they like me? Can me and my coworkers have a meaningful connection? Maybe when I was younger I might have thought alone those lines. With age comes maturity and I have found that it is pointless to think about these types of things BEFORE I have the job. The thing about Fi is that it seems to happen in no matter what situation I find myself in. So whether I am working for a National park, for the ambulance service, or as a security guard, or at a busy lumber mill, or going to school, I always have Fi going on in the back burner. I say back burner because as far as Information Elements go, its is pretty useless. Who cares, in the short term, who is getting along with who in a work place where production is occurring, or "the job just needs to get done"? It doesn't and is not necessary. Especially in today's age where a work place may have people coming and going on a pretty regular basis, so the turn around causes people to have little obligations socially to the people around him and her. Now, I say short term, because after a certain point, Fi really becomes the solid foundation on which all productive relationships are formed. After a certain point, however, it does becomes vital to the work place that people have relationships that are amicable, amiable, and helpful, or at the very least not destructive. The only way this seems to happen in the long term is if you have some people around who are Fi valuing, and its for this reason that Fi valuers seem to become the heart of their companies, or causes.

    Fi as an ego block is flexible, it works in whatever scenario the person is in. It doesn't matter. In fact, as a young person it used to be a huge hindrance to me. No matter where I was, whether it was in a summer camp cabin, or a high school classroom, or at a family gathering, I become increasingly distracted by the interpersonal relationships going on around me, and in fact inside me as well. It's partly for this reason that I believe Fi valuers by nature seem to be so un-emotive even though the highly value the relationships they are forming in a given setting. The Fi ego is ALWAYS observing, even in ways that are not apparent to the outsider. Who are you? What do you you reveal about me? What do you think about such and such person, and what would your attitudes reveal about what you think of me? Do we think the same? Do we think differently? What about you would make me open up about? Endless questioning, mostly going on inside my head. It's a huge distraction and I have to actively concentrate on NOT doing it while at work. It is for this reason that Fi valuers would much rather have a formal system of interaction in the workplace, at least in the beginning. "Hello, how are you?" "Fine thank you, and how are you?". If you know you are working with an Fi valuer, know THIS: long before you may have ever thought about their character, they have already thought about yours a hundred times by now. They, over the long term have discovered who your parents were, how many children you have, how you felt about your cat dying 20 years ago, where you went to school, what your political views are, who you think are the better coworkers, how you act under stress, what you want out of life, what your values are. And you will have no idea they know all this stuff because they have only worked with you for such a short amount of time. They were sizing you up, not to hold a power over you, but in order to connect, which they feel they have, as soon as they started working with you. The trouble is, what does all that matter? For the sake of being productive it doesn't. For the sake of bringing meaning and fulfillment into the workplace, Fi valuers eventually do this, and over the long term those that feel more fulfilled in the workplace, will become more productive in the long run, as the job becomes more then just a pay cheque. Like I have said before I rarely make career decisions based on Fi information because I have learned that no matter where I am Fi is going to be playing inside my head regardless of outer circumstances.


    (god, what a bad hat)

  23. #103
    Jesus is the cruel sausage consentingadult's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,778
    Mentioned
    107 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    “I have never tried that before, so I think I should definitely be able to do that.” --- Pippi Longstocking

  24. #104
    both sides, now wacey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Canada
    TIM
    9w8
    Posts
    3,513
    Mentioned
    140 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nanashi View Post
    ooo-ooo! Wacey, is the guy on the left an ESE? I've been unsuccessfully trying to type my first boyfriend for years, and he appears to VI similarly.

    We lived together for many years, and shared many experiences together. We shared many trails, many friendships, many amazing times, and many frightening as well. He taught me many things and I taught him. "It was the best of times, and it was the worst of times".

    I know as a socionist that even if you live with someone so closely you can never be sure of their sociotype. Was he an ESE? Did he have an excellently developed Te? What made him Fe valuing? Was it in fact Si creative among other thing that I so appreciated from him? The questions went on and on. I think one key to sociotyping those close to you is found in the intertypes. I found this quote from socionics.us that summarizes what I mean. "Socionics is not a typology of personality, but a typology of perceptual traits that define one's relationships with others".

    We cared for and loved another no doubt about that. But, we were always stepping on each others toes. I jived while he jumped, and I jumped while he jived. We could never quite get on the same page. And eventually this gap was terrible. We could never help one another even if we wanted to because the help provided by either of us was scoffed at, ignored, taken lightly, and at its very worst, subject to suspicion and contempt. So my point is taking everything into account, it must have been a MIRAGE relationship? How else could I explain it? (strictly discussing personality types and not taking into account other life issues) If these sustained personality clashes were not the definition of an ILLUSIONSARY relationship, then I don't know what it could be and I would toss my hands up in the air and say "ENOUGH, I QUITE SOCIONICS!!!!" We must remember that socionic types are deep psychic phenomena and that means that not all is what it seems when it comes to someones behavior, emotions, motivations, strengths and weaknesses, interests and dislikes. Intertypes are key. How do I relate to this person? How do they relate to me? These are important questions.

    I can say with certainty that of all the types, I am most familiar with ESE.

    (As a side note I would like to add that I believe ESE's are one of the strongest types mentally and that every stereotype about them is essentially retarded. These people are tough and life only serves to temper them like steel)

  25. #105
    Humanist Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    25,913
    Mentioned
    664 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    I have a very clear example...

    A mutual acquaintance of my SEI friend and I walked up to us

    Chris: hi girls
    SEI: Hi Chris! Where have you been? (in an excited slightly up tone)
    Me: Hi Chris (very even tone)
    Chris: I've been away in the AA program for a while.
    SEI: Awwwwww and they let you out? (the aww part was long and very expressive, the "they let you out?" was meant to be a sarcasm)
    Chris: (doesn't react to the sarcasm) Yeah ladies, I should take you out for a margarita sometime.
    Me: *thinking: seriously! I can't believe that you can stand here and talk about drinking with us when you're supposed to be getting better.* (you can see my serious tone and expression whereas my friend SEI thinks that drinking is HIS life and HIS choice so she can't judge him...I do.
    -
    Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
    Enneagram 2w1sw(1w9) helps others to live up to their own standards of what a good person is and is very behind the scenes in the process.
    Tritype 1-2-6 stacking sp/sx


    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

  26. #106

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,284
    Mentioned
    101 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maritsa View Post
    I have a very clear example...

    A mutual acquaintance of my SEI friend and I walked up to us

    Chris: hi girls
    SEI: Hi Chris! Where have you been? (in an excited slightly up tone)
    Me: Hi Chris (very even tone)
    Chris: I've been away in the AA program for a while.
    SEI: Awwwwww and they let you out? (the aww part was long and very expressive, the "they let you out?" was meant to be a sarcasm)
    Chris: (doesn't react to the sarcasm) Yeah ladies, I should take you out for a margarita sometime.
    Me: *thinking: seriously! I can't believe that you can stand here and talk about drinking with us when you're supposed to be getting better.* (you can see my serious tone and expression whereas my friend SEI thinks that drinking is HIS life and HIS choice so she can't judge him...I do.
    lol

  27. #107
    Humanist Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    25,913
    Mentioned
    664 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    I have another example...

    LSI calls (SEI picks up) and is asked to be placed on hold. LSI makes a fussy sound, blowing out a breath of air as if he's highly inconvenienced and must get to his desired person right now. SEI picks the phone back up again and says "thank you for holding. Aw you sound so irritable. Haha" He loves being pointed out something about his external feelings which he didn't notice. Very moody like things which an SEI picks up on so quickly. While I am saying "really? you have to act that way. Does it ever occur to you that people are actually busy and doing their job?" I'm too serious and expect the same from others the SEI is better at identifying moods and teasing people about them. Fe valuers love that stuff. I DON'T.

    I love vulnerability...things like someone talking about how they are feeling on the inside and what other stuff in life is making them feel. I love it when a person talks about their troubles, their sadnesses. I'm there to listen and not to say "awww" but to just steer them in the right places.
    -
    Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
    Enneagram 2w1sw(1w9) helps others to live up to their own standards of what a good person is and is very behind the scenes in the process.
    Tritype 1-2-6 stacking sp/sx


    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

  28. #108
    Humanist Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    25,913
    Mentioned
    664 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by golden View Post
    Although this is your experience, so how can I argue with it, I must say I've never seen an Fe-valuer walk around just letting all their negative assessments of various people hang out in every direction. Even an SLE with Fi-PoLR, I have seen him show tremendous restraint in dealing regularly with people he really does not like, being tolerant, showing respect, making an effort, and absolutely NOT letting the person know that maybe ... he doesn't like them so very much. And in some cases he will change his mind with time--the person isn't so bad, he judged them wrong, etc.
    In terms of human relationships I've noticed ESI "rubbing up to their favorite people" or me sticking near my favorite people or me just existing in a neutral state with everyone around me.

    I keep trying to find ways to understand, connect, improve relations.

    So somehow this doesn't really add up for me. Much as there are times I would loooooove to tell someone to such my nonexistent dick, I almost never do. I keep trying to find ways to understand, connect, improve relations.
    You wrote this Idk if I do that since I mostly hold everyone around me in a neutral state like everyone is pretty much on the same level of acceptance and love with me. Some people drop to a lower level of trust as they begin to do bad things against me like betray my friendship and trust but even then...after a while go back on to the same level. I would say I have no one with which I share my deepest self with other than my writing as I don't trust any human being to any deep level because I know human nature is not perfect and there are so many things that can cause them to pick out a splinter against you to harm you if need be. I don't like getting hurt by others.

    I feel though that my SEE dad knew me well and deeply. He understood that I shared with no one except in my writings and probably let me write for that reason. Remembering him and how he left me along for long periods of time or even how he pulled me out and made me do other things like clean the house, go grocery shopping, take us out to parks and play that sort of things I observed in another interaction between an SEE parent and an EII son and that made me feel kind of accepted.
    -
    Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
    Enneagram 2w1sw(1w9) helps others to live up to their own standards of what a good person is and is very behind the scenes in the process.
    Tritype 1-2-6 stacking sp/sx


    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

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •