What is it?
What is it?
One is introverted subjective feelings derived from exposure to objects and people (Fi) the other is objective feelings derived from objects (Fe); Fi is empathy, morals, personal/subjective judgements; Fe is sympathy, feelings existing outside of oneself, reflection and contemplation of social norms and fore.
-
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
An example off the top of my head (Fe-Base judges by experience/objects, Fi-Base by relationships):
- Fe: person A is OK but related to person B who I dislike, I prefer A stays away from B;
- Fi: person A is OK but related to person B who I dislike, I prefer to stay away from person A.
In that case, the relationship between A and B would be meaningless, thing which in fact is meaningful when Fi is involved. Also note that I cautiously restricted my case to F-Base, in the case of Extrovert Fi and Introvert Fe things change based on other factors, though processing the preference is still based on the specifics of the Ethical function.
The relationship between A and B is not necessarily casual, they may be brothers but they may be in agreement, the difference doesn't change much, but one can think of more palpable scenarios. If A agrees with B while B disagrees with your Fi-based principles, that is actually a problem. An extreme case which comes to my mind is when B is teaching everyone how to steal, thing you strongly oppose; in that case if you're Fe you just try to detach A from B because of this problem ("he's trying to teach you how to steal" - judgment based on objects), but if you're Fi, hanging out with B is inconsistent with your values - agreeing with B is unacceptable in advance (judgment based on relationships).
I had to go for a walk to help me work through why the following paragraph bothered me...
The scenario given:
F = our Fi-based person and their Fi-based principles (as per the paragraph)
B disagrees with F.
A agrees with B's disagreement with F...leading us to believe that A disagrees with F.
A's disagreement with F puts A in conflict with F.
Regardless of A's relationship with B.
In the extreme case example...B is teaching A how to steal.
F disagrees with the act of stealing.
If A is stealing, then A is in conflict with F (and F is in conflict with A).
Regardless of any relationships to B.
If A is not stealing, then A is not in conflict with F.
Regardless of A's relationship with B.
If A supports the idea of stealing, but does not steal, then A is in partial conflict with F.
This conflict arises when A is supporting stealing around F.
A and F are not in conflict when neither is relating to the idea of stealing.
If A and F want to relate on other things, then their relationship is best served by avoiding discussing with each other the topic of stealing.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
Maritsa33 is pretty good with Merry/Serious distinction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary...ty_distinction
(the description isn't perfect)
Fe: secondary qualities (ontologically subjective qualitative distinction)
Fi: primary qualities (ontologically objective qualitative distinction)
F is about qualitative distinctions.
as always the i/e aspect is more hindrance than help and gets the subjective/objective qualifier completely wrong. no wonder people end up with such idiotic views on this issue.
I write a cool, deep blog. I put my heart and soul into writing it.
Days later I check my blog and see that 2 people have visited my site:
Fe-Girl, comments on my blog post: "ZOMG!! Awesome post!!!You are like SO COOL! LOLZ!!@11!"
Fi-Girl, I see has visited my site, but has not commented.
Fi-Girl, instead, smiled creepily in front of the computer in the dark, read the post, and left.
Fe types pull on your emotions, they shake you up to see your response and if it's truthful and honest. Fi types either trust you, because they already have a bond with you, or suspect it, but they, unless Fi is demonstrative function, will usually not try to tug at your emotions.
For the best example of Fe, you may watch Eat, Pray, Love starring IEI Julia Roberts, but remember, she demonstrates Fi too, so there's a lot of hint of empathy in this movie.
-
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
IndeedFe types pull on your emotions, they shake you up to see your response and if it's truthful and honest. Fi types either trust you, because they already have a bond with you, or suspect it, but they, unless Fi is demonstrative function, will usually not try to tug at your emotions.![]()
My sister is an FeSi and it's interesting how she can wield my innocent and unsuspecting brother-in-law around on her pinky finger, by using pure and unadulterated drama, faking crying and emotional pain associated by some cause, like my mom's condition, while out shopping for hours in an attempt to avoid him (he's LSI type); all she has to do, to lie to him, is to play miss "my emotions are hurt" game with him in a blatant show of emotions; I have morals, I don't have Fe as a demonstrative function. It hurts me (notice the subjective additive of "me" here associated with Fi) to lie and because of this I don't do it.
SEE types, because of Fe demo, even though they have Fi ego, can do what Fe ego types can also...kind of "manipulative".
I'm blunt. If it's a "no" then it is a "no"; there's no ambiguity with me, which my dual appreciates very much because they have a hard time telling people's motives, so require people to be open and unambiguous.
-
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
Because functions totally equate to generally poor behaviour, yup![]()
I have seen Fi valuers do all of the above, as well as lie to bring people closer, and generally being very selfish with an egocentric focus on their own feelings - at the expense of others. Lying isn't related to Fe and Fi, to suggest so is disgusting.
I really dislike your posts maritsa, it's like you've learned nothing in the time you've been here.
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" isand not
I do things like this all the time
I'll read something awesome, I won't know enough about the person to know the correct way to respond, I'll be nervous for a while, then I'll get distracted and wander off elsewhere mentally...
I love this post![]()
I know whatand
are from a distance, and Ashton pointed out about how Jung referred to a certain symmetry existing between all four J functions:
is to
, as
is to
is to
, as
is to
I look at the way I think about things, casting my net far and wide with pieces of information and all, and I'm trying to imagine people doing that with outward emotional states to form a type of ethical judgment - I'm certain I've witnessed it many a time before, and it's been pointed at my direction a lot, and it's a bit mindblowing to me, reasoning in that manner (though it seems to work very well for lots of people)...
is going to be more difficult for me to get a feel for, as should be expected
I suppose I should smile more and all when surrounded byvaluers? I'm pretty outwardly unemotive at times (which works great for deadpan humor, intentional or not)
![]()
(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
well that explains it
It's kinda late for me, so I'll be brief about this. This is essentially what I've been saying about Fi for a while now. The way I see it working in me is a means of mass information consolidation into a single gestalt feeling of sorts. The emotions one feels isn't so much an entity that floats around in space that can be observed in its entirety by others, as much as it is the resulting network of all (relevant) information at any given moment that holds it all together and gives it meaning. That is to say, each exact situation possesses an inherently unique emotional construct different from any other, since each exact external situation is filled with a unique combination of parts and pieces. This is a difficult thing to explain in full, but if you want further explanation I'll try to expand on it.
As to how it differs from Fe, I would say that Fe sees one's emotional state as something that is meant to be explicitly seen and observable by others. I was talking to my ISFp mother about this sort of thing, and she explained that she has to be able to see for herself people's various states in order to know that the person even has emotions in the first place. One manifestation of this mindset is that sometimes when she sees me or my brother she'll say "show me a smile!" I see no reason for me to oblige, since demonstrating to others in a clearly, unmistakable way that I'm capable of happiness seems like a pointless exercise to me. Conversely, my ENTp brother eats that sort of thing up, which seems to happen in Fe HA a lot I find: they seem very eager to experience not just discrete, but particularly novel states of emotion and try to express those states in a way so that other people can know they're experiencing them.
This kinda went off on a tangent, but since I have no first-hand experience of how Fe works I can only give secondary accounts of how I see Fe working in others.
First off, let me say that I doubtis correlated to emotions, and I doubt that
is not often related to emotions and sensing emotions.
to me personally has a lot to do with being aware of my inward emotional resonance with things or feeling of personal distance/judgment about things/people, usually stuff that I can't word or explain but that happens automatically in my mind, as a kind of subjective reasoning afterthought to my own biased feelings. I also agree with maritsa's first post (didn't really read the others,) but what she means by morals is not really so all-encompassing or judgmental often, rather it's a way of filtering everything through your subjective reactions or beliefs: things about primarily you that no one can take away.
seems based on a personal observation of the ethics of other people, and where they and others fit in, too much so to have real meaning to me (not because it's about 'other people,' but because it turns to an emotional focus at others, where as
to me is already emotional in of itself.) I've contemplated endlessly on how
types are great people for caring in that way, and why I'm not like that even though its logical to be
and try to understand the angles on everyone and where and how they should fit in to the world of emotions, but it's just not how I operate. I'm not interested in an 'objective' approach to understanding this function. It becomes too analytical of other people and 'how they're are supposed to act in accordance with others' and divides from my own emotional path. Reread the delta quadra description about 'going your own path.'
Aroundtypes I get signs from them like I have to adjust, especially at first meeting. When you see
types they don't really care how you're behaving as long as its not conflicting with their personal mission. The worst of us may chose to judge someone and come out with negative reactions, but for the most part its fairly internal, and most
judgment is revolved around/about the self, and only casts reflections of our nature onto the outer world.
Also, you can flip this 180 when it comes toand
of the same types.
-valuers will manage what is externally emotional and amass emotional consensus,
-valuers will manage what is externally logical and amass logical consensus.
-valuers will manage what is personally emotional and divide and weave their own emotional path amidst,
-valuers will manage what is personally logical and weave their own logical path amidst.
The idea is like filling a container full of two liquids. Gamma and Delta's logical liquid emerges at the top by nature, and emotional liquid under the surface, and Alpha and Beta's emotional liquid emerges at the top my nature, and logical liquid under the surface. Logical and emotional awareness are still there for anyone of any type, but manifest in different directions by a natural selection, A or B. It's the fundamental structure of intertype relations and how groups of people naturally get along, and I believe it to be so much more visible than the idea that some people more emotionally adept get along best, where others more sentimentally adept get along best. It really does not work that way in reality, much ever.
I find that the/
quadra groups will have a sharper eye for logical consensus, making sure to structure and communicate to one another joint plans expressed in a pragmatic and logical fashion, while consuming under the surface, and emerging, various emotional viewpoints, inevitably valuing connection/empathy while being unable to sacrifice staying emotionally true to oneself. I find the
/
quadra groups converge more so with one another emotionally and make joint decisions and plans based on an ethical mindset, while consuming under the surface and emerging various logical viewpoints, valuing one's own personalized thought and sharing these ideas loosely rather than forming them externally. This is pretty much the crux of
/
vs
/
group behavior and makes type observations so much more apparent and meaningful.
is often not deep or personal enough to me (from my side of things), but it does trigger joy in my heart seeing them sympathize with others, when I find myself seeing a familiar
aspect to them and their true feelings come out without being labeled. I'm sure its the same way for when they see me find a sense of
, and by
I don't mean emotional expression but when they find me meeting them in the middle to connect to an emotional force greater than themselves. I think
creatives might not relate as much to my sense of
because they're extroverted and the ones trying to implement it, but the overall feel of
still applies 100%.
Last edited by 717495; 05-25-2011 at 10:46 AM.
Yeah, I agree. That is pretty easy to understand, the Fi is knowing in advance what's bad and good, what you relate to or not and so on, mostly based on that it gets enriched/refined, through new associations. Being either both strong or both weak, the ethics supplement each other, I think this should be told as well, because in alien situations Fi Egos do actually use Fe - immediate, gut feeling evaluation - to determine values to start off, pretty much how Ti uses Te empiricism to determine the root principles. The other way around hapens too, when one can't have a preference on something (neutral impression), so he/she needs to make an appeal to existing relationships (associations with others, familiarity, etc) to make his mind, whether he likes that or not.
Take the following situation: you have a new colleague. We assume this guy does reveal nothing about himself for a long time, either doesn't speak much or talks only generalities, he's dressed casually, decently. Fi types (or rather "using Fi, one ...") won't be able to make an opinion about him too easily, he breaks no rule, he has no evident problem. Through Fe however, he can be easily judged based only on what he shows, for example being "too silent" or "too dull" may be criteria for disliking someone, because this can make you feel uncomfortable - Fe-Base types in fact have this annoying habit to ask "why don't you talk?", or "don't you find this funny/stupid/good/bad?", or "tell me your opinion on this", which is so absurd for and despised by Fe-PoLRs, who are very neutral in their subjective preferences. To note that in the case of Fe, you don't have to dislike silent or dull people to dislike this guy, you may simply dislike that *in him*, if he makes you uncomfortable or spoils the atmosphere, it's all based on your immediate experience instead of a priori judgments.
Fi is subjective relations between objects. It filters the sentiments of repulsion and attraction in oneself and in others. When a person is questioning how much, say, they or someone else likes a person or if that person appears to like or dislike them, they're using Fi. It's typically linked as a relational element since it monitors the relational proximity between others, which allows for one to adapt to particular relations appropriately
Fe monitors the internal emotional processes that are taking place within an atmosphere or individual. It allows the ability to convey and identify the mood in oneself and others. When a person is identifying the emotional state of an individual or the general mood of the atmosphere they're within they're using Fe (i.e. "this person is sad/happy, warm/cold, grouchy/elated" etc) Fe can also enable someone to make attempts at inducing said moods in others
EII INFj
Forum status: retired
moods are an Fi construct. Fe is about qualitative evaluation of phenomenal (Pi) content. Moods are not Fe because they have an objective mode of existence. they are most likely the furthest Fi types can take their imagination in their efforts toward understanding Fe, which is why they end up associating it so often.
i don't viscerally "believe" in moods. they are something other people have, i.e. non Fe types, although i find it hard to believe they aren't faking them too (and NO, "faking" in this sentence does not connotate with Fe).
Moodiness seems to be Dynamic related as far as type dichotomies go, not Fe-valuing or Fi-valuing.
i don't really think so. they are understood through the Static functions, because they concern something that lasts through time rather than just something specific to a particular moment in time that is registered entirely on a phenomenal level. you use the word "moodiness" by which, in the most extreme form, you would mean the complete opposite of having moods: namely that of generating emotive content without any lasting basis behind it. this is what Fe is.