Fe = Lie detection?

[Raver]

I am under the impression that someone who is excellent at lie detecting can easily pick up cues involving emotion. From my observations dominants are simply superior at performing this and are brilliant lie detectors. This would include ESFJs, ENFJs, INFps, ISFps. To find out the truth, I'd like to hear your experiences of whether you've observed 's lie detection capabilities. Is it possible that another functions is better suited to identify changes in a person's mannerisms and behaviour when they lie?

[vague]

[Raver]

It makes sense that if there was a function related to that, would be it. I personally haven't really observed it. I am notoriously gullible. I can't remember the last time I thought someone lied to me, which probably indicates I'm a horrible detector. I can't even tell when people are pulling my leg in jest half the time.

I would think types would be related to exaggerating and bullshiting more than the other functions because it is more concerned about telling people what they want to hear.

What you said resonates with me as well, since it is very rare when I converse someone and then all of a sudden realize that someone had lied to me. I had read that sensors make better lie detectors then intuitives. Maybe lie detection is actually correlated with and not .

[implied]

i don't know. i have heard a few INFps claim that they suck at this/suck at reading body language/cues/etc.

i actually think ego block types are better at this, if we're limiting it to F's.

i might venture to say that types can be good at it.

[Slacker]

I can *always* tell when someone is lying to me. I can see it in their eyes.

So I think we Fi types might have something going here too.

In journalism school we called it a bullshit detector.

[implied]

i'll go on ahead and state that i totally believe my ISFj mother keeps me from falling for dishonest people. she seems very keen on the motivations of other people. it's like she's got a built in lie detector. she picks up on this sort of thing so much more quickly than other people. [/end gush-about-how-great-my-mom-is tangent]

[aestrivex]

i doubt that any particular type or function could be associated with something as variable and unscientific as the ability to tell when somebody is lying. some people with high Fe or Fi might have more innate ability to understand the emotional state given off by those with malicious intent, but the fact remains that almost any other type could attempt to develop the ability to read others, or have some uncanny understanding of other's psyches as to make this type of association relatively meaningless.

[pesto]

I've noticed that Fe oriented people (mainly INFp, ENTp) are quicker than me at seeing through bullshitting like EDIT: vague, sorry, said, to see the motivations behind someone's behaviour when they are being manipulative. I (INFj) on the other hand seem to be better than them to understand flat out lies people tell about their own motives or actions.

[MySaviour]

I think Ni and Te are both involved in lie detection, prominently.

[Raver]

I can *always* tell when someone is lying to me. I can see it in their eyes.

So I think we Fi types might have something going here too.

In journalism school we called it a bullshit detector.

Interesting, Fi or another function might be linked to lie detection or maybe it has no correlation with a function at all and depends on the individual. However, when you mentioned seeing it in their eyes that sounds like to me. It is strange though, because ENFps tend to believe almost anything from my experience. There are occasions where I can detect when someone is lying to me, however I doubt I'm more efficient at it than anyone else.

[vague]

[Raver]

I think Ni and Te are both involved in lie detection, prominently.

You should not have edited. Your post made a lot of sense. I think it was a really good point you brought up that some types are more prone to filling in the gaps of another person's fabrication with their own explanations while other types insist on all the facts from the person.

Makes sense. I believe that certain functions are capable of detecting certain lies based on different set of circumstances. might be excellent at detecting a person's changed behaviour after stating a lie or avoiding confrontation. Other functions are better suited to detecting lies using other methods. It's as if every function is skilled at detecting one type of lie.

[Rocky]

Ne is not analysis.


And I think I'm fairly good at detecting these things mearly because whenever I think it, I point it out to people, and then they apologize for trying to lie to me. *evil grin*

[Mariano Rajoy]

my esfj step-mother would always play games with me when i was a child. she would tell me that she always knew how i felt because a little birdie would tell her. i believed that she had a little birdie that i had never seen, because a lie was unfathomable to me at that age. it was so confusing for me, it made no sense. i remember this story because she played the little birdie card over a period of time. she also hated lies, and would occasionally say that she hated lies. i think she would do this so as to apply pressure and hence make Fe clues more noticable. as i grew older i became more successful at lying; the secret my intj friend and i found being to just keep a straight face and premeditate in detail.

as for an isfj friend that i have, she has trouble detecting the truthfullness of things that i tell her. not that i lie to her, but tease her with something that has a grain of truth to it that i exaggerate through over expression to wind her up. she and i have differences of opinion concerning people though; i excuse certain behaviors as type related whereas she sees certain behaviors as wrong. she says that she is good at detecting lies and fishing out malicious people, but to date i have yet to see her skills in action.

[MySaviour]

Most people detect only the lies they would have told, or that they have told, or that they have heard someone tell previously.. not necessarily the lies of a good liar. Once they start going into how people look, act, and carry themselves (etc), then they start including a vast subset of people who would look like they are lying, but are actually not. I always doubt when most people accuse others of lying (unless the lie is blatantly obvious), because people are full of it, and their conclusion was raced to without any real backing, or verification, and once they had a conclusion in hand, there was no attempt to weigh the strength of the conclusion, as there was only a motivation to take into account whatever bits of information SUPPORTED the conclusion. I hate it when people run purely on instinct, or run on instinct with a too heavily biased "check."

I mean, people tending to make snap judgements (whether they have come to terms with doing so, or whether they still are not aware that they do) are primary motivators for needing to learn body language, or proper grammar, or proper social ettiquette, or whatever, because they couldn't label those who don't comply with the social norms ANY quicker. They've misunderstood the situation, and they don't even care enough to realize. Once someone starts to realize they have the situation out of scope, they don't really do much of anything to educate themselves, they simply try to bring others to "their level," because the shallowness of surface impressions are really the way to go. Now, mind you, they are, by now, quite heady, because they have gone the extra mile by "digging deeper" with "open minds" to see what was going on. Its amazing to see how people reached their conclusions, should you ever get them to say it out loud: a snap judgement, with a bit of "logical backing" to cover their stupid ass. Of course, stupid is a mere adjective, because usually only the smarter people, socially, make judgements like a neanderthal, and then find themselves the balls or naivety to portray themselves as level-headed and open.

This post is completely biased, but that's fine.. this is one perspective people refuse to accept, unless they aren't actively involved in its "premise."