Fi PoLR - Misunderstood

[marooned]

I don't do this generally. usually the other person has to initiate everything... I just follow suite.

anyway I think it makes sense for Fi super-ego because it sounds like poking around for Fe cues from the other person, or just being "distant" when the Fe isn't charged enough or something.

[squark]

At least going formal in writing keeps you from embarrassing yourself. Phone conversations though. . . I'm so dorky At least until I've gotten used to a person.

[April]

Perhaps this is weak Fi, because it's a bit weird and funny to me. Sure, there are formalities to get out of the way in the beginning stages of a relationship, but to stick to them would feel awkward. Basically, the more relaxed, confident, and informal you are, the more the other person mirrors you and becomes comfortable. I have no problem in creating or setting my desired "distance" with the other person.

[Beautiful sky]

Might it be related to Fi-polr if someone is jumping around with the distance in a relationship? For example, acting "close" to someone one day and then more formal the next. Like they're waiting for clues from the other person as to what the relationship is. Acting unsure in written communication--signing one's full name with a salutation in a more formal way, then at other times using only the first initial and other times nothing at all. Anyone have experience with someone doing this?

No, it's not from Fi polr, it's related to being an introvert. Extraverts remain a positive relations with an object, so unless an extravert is dealing with a depression caused by an internal thought matter, they will not change their feedback towards you in terms of proximate signals of closeness. But, you will usually notice that an extravert is upset and that will not be caused by you or their relation to you, unless you did something wrong to them; in general Fe types, who have weak Fi, don't hold onto hurt emotions towards others (this is more so with extraverted Fe valuers) for extended times.

In fact, this sounds like Fe polr. Now that I think about it it can also be ISTp or ISTj thing because they both look and act kinda the same.

[jessica129]

I've noticed everyones description of Fe and Fi POLR are completely different. We should probobly get to the bottom of this. It's annoying.

[Simon Ssmall]

Might it be related to Fi-polr if someone is jumping around with the distance in a relationship? For example, acting "close" to someone one day and then more formal the next. Like they're waiting for clues from the other person as to what the relationship is. Acting unsure in written communication--signing one's full name with a salutation in a more formal way, then at other times using only the first initial and other times nothing at all. Anyone have experience with someone doing this?

Hah, this sounds quite funny. I never do that, Im never unsure of what should be the tone or whatnot. Neither I am jumpy with distance in the relationship with one exception where the person THINKS I am interested when I am clearly not then I can become more distant. So in someones eyes it could be perceived as jumping around in distance, however for me its not jumping around, its a very clear and sensible thing to do (but id never change my signature to a more formal one lol). I can see how this could come from a weak Fi person, simply being unsure of the distance of the relationship.

[Park]

I like to call both Fi and Fe-PoLR types, the "emotionally retarded" types.

The first group is emotionally clueless and seeks external demonstration of impersonal feelings and joviality, while the second one is also clueless, but seeks consistency and a more implicit demonstration of feelings through actions, personal bonds and loyalty.

Paranoid representatives of each group may exhibit very aggressive and/or destructive behavior if their emotional expectations (/needs) remain unfulfilled. Because feelings are not their strong suit, Fx-PoLRs tend to be emotionally insecure and needy.

[redbaron]

No, it's not from Fi polr, it's related to being an introvert. Extraverts remain a positive relations with an object, so unless an extravert is dealing with a depression caused by an internal thought matter, they will not change their feedback towards you in terms of proximate signals of closeness. But, you will usually notice that an extravert is upset and that will not be caused by you or their relation to you, unless you did something wrong to them; in general Fe types, who have weak Fi, don't hold onto hurt emotions towards others (this is more so with extraverted Fe valuers) for extended times.

In fact, this sounds like Fe polr. Now that I think about it it can also be ISTp or ISTj thing because they both look and act kinda the same.

the person is either SLE-Ti or LSI-Se.

[EyeSeeCold]

Paranoid representatives of each group may exhibit very aggressive and/or destructive behavior if their emotional expectations (/needs) remain unfulfilled. Because feelings are not their strong suit, Fx-PoLRs tend to be emotionally insecure and needy.

You must also explain the differences here. The PoLRs manifest differently due to differing leading functions. I would not say Fi PoLR people are needy and insecure in the same way as Fe PoLR people, though from afar they may seem similar.

[Marietta]

hello, I'm new here, but interested in socionics for a long time. I'm a bit confused about Fi and how it manifests. Maybe Fi and Fi polr types could relate? Fi is called the ethics of relationships. What do Fi and Fi polr do when they think or feel that the partner, friend, or whatsoever violates the relationship somehow? how is it different? which is more prone to have a hard time forgiving people's mistakes? I have read contradictory opinions on that.

also, I would be interested to know how is fi or fi-polr connected with trust. which types - Fi or Fi Polr are more inclined to distrust people, and be cautious in their relationships? I could see fi types waiting with their trust until a strong relationship is established, but on the other hand if they are capable in the relationship area maybe they don't have any problem with that?

[The Ineffable]

Hmm as long as you don't specify what Fi that is, I think you mean Fi Ego (strong and valued Fi) and Ti Ego (weak and unvalued Fi). Here's how ("Pe" being either Ne or Se):
- Fi/Pe - Fi Ego, Ti Super-Ego - Fi Base, Pe Creative, Ti Role
- Pe/Fi - Fi Ego, Ti Super-Ego - Pe Base, Fi Creative, Ti PoLR
- Ti/Pe - Ti Ego, Fi Super-Ego - Ti Base, Pe Creative, Fi Role
- Pe/Ti - Ti Ego, Fi Super-Ego - Pe Base, Ti Creative, Fi PoLR

So, only the last case is Fi PoLR, while both first cases are Fi. It matters whether Fi is positioned as the first function (Base), when Ti becomes Role, or in the second one (Creative), when Ti becomes PoLR.

So basically what Fi are you talking about, Base or both Base and Creative? They manifest differently; in case you talk about Fi and Ti as Information Elements (not functions), then we need to agree on that first.

[Marietta]

thanks for reply. I was mostly thinking about comparing types with Fi as the1st or 2nd function and by contrast those with Fi polr.
I know that Fi or Fi polr manifests itself differently in Se and Ne types, but I wonder what is in common when it comes to dealing with conflicts and trust in the relationships and Fi. Those issues are related to every function in a way and every type resolves them differenty, but I would like to know the role of Fi in it, if there is any difference based on fi alone as a weak/strong function.

[Suz]

thanks for reply. I was mostly thinking about comparing types with Fi as the1st or 2nd function and by contrast those with Fi polr.
I know that Fi or Fi polr manifests itself differently in Se and Ne types, but I wonder what is in common when it comes to dealing with conflicts and trust in the relationships and Fi. Those issues are related to every function in a way and every type resolves them differenty, but I would like to know the role of Fi in it, if there is any difference based on fi alone as a weak/strong function.

You might find Expat's laser beam and fog analogy useful. In fact the whole thread is useful for other IEs too (some descriptions better than others though). http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...laser+beam+fog

Krig's revision of the Fe/Fi analogy which is also good: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...41&postcount=1

[Beautiful sky]

Differences between Fe and Fi are:

EXTRAVERTED EMOTIONAL CONCEPTION

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. This means that the person, when faced with a situation that requires empathy is likely to face it with humor because emotions become objective and detached from the person's own self. Take my cousin's cancer case. While an empathetic type like me is feeling the sorrow of my cousin and crying with her, my sister, an ESE type, is approaching this situation with humor and the need to celebrate with wine and bold emotions.

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.

Being Extraverts, Fe types are likely to not be able to adapt into new societies well, not like Fi types. This is why they would prefer, often times, to marry or to integrate themselves to the society in which they are from and they have a hard time fully incorporating into new societies. This is apparent with my ESE Armenian cousin, who has a hard time dating men of other culture/societies, because, being an E type, she is only comfortable with her own society even though she tries hard to look like she's integrated with the American culture, from the outside. From the inside, she's very uncomfortable with marrying and even dating someone who is not of her own traditional heritage.

When Extraverted Emotional Conception takes
over the entire personality, it develops to a point where it
reacts overly emotional to every little phenomenon,
whether it’s worth it or not. These emotions look
exaggerated to others, but that is the real strength and
extent of it. Such emotions may turn about very quickly
and be exhausting for other people and the Extraverted
Emotional Conceptive type itself. Such person looses
touch with himself/herself and suffers from obsessive
thoughts and ideas that wouldn’t let go. Overdeveloped
Extraverted Emotional Conception may sacrifice its life
for the ideas that don’t make sense and have no practical
use. Sometimes, Extraverted Emotional Conception has
a feeling that other people speak out their thoughts,
whereas they can barely follow their thoughts themselves
and can’t express them.

INTROVERTED EMOTIONAL CONCEPTION

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.

This is otherwise known as ethics of relationships. Because the person tries hard to keep her relations close by and endures for them. Expression is readily found and expressed through LOVE, the internal feelings and connections made to another person.

In extremes, Introverted Emotional Conception
becomes hyper introverted and loses touch with reality. It
goes completely into its world of inner feelings and
characters. The function that suffers first is Extraverted
Intellectual Conception . It starts delivering objective
facts and conclusions about the reality that disturb the
person and don’t let be. Obsessive thoughts and notions
come to mind and demand attention, preventing Introverted
Emotional Conception from dissolving in its mysterious
inner world.

[Beautiful sky]

Fe and Fi need something completely different from a partner...

Fi needs someone who updates factual information and can evaluate them as the world offers new ones, because the person is an introvert and easily loses touch with the outside information and dynamics of things. So, the best fit for this person is an E type and more so Te. Te types tend to be external, highly organized and they find ways to be most efficient.

Fe types are already emotionally in touch with the outside object/subjective world, they need help analyzing what they see/hear, etc. Ti types analyze very well, and may form some structure to things. Ti types ignore Te, they ignore consideration of the most efficient systems and structures and only pay minimal attention to the external dynamics of the structures they help to implement as they focus on analysis and finding matches or logical consistencies between things.

[Beautiful sky]

Fi PoLR types are definitely more inclined towards forgiveness than Fi ego types. Fi ego types can hold to resentment FOREVER unless they forgive because their ethics say not to hold grudges (and even then they deep down will still resent the violater) or else because the offender makes amends by apologizing and/or amending their ways. Actually, someone who doesn't ever outright apologize but shows penance by showing a change of heart and a change in ways is likely to be forgiven more easily than someone who apologizes, doesn't change, and makes excuses for their blatant asshatery.

I see a lot of relational drama with the Fi PoLR people I know. It's like they don't even want you to really apologize much or say why you were wrong, (after the fact) just to smile, be pleasant, and act like you guys are cool. So yeah, they are a LOT more forgiving of not only themselves but everyone around them, for the most part, which makes sense if relational ethics are naturally difficult for them to distinctly perceive and maintain in conscious awareness, otherwise they wouldn't be so forgiving (naturally perceiving information which makes you go 's/he is nice, trustworthy, not an asshole, s/he is a malicious jerk and no-lifer who just wants to make people miserable.')

Only unhealthy Fi types.

[Marietta]

THANKS EVERYONE.

aixelsyd, that's more or less how I thought about it. but there are some descriptions at wikisocion that I find contradictory.

for example, I've read that ILE's due to Fi polr are supposed to want everyone to simply be their buddy, aren't comfortable with changing this distance, don't like declarations about relationship. For me it seems contradictory to the following description:

ILE By Stratievskaya (from wikisocion)
"This occurs because of the logical approach of Don Quixote to questions of ethics, and also on the strength of the fact that it not at all sees distances between themselves and man, with whom it will intend close to associate. Hardly after having time to tie relations, Don Quixote already considers his partner as part himself - from what is done the "logical" conclusion that the partner now already belongs to it completely. Consequently, now narrower than no right of selection and personal freedom in partner remains, just as and there cannot be the noncoincidences of views, since now it decides for it, thinks vybiraetDon- Quixote.Outside person still can have a certain freedom of opinions. This Don Quixote completely can allow. But concerning partner, here everything is solved by it unambiguously: partner - this already the part of his very, and consequently, it must in everything be subordinated to it. ("the partner" of Don Quixote it is possible to become after only 15 minutes after acquaintance with it and precisely because it thus solved. (...) "

This description refers to ILE having problems with psychological distance, but it seems to state that ILE doesn't want a buddy but the partner who belongs to them completely, a part of themselves (even if it's in the field of opinions and logic) and stuff like that. According to this description ILE's may want the partner to break other relationships. There is also stuff about a tendency to leave the relationship upon minor misunderstandings and imperfections of the partner, which is why I was asking about forgiveness and Fi.

Both views state that there are problems with distance in relationships, but here it is described from completely different angle.

any ideas?

[Krig the Viking]

The Vulnerable function is rather like the hot water tap in your shower -- it's easy to make the water way too hot, or way too cold, but very difficult to get it "just right". For example, Vulnerable Se types are either way too passive or way too aggressive, and have a hard time being able to tell how much force is "just right" to achieve the results they want in the world. Vulnerable Fi is similar. Fi-Vulnerable types would tend to either keep everyone at too far a distance, relationally, or go overboard and suddenly consider them "best friends" like the above description. They have difficulty accurately assessing Fi matters and finding the "just right" behaviour.

The best word, I think, to describe Vulnerable function behaviour would be "clumsy".

[Suz]

THANKS EVERYONE.

aixelsyd, that's more or less how I thought about it. but there are some descriptions at wikisocion that I find contradictory.

for example, I've read that ILE's due to Fi polr are supposed to want everyone to simply be their buddy, aren't comfortable with changing this distance, don't like declarations about relationship.

My understanding is that Fi-POLRs do like declarations of relationships, because they are completely unable to assess the state of the relationship for themselves.

FYI keep in mind that online translations of russian to english can inadvertantly result in the opposite meaning because often a "not" is dropped, or added where it wasn't supposed to be.

[Exodus]

Fi PoLR types are definitely more inclined towards forgiveness than Fi ego types. Fi ego types can hold to resentment FOREVER unless they forgive because their ethics say not to hold grudges (and even then they deep down will still resent the violater) or else because the offender makes amends by apologizing and/or amending their ways. Actually, someone who doesn't ever outright apologize but shows penance by showing a change of heart and a change in ways is likely to be forgiven more easily than someone who apologizes, doesn't change, and makes excuses for their blatant asshatery.

I see a lot of relational drama with the Fi PoLR people I know. It's like they don't even want you to really apologize much or say why you were wrong, (after the fact) just to smile, be pleasant, and act like you guys are cool. So yeah, they are a LOT more forgiving of not only themselves but everyone around them, for the most part, which makes sense if relational ethics are naturally difficult for them to distinctly perceive and maintain in conscious awareness, otherwise they wouldn't be so forgiving (naturally perceiving information which makes you go 's/he is nice, trustworthy, not an asshole, s/he is a malicious jerk and no-lifer who just wants to make people miserable.')

And Fi PoLR can go both ways with trust. Some are trusting without any discrimination and others trust no one, though this is probably related to uprbinging and early environment as well as personal character (untrustworthy people assume others are like them, though sometimes it's not that but being hurt by too many people). I tend to think Fi ego types are naturally adept at knowing who to trust since detecting motives, character, and so forth comes most naturally to them. I know I have loads of trust issues but I manage to instinctively know I can trust him/her and know that this other guy is dangerous to trust because his motives, behavior, etc brings me to believe his heart is crooked, so to speak.

Wow. Very good explanation.

[redbaron]

My understanding is that Fi-POLRs do like declarations of relationships, because they are completely unable to assess the state of the relationship for themselves.

I've found this to be the case, yes. But they don't like a lot of discussion about it. More like "tell me what this is" and then move on to doing stuff, having fun or whatever.

[plotter]

Personally I tend to feel very unaware of the status of my relationships.
I usually assume distance before closeness, and once I've decided a distance, it's very hard to change. I constantly doubt it, but it's easier to decide something.
I become uneasy when the people doesn't act according to what I've decided.
I like declarations of the state of the relationship before I've decided or when I'm certain I want to change it. Otherwise it may be awkward.
I hardly ever try to change the state of a relationship myself.

[1981slater]

Personally I tend to feel very unaware of the status of my relationships.

Marriage was created for Fi polr people

I usually assume distance before closeness, and once I've decided a distance, it's very hard to change. I constantly doubt it, but it's easier to decide something.

I become uneasy when the people doesn't act according to what I've decided.

Roundhouse kick'em, boy!

I like declarations of the state of the relationship before I've decided or when I'm certain I want to change it. Otherwise it may be awkward.

I hardly ever try to change the state of a relationship myself.

IMO, fi polr are really the ones who promote changes. Others are more "stubborn".

[plotter]

Marriage was created for Fi polr people

Haha I know

Roundhouse kick'em, boy!

I'll add that to my repertoire Might give me enough time to make a grand escape via the fire escape ladder.

IMO, fi polr are really the ones who promote changes. Others are more "stubborn".

Probably true. An outside observer would probably say I do change 'em all the time. From my perspective though, most people are in the category with people I treat like family when I'm with them and strangers when I'm not.

[mu4]

Fi base and Fi polr types = Evaluatory Fi
Fi creative and Fi role types = Situation Fi

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...nd_situational

People make strong judgments in their evaluatory.

So a type like a ILE can be ok with being buddy with almost "everyone".

But for someone they want to be with intimately, they may want something totally connected.

4th function Fi is weak, evaluatory, inert, and producing. It's not used all that often in a Fi polr type, but when it's used it can be very intense, firm and uncompromising. It's basically a on off switch.

[Lobo]

hello, I'm new here, but interested in socionics for a long time. I'm a bit confused about Fi and how it manifests. Maybe Fi and Fi polr types could relate? Fi is called the ethics of relationships. What do Fi and Fi polr do when they think or feel that the partner, friend, or whatsoever violates the relationship somehow? how is it different? which is more prone to have a hard time forgiving people's mistakes? I have read contradictory opinions on that.

also, I would be interested to know how is fi or fi-polr connected with trust. which types - Fi or Fi Polr are more inclined to distrust people, and be cautious in their relationships? I could see fi types waiting with their trust until a strong relationship is established, but on the other hand if they are capable in the relationship area maybe they don't have any problem with that?

Are you looking for an answer based on socionics theory, or from personal experiences of Fi/Fi polr types? Those two need not correlate... I'd like to get a better idea of what you are looking for before answering.

[Beautiful sky]

Fi PoLR means that when you're with the person that a relationship is automatically assumed that there is no requirement of declaration needed.

[The Ineffable]

Personally I tend to feel very unaware of the status of my relationships.

What status? Either in relationship or not...

I usually assume distance before closeness, and once I've decided a distance, it's very hard to change. I constantly doubt it, but it's easier to decide something.

What do you mean by "closeness" and "distance"? With strangers, a potential spouse or a spouse?

I become uneasy when the people doesn't act according to what I've decided.
I like declarations of the state of the relationship before I've decided or when I'm certain I want to change it. Otherwise it may be awkward.
I hardly ever try to change the state of a relationship myself.

That sounds like Rational, I suggest that you might be mistyped.
For the record, I distrust declarations, I'm only shaken when people react in a way I don't understand - not that "I decided". Furthermore, the solution is not a declaration of status - to a Fi-PoLR that means nothing, it's like the confession of a someone who's both accused and witness - but an explanation, to understand myself what happened, how consistent is that with their personality, past actions and my expectations.

Marriage was created for Fi polr people

False. Additionally (IME) the only Fi-PoLR I know valuing marriage is a SLE ex-schoolmate who stated that "it's different" to say "my girlfriend" vs "my wife", that it has a meaning, otherwise he was in a good relationship with that woman both before and after the official ceremony.

So a type like a ILE can make be ok with being buddy with almost "everyone".

But for someone they want to be intimately, they may want something totally connected.

Yes.

[Timeless]

Marriage was created for Fi polr people

The way I see marriage and the likes: If humans were monogamous by nature there would be no such thing called marriage, people would naturally hook up one-on-one for life. But that doesn't exist "You 'cheater!'"

[EyeSeeCold]

The way I see marriage and the likes: If humans were monogamous by nature there would be no such thing called marriage, people would naturally hook up one-on-one for life. But that doesn't exist "You 'cheater!'"

And if humans were polygamous by nature there'd be no such thing as bonding and jealousy.

[Timeless]

And if humans were polygamous by nature there'd be no such thing as bonding and jealousy.

I think jealousy comes from a sense of imaginary entitlement and ownership:

"Don't touch my car, I own it!"
"Don't look at her that way, she's mine!"
"Don't play around with my grandfather's watch, it belongs to him!"

As for bonding, I think that's natural monogamous or not, but I don't think has to be limited to 1 person or many, it just "is." You can bond with your friends, family, significant other, and even a dog. But the dog isn't going to bite your leg because you also bonded with your neighbors cat, your friends aren't going to shoot you because you have other friends, your girlfriend isn't going to cut off your balls because you bonded with her parents; well that depends on what U.S. state we're talking about.

---

P.S. I was just thinking what if the Matrix was filmed in Spain instead?

"¡Ole! Yo soy el arquitecto!"

[Marie84]

The Vulnerable function is rather like the hot water tap in your shower -- it's easy to make the water way too hot, or way too cold, but very difficult to get it "just right". For example, Vulnerable Se types are either way too passive or way too aggressive, and have a hard time being able to tell how much force is "just right" to achieve the results they want in the world. Vulnerable Fi is similar. Fi-Vulnerable types would tend to either keep everyone at too far a distance, relationally, or go overboard and suddenly consider them "best friends" like the above description. They have difficulty accurately assessing Fi matters and finding the "just right" behaviour.

The best word, I think, to describe Vulnerable function behaviour would be "clumsy".

yes

To add to what Krig said,
The way I perceive Fi PoLR is a wall between understanding the complexities of human sentiments, which can cause them to react inappropriately to the actualities involving the exchange of interpersonal connectivity.
I think it was Blaze who said Fi PoLR's are "relationally retarded" which is sort of a blunt way of putting it but rather true; it's like lacking a filter in human conduct, they don't seem to understand the impact they're having on others and seek external emotional reactivity to help gauge that.
It's not uncommon for them to do or say something and be oblivious as to why someone is reacting to it in a way that is opposite to their intent.
(i.e. "why is this person getting defensive, what did I do? Why does this person appear unhappy, do they dislike me?" etc)

Fe PoLR's seem to be the reverse of this; they see external emotionally reactivity as confusing and will have difficulties displaying and reading appropriate emotional exchanges.
("why is this person being excitable and smiling at me, do they like me? Am I appearing cold/dull, will people think I'm in a bad mood?" etc)

of course these are rather loosely put together, but yeah...

[Beautiful sky]

And if humans were polygamous by nature there'd be no such thing as bonding and jealousy.

I agree

yes

To add to what Krig said,
The way I perceive Fi PoLR is a wall between understanding the complexities of human sentiments, which can cause them to react inappropriately to the actualities involving the exchange of interpersonal connectivity.
I think it was Blaze who said Fi PoLR's are "relationally retarded" which is sort of a blunt way of putting it but rather true; it's like lacking a filter in human conduct, they don't seem to understand the impact they're having on others and seek external emotional reactivity to help gauge that.
It's not uncommon for them to do or say something and be oblivious as to why someone is reacting to it in a way that is opposite to their intent.
(i.e. "why is this person getting defensive, what did I do? Why does this person appear unhappy, do they dislike me?" etc)

Fe PoLR's seem to be the reverse of this; they see external emotionally reactivity as confusing and will have difficulties displaying and reading appropriate emotional exchanges.
("why is this person being excitable and smiling at me, do they like me? Am I appearing cold/dull, will people think I'm in a bad mood?" etc)

of course these are rather loosely put together, but yeah...

I have an SLE friend who broke up with his G/F on valentine's day and he seems to be sort of clueless as to how to handle conflicts within relationships (my interpretation is that he very much wants Fe).

[jessica129]

I have an SLE friend who broke up with his G/F on valentine's day and he seems to be sort of clueless as to how to handle conflicts within relationships (my interpretation is that he very much wants Fe).

I did that before. It happened because he was taking the V-day thing way too far. Stuffed animals and dinner and kisses and hugs. Ew. That holiday makes me so mad.

[Beautiful sky]

I did that before. It happened because he was taking the V-day thing way too far. Stuffed animals and dinner and kisses and hugs. Ew. That holiday makes me so mad.

I don't think that's why he did it, it can happen to anyone on that day, but he was particularly without any Si, sense of how she feels; I think your case was more Si (feelings you got from the way he behaved); he's was very very Se...he was sick and tired of empowering her and suggesting/changing her to find that she was unchangeable..

[Suz]

I don't think that's why he did it, it can happen to anyone on that day, but he was particularly without any Si, sense of how she feels; I think your case was more Si (feelings you got from the way he behaved); he's was very very Se...he was sick and tired of empowering her and suggesting/changing her to find that she was unchangeable..

u mean Fi, not Si.

And sounds like Jessica had an aversion to all the mushy, over the top Fe V-day associated gooeyness. It hit her Fe-POLR and made her highly irritated.

[Suz]

And if humans were polygamous by nature there'd be no such thing as bonding and jealousy.

[Beautiful sky]

u mean Fi, not Si.

And sounds like Jessica had an aversion to all the mushy, over the top Fe V-day associated gooeyness. It hit her Fe-POLR and made her highly irritated.

Se ego types ignore Si; I'm right, he's without Si as he ignored how she felt or how she makes him feel remaining totally objective in the extraverted sensory like self.

[Suz]

Se ego types ignore Si; I'm right, he's without Si as he ignored how she felt or how she makes him feel remaining totally objective in the extraverted sensory like self.

Just because Se-ego types ignore Si doesn't mean that's the function that was involved in what you're describing. SLE's also have Fi-POLR and thus would "ignore how she she felt or how she makes him feel."



You're wrong.

[Beautiful sky]

Just because Se-ego types ignore Si doesn't mean that's the function that was involved in what you're saying. SLE's also have Fi-POLR and thus would "ignore how she she felt or how she makes him feel."

What I'm saying is that they approached breaking up in two different motives/ways. Anyone can break up, it's what they are thinking and feeling as they are doing it that makes the type they are. Yes he ignored how she made him feel; I asked him and he said he only considered what he observed about her and the decision was objective and "rational" as he called it.