Fi vs Fe: quadra values

[implied]

*sighs*

The intended idea is that Alpha/Beta have a difficult time building a close relationship with someone if the interactions are not warm, and Gamma/Delta have a difficult time being familiar/warm with people who they don't have close relationships with.

i'll 3rd this!

[Joy]

care =/= warm

The Fe warmth I spoke of is more about familiarity, emotional interaction.

Gamma/Delta member can act warmly to people they are not close to, but they prefer not to experience that type of emotional interaction with people who they are not close to.

I really hope I don't have to explain what "close" means... Think of your best friend or boyfriend... now think of the many people you come in contact with who you do not know as well and who are not as important in your life.

[FDG]

If it is grounded in objective data, then I need to know what norms or criteria to refer to when deciding what is "warm" or "close".

Since the only logical possibility is to ground it in objective data, then supposing that Joy's premise:

"needs a warm emotional atmosphere, and the relationship follows "

is true, warm can only be defined as the condition under which a relationship follows. If the relationship is present, then warmth. If it isn't, then not warmth.

It seems impossible though to punctify the continuum in order to precisely quantify the "break even" point, since of course warmth is not binary (though I guess it can be binarized if you stricly reduce it to relationship/not relationship as I just did. Doesn't sound effective to me).

[Slacker]

People are trying to find objective ways to measure closeness and level of warmth in relationships?

[FDG]

Why would Alpha/Beta have a difficulty time building a close relationship with someone if the interactions are not warm? What does this mean? Is it saying Alpha/Beta has a difficult time developing attachments to people who don't care?

"Don't care" is not externally definiable, therefore we can kinda throw if away I guess. Better stick with the post hoc ergo propter hoc risk.

Oh, in order to use the approach I just tried to define, we of course have to previously know the types, since otherwise everything's messed up.

[FDG]

People are trying to find objective ways to measure closeness and level of warmth in relationships?

No, reread what I wrote. Since it's impossible to measure that, we just define warm a relationship which is formed if at least one of the components is Alpha/Beta, supposing that Alpha/Beta needs warmth in order to form a relationshiop.

[implied]

all i know is that ESFjs/ISFps laugh really loud. like sometimes they laugh so much that i'm wondering if they really think i'm that funny? so even getting close to those types is strange for me.

(but i still think that a lot of the guys can be really funny.)

[Slacker]

People are trying to find objective ways to measure closeness and level of warmth in relationships?

No, reread what I wrote. Since it's impossible to measure that, we just define warm a relationship which is formed if at least one of the components is Alpha/Beta, supposing that Alpha/Beta needs warmth in order to form a relationshiop.

I meant Kioshi really. I saw where you said it's impossible to measure.

[Expat]

Fe: needs a warm emotional atmosphere, and the relationship follows

Fi: needs a relationship, and the warmness follows


Does this sound about accurate, generally speaking?

As I said it works for me, but I had a hard time discussing that with an INFj male friend of mine (let me just say that personally I have no reasonable doubt as to his type, I've known him for 10 years). Although to me he does have clear over preference, he's also so comfortable "navigating" in that he found it hard to draw a line. I think he kept thinking that "warmness" = "sense of connection". He could see how it worked for me though.

Still, he has also mistaken other people's warmness for relationship.

My point is that this distinction may not be obvious to everyone.

[SLeo123083]

I think I'm confused on just what all this 'warmth' talk is about. To me warmth is wanting to spend time with me and having that connection of mutual interests and sharing similiar ideas but not being afraid to disagree with one another. It's just...comfortable.

Warmth is loyalty to me. I can't really stand people who act superficially friendly to me. I have no idea what function that is (if any) but you know, people who act like our relationship is something that it isn't. I don't really trust 'popular' people per se, because they treat EVERYBODY kind. I'm rather selfish, which is why I don't have very many friends. I want to feel that I'm special in that person's eyes and that I'm the only one they talk to like that. I know that rationally, people make friends easily by being nice to others equally. I just don't like doing that. I prefer to have one or two close friends and talk about how we hate everybody else. Daria-ish I guess.

I don't think of this is as wrong or right. It's just the way I am. I prefer people who pick favorites because I think it's just natural.

I have no idea what this has to do with functions but...that's how I describe it I guess.

[Joy]

are you INTp or ISTp?

[Joy]

or ENTj?