Empathy Fi or Fe?
@Maritsa posted something that made me curious about this.
Originally Posted by Maritsa
The questions are really close together and it is easy to click the wrong one if you're not careful.
Your Empathy Quotient score was 61 out of a possible 80.
Scores above 30 are generally not indicitive of an Autism Spectrum disorder.
Higher scores indicate greater levels of empathy.
Last edited by Aylen; 02-14-2015 at 02:06 PM.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Your Empathy Quotient score was 30 out of a possible 80.
Scores of 30 or less indicate a lack of empathy common in people with Autism or Asperger’s Syndrome.
Made me laugh, thanks
i think neither. Empathy is a human trait.
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
Maritsa answered me here if anyone is curious about her response.
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...=1#post1075104
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Fe is empathy in as much as one can expect from functions imo.
Take this example. Both my sister and I are visiting my father who is bed ridden at the hospital and on morphine for extreme pain. While I remain quiet and listen to my father attentively as he tells me "honey, I can't stand this pain any more, I don't know what's going to happen to me." I listen without any further emotional output or expectation than rubbing his shoulder and saying "I know dad, I'm working closely with the doctors to see what we can do." I provide reassurance and a breath of hope; my sister reacts and cries saying how she's feeling about dad being so bad. I feel bad too, but I don't get into emotional hysterics at least I don't let my dad see that as a proof of how I feel. I toughen up and I am that person's compress. I'm not there for my own proof of emotions. My sister tries to stir the pot and make him laugh or aggravate him by saying "we'll just cut your foot off…" and whatever any other shit she can say that will get him to get mad or react. I use my calming emotions to be a compress she uses hers to liven him up rattle him up.
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
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
Last edited by Aylen; 02-14-2015 at 04:59 PM. Reason: keeping conversation in context
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
We don't understand each other.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
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
I understand you just fine so speak for yourself. Not trying to be mean here. I read between the lines of most of what you say.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Then an eye roll is inappropriate. If you're thankful and understand me you can simply say, "thank you" or "thanks"
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
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
Maritsa I think this is a wonderful thing.
It is interesting because i remember when I used to go on TC a little and you would always burst into tears or create a drama scene, your favourite target was Ashton. So please don't say you are a calm one or is your Fi malfunctioned?
I cried when Ashton was around because I tried hard to communicate my needs despite him cursing at me endlessly and how bad he used to make me feel. My bf has observed that the miscommunication created by myself and my activity relations brings me to rage, a state that is uncomfortable and out of the ordinary for me. He recently took steps in cutting a relations between myself an an activity who was using me and who resorted to insults to make me feel bad about who I was and what I was doing. I quickly returned to my calm and serene state and feel good now. Ashton and I have no place in one room together ever.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
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
Is it possible for you to go OH WAIT I SEE WHAT YOU MEAN I AM WRONG. Maritsa you were crying and screaming and all sorts, so what you say about Fi not Crying or Not Screaming or Not Having Histrionics is nonesense. I think you just want to be right all the time which is a very unattractive quality regardless of type.
Words you're equating my reaction in two separate situations. Why do you want it to be all the same? If you find it unattractive then don't talk to me. I don't talk to people who have qualities that don't appeal to me. Why would I? You want to change me, go change yourself.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
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
Your Empathy Quotient score was 47 out of a possible 80.
I got 71 out of 80
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
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
the conflict in this thread is a pretty good example of how Fe and Fi respectively empathize...
4w3-5w6-8w7
Care to elaborate? I just see it as a personal conflict between alyen and maritsa ...
In my view Fi is empathetic if they know the feeling very well ('oh, I have been through that and I know etc.') and if the feeling they 'should' empathize with is authentic (not too dramatic and not oriented towards getting sympathy, but pure and contained). Ah and also Fi is decidedly more empathetic in close relationships and with people they like. Fe would be more like 'you should be empathetic when someone is sick' etc. and act on that regardless of the personal stuff someone feels in a given situation.
That's the most I can generalize about Fi vs Fe and empathy. Otherwise I agree empathy is a human trait and frequently highly dependent on context.
Since i've been in this thread - you are getting some responses lol.
My take on it from a functional POV is this:
As Fi is subjective it is more concerned with how *it* feels, to do OK with an Fi type you have to correspond with how they feel about things then they extend empathy.
As Fe is external it is more inclined to put on the other persons shoes so to speak, it looks at external reasons/feelings rather than the personal take on the ethical situation.
For me Maritsa is demonstrating an Fi approach in how I explained it.
I think I am starting to understand a bit more the difference between Fi and Fe. I can and do push my personal feelings aside when I know they will not be helpful to anyone involved. I can smile and laugh while crying inside but my personal feelings don't stop me from feeling exactly what another is feeling. It doesn't even depend on my past experiences. I can empathize with people who are experiencing things I have never lived through. I remember the Tsunami that killed so many. I was torn up for months after that. Had nightmares about Tsunamis, days before it happened, then months after. But there are situations for example, terrorist killing, where I am more objective and can sort of empathize with both sides so I have to push my personal feelings aside and just try to see it objectively. Except for beheadings, those really dig into my psyche and bother me more than a bombing would. I know it may sound irrational but that's how it is. I want to say more here but not sure what, yet. :/
Edit: Re: Bombing vs beheadings. I thought about why I feel the way I do about these situations. In a bombing people don't see it coming, usually, and that is preferable to me than a beheading, where you know it's coming and it's slow and painful at the same time. I imagine it seems like an eternity before the person actually loses consciousness. *shivers*
Logically I understand that bombings are traumatic to those involved but the level of psychological suffering inflicted upon them beforehand seems far less horrible to me somehow.
Last edited by Aylen; 02-14-2015 at 06:57 PM.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
I generally agree with your generalization. basically the way I see this thread proceeding, is with aylen operating in a more direct, emotionally tactile way ('I'm reading between the lines,' 'I understand what you're saying'), almost implying a kind of emotional common ground, or at least some frame of reference which makes the various forms of expression if not fully understandable at least somewhat coherent. this is how Fe "empathizes": emotion is seen as objective, collective, there's always some kind of middle-ground that can grant both parties access to a certain level of insight. maritsa, on the contrary, is insisting on the singularity and self-containment by of her sentiments, completely to the exclusion of anything aylen is suggesting. Fi in some sense has more integrity in this way, since it's strictly about what resonates, but is also more shortsighted/limited... basic insight and a kind of silent empathy trump common understanding.
also, aylen as an IEI is being a little bit more passive and courteous -- an Fe-dominant would be more aggressive and demonstrate a similar but different kind of emotional starkness as an Fi-dominant (whereas an Fi-creative would be slightly more like an Fe-creative but still more self-contained).
yeah, I basically see Fe empathizing via a context established by Ti, and Fi using Te as a kind of barometer for its inner sentiments.
4w3-5w6-8w7
Apparently the derail age thread was closed but just wanted to respond to Maritsa.
Not everything is about you Maritsa. My statement was general. I was not trying to figure you out because you are pretty much "what you see is what you get". That's fine.Originally Posted by Aylen
Of the two arguments the first one is the one that would reflect my beliefs. As for the second argument, I actively seek out people different than me to test myself in all kinds of ways, so I am not against those who come from an argument two perspective. I do poke people a bit but I am not being malicious. I just want to see what they're made of underneath the public persona. I want to see what is "real" even if it isn't politically correct. It's my way of confirming my own intuition of people and situations. I can imagine this or that about someone but until I find a way to expose it, there are still doubts of my ability to read people. I guess I just need some validation of what I feel but not from the other person. It all comes from within. I feel a lot of empathy for @Kim and not just for her views in this thread. I also feel empathy for others in this thread . I have things that bother me.
Edit: as for my little outburst... I am very protective of people I love.
Maritsa responds:
To figure someone like me out by pushing to define boundaries and making me upset in the process is malicious to me and how is that not an action that progrwsses from a stereotypical view of how people should be gotten to know?
Edit: I got what I wanted from this thread.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
I got 74 out of 80. No wonder I can create life long bonds with someone even after just meeting.
Last edited by Moonbeaux Rainfox; 07-12-2015 at 08:15 AM.
To understand what a person is experiencing from their frame of reference, you probably have to put aside your own frame first. To understand you probably need more Information, so gathering more Information about the situation is a good way to go. It's better to remain neutral and open. Neutral so that you don't mix your own stuff in and open to not miss anything by judging things too soon. People usually are more cooperative and tell things, when they sense that you can help and that it's really about understanding them. I also think people trust persons more, who have shown that they can handle a situation (and show level headedness and understanding) but also remain neutral (are not biased by personal things etc.). Stuff is more complex irl. I know that, but what I want to say without writing a wall of text is, that I don't see how any of this could be limited by one function or encompassed by one function so that's the reason why I don't tie empathy to any function.Wikipedia: Empathy is the capacity to understand what another person is experiencing from within the other person's frame of reference, ie, the capacity to place oneself in another's shoes.
Last edited by Moonbeaux Rainfox; 04-05-2015 at 07:53 PM. Reason: spelling
My psychic friend accused me of being an Empath. She said I'm observant like a wolf *howls* I'm just not into theatrics or dramatic displays of emotion. It's just too damn unmanly*places stein down on table* Whether its Fi or Fe, it's draining to be around negative emotions. I like atmospheric pleasantness. I try and avoid people who always seem to be in a bad mood. Some I try and cheer up a little, but even some of those get more agitated for you trying, so I've learned to just keep an emotional distance from most people. I'll just tell them to let me know if they need anything.
There was a time when I could not separate my feelings/emotions from other people. Like I didn't know that some of the stuff I was feeling was being imposed on me by others but only 'cause I allowed it to penetrate. This was very hard for me to handle as a child. I had a pretty good mentor who taught me how to differentiate (by questioning) my emotions from those of other people. I walk into a store and I am bombarded by the energy of other people. Like I can look at them and if they are angry I start to feel anger or aggressiveness build inside me. If they are being silly and playful I can emotionally feel it even though I am not part of it. It is like rapid emotional mood swings if I don't put this invisible shield around myself. It is part of the reason I can be such a recluse. I even seclude myself from others in my house just so their moods don't affect me. It is not easy keeping up a shield and unless I actively go in and change their moods, which I do sometimes when I had enough, I will feel overwhelmed. I will make a silly joke in the middle of an argument just to ease the tension that is building up in me. Seems to work because everyone starts laughing and then it is like they were never even feeling *fill in the blank* at all.
FTR: I live with all betas. An LSI and an IEI. They seclude themselves too so it isn't so bad.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
I have been thinking more on what you say here and we are really not that different. I think we are just using different words to explain something similar. I call it my invisible shield and I imagine a bubble around me, if things are too intense, but really it is just emotional distancing. Thanks for the insight.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
"Your Empathy Quotient score was 31 out of a possible 80.
Scores above 30 are generally not indicitive of an Autism Spectrum disorder.
Higher scores indicate greater levels of empathy."
I got 39. I actually consider myself to have pretty good Fi and empathy as well, though it has been something I have had to work on.
Also I think it is not necessarily a correlation coefficient being judged between Fi and Fe. It just manifests itself in different ways. For example, I would say Fi has more to do with empathy based on individuals as opposed to group empathy and Fe would be the opposite. or Asis la vida.
Could you maybe explain what you mean by group empathy? I read it a couple of different ways. I can empathize with groups of people but it is usually the individuals whose stories touch me that I have the most empathy for. It is easier to be less empathetic to groups because the group may not have a "face". It just depends on how well I can connect to their pain or sorrow. It is far easier to do one on one because then you are not as overwhelmed by the feelings of everyone all at once. Feeling everyone else's emotions all at once is a whole different kind of experience for me. It's not empathizing by putting myself in another's shoes. It is more like a mood shower and I'm trying to not to get wet. Unless it is a pleasant shower.
I mean I cried for 5 minutes during the last episode of Vampire Diaries 'cause I felt empathy for the characters as individuals. The storyline in that episode reminded me of what it felt like to lose what you love most. I wasn't even feeling sad for me. I felt sad for characters and I obviously knew it wasn't real. Sort of embarrassed to admit that.
One other thing. Those who can empathize with me best, know not to point out that I am crying over the Vampire Diaries. They just stay quiet since they know I am already embarrassed about it. Sometimes there is that one person in the room that looks over and calls attention to it and makes fun of me and I feel self conscious and weak. :/ I have an ESE sister who wants to be comforted when she is crying during movies so I will take her hand and hold it but I won't make a big deal out of it because I wouldn't want that done to me.
Last edited by Aylen; 02-17-2015 at 12:32 AM.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
I think I pretty much just said it in a terrible way. Basically, compromising yourself for others benefit and being a martyr of sorts as Fe and being selfish and being a Pre-Madonna being Fi. But to say that An Fi user can't accommodate others or that Fe users can't see personal meaning in something is just plain silly. But to clarify, both can be just as empathetic as the other and it isn't necessarily having to do with I or E but rather that you just end up with the I version or E version.
My God I sound so basic... Just pretend I didn't say anything, K?
We'll pretend like this never happened.
I was going to add that I really do not like to be babied when upset, just understood, and it is always cool when someone just "knows" what you need in that moment, even if it is leaving you alone until you are ready to talk about it or let it go like it never happened.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
After rereading the OP, and to answer the question more directly, Fe tend to have more empathy (here's looking at you Fe, Ni and Ni, Fe).We'll pretend like this never happened.
I was going to add that I really do not like to be babied when upset, just understood, and it is always cool when someone just "knows" what you need in that moment, even if it is leaving you alone until you are ready to talk about it or let it go like it never happened.
INFj
INFj
Ugh. Misconception these days that Fi/Fe is a dichotomy describing purely the inner and outer ethics. As in Fi is purely the subjective and Fe is purely the emotional collective. Its such horse-shit MBTI garbage and I'm sick and tired of seeing this.
Fi/Fe are two separate, discreet facets of reality and the information filtered by them are also different.
Neither ethic type is more empathic then the other.
What IS different is how the ethical acts on the empathy. And even then I have my doubts.
No one likes to be called out on their flaws, but really I doubt it's going to change anything at this point, guys. Those kinds of changes only come about with huge revelations and even those are rare.
People are just going to get defensive because their back is against the wall. A because they are defensive nothing will get through anyway (unless there is this foundation of intensive self-awareness).
too many questions
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
