@grumpyvic81
"So I'll answer this for myself. What I'm finding is
1) I have really weak affective empathy. Most of the time I barely feel it or at least not too strongly when others express emotions, but I can automatically mirror them in some cases - without noticing. I find it useful that I do not feel it strongly i.e. my internal state* remains neutral or almost fully neutral, this way I can keep my independence and be able to evaluate things objectively without being overly affected by others. So I'm like, I may feel a little emotion, but I just feel it on top of my default calmness/neutrality, i.e. that calmness stays just fine. If others are upset or there's a crisis I'm able to stay calm and collected thanks to this too. ... I find anger I absolutely do not take up at all, for some reason. I may get angry myself but it's a fully conscious decision whether I want to respond with anger to an angry person or not."
This was an excellent description of how low D Fe valuers tend to experience and process affective empathy. But the very fact that you experience this cancels out being a Delta ST, because Deltas and Gammas don't do affective empathy--we don't have those physiological capabilities. Only Alphas and Betas have access to both forms of empathy.
"2) Perspective taking of feelings is also weak. I find perspective taking an interesting task sometimes, but then I get frustrated that there's too many possible interpretations and I feel it's then impossible to pick the right one. When I was more into this, I made the mistake easily that I picked the first one I thought of and be enthusiastic about having found it, and then it turned out to be completely wrong. So yeah, I decided I can't be bothered with this. People either tell me what they feel, or not. ... I do find it useful when they tell me, because then I can take that into account for more smooth negotiations or discussions instead of conflict of the bad kind that leads nowhere. And when they told me, I'm able to use my knowledge of cognitive empathy to do something with it. As I spent a lot of time on learning about that type of empathy. I find it very useful in some cases for sure."
This sounds like 2D role Fi > 1D Fi PoLR:
It is typical for people to periodically work on their role function in order to correct imbalances in their life and improve their weak areas. However, these attempts are generally sporadic and are forgotten as soon as the perceived problem begins to go away and the person once again becomes carried away with their usual lifestyle which is dominated by their base function. Thus, development of the role function is more like patching up leaks than building a complete, self-sufficient structure. Often individuals wish they could build up their role function and become "supermen", but an excessive focus on this unreachable goal brings disappointment, because the base function always wins anyways.
When people are criticized for their lack of attentiveness to their role function, they are often irritated because they are already well aware of the deficiency and have already tried and failed to correct it. When problems arise with the role function, energy flows away from the base function, the individual brings his usual activities to a halt, and tries to pick up all the tasks he had been neglecting. Directing energy through the base function is effortless; working with the role function requires effort and concentration. Thus, people's concept of self-development is often centered on development of the role function and the Super-Ego block in general.
Compared to the vulnerable function, role function criticism is easier for a person to respond to or dismiss, since they believe that it has some value, in theory. The role function is triggered situationally, when individuals are met with situations that oppose their base aspect of reality. The base function only accepts information relating to its information aspect, and other information cannot be produced into new data with the creative function.
http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.php?title=Functions
"So, whenever I think of empathy, I think of perspective taking of feelings or just cognitive empathy, but again, I usually do need to be told by people about their feelings to be able to make use of that. I have found that the only time I can read their feelings/emotions is reading their anger, if they are angry. Strangely enough, I have some ability to read that emotion in a really nuanced way. (And like I said I can decide CONSCIOUSLY if I want to use anger. I cannot use other emotions, cannot call them up at all, anger I can at will.) Other ones... eh, no. Simple basic obvious expressions I will read tho' sure. The rest no, they are an encrypted language that I never pay attention to but can enjoy sometimes."
This brings to mind an aspect of strong Se valuing. Gulenko describes Se as "function of the psyche responsible for excitability and release of the accumulated aggression":
What's rather interesting to me is the link between anger, aggression and the "excitability" Gulenko describes. Excitability is another way of saying high reactivity to stimulation, which is oftentimes related to having a short fuse, or the capacity for accelerated anger. Anger is an emotion that motivates and energizes one to act. Aggression is the act, the instrumentation of forceful behavior, and is often a byproduct of anger. I interpret your ability to "read" anger in all of its nuances and manifestations as gauging another person's degree of "excitability (read: reactivity)," the kinetic energy field surrounding someone and the degree to which they can mobilize/make use of it.The type of people with pronounced (Se) force sensation is characterized by periodically discharging irritation with aggressive reactions. At such moments, it's best not to interfere. Therefore, we call this type enforcers or assertors.
In everyday life, assertors can be calm and even relaxed people who are happy for extended periods due to neither being hungry nor provoked, though the transition to an excited state can be quite spontaneous when hungry or experiencing any jolt triggering a role switch. In other words, if their mind short fuses, it automatically triggers natural instincts. This triggered impulse immediately excites assertors. Their breathing and pulse increases, and the body is mobilized and enters a state of combat readiness. Such provoking factors for enforcers is often dramatic shouting or coarse language, but also the demonstration of fear.
As someone who has unconscious, weak 2D Se and was forced to partake in Anger management because I don't have natural control of my anger, or more precisely, my reactivity, I'm envious of those who know how to wield it effectively, and with greater precision, intention and purpose.
"As for the affective side of empathy, I thought for a short time that affective empathy is useful, but then I found out that when I'm very upset, some people WILL misread that the wrong way. I am not sure if they are even doing affective empathy and it overloads them leading to bad results, or they are doing perspective taking because they don't want to feel with me, and then that's what goes wrong, I don't know.
This is an interesting issue actually, I should ask some of these people which type of empathy they were doing. But I assume affective empathy, because things go most wrong if I cannot express my upset directly enough and I just ask verbally for things that would help with feeling less upset. Some people feel they are being "told what to do", then, because not enough emotional expression accompanies the request, I figure. Things also do go wrong when someone reads my emotion of upset, exaggerates its importance (when I'm very upset, it does look very bad emotionally), and then they may be using some additional perspective taking to assume my needs but they assume wrong...? They overthink it and think that I have a load of needs that I don't in actuality. These people are unable to read my direct straightforwardness and must look between the lines and read my expression too much."
1.) The thing is, those with 1D Fe (IXTp and IXTj), by default, tend to have the least mobile, least expressive faces and discernible emotionality; therefore, it makes sense that they are cognitively paired with 4D Fe types (EXFp and EXFj), who tend to be the most outwardly emotive/expressive types.
However, Fe valuers "communicate" by way of making emotional provocations, saying or doing something to illicit visible and direct emotional feedback (by way of affective empathy)--it's useful because it's a form of immediate, actionable information. Fe valuers need to "see to believe" and so they may feel unsure, insecure and thrown off when they can't visibly discern what someone is feeling, which seemingly creates a problem when it comes to properly reading Fe suggestive types due to their general lack of Fe expressiveness. But Fe leads counter that by spreading their own infectious, high expressiveness, kind of like a fishing lure with tasty and tantalizing bait.
Oftentimes, Fe leads can use this to goad others (especially those with suggestive Fe) into mirroring their emotional state, like if LSI is feeling bad or in a nasty mood and EIE wants you to feel better (ultimately, so that they feel better as well, because they can intensely feel another person's "funky vibes"). Whereas you can also pick up others' "vibes" but not enough for them to claim your "independence," Fe leads don't have that luxury--they can be overridden (to their detriment) with someone else's bad mojo, like a raw, exposed nerve sensitive to the touch. It's very possible for "things to go wrong" in that case because an inability to change your bad mood will mean they must also endure a bad mood, themselves--and that can feel particularly awful for them.
2.) What is the nature of your "needs" that have been misread? I ask because it's possible that an ethical type didn't make the "wrong guess" concerning your needs because of the particular brand of empathy they employed, but because of the preference and strength of their perceptive functions (sensation vs intuition).
For example, ESEs and EIEs cognitively expect and anticipate the subconscious SF and NF "needs" of LIIs and LSIs. ESE and LSI is a common pairing, for example, and so it's not difficult to imagine ESE trying to cater to sensory based needs that LSI is more than capable of handling on their own, which could cause some friction. ESE can use Fe to pick up that LSI is feeling bad, but to cheer LSI up, ESE is more likely to resort to concrete acts of service, rather than engaging the abstracted Ne "possibilities" and overarching Ni "essence" behind whatever problem LSI might be experiencing. Furthermore, ESEs have powerful 4D Se working alongside their 4D Fe, and so they damn sure wouldn't want to be "told what to do"; they work better with Se PoLR types like LIIs because they don't put up as much resistance.
"But I find some people do not need to use affective empathy at all to be able to fulfill my concrete requests at such times. For example an ESI friend of mine, he failed to read my upset right with whatever empathy he may have used, but he was able to take away the message from my request later and he did comply and then we were able to solve the whole issue. As a contrast, I talked to someone else who said, if someone asks them x thing to do, that to them is emotional, and the person does not add the matching emotional expression, she feels horrible about it and definitely will NOT do the request. That person may have been an IEI, I don't know for sure but it's likely (the alternative would be EII). With such people I figure it would obviously all turn into a disaster - them feeling like they are being told to do x, but without emotional info added from nonverbal or verbal expressions or whatever."
Yup.
"*: Frankly I don't even want any emotional state internally 99% of the time. I do not want to be "filled" with emotions. If they come up it's OK for a second or two, but then I want them pushed out of my system fast. Need them released or removed in some way ASAP. It's rare that I'd want them to stay longer. Anger/rage is where I have the most tolerance for having it internally but it's still not for very long - a few minutes, at most half an hour - before it feels draining or like it's been an eternity and then I don't feel fully in control anymore, if it feels like the emotion's been there for an eternity. Also with anger/rage I must release it as soon as I can (by action, or maybe by swearing and the like, depending). Feeling in control of the emotions is very important for me, for sure. All in all I do SOMETIMES enjoy emotions moving through me or whatever, but they MUST go away fast or be released fast. Beyond irritation/anger/rage, I don't often need an actual release - or I don't notice? - the exception is if I'm very upset about a personal issue, then yes it will help eventually. In all other cases, I just turn the emotion into action, instead of focusing on feeling it, I'll take action and that way I can enjoy some emotions stuff. ... Or I can turn them into analysis when it's negative emotions and need problem solving."
A lot of this is very relatable content; this reads like a fear of disorientation, of our already shoddy ass emotional processing units (as logical types) being short circuited by too many emotions we're unable to efficiently process, which I have personally experienced as a "madness" of sorts. If ethical types can hold about a gallon, we're good for a shot glass of pure, raw emotion--and that can be enough to have us "flying high." lol Like you, the only emotion I feel comfortable indulging is anger, but even that has a limit.
"Well does that say anything?"
Yes, that @Northstar is probably correct; LSI seems like a great fit. Holistically speaking, you "vibe" very LSI to me, based on my ITR/experience with LSIs.