@grumpyvic81
"Thanks for your input too. I'll respond to some of the points."
No problem. It's interesting to read your thoughts/your own creative understanding of how things work; when conversing with Ti leads, it's as if they are giving me a sneak peak inside of their head, where there is a "language" of their own. LSIs are Te ignoring, and I'm amused by your truncating, correcting, sorting, refitting, and re-articulation of my Te bullshit into your own personal, subjective Ti framework/categorizing system. lol I see you trying to be as true and as accurate as possible, which is why you will categorically refute something that doesn't gel, but still question your presumptions. It's kinda cool because it's like you're constantly building and renovating your understanding in real time, with the structure becoming ever more stable and secure.
Whichever parts of your response that I do not address, take that as your Ti conclusions and S* experiences coinciding with my own Ti understanding in addition to the objective Te criteria (and N* realm of possibility and probability), which basically means I agree and/or can see the plausibility of your argument.
"Also, Se demonstrative doesn't do any of this?"
Yes, but what stood out to me was your usage and emphasis of the word "consciously," and because your Se seems to be strong, that suggests it's an aspect of your ego block; the demonstrative function is strong but unconscious.
I noticed that in some situations when it's informal enough and it's not like me being fully focused on tasks, or a completely official situation, I feel better when there's interaction and when there's interaction there's ofcourse usually always some emotional information too but I don't think I consciously focus on that. Maybe subconsciously, tho' yeah. Consciously I focus more on the interaction itself and that's what relaxes me. I don't know if it's the emotional part that relaxes me too additionally, or that doesn't play a part.
This calls to mind the Merry/Subjectivist [Reinin] dichotomy or being Fe/Ti valuing, where the emotional atmosphere/mood of the environment (and the people involved) is vital in dictating the type of activity/engagement/interaction undertaken.
https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...-Merry-Serious
- Subjectivists are good at noticing the general emotional background that accompanies contact with people (For example: enthusiasm, fun, stress and so on). Fun (as, probably, every other emotional experience) for them is allocated into a separate aspects of activity (to a question "what were you doing" they can answer "we were having fun"—they perceive emotional engagement as a separate type of activity)
- Subjectivist types do not perceive "getting to know somebody" as a special kind of activity, in contrast to Serious types, for whom it is a kind of a ritual. They know very well why they are getting acquainted (the purpose of this acquaintance is interest, business, travel, and so on). In contrast to the Objectivist types, they do not divide the process of getting acquainted into consecutive stages. They immediately establish the necessary emotional distance in contact and can regulate it as needed. To bridge the gap between poorly acquainted people in a group they amp up the emotional tone—this can be mutually experienced happiness or misfortune. The "name" of the person is of secondary relevance for them. Interest towards the person and relations is primary here, thus Merry types do not consider formality as a necessary part of becoming acquainted with someone.
http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.p...le=Beta_Quadra
"As for emotional provocations, I don't think I do that. Or I don't recognise it if I do."
Using this post as an example of what I mean, the only reason to apologize about possibly offending someone is if you think your words might hurt their feelings; so that means you knowingly said something emotionally provocative (as in it stirs an emotional reaction), and then countered it with another emotional provocation (saying 'sorry') meant to keep negative feelings at bay and/or imbue a feeling of forgiveness. And I don't say this to make you feel bad (because clearly you have good intentions), but what's interesting to me is that from my vantage point, it seemed like YOUR questioning of FreelancePoliceman's sincerity was a troll attempt due to the blunt, slightly insensitive phrasing and even the very act of questioning some's truthfulness in what is ostensibly a moment of vulnerability. Strong Ti, Weak Fe types can be notorious trolls, if so inclined, because they have a coarser, less refined manner of eliciting an emotional response (perhaps in trying to raise someone's mood). Again, it's obvious that you meant well (especially seeing as how you apologized) and were trying to be empowering (another instance of trying to provoke a feeling).Originally Posted by grumpyvic81
"Again. In general too I noticed I do better if I don't go too deep with feelz, especially not for longer than a second, because that's just really unhealthy for me, I can't and won't deal with it, I'm better off forever denying that sortof shit lol. I deal better with intense emotion than deep feelz. Even tho' intense emotion is hard too sometimes. But when I understand what the emotion is I can control it really well physically. I don't know if that makes sense (the physical control --> it does need some rational understanding too but nothing too complex).
Is this related to Fe > Fi, and would you say you as a Fi valuer, you need the deep feelings?"
1.) Yes, high D Fe valuers like SEIs and IEIs are two of the most empathic sociotypes, because not only are they physiologically sensitive to ambient emotion (affective empathy), but can also easily place themselves into the shoes of others (cognitive empathy)–and that’s not an easy burden to bear (possibly losing one’s sense of self, being subject to the moods and attitudes of others willy nilly), though they’re built to handle it. Because Low D Fe valuers are more easily overloaded, it makes sense that while you don’t mind the more shallow, albeit intense emotions you may pick up from others or the environment you're in, the additional layer of “deep feelz” that come with Fi would be too much, and so it's like "thanks, but no thanks, I'll just be having the Fe to go." lol Fe valuers, in general, prefer the visceral immediacy of Fe feedback, even if they're also capable of cognitive empathy, as well.
2.) Contrasted with me, who, without those "deep feelings," is emotionally dead. lol I'm not privy to Fe/affective empathy and so Fi/cognitive empathy is the only way I get my "fix."
I have very few stable, deep convictions and ethical principles. And that’s because having 1D Fi means that I’m generally unsure of, out of touch with and disconnected from what it is I truly feel, like/dislike, love/hate, am attracted to/repulsed by, etc... which is why it’s easy to ignore and dismiss all of those concerns when necessary or convenient for me to do so (particularly in the past, being unprincipled landed me in some dicey situations); it can be difficult to unpack and understand why I feel or believe the way I do with any nuance and complexity.
The Terrence quote “I am human, and I think noting human is alien to me” perfectly describes high D Fi’s penchant for cognitive empathy/perspective taking–but vital to being able to “see” and “know” someone else’s perspective is the ability to first deeply know one’s self, one’s own point of view, one’s categorically placed sentiments through and through (so as to transpose that psychological blueprint onto others). Because I may barely know where I “stand,” it’s difficult for me to accurately gleam that for others, which means I’m naturally prone to possessing less [cognitive] empathy and that directly impacts how I relate to people and their subjective beliefs and feelings.
Essentially, strong Fi valuers help me know what to feel, why I should feel that way, and/or clarify why I feel the way I already do about something, which provides a jumping off point that can then be used to better understand and empathize with others (which builds more stable interpersonal bonds, another hallmark of Fi); they help to make my personal feelings stronger and more real by giving them meaning, clarity and purpose. And my dual is the most alluring because their static, deep, well fleshed out ethical convictions make them a reliable compass that’ll always steer me in the “right” direction, up until I begin to build and rely on my own compass–1D Fi learns by way of experience and exposure. I wouldn’t possess 3/4 of the deep convictions and views I have today if it weren’t for ESIs, EIIs, IEEs, and SEEs guiding, distilling and refining my beliefs, subsequently strengthening my sense of conviction, which makes me feel more fired up and engaged, more alive.
Reply With Quote