Introverted Ethics Fi not like emotions or feelings

[jimbo]

I'm not sure how most people perceive Fi but I was just thinking about it and to me it totally doesn't seem like emotions or feeling at all, which I sometimes find in descriptions and have also inferred from how people talk. To me Fi doesn't seem like feeling at all. But rather it is an analysis of certain characteristics of people, well this is how it predominantly comes across anyway... there are also other ways. So yeh, I think Fi has pretty much nothing to do with feeling. To me it is totally a thinking function. For example Fi "says" to me "based on what I have previously seen in this person he/she will likely have this, this, and that on his/her wall. Will behave like this in this situation and that in that situation. He/she will like this but not that.... etc. It totally seems to have nothing to do with emotions.

Does anyone else identify with this?

Is this pretty much the description of Fi?

[717495]

Fi doesn't judge the object like Fe does, so it's not about the emotions, motivation, and intentions of a person. It's about the broad picture of humanity, the field of ethics, where humanity is one large intention and there are no objects separate from it. All of the objects, the people, are in ideal working together, and Fe unvaluing comes from an Fe valuer trying to separate themselves or an object from the Fi big picture of ethics. So there are emotions that spring from Fi, however Fi does not see how they pose of any merit to the larger picture. You can see how this idea of Fe separation, ethics out of context to pure information, makes Fi analysis uncomfortable, for the variable is still being thought of as undefined, and it can not be defined by self.

[ArchonAlarion]

I'm not sure how most people perceive Fi but I was just thinking about it and to me it totally doesn't seem like emotions or feeling at all, which I sometimes find in descriptions and have also inferred from how people talk. To me Fi doesn't seem like feeling at all. But rather it is an analysis of certain characteristics of people, well this is how it predominantly comes across anyway... there are also other ways. So yeh, I think Fi has pretty much nothing to do with feeling. To me it is totally a thinking function. For example Fi "says" to me "based on what I have previously seen in this person he/she will likely have this, this, and that on his/her wall. Will behave like this in this situation and that in that situation. He/she will like this but not that.... etc. It totally seems to have nothing to do with emotions.

Does anyone else identify with this?

Is this pretty much the description of Fi?

I'd be interested to here about this in greater detail.

You may be getting Fi confused with another element...

or this may be an example of the silliness of "F" as Fi and Fe are miles apart. Also no element has to do with emotions. That is a separate biological/psychological issue.

[ArchonAlarion]

Fi doesn't judge the object like Fe does, so it's not about the emotions, motivation, and intentions of a person. It's about the broad picture of humanity, the field of ethics, where humanity is one large intention and there are no objects separate from it. All of the objects, the people, are in ideal working together, and Fe unvaluing comes from an Fe valuer trying to separate themselves or an object from the Fi big picture of ethics. So there are emotions that spring from Fi, however Fi does not see how they pose of any merit to the larger picture. You can see how this idea of Fe separation, ethics out of context to pure information, makes Fi analysis uncomfortable, for the variable is still being thought of as undefined, and it can not be defined by self.

You are on the right track, I think.

[Wynch]

Fi doesn't judge the object like Fe does

Sure it does. Fi is static, and in the case of an IEE like jimbo, judging objects is exactly what it does. Ne base perceives in object form and Fi creative judges it. Static thinkers (especially EPs) will always be thinking in the mode of object judgement.

I think the issue here is the difference between Static and Object/Dynamic and Field. I'll talk about this later as I have to get to work.

[ArchonAlarion]

I don't believe "judgement" is always via a subjective element. Wouldn't the perception of every element involve judgement? For instance, judging the presense of objective data.

Perhaps its just the way you are using the term. Do you mean specifically "determining if an object fits criterion for its inclusion within some wider framework"?

Yeah, Fi would focus on determining inclusivity of actions... like, "This action is not allowed due to my beliefs." Ti behaves in a similar way, although its the criterion not the actions themselves which are demonstrable and explict.

For Ti/Fe, the rules are solid and the actions intuited and for Fi/Te the rules are intuited and the actions solid.
This is a grand over simplification, but may be useful for a realization.

So, okay Vero, I agree lol.

[Park]

Fi is more connected with ethical values, principles and personal sentiments rather than expressed emotion which is a focus of Fe. But,

It totally seems to have nothing to do with emotions.

it does have something to do with emotions, in the sense that, subjective judgment and personal sentiments are often expressed through (or followed by) some sort of emotion.

[anndelise]

The F elements deal with affect, as in influences.
In terms of "ethics vs logics", F seems to be treated as a combination of Ethos + Pathos.

Logos, Ethos, and Pathos are methods of persuasions.
Logos methods attempt to appeal to the intellect and includes such things as symbolic logic, mathematical logic, and formal logic.
Ethos methods refers to the trustworthiness of the speaker/writer.
Some of the ways of gaining trust of those you are attempting to persuade is to
* establish yourself as an authority figure on the topic (assuming the audience respects "authority")
* establish yourself as knowledgeable on the topic
* demonstrate respect for the audience's ideas and values
* know your audience's preferences
* know your audience well enough to know what kinds of things they trust or distrust
* know the kind of language to use with your audience
Pathos methods deal with sympathy and empathy. Giving someone a logical reason why to do something doesn't get that internal energy moving inside them that would prompt them into motion. But touching a nerve of theirs helps to compel them into action.

Ethos and Pathos both utilize awareness of the audience's emotional potential and values (among other things) as a way to influence their audience. Their both aimed at attempting to produce a mental or emotional effect, to act upon a person's emotions, to recognize what influences the audience.


The OP is a good example of what I mean.
The OP said,
* "[Fi] is an analysis of certain characteristics of people"
* "Fi "says" to me "based on what I have previously seen in this person he/she will likely have this, this, and that on his/her wall. Will behave like this in this situation and that in that situation. He/she will like this but not that.... etc."

Each of those examples deals with awareness of what influences the person, knowing the person's values ("will likely have this, this, and that"; "will like this but not that"), and what influences their behaviors and actions (which is a combination of their values + the nerve that prompts them into motion).



As an aside note: Even "Ethics" as is commonly referred to on this forum deals with values, and rules and principles of behavior. (The problem comes when "morals" are referred to instead of ethics. Morals deals with "correctness" of behavior, character, and conduct. Attempting to persuade an audience of 'correct' behavior is one possible goal of ethos/pathos persuasion attempts, but it is not the only possible goal.)

[717495]

Well Fi isn't objective in the socionics term. It isn't detached from the whole like emotions are. Sure Fi can produce emotions and like winterpark said is expressed through emotions. Sure an Fi-ego can sense emotions, they have Fe. Emotions are objective in the socionics term because they are being judged apart from the field of ethics. Emotions capture motivation and willpower, something internally objective, Fe. So I am referring to socionics objectivism. However often than not, emotions aren't going to change the Fi big picture of humanity. They have little effect, aren't valued, and most importantly they aren't perceived and then exchanged, because the judgment of Fi occurs on the basis of wordly ideals, which is judged through oneselves standard, not the basis of individual people standing for themselves. Most information about individual people that supports Fi is supposed to come from the extroverted irrational function.

[jimbo]

Fi doesn't judge the object like Fe does, so it's not about the emotions, motivation, and intentions of a person. It's about the broad picture of humanity, the field of ethics, where humanity is one large intention and there are no objects separate from it. All of the objects, the people, are in ideal working together, and Fe unvaluing comes from an Fe valuer trying to separate themselves or an object from the Fi big picture of ethics. So there are emotions that spring from Fi, however Fi does not see how they pose of any merit to the larger picture. You can see how this idea of Fe separation, ethics out of context to pure information, makes Fi analysis uncomfortable, for the variable is still being thought of as undefined, and it can not be defined by self.

I like this. I don't understand the last sentence though.

I would add something to this though. I think Fi can take a person and separate them from the broad picture of humanity. Relating everything to this broad picture and the formation of ethics is just one aspect of Fi.

A person can be separated from this big picture however it is still not the objective emotions of the person that are assessed. As you said. In this context Fi could asses ,like I said in the original post, the attraction and repulsion between that person and objects, other persons, beliefs etc. Basically; what the person would like/dislike.

Then on an even smaller context it could asses different aspects of the same person and the repulsion and attraction between them.

Basically I think that Fi can get small scale, but it always deals with relationships of attraction and repulsion.

Like you said I also think this works well on the large scale. ie, taking into account all of humanity.

Perhaps it could be said that it cannot just take one aspect, as Fe does, and look at it on it's own, without relating it to anything else.

To clarify further; Fi Looks big picture but the scale can be small (e.g. the entire person becomes the big picture in a small scale context). Where as Fe looks little picture but the scale can be large.

[jimbo]

Also no element has to do with emotions. That is a separate biological/psychological issue.

This is basically what I was thinking. It is interesting that F types, especially Fe types, seem to display more emotions??? maybe display is the key work here???

[jimbo]

it does have something to do with emotions, in the sense that, subjective judgment and personal sentiments are often expressed through (or followed by) some sort of emotion.

Yep agreed. Yeh actually this makes a lot of sense.

So could we say that it is the Fi that leads to emotions because things are looked at subjectively, because personal involvement leads to emotions about the event/issue etc??

And that an expression of Fi could be seen as an emotion when personal sentiments are expressed. Eg. I like this, love that etc.

(pretty sure I pretty much just said exactly what you did...)

Man now I think that Fi does have to do with emotions.

Well definitely in this context anyways.

[jimbo]

Liked the post Ann. Us F types would defs be good at ethos and pathos.

[jimbo]

Most information about individual people that supports Fi is supposed to come from the extroverted irrational function.

Interesting...

[jimbo]

K. That will prolly be my last post on this topic. Cheers guys.

[Beautiful sky]

What is Fi?

[Beautiful sky]

@kingslayer - this may seem familiar to you from our conversation in the chat box

Fi interprets, analyzes, helps you understand why some human beings are out of the expected box of rational behavior

[consentingadult]

@kingslayer - this may seem familiar to you from our conversation in the chat box

Fi interprets, analyzes, helps you understand why some human beings are out of the expected box of rational behavior

For this to be meaningful, one has to ask: "but how does it work?"

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.co...fi-and-fe.html
http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.co...ork-floor.html

Now 'interpret' and 'analyze' are not good words to describe what Fi does, as these words imply conscious thinking processes to most people. But Fi does 'interpret' and 'analyze', but it does so at an emotional level, probably in deeper regions of the brain, not in the cortex.

[Beautiful sky]

For this to be meaningful, one has to ask: "but how does it work?"

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.co...fi-and-fe.html
http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.co...ork-floor.html

Now 'interpret' and 'analyze' are not good words to describe what Fi does, as these words imply conscious thinking processes to most people. But Fi does 'interpret' and 'analyze', but it does so at an emotional level, probably in deeper regions of the brain, not in the cortex.

You should read my other post. You’ll love it

[Beautiful sky]

For this to be meaningful, one has to ask: "but how does it work?"

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.co...fi-and-fe.html
http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.co...ork-floor.html

Now 'interpret' and 'analyze' are not good words to describe what Fi does, as these words imply conscious thinking processes to most people. But Fi does 'interpret' and 'analyze', but it does so at an emotional level, probably in deeper regions of the brain, not in the cortex.

This
https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...=1#post1332715

[consentingadult]

This
https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...=1#post1332715

I think this is actually not an example of how Fi works, but of how Ne works. It is the intellectual understanding that EIIs and IEEs come up with after they have already passed value judgements. These are highly verbalized abstractions and generalizations of their experiences. An EII confronted in real life with someone like Trump will first and foremost feel disgust and resistance at the bodily/emotional level, instinctively (quite literally) sensing this is a 'bad' person. The intellectual understanding follows as a rationalization/intellectualization afterwards.

See how your example the IEE keeps things simple and the EII goes full throttle with an explanation: that's creative Ne in action!

[Beautiful sky]

I think this is actually not an example of how Fi works, but of how Ne works. It is the intellectual understanding that EIIs and IEEs come up with after the have already passed value judgements. These are highly verbalized abstractions and generalizations of their experiences. An EII confronted in real life with someone like Trump will first and foremost feel disgust and resistance at the bodily/emotional level, instinctively (quite literally) sensing this is a 'bad' person. The intellectual understanding follows as a rationalization/intellectualization afterwards.

I have passed off Trump actions as equating to an attention seeking person... already made the judgements before proving the example

[consentingadult]

I have passed off Trump actions as equating to an attention seeking person... already made the judgements before proving the example

Yes, that's what I said: you make the judgement before providing the example. The problem is, the example you are giving, explains how creative Ne works, it does not explain how Fi works.

[Beautiful sky]

Yes, that's what I said: you make the judgement before providing the example. The problem is, the example you are giving, explains how creative Ne works, it does not explain how Fi works.

Fi works in conjunction with the Ne.

[consentingadult]

Fi works in conjunction with the Ne.

Obviously they do. But I still say that your example does not make clear how Fi works to someone seeking such understanding.

[Beautiful sky]

Obviously they do. But I still say that your example does not make clear how Fi works to someone seeking such understanding.

This is where I completely agree with the OP

“To me Fi doesn't seem like feeling at all. But rather it is an analysis of certain characteristics of people, well this is how it predominantly comes across anyway... there are also other ways. So yeh, I think Fi has pretty much nothing to do with feeling. To me it is totally a thinking function. ”

[Beautiful sky]

Obviously they do. But I still say that your example does not make clear how Fi works to someone seeking such understanding.

I categorize human interactions and make judgements and references back and forth to the knowledge

[Beautiful sky]

Obviously they do. But I still say that your example does not make clear how Fi works to someone seeking such understanding.

Because of how I can analyze I come off as a T type to an outside observer who don’t understand that Fi analysis not Ti.

[consentingadult]

I categorize human interactions and make judgements and references back and forth to the knowledge

I'm glad you agree with me in this respect.

This is where I completely agree with the OP

“To me Fi doesn't seem like feeling at all. But rather it is an analysis of certain characteristics of people, well this is how it predominantly comes across anyway... there are also other ways. So yeh, I think Fi has pretty much nothing to do with feeling. To me it is totally a thinking function. ”

Perhaps you need to, like I had to, discover the true source of these value judgments inside of your body. Perhaps you have not yet descended down into the deep dark dungeons of your emotional life, where both the Goddess and Devil inside of you can be found. The true places where the value judgments originate, are not in the conscious parts of your brains. Sometimes they are not even in the brain at all.

[consentingadult]

Because of how I can analyze I come off as a T type to an outside observer who don’t understand that Fi analysis not Ti.

This is why we must provide decent information to all who are seeking it, so they understand that what we communicate about our value judgments, is not what Fi is. Such descriptions are the verbalized conclusions of our Fi value judgments, in the form of intellectual constructs, which to the listener might sound like Ti indeed.

[Beautiful sky]

This is why we must provide decent information to all who are seeking it, so they understand that what we communicate about our value judgments, is not what Fi is. Such descriptions are the verbalized conclusions of our Fi value judgments, in the form of intellectual constructs, which to the listener might sound like Ti indeed.

I see where you’re coming from. Fi makes value judgements but where do they come from? It comes from models role models in real life. My mother “dad’s don’t do that” dad’s who don’t do that must be good dad’s. This knowledge is built over time. Another example “to destroy a Bible is a sin” -don’t destroy that bible!
Love it and cherish it close to your heart. These are my earliest memories of values and judgements against them

[The Reality Denialist]

how one even formalizes it? Would be interesting to see.

[Beautiful sky]

how one even formalizes it? Would be interesting to see.

Lmao

[consentingadult]

I see where you’re coming from. Fi makes value judgements but where do they come from? It comes from models role models in real life. My mother “dad’s don’t do that” dad’s who don’t do that must be good dad’s. This knowledge is built over time. Another example “to destroy a Bible is a sin” -don’t destroy that bible!
Love it and cherish it close to your heart. These are my earliest memories of values and judgements against them

If that would be the case, than most people would be adept at Fi, but many of them aren't. I do not agree with you, I believe I was born with the capacity of a innate moral compass, which obviously had to be developed, but it would have developed even when it would have met counter forces (and it did). I have one brother who also has the same moral compass and developed it against all odds. Another brother of mine doesn't have such a compass, but is receptive to such information from his dual wife and leads a stable life. Then I had another brother, who lacked a moral compass, and developed into a drugs criminal and a womanizer, screwing every woman who was willing to spread her legs for him (and an astounding number of women did). He died last year from a cerebral haemorrhage, all alone, drenched in his own blood before he was found three days after he probably died.

[Beautiful sky]

If that would be the case, than most people would be adept at Fi, but many of them aren't. I do not agree with you, I believe I was born with the capacity of a innate moral compass, which obviously had to be developed, but it would have developed even when it would have met counter forces (and it did). I have one brother who also has the same moral compass and developed it against all odds. Another brother of mine doesn't have such a compass, but is receptive to such information from his dual wife and leads a stable life. Then I had another brother, who lacked a moral compass, and developed into a drugs criminal and a womanizer, screwing every woman who was willing to spread her legs for him (and an astounding number of women did). He died last year from a cerebral haemorrhage, all alone, drenched in his own blood before he was found three days after he probably died.

I was attracted to moral information. To be a good dad a good friend these are all information of that kind that is being gathered and analyzed

[Aylen]

Basic Elements of Informational Metabolism

To describe the IM process Aušra Augustinavičiūtė divided it into eight elements, together
they reflect the variety of ways a human being communicates with the world. The number of
elements does not contradict the general scientific informational concept of all communication
types studied in terms of information, energy, space and time.

Now let us examine the elements of informational metabolism; we will be using symbols
developed by Aušra Augustinavičiūtė. These symbols proved to be rather convenient and are
widely used by socionists.

The semantic fields of IM elements could be described as follows:

- Subjective logic. It is my own logic, my understanding, explanation, description,
concept, and theory of things. It is my hierarchy of notions of the things that are closer
or farther, higher or lower. It is what I was taught, my view of this world, my world
outlook. It includes my education, i.e. the system of my ideas and my schooling.

- Objective logic. Logic of the objective world - objective circumstances, facts.
Example: the day began and it started raining. Systems, statistics. Event queue.
Example: “I am late for work because the bridge collapsed". Laws, political policies of
the government, stamps in the passport, traffic laws, prices, private summerhouse
property, my territory, and design drawing of a unit. Thinking objectively people usually
ask: “I want to know the reality of the matter.”

- Subjective intuition. The inner harmony. A state, a mood, and a sense of time.
Personal evaluation of events, of people's actions and morals.

- Objective intuition. The order of events from the beginning to the end, i.e. the
sets of events known beforehand, the schedule. Potential opportunities. Behavior
program, the way of life, the rhythm of life. Scenario of any action, acting in accordance
to predetermined scenario.

- Subjective sensoring. My inner feelings: gustatory sense, tactile sensoring, and
sexual sensoring. State of health. Ability to discern between the pleasant and the
unpleasant.

- Objective sensoring. It is the form, the action, the motion, the act, the
appearance, the gestures and the mimics. It is the person’s will.

- Subjective ethics. It is my attitude to people. It is the liking/disliking of
people/things. It is the emotions I experience.

- Objective ethics. It is the external relationship, the relationships between other
people and their attitude towards me. It is the emotions of other people.

These are the semantics of the eight basic elements of informational metabolism. And
now let us turn to Table 1.

Agree or disagree?

[Number 9 large]

Agree or disagree?

Ni is not a state or mood.

[Beautiful sky]

Agree or disagree?

Fi seems to encompass ethics (system of values within Intertype relationships).

[Aylen]

Ni is not a state or mood.

Yeah I wondered about the mood thing. It is as if Reinin was pairing Ni/Fe there. The link goes into IMs.

Nvm, seems he means mood as in a temporary state of mind which makes more sense. Things translated from Russian are tricky sometimes.

[Aeris]

Yeah I wondered about the mood thing. It is as if Reinin was pairing Ni/Fe there. The link goes into IMs.

I can see how Ni could be experienced as a "mood" in itself while having nothing to do with moods. I can't "show" it though.