The reason why Fe and Fi users give - Page 11

The reason why Fe and Fi users give

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Page 11 of 15 FirstFirst ... 9 10 11 12 13 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 147
Thank Tree243Thanks

This is a discussion on The reason why Fe and Fi users give within the Cognitive Functions forums, part of the Personality Type Forums category; I'll throw my own interpretation of Fi/Fe into the mix too... Just thought of this analogy: You believe very strongly ...

  1. #101
    INFJ - The Protectors

    I'll throw my own interpretation of Fi/Fe into the mix too...

    Just thought of this analogy: You believe very strongly in fair labor practices around the world. You are diligent about thinking about the ethics behind every purchase you make, because you believe that the best way to influence trends as a consumer is to put your 'money where your mouth is.' You buy fair trade coffee and domestic whenever you can. This is something very important to your core values.

    At Christmas time, you've need a new Gadget for school. Gadget A, which is the most popular/best Gadget for your needs, is made in a factory in China, which was recently criticized in the media over its questionable labor practices. Now, you would never buy this Gadget for yourself, but a family member or close friend buys it for you as a Christmas gift. How do you react?

    Fe: You graciously accept the gift. Even if it goes against your personal moral standards, you accept these are your own personal standards, not everyone else's. Moreover, it is a well-meaning gesture, and the person put a lot of thought into giving it to you, and you don't want to offend them.

    Fi: You thank the giver, but explain that you'll be returning it for another Gadget manufactured under more fair labor practices. You let the person know they shouldn't be offended, because they didn't know, but this is something you personally feel very strongly about, so you cannot live with yourself if you accept this gift.

    I'm new to this whole cognitive functions world, so I am open to criticism/reworking.
    teddy564339 thanked this post.

  2. #102
    INTJ - The Scientists


    Quote Originally Posted by sts06 View Post
    I obviously wasn't clear here, but it wasn't his values that were being stretched, but mine. He was having a discussion of something that he found interesting, but nothing that was said was a problem with his value system - he didn't agree with my position, but it wasn't contradicting his core values.
    Okay, fair enough.

    Quote Originally Posted by sts06 View Post
    They were strong enough that I thought they were real and deliberate.
    When you opened with saying you were extremely sensitive to these things and noticed them really easily when they were subtle, I sort of assumed that was describing what happened - by emphasising your sensitivity I assumed by extension that he wasn't being obvious. In my experience, Fe is able to notice these things when they are minor - or sometimes nonexistant - so it sort of fit with that too. But I will take your word for it here. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

    Quote Originally Posted by sts06 View Post
    For me it's about respect. If someone doesn't respect the position the other person holds even while disagreeing then there can be no genuine progress in the conversation. If the attitude is 'this is stupid and not worth bothering with' then yeah I will find that problematic when it sits at the core of how I see myself, because in that situation it feels like what is being said is 'you are stupid and not worth bothering with.' So someone can disagree with me, they can disagree with my deeply held values even, but if they show me that they find my values ridiculous in the way they talk about them (and that can be either the words used or the body language associated with them) then yes I will go on the offensive because I will feel offended.
    Yeah, this is very alien to me. I have a friend, for instance, who loves this 'respect' thing and insists on, basically, reverent silence when he talks (rather like the way a lot of men seem to act in intellectual discussions with women, treating it like a lecture not a conversation). And then he describes an instance where a friend called a homosexual man a faggot (but wait, it's okay because he thought he was straight! :/). Sorry, not going to sit there passively when you describe something that nasty - I will react with disgust, disgust at said homophobia. It is just about the topic, not the speaker, and expressed as such. I suppose I separate the two more easily.

    I have seen INTPs do this too - I remember one former member in particular would endlessly sidetrack discussions complaining about the ways others expressed themselves - pages of this, completely off-topic demands for what he considered respect - that he didn't necessarily earn, or narrowly defined according to certain rules not everyone shares. I do have a problem with deliberate personal attacks, though I think I define them more narrowly than you do, but I can't imagine caring enough about that stuff to derail a discussion like that. I might end it, but not demand anything. I don't define respect that way and I don't hold it as high a value - and if I did, I would apply it to myself rather than policing other people for it. I might be offended, that is anyone's right, but I wouldn't think they owed it to me if it isn't their value. That tends to be the part that bothers me the most about the policing. I understand feeling offended even if I wouldn't, happens all the time and people have a right to their feelings - but criticising as if someone has a responsibility to live up to your values rather than their own is something I constantly encounte and never can accept. Fi tends to have a problem with it. If they just say they feel offended, rather than complaining that I didn't live up to standards I don't share or have to share, then the conversation tends to move forward much better and I can adjust to that. I'm not trying to hurt people after all.

    Quote Originally Posted by sts06 View Post
    I don't tend to be comfortable in those situations either and will do my best to move the conversation away from the topic I'm not happy with, but I'm more comfortable keeping conversational harmony and agreeing with only the bits I do agree with than I am in confronting something in a situation where I could end up in a fight over something that is basically meaningless. If it's meaningful then yeah of course I will make my case.
    If it is meaningless then it wouldn't be a value issue, in my case - though I might disagree simply because it is meaningless and so not a big deal to differ in opinion. Any value issue is never meaningless to me. Hence the refusal to even appear to agree in this situation overriding conversational harmony. We both argue with the strong ones but the lesser issues, if they are a value issue, can't just be glossed over for me; I have to withhold certain positive markers, even if they also have a social function, to avoid appearing to support values I do not, whereas you seem to treat the positive markers mainly as having a social purpose.

  3. #103
    INFJ - The Protectors

    Quote Originally Posted by lirulin View Post
    I don't define respect that way and I don't hold it as high a value - and if I did, I would apply it to myself rather than policing other people for it. I might be offended, that is anyone's right, but I wouldn't think they owed it to me if it isn't their value. That tends to be the part that bothers me the most about the policing. I understand feeling offended even if I wouldn't, happens all the time and people have a right to their feelings - but criticising as if someone has a responsibility to live up to your values rather than their own is something I constantly encounte and never can accept. Fi tends to have a problem with it. If they just say they feel offended, rather than complaining that I didn't live up to standards I don't share or have to share, then the conversation tends to move forward much better and I can adjust to that. I'm not trying to hurt people after all.
    That's interesting. To me respect just seems like an obvious value to have. In my eyes, if you can't disagree in a polite, unemotional way, it reflects more than a disagreeing of an idea, but a projection of negative feeling onto the person as a whole. I see that you distinguish between the two, but it's so hard to truly understand! It's good to know, though.

    It seems like in order to communicate properly with someone, sacrifices need to be made on both sides where each person consider the other's values. So for example, the Fi user could prevent hurting a Fe user by speaking respectfully, and in turn, the Fe user should be sensitive to saying things that step on a Fi users values.

    Or would you say it is better to not compromise--Fi user expresses when his/her values in whatever manner they please, and Fe users expressing their values (respect?) however they please?

    Also, what is your purpose in expressing when someone has offended? Is it to change their opinion, or to express hurt to you personally?

    What's the difference between Fe policing and Fi showing disgust about something? (What's the difference between a Fe person saying, "it is wrong that you're not speaking respectfully" and Fi saying, "your homophobic ideas disgust me.") Isn't there implication that the person who offended the Fi person with their values should not have such ideas? If there is no implication, what is the point of expressing?

    Thanks, this helps me understand Fi better.
    lirulin, Nonconsensus and Ubuntu thanked this post.

  4. #104
    Unknown Personality

    Quote Originally Posted by elemental View Post
    Just thought of this analogy: You believe very strongly in fair labor practices around the world. You are diligent about thinking about the ethics behind every purchase you make, because you believe that the best way to influence trends as a consumer is to put your 'money where your mouth is.' You buy fair trade coffee and domestic whenever you can. This is something very important to your core values.

    At Christmas time, you've need a new Gadget for school. Gadget A, which is the most popular/best Gadget for your needs, is made in a factory in China, which was recently criticized in the media over its questionable labor practices. Now, you would never buy this Gadget for yourself, but a family member or close friend buys it for you as a Christmas gift. How do you react?

    Fe: You graciously accept the gift. Even if it goes against your personal moral standards, you accept these are your own personal standards, not everyone else's. Moreover, it is a well-meaning gesture, and the person put a lot of thought into giving it to you, and you don't want to offend them.

    Fi: You thank the giver, but explain that you'll be returning it for another Gadget manufactured under more fair labor practices. You let the person know they shouldn't be offended, because they didn't know, but this is something you personally feel very strongly about, so you cannot live with yourself if you accept this gift.
    I could see this more for a dominant Fi type and I'd be doing what you said for Fe and I'm about 99.9...% sure I'm an aux Fi user, at least. Maybe someone else will pitch in too. My Fi is much more flexible, but the concern over offending someone who had gifted me would be the greater "sin" any day.

  5. #105
    INTJ - The Scientists


    Quote Originally Posted by eunoia View Post
    That's interesting. To me respect just seems like an obvious value to have. In my eyes, if you can't disagree in a polite, unemotional way, it reflects more than a disagreeing of an idea, but a projection of negative feeling onto the person as a whole. I see that you distinguish between the two, but it's so hard to truly understand! It's good to know, though.

    It seems like in order to communicate properly with someone, sacrifices need to be made on both sides where each person consider the other's values. So for example, the Fi user could prevent hurting a Fe user by speaking respectfully, and in turn, the Fe user should be sensitive to saying things that step on a Fi users values.

    Or would you say it is better to not compromise--Fi user expresses when his/her values in whatever manner they please, and Fe users expressing their values (respect?) however they please?
    I don't think respect and courtesy are bad things, but I find in some situations it can, essentially, place more responsibility on the oppressed party. Someone can unemotionally and 'politely' say bigoted things and the homosexual/woman/visible minority who is the target of the bigotry is chastised for not responding to their oppression 'politely.' That's why the tone argument is considered a derailing tactic. Even when it isn't so big an issue as systematic oppression it still sounds like a derail to me.

    Fi is in some senses very uncompromising so I do find the second scenario, in principle, preferable but in terms of having a functional discussion I think appealing to empathy as a way to reach the Fi user is the most effective strategy. For me, my ideals are far more important than conversational protocol, so I won't respond to that but I will usually respond to 'you are hurting me.' Except when they are being unforgivably offensive, I can probably apologise and say 'just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I respect you less, I know you are a good person' or rephrase a few things. The other option is, of course, to agree to not discuss hot button things. I basically feel a moral obligation to defend certain values - and love the people who argue it for me so I don't have to - simply biting my tongue when there is a values clash is already a compromise for me, so the avoidance issue when people are feeling hurt is one I use a lot.

    Quote Originally Posted by eunoia View Post
    Also, what is your purpose in expressing when someone has offended? Is it to change their opinion, or to express hurt to you personally?
    Neither for me. It isn't an interpersonal issue or situational, but an abstract one. Some things are right and some wrong and what is right should be defended and what is wrong should be criticised - or at least not actively supported, depending. My goals in defending my values usually aren't that situational. I might express hurt to me personally if I consider it a courtesy issue, but a values issue isn't about me. And if it were about changing another's opinion then I would probably be doing more ass-kissing rather than being honest about what I think is wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by eunoia View Post
    What's the difference between Fe policing and Fi showing disgust about something? (What's the difference between a Fe person saying, "it is wrong that you're not speaking respectfully" and Fi saying, "your homophobic ideas disgust me.") Isn't there implication that the person who offended the Fi person with their values should not have such ideas? If there is no implication, what is the point of expressing?
    Similar to above. The implication really isn't the point though it can be read into it. The expression isn't so much a strategic interpersonal decision but an abstract idealistic one. It's great if someone changes their mind about hating on gay people but I don't really expect it to be that easy and I'm more interested in defending gay people in that situation. Like Fe can consider body language an attack, Fi can consider an opinion to be an attack though it may not be personal. In most cases, I think, each person, Fe or Fi, feels they are on the defensive. That and similar to above, the Fi person isn't necessarily, in any way, being harmed by the homophobia - it is possibly the case but isn't of necessity the case. It's not really about them personally, what makes them comfortable. Whereas, 'it's wrong you aren't speaking to me respectfully' is more about what the speaker wants for themselves. Plus, to be honest, I just basically consider what someone says to be far more important than how they say it so to me that makes it different too. I hope that makes sense.

    (Anyone who also has Fi who has different ways of reacting, feel free to point out if I generalise too much about it or share your experience.)
    Neon Knight and Nonconsensus thanked this post.

  6. #106

    Quote Originally Posted by saffron View Post
    I don't know, most of those Fe examples would apply to Fi users as well. Most of the people I'm closest to happen to be Fi users (especially dom - both ISFP and INFP) and we would all exhibit most of those behaviors.

    I'm not sure that's a great distinction between the two functions.
    Here is a description of both Fi/Fe that i find interesting and more in depth. It also shows more of a distinction between the two much better than the previous post left by freedom.

    introverted feeling | The Third Eve
    saffron thanked this post.

  7. #107
    Unknown Personality

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter View Post
    No. I'm saying that Fe dominants tend to give in order to avoid feeling bad.

    This statement says nothing about Fi.
    You say that Fe dominants give in order to avoid feeling bad as if it differentiates between them and Fi types. I fail to see why it is only Fe types who do something in order to avoid feeling bad. Otherwise if that is true then, for example I'm going to call all those people who take drugs or get drunk to numb their pain Fe types, and feel stupid doing so.

    The only reason why an Fe type feels bad is because they have gone against their introverted thinking, which is not always conscious. Any bad emotion felt merely points to a disonance in their thinking. I imagine similarly, Fi types feel bad when they go against their introverted feeling judgement.
    lirulin, Nonconsensus and AlltheIntuitiveFeels thanked this post.

  8. #108
    ENFP - The Inspirers


    Quote Originally Posted by MuChApArAdOx View Post
    Here is a description of both Fi/Fe that i find interesting and more in depth. It also shows more of a distinction between the two much better than the previous post left by freedom.

    introverted feeling | The Third Eve
    I can relate to a lot of the introverted feeling description, and it rings true especially for the Fi-doms I know. But it does a good job at isolating the essence of the functions even if some of it is tempered by where it shows up in the order.
    MuChApArAdOx thanked this post.

  9. #109
    INTJ - The Scientists

    Quote Originally Posted by pc3000 View Post
    You say that Fe dominants give in order to avoid feeling bad as if it differentiates between them and Fi types. I fail to see why it is only Fe types who do something in order to avoid feeling bad. Otherwise if that is true then, for example I'm going to call all those people who take drugs or get drunk to numb their pain Fe types, and feel stupid doing so.

    The only reason why an Fe type feels bad is because they have gone against their introverted thinking, which is not always conscious. Any bad emotion felt merely points to a disonance in their thinking. I imagine similarly, Fi types feel bad when they go against their introverted feeling judgement.
    Nope.

    Fe causes people to feel what other's feel. What you see in Fe dominants is that they can be really tough towards people they don't have to deal with directly but completely fail to be tough towards people they do interact with. (unless they don't like these people ofcourse.)

    When an Fe dominant interacts with a person that's not happy, s(he) will start to feel the same and as a result want to help because that will take away that bad feeling they picked up.

    Fe is not the opposite of Fi.

    And if Ti would be the reason for being helpful, INTP's and ISTP's should be the most helpful types there are and ....... they´re not.

  10. #110
    INTP - The Thinkers

    Quote Originally Posted by MuChApArAdOx View Post
    Fi=independent thinking, or feeling. Fi considers how it makes us feel internally, personally. We will act according to how it will effect us personally how it makes us feel. Fe= attaching their emotions to how it makes others feel, group thinking. I don't want to go against the group, that would appear selfish, Fe. Fi, i have an independent view with what is true for me personally, i won't go against my personal belief system in order to make you feel better. Then there is this. Fi will compromise depending on with whom, the importance, if they value/love the person . They will go against their own internal personal belief system in order to maintain peace. Fi doesn't change their belief system, only compromise in certain situations.
    Yeah, that's what I have noticed too.
    Fi people aren't necessarily selfish, they can be quite selfless as you point out.
    The Fi function itself can appear selfish to others, I think mostly because it personalizes everything. This is more obvious in unbalanced or immature Fi users (where Ne/Se isn't as well developed as it needs to be)

    For example take an ISFP I know.. She accidentally caused a minor cut to her granddaughter. The next day the mother had a bandaid on the cut. She got upset, not because her granddaughter was cut, but because her daughter was "trying to make her feel guilty" by putting the bandaid there. She does that all the time. Everything is about her and how she feels. Now this is an extreme example, I suspect she doesn't have enough Se and too much Ni which causes these interpretations.

    Most of the Fi users I know do not show this extreme behavior. They show alot more concern for others, and can be quite selfless, but they still show this personalized way of processing feeling (example: taking things personally that have nothing to do with them)
    allisreal and BlondeRJ thanked this post.


     
Page 11 of 15 FirstFirst ... 9 10 11 12 13 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 77
    Last Post: 05-03-2015, 04:49 PM
  2. [ISFJ] What's an INFP to do to give back and give affection?
    By mintyphoenix in forum ISFJ Forum - The Nurturers
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 10-25-2010, 12:34 PM
  3. give me a good reason to become a vegetarian
    By Munchies in forum General Chat
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-01-2010, 10:55 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:13 AM.
Information provided on the site is meant to complement and not replace any advice or information from a health professional.
© 2014 PersonalityCafe
 

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0