Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
737 Posts
This is an excellent video, but this doesn't sound like Fi at all. If anything, this sounds more like Ni or Ne more than anything.

But, boy, this is all exciting! I don't know if it'll work, but I'll pray it does. In the mean, I'll think about what this video suggested.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,009 Posts
Fantastic video.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Black Rabbit

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,917 Posts
I saw this video somewhere else. As soon as I saw it, I said, "That's a really good example of developed Fe in our sociology." Fi is demonstrated primarily as a deciding factor between two or more variables. In other words, Fi is used to decide which path we should take. (keep in mind that Ti does this as well, but on a more analytic scale) Fe, on the other hand, is used in taking action. It's used more in instances where the choice is action or inaction, involvement or ignorance. If Fi is what helps us decide which path to take, then Fe is what helps us get our feet moving.
 

·
Registered
INTJ
Joined
·
1,506 Posts
Is an interesting video. That is how I think of Fe actually. Too much dealing with other people to be an introverted function.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Unicorntopia

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,228 Posts
I just liked it because of the number of ideas it sparked, and the path of reasoning it took.

I don't think you can necessarily encapsulate any function in terms of ideas and personal values.
 

·
MOTM Dec 2011
Joined
·
8,651 Posts
Yeah, I see a lot of this connecting to what Feeling is (both Fe & Fi), but also Fi specifically. I think what people see as Ne or Ni in the video is how it is explained, how the connections are made for the speaker to arrive at his conclusions. However, what he is articulating is something that I'd argue most Fi-doms have a natural connection to, without any need to break it down to grasp it. It's a feeling that arises as a whole, a base for smaller ideas to branch out from.

Watching this was like hearing the obvious - "this is a discovery to people?!". I don't agree with every idea here, but some of it is very basic to my grasp of people, especially from an emotional standpoint. Everyone uses Feeling, but arguably, Fi-doms are most in touch with this part of their mind.

My rough understanding of Jungian theory is that Fi ideals come out of "primordial images", or something like innate, basic concepts of what is good or bad. These significant ideas are often interpreted to the Fi-dom's own individual needs, but this self-awareness also lends an insight into other people. It's like, the more we know ourselves, the better we grasp the underlying motivations of all people, and they are good or bad.

Jung says these underlying images come from the "collective unconscious", which to me sounds like an inborn conscience of sorts. Basically, it's like an inherited sense of morality, which every human shares as we all stem from the same first pair. It allows us to relate to every human by turning inward and accessing these basic, innate concepts of what it means to be human and what humans need; even what it means to be alive & what all living creatures need. You could put an evolutionary or theological slant on this, depending on your personal beliefs. This is entirely philosophical of course.

What I also notice among Fi-doms is a tendency to value what the video ascribes to the empathic viewpoint as opposed to the utilitarian one. I definitely see Fe promoting these shared values also, but Fe seems so much more adaptable to the external, so that it will try and work with what is there. Fe is important for implementing Fi ideals in reality, just as Te is important for making Ti logic viable. But I see the basic concepts of ideal originating with Fi, as it looks inward to judge and Fe uses more objective criteria.
 

·
MOTM Nov 2010
Joined
·
10,402 Posts
Yeah, this was pretty much like "duh" to me. It was all Fi up until I was empathizing with animals. I really think that affection for animals has more to do with Fe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
749 Posts
Interesting vid; however, the message is just a little too trite for my taste: come together and love one another, yeah, that would be nice. Furthermore, if one shares in someone's emotional tumult, ie, when the spider crawls up someone we feel creepy too, and in helping that person get the spider off of them we are merely trying to avoid feeling creepy ourselves, which is inherently selfish. :tongue:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,486 Posts
Interesting, but idealistic. He says something about treating everyone as you'd treat your family meanwhile there are a lot of problems in many families or even if you treat everyone as you treat yourself, some people don't treat themselves very well.

Actually he says if you increase selfhood, you increase empathy but how would you do that when everyone likes to define who you are or tell you what you should do or be or have.

And he said something about how schools and business practices are based on the idea that people are generally selfish and greedy and you should drive the innate selfishness out of your child. So I guess the idea is to assume that people have good intentions? But I tend to think they do anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,099 Posts
Interesting, but idealistic.
Maybe that's why Troisi considered this video to illustrate Fi.

But the examples in the video fail. Germans and Jews didn't get along during a certain point in time, despite Jews having been considered part of the German nation. That also means the time line of humans moving on from blood to religion to nations is wrong, since they all existed together at the same time. That would mean, that if that continued to a worldwide group, we would still have the same splits.

I would guess humans grouped together into these organizations because of Si, not Fe. SJs make up nearly 50% of the population, and they're the ones that love to create and follow these external structures. The main reason is that the structures give them stability.
 

·
MOTM Dec 2011
Joined
·
8,651 Posts
^ You guys are focusing on details instead of grasping the concept. Yet, you use complicated situations to criticize the concepts, basically ignoring the details of those situations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
749 Posts
^ You guys are focusing on details instead of grasping the concept. Yet, you use complicated situations to criticize the concepts, basically ignoring the details of those situations.
You use sweeping broad-strokes to accuse people of not understanding one man's warmed over pining for utopia. "Let's all just love one another, we're hard wired for it." What have I missed?

Explain how I have overlooked the concept. I took an example he used as part of his proof that humans are hard-wired for empathy and not for selfishness, and I used it to posit a counter argument that empathy is selfish. All human action is done to derive utility, ergo, is utilitarian. If I won the lottery and gave it all away I'd feel damn good about it, and to me that feeling would be worth the millions of dollars, I have done nothing more than made a purchase. Tell me how that differs from feeling good by spending that money on a bunch of stupid shit? It's still utilitarian, and if I buy a bunch of bullshit that money goes to people with jobs.

I hope your rejoinder actually attempts to refute my argument rather than insult my intelligence because I'm not on board for a bunch of feel good BS that stands zero chance of working.


Ooooh! Good chance for type analysis here: INTPs tend to get caustic and defensive when they feel their intelligence is being insulted. < We need a narrator with an accent, "The elusive INTP has emerged from his shell to defend his territory, and he looks angry." :wink:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,417 Posts
No, I don't think so.

I always just viewed Fi like looking within for ethics, instead of to the outer world to more accepted ethics. It's the proof that morality is subjective in some and objective in others. I think Fi users do tend to be more empathetic though for this reason, they empathize with everyone and try to understand the people that aren't socially acceptable to understand, therefore putting themselves in more people's shoes.

I think when it comes to making decisions based on people, morality, no matter what type you are, you'll use either one or the other. I use Fi, though I'm mostly uncomfortable using it, I still use it on a daily basis. But I'm not an empathetic person, so I can't say for sure if this is how Fi should be viewed.
 

·
MOTM Dec 2011
Joined
·
8,651 Posts
You use sweeping broad-strokes to accuse people of not understanding one man's warmed over pining for utopia. "Let's all just love one another, we're hard wired for it." What have I missed?

Explain how I have overlooked the concept. I took an example he used as part of his proof that humans are hard-wired for empathy and not for selfishness, and I used it to posit a counter argument that empathy is selfish. All human action is done to derive utility, ergo, is utilitarian. If I won the lottery and gave it all away I'd feel damn good about it, and to me that feeling would be worth the millions of dollars, I have done nothing more than made a purchase. Tell me how that differs from feeling good by spending that money on a bunch of stupid shit? It's still utilitarian, and if I buy a bunch of bullshit that money goes to people with jobs.

I hope your rejoinder actually attempts to refute my argument rather than insult my intelligence because I'm not on board for a bunch of feel good BS that stands zero chance of working.

Ooooh! Good chance for type analysis here: INTPs tend to get caustic and defensive when they feel their intelligence is being insulted. < We need a narrator with an accent, "The elusive INTP has emerged from his shell to defend his territory, and he looks angry." :wink:
Oh honey, I hope to do both :tongue:.

There is a distinction so obvious to me, and the fact that Ti-doms often struggle to understand it is amusing.... :proud:

Motive is a factor....do you give the money away to feel good or to make others feel good, because you know what it is to feel good? It's only selfish if your only concern is how the result affects YOU.

In the spider example - do you act to remove the spider to avoid your own creepy feeling or because you know what the creepy feeling is like and you want to help someone else avoid it also? Is the motivation for your own well-being ONLY? Win-win situations are not selfish, as they concern the welfare of both parties.

It becomes more complicated when you realize that people feel differently...maybe some people like their pet tarantula to crawl up their arm, and in taking action to remove it, you would not be helpful. You now must put aside your own feeling & make an effort to grasp theirs by comparing it to something you do understand, such as petting your dog & the pleasure it gives you. Then you can respond in ways which truly help people in their goals & they can do the same for you; and now you have people interacting productively.

Yes, there is more to it all than that, because there are always more variables, but the simplicity of the scenario illustrates a concept.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
749 Posts
Oh honey, I hope to do both :tongue:.

There is a distinction so obvious to me, and the fact that Ti-doms often struggle to understand it is amusing.... :proud:

Motive is a factor....do you give the money away to feel good or to make others feel good, because you know what it is to feel good? It's only selfish if your only concern is how the result affects YOU.

In the spider example - do you act to remove the spider to avoid your own creepy feeling or because you know what the creepy feeling is like and you want to help someone else avoid it also? Is the motivation for your own well-being ONLY? Win-win situations are not selfish, as they concern the welfare of both parties.

It becomes more complicated when you realize that people feel differently...maybe some people like their pet tarantula to crawl up their arm, and in taking action to remove it, you would not be helpful. You now must put aside your own feeling & make an effort to grasp theirs by comparing it to something you do understand, such as petting your dog & the pleasure it gives you. Then you can respond in ways which truly help people in their goals & they can do the same for you; and now you have people interacting productively.

Yes, there is more to it all than that, because there are always more variables, but the simplicity of the scenario illustrates a concept.
Making others feel good makes me feel good, therefore via the transitive property helping others is masturbatory, about making myself feel good. Extending it to your paragraph regarding the pet tarantula: our intentions, whether good or bad, don't always meet with reality, and that usually makes me feel bad, and I try and avoid this at all costs. Avoiding negatives is utilitarian.

Human behavior happens on a subconscious level, ultimately the brain chemistry wants to be a certain way because that ensures survival. What I mean by this is that high calorie food releases endorphines, and makes us feel good because those foods, in the baser era of our development, were good for survival; furthermore, being socialized, which requires empathy, makes us feel good too because it helps us survive. A human alone in the wild -excluding Bear Gryles- is dead. All human behavior is utilitarian. We do things that feel good because while evolving they helped us survive; however, as I said before, intention doesn't always meet with reality. Drugs make us feel good, and etc., yet they don't necessarily ensure survival because they can ruin people's lives, just like squirrel at a bird feeder gorging on seed may often times find itself at the wrong end of a pellet gun. Point is, those actions are all ultimately selfish, preservation oriented, and ultimately whether or not they preserve us is up to factors beyond our control.
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top