I appreciate the additional information. It definitely changes my perspective as it gives me both a different analysis and a lot of new information to see alternate perspectives and deepen my interpretation beyond assumptions.
"About my values...I wouldn't say I live with many values, causes that are dear to me. But at the same time, when I think about different things I could possibly do, for myself or others (lie, manipulate, etc...), I tell myself «...no». Perhaps it's those «values» dear to Fi users the latter are only really aware of once they have to deal with situations that go against the said values."
I have heard Fi users describe Fi as a sort of search for their values. It's not that they immediately have a value that they can't break. They have to experience or imagine it first. The same thing is true with Ti. Ti doesn't immediately have a system or logic to anything ever. It has to create it and test it mentally first. By your description, I would say that that is possibly Fi. I think Fe and Te feel a little more "Free-willed" when it comes to finding their values. If I wanted to decide on my feelings toward something, I would wrestle with the multiple feelings that I have in order to find which is more overpowering.
"My whole conception of things seems to be fucked up 😆 I would probably know more if I were to search fore more informations...but at the same, I'm not totally comfortable around functions articles. I think I'm reluctant because I don't want to read things that could make me consider some high Fi-ness (if I have it, I hardly see «my» Te above «my» Fi, I'm way too indecisive for that). Being reluctant to do/watch something because you «know» this will make you feel bad or angry sounds like a pretty F thing to do, doesn't it? To give importance to your feelings sounds like a pretty Fi thing, nah?"
Fe still values their own feelings, but may not make it a priority depending on the situation. What you described depends very much on the situation and whether they are generally comfortable being uncomfortable, rather than how they process feelings. Fi will, however, focus more on their feelings when deciding their core personal reason for liking or disliking something, whereas Fe will look more at the big picture. If you always do this, no matter what, for the sake of yourself, and for the sake of quality, rather than an outcome, it's probably Fi.
"I'm afraid my own vision of good and wrong could affect my decisions, starting with things as dumb as killing rodents. My mom recently told me she saw what she thought to be a mouse. I told myself «what do I do if there is indeed a mouse and I see it? Could I kill it?». I don't know if I would have the «guts» to do something I see as «wrong» even if deep down, I know it's the best thing to do."
This definitely sounds like an Fi thought process. An Fe user may come to the same conclusion, but would likely not base it on pure morality to the user. Additionally, there is a focus on what "you" would do. When I view situations like this, especially morally, I detach from myself in order to see whether my actions would actually change the effect on the mouse. For example, would the mouse suffer more if I didn't kill it and it starved? If so, maybe it would be best for me to choose to go against my personal morality and kill the mouse anyway.
"So there was this rapper who apparently lynched a guy with some of his friends. And there was this guy who defended him: hey, only god can judge him!». That's stupid. That's not how society works. If anything, saying «I let god judge me» means you can do all sort of terrible things but still avoid the law because «divine justice is more important to me than your justice». Who is willing to do horrible stuff on earth while «knowing» (I don't believe in god, it feels pretty weird to put yourself in their shoes, damn) god will punish them for their misdeeds (and if murder is one of the worst crimes in every religion, why would you want to commit it and live 30 years or 84 years...no one knows and then rest in hell for the rest of your «life»? It's not worth it. This kind of things is why religions are so badly seen nowadays. As if you could do anything because «hey, don't worry, maybe I raped and killed your daughter, but Satan will punish me when I die!»."
This sounds like a fed up Te and a Ti argument for an Fi value to me. You are arguing for the ineffectiveness and unreasonableness of an action and questioning why anyone would even want to do such a thing. You seem to use Te to argue that their plan is ineffective, you use Ti demon (8th slot demon comes out when you feel that the inf. function has been abused or can't be used effectively in a situation) to prove that it would be fundamentally illogical, then you add that you can not see how anyone would want to go against the Te mold just in order to also go against one of your Fi values.
The other person mentions that you seem to have low Fe and that you were using Ti somewhat. IxFPs actually do have very strong Fe, but they rarely choose to use it, as it goes directly against their ego. IxFPs have weak Ti, but will still use it extensively to prove something when challenged.
"Do you sometimes hesitate to post something because of how it would be seen (as stupid, for example)? I think nowadays I tend to «expect» other people to answer me a certain way and it's as if I was arguing with myself : initial thought yeah, but there's also this, you're contradicting yourself or people will reply this, if they think about it, of course... yeah, you're right bud"
This sounds very similar to a Ti-Ne thought process, but it could very well be Te. Whereas Ti would try to be correct for the sake of itself while trying to describe their analysis in an Fe way that doesn't come off as insulting or strange, Fi will have an opinion that it will try to express coherently through a Te explanation, and will be discouraged if the explanation is not able to make sense or influence the people that need to be told. For the record, I also have thoughts like this, even with blindspot PoLR Ne, but they are based more on an insecurity of
not knowing many possible scenarios, whereas Ne would be insecure based on seeing negative scenarios.
"I also have the impression that when I think about something, I just «throw» ideas I have, ideas that can be totally dumb...but then, when I «check», I realize it's dumb and I think more and more until I find something."
This seems like a combination of Ne and Te. Ne comes up with many surface-level observations/ideas and Te comes up with many surface-level arguments. Because of this, you can come up with many different solutions, but many will fail. The opposite of this would be my thought process, which is Ti and Ni. I cannot for the love of anything come up with enough ideas and arguments to effectively maneuver most new situations. However, when I do come up with something, it will almost never need to be entirely thrown away, and will likely only need minor adjustments.
"Someone ironically says «in 20-30 years, white race will no longer exists». Some black guy says «good news!». Another guy tells him something among the lines of «ur mom is working for me as a cleaning lady lelelel». Some girl starts getting mad at him so I start wondering...why would you be mad at someone because of a slightly racist comment making fun of his mom and cleaning ladies but not at the guy who's happy at the thought of the disappearance of the white race?». Her answer: both answers are racists but the other guy is worse because he makes fun of the guy's mother AND a certain category of jobs. According to her, it doesn't matter if you rejoice about that because «the white race won't disappear, so it's okay». So...it's okay to say the worst things if it's «unrealistic», it's not «going to happen»? I don't know if it's intellectual laziness, but I'm almost tempted to say «yeah, you're right, sorry about that». If you look at things through her lens, there's something real (making fun of a category of people) and something which is not (our upcoming extinction). I think I was «mad» because I saw that as a wish: for us to go extinct. She draws lines. For her, there are the «serious, real things» and the rest «what is not real, humor». This lad was just joking, as he said.
I know I'm more likely to believe in those «conspiracies» due to my years as an alt-right sympathizer but as far as they're concerned, they clearly don't think it's real. If they thought it was real, I think (hope...) she would be a little more shocked. So in the end...if you say one thing absolutely malevolent, if it doesn't have anything to do with reality, even «real» things that seem unimportant in comparison are worse... I absolutely have no point. I wrote this wall of text as I was thinking about it and...I'm concretely just saying «yeah, you're right»...bah, doesn't matter"
This is an in-depth analysis of feelings and values for actions that I would never even be capable of doing, especially with interest. I definitely think this is Fi. You examine the personal reasons behind people's feelings and thought processes while criticizing their actions, as they seem to contradict their own feelings and interests. I would not be interested in this analysis myself and would instead simply try to change the opinions of these people, regardless of their core perspectives.
"«One of our ministers shouldn't go to the 93» (a department which is...pretty much your typical shithole full of immigrants and drugs that "white rich people" despise and fear). This comes from a muslim. Context: some politicians don't want muslim women to wear their veil during school trips. Some people saw this as a threat. At first, I wanted to «defend» him (even though I don't have any sympathy for him) by saying it was just an advice and not a threat but...the more I think about it, the more I realize I don't even know the definition of «threat». I see threat as something which is rather «active»: «if you do this/don't do this, I'll break you». There is a concrete implication of the person who threatens. As for advice, I would say it's much more «passive»: «oh, if I were you, I wouldn't do this...but hey, whatever, it's your life, not mine». Threats are a «bad thing» : you intimidate someone, you only think about yourself and your interests. While advices seem to be a much more friendly, selfless thing. But if you think about it...when you threaten someone not to do something, for example...in a certain way, it's an advice. You «protect» their integrity by warning them. You put your interests and their integrity on the same level. Is he telling him he will actively assault him if he shows up in this part of our country? No. Is he telling him he shouldn't show up there because some people could beat him? No, but you could understand it that way. If he had influence and told his minions to harass him if he showed up there, you could see this as a threat. But we're not barbarians, are we? So, to sum it up (because it's a mess, I should be more organized and make up my mind: I'm literally writing this as my ideas progressively come to my mind): in my humble opinion, a threat is a threat when you want to prevent someone from doing what they want and you are capable of retaliate if they do it anyway. Example: don't date this girl, or... (I'll shoot you, rape her in front of you, execute you, torture her and finish her...). An advice doesn't have the same intensity and isn't as morally reprehensible. You simply tell someone they should not do something, for this may cause problems to them. You don't intend to harm the person. You just want to give your opinion: it's a bad idea. As a conclusion, no matter how bad you want someone not to do something, if you consider things from an objective point of view («people may beat the crap out of you»/«you will dislike what you will see there») and not a subjective point of view («I will actively kick your ass if you come here, be sure of it»), it's not a threat. Just a mere observation. Now, of course, maybe he just don't want to see him in his «territory» and of course, there's a subjective point of view...but still, it's passive => it's an advice. 4 A.M and I'm tormenting myself (and I will torment you as well) with all this conceptual wank...what am I doing with my life!"
You state many personal interpretations of values based on different perspectives of concrete examples. I think this is an example of an Fi-Ne thought process. Additionally, all of your examples seem to work this way. You state a detailed Si scenario in which there are different Ne perspectives that your Fi values can be viewed from, where you doubt the feasibility of this analysis in the Te real-world system(...what am I doing with my life!).
I don't really think I need to continue... but I will for the sake of it.
"Our president answers an interview given by a «far-right» magazine...apparently it's the first time one of our presidents do that. So now, people think he's licking the arse of the far-right. But at first, there's something that really pisses me off: why couldn't he answer them? He's not trying to get the «far-right» on his side just because he accepts to answer them. With this logic, if one day we have a far-right president (lmao) and he accepts to answer an interview given by a far-left magazine, will the population shout «and now he's befriending the commies!»? No. But even if the principle, the «logic» is dubious...then I think about those people who say he adopts a «far-right» politics when it comes to immigration for example. And then I understand their indignation, I understand why they think «he has a far-right policy and now he's answering their interview!? My fears are justified!». So...my first reaction was «anger» (disappointment? Scepticism? Bah, I don't really know) but when you think about it...it's more than just a bunch of whiners. If people think he has a far-right policy on a certain topic and he decides to tell far-right guys about this very policy, yeah, I can understand why people yell. Now, apparently, what he said was not really something a far-right person would say...so yeah, I think people are just hysterical"
This seems very much to be an Fi view of hysterical Fe behavior. The Fe behavior has a place in functioning society, but does not have a place in the true values of this political issue. You acknowledge that there is no way to avoid this behavior because it is useful for the people involved, but you dismiss it as trivial to your own values.
"Some teacher killed a girl in a pretty atrocious way. The school «belongs» to a far-right politician so now people start to condemn far-right: «look! This is the far-right! Do you want our country to be governed by people who are friends with this kind of criminals?» Looks pretty stupid to me: looks like they're blaming the politician because she gave him the job...as if she could know the guy was a future murderer. Make generalizations? Sounds dumb, it's just one of them...but saying this makes me a fucking hypocrite, considering how my «side» just does the same. Discredict a whole movement/religion because of a minority of extremists or criminals is pretty stupid, it's true but...no wonder you do that when you see the ideas spread by far-right movements or religions (I'll be honest there, I'm thinking of Islam). Makes more sense than to shit on Walmart or Ikea because of one of their employees, let's say. Now a religion or a political movement...those things have ideologies. If you kill someone and use your religion as an excuse when it's just you who want to commit a crime, it can be quite a dick move, yeah...but then, if your action can be explained by some things your prophet said... Oh, I also saw someone say this «far-right» school was meant to radicalize students...problem is if they enter this school, they probably already belong to the far-right and therefore already radicalized :>"
As with the above scenario, you analyze the values and behavior of the public and criticize their actions for being illogical for the values that they hold. There is also analysis of their reasoning and deconstruction of fallacies and inaccuracies in their situational arguments, but it is used to serve your interpretation of their values to prove that they are not being true to what they value anyway.
"Turks telling us we shouldn't criticize them because we colonized the world and committed slaughters...why should we not criticize other peoples when we did something «wrong» (the important word being DID)? If your dad was a killer, does it mean you can't shit on killers? Now, I guess they refer to the «fact» we still «exploit» Africa, so we're not all goodies, but still."
This could be either a Ti or an Fi argument. It could be defending Fi identity because the accusation of your values was not true or it could be Ti criticizing an Ad Hominem argument.
"Nowadays, I think more (maybe too much, it's probably why I hesitate so much and don't send a lot of messages) about what I want to say and find contradictions. Perhaps I don't want to be contradicted or seen as a dumbass..."
This could be Ti or Fi as well. This is common in IxxPs, as they may be confident in their own capabilities of analysis but not their capabilities to continually justify their explanations to other people.
"I can be fairly disagreeable when something or someone bothers me. When people tell me I don't smile and look pissed off, I can be quite cold and clearly annoyed. Sometimes, my mother tells me I become «aggressive» (to be fair, it's more like bitchy «ugh, I don't want to talk, you told me enough things, no need to continue the discussion» moments). I'm «aware» of those moments and sometimes tell myself «shit, I said it in a pretty grumpy way»."
This seems like Fi not wanting to have to modify their outward appearance for the sake of someone else, as they still have the feeling and they want to analyze it. Ti will do the same with arguments and will not care whether their argument is irrelevant or not. When confronted with the inferior function however, the person, if in a healthy mindset, will normally acknowledge their weakness and try to adjust. An Fi dom will try to lessen the burden of them being in the way of goals and a Ti dom will try to lessen the burden of them being in the way of another person's feelings.
"Even if I'm «able» to understand the point of view of other people (I guess) and think it's not «that» dumb, I rarely change my opinion, even when I know I'm in the wrong. As if I just wanted to keep shitting on other people for the sake of it."
If you are an IxFP, your identity hinges on your values and opinions. If you don't shit on other people when you think they're wrong, you won't be able to function as yourself
. If you know you're in the wrong, then I think you probably either want to slowly ease into the change or you're only in the wrong according to other people, as your opinion is actually what defines wrongness for you and conforming to other people would be inauthentic, regardless of whether they have a point or not.
"About my reluctance to talk about my feelings, I have to wonder why I don't talk about them. I let people know about it online (I talk about my problems and the way I feel about some things as if sharing those stories helped me dealing with frustration, disappointment or weird situations that put a smile on my face while I'm also confused or hurt at the same time) but otherwise, I'm so reserved the only things that could let other people know I feel bad are some grunts, deep breaths, angry/sad/annoyed looks. I don't think it's because I don't want to «ruin the mood» (Fe?) or because my feelings are 2deep4u (Fi?), I think it's simply because I know how to deal with them (aka I know how to wait and quickly forget about my problems."
I think that for an IxFP, sharing their feelings is sharing a personal problem that is not meant to be dealt with by other people and is for the most part meant to be felt and not pushed away. Involving another person in your feelings would be involving them in your decision-making process and would mean that they have personal insight into your identity, which you would need to update them on if it was changed. Also, those small grunts, deep breaths, and angry/sad/annoyed looks are quite enough information for a lot of people to understand your general feeling in the moment. It doesn't usually require a deep analysis of your psyche or a verbal declaration to know that you look pissed. In particular, I'd think that Fe-Se especially would be able to take in those details and get a quick understanding of a few possible moods that you could be in.
"I feel like I don't understand things very quickly and I'm a little «slow». I also think I don't understand all the things that are subtly implied. Since that dumb habit I have to think T types are geniuses who must absolutely understand everything, I spend too much time thinking about things that I don't understand easily enough. It can happen a lot. In this case, I end up «drawing my own conclusion» and stop when I find it satisfying."
This sounds like insecurity about the thinking functions. A lot of the time "subtle implications" are actually just logical conclusions, not additional observations or the result of a faster thought process. Thinking doms have the same issue with trying to understand feelings. When I try to analyze feelings in depth, it ends up becoming entirely Ti or entirely shallow. There's no way for me to just feel my emotions stronger or anything. I just have to deal with it. I imagine it's similar for feeling doms in regards to thinking.
"I think I have a problem. I watched a Super Mario 64 video where some guy kills that annoying penguin and I told myself «shit, poor penguin, could I even do that?». Or when I hesitate to declare war to a country that appreciates mine in Europa Universalis IV. Would thinkers even care about that? Since when do I even do that? I know I can be sensitive but that's just ridiculous."
I have to actively choose to care about things like that most of the time, but when I do, it adds to the experience of the game and adds a layer of depth and challenge, as well as a feeling of actual humanity in-game. I love EU4 btw.
"Went to the supermarket, bough a beer and gloves. I ended up buying food to a hobo who talked to me (and yes, I decided to leave when he approached me), I don't really know why. To feel at peace with myself? To make him happy? Because of the alcohol in my veins? I don't know but when I told my dad, he told me I should not give food to hobos since we don't even know if they try to find a job. When I got home, I realized the gloves were too small, got really pissed, bit the box and angrily threw it in the trash. This good deed as well as my response to this plan that clearly wasn't planned well enough...does it say anything about me...in a mbti way?"
You mentioning that you don't know why you gave the food strikes me as Fi questioning whether its intent is real or not. When I ask this question, I always land on the conclusion that I did it to feel better about myself, regardless of what my brain makes me want to feel. This fact does not make the action invalid though, it's just the observation that we're all flesh robots. You biting the box and throwing away the gloves doesn't say much about MBTI, as any type would do this under different circumstances. The difference is just at what point a type would decide to give in or at what point a type would be affected by their circumstances to be angry enough to do this.
"I don't really know what it says about me, but sometimes, when I play some games, I can become very angry and enraged, when we're not good enough. As if I take it a little too seriously or personally and being great at games was the only way I found to prove my worth. In this regard, even if I don't shit on my teammates or «enemies», I still get very mad, blaming my teammates, thinking «come on, we can't lose against those idiots». When I see someone play my «main» better than me, I usually get mad. Again, I only insult those who insult me. And when people criticize me, it's as if, at first, I didn't take it that bad, but only then, after a few minutes, I started to think about it too much and got pissed. I usually don't leave but I have to admit that one day, I got offended and left the game. Strangely enough, I could still see their messages and of course, everyone was shitting on me (even the enemy team, which makes sense: finding games can take quite a while). So...maybe I'm a little sensitive, sometimes."
Your response seems based on anger when you personally cannot become good at certain Te skills even though you are sure of your desire and deservedness for them. It could also be anger directed toward yourself for not being able to acquire a certain desire fairly by yourself.
"I avoid videos from people I don't like (in order to...avoid negative feelings, frustration, I suppose). I sometimes wonder if I could even do things such as "liking" posts from communities I don't appreciate (TeamPB from 2021 speaking here: yeah, of course I could do that), even if I find their comments funny or watch a T.V show if it tells us about crimes that target minorities. As if I didn't want to feel bad or something. I don't know if this is a remnant of my edgy alt-right phase but I assume people would think this is ridiculous and I won't blame them for this. This also reminds me of this «fear»: responses people can give me. Maybe this is why I'm «intimidated» by some T forums on the website, for example (answers that won't please me, telling me I'm some feeler)."
This sounds like Fi avoiding feelings that aren't desired or committing actions that show inauthenticity of values. I also generally avoid video like these, but I do not immediately decide not to watch them. Instead, I watch them for a while and realize that they aren't going anywhere for me. Your fear of being told "real" answers is also likely Fi, as it conflicts with your values and identity to tell you that your values are not worth your effort.
"There are those cases where I wouldn't want to return to a job if I don't feel as «ready» as I was before. That job at a supermarket, for example (sent my CV 5 days ago, they don't seem to care), go to vote (after making a fool of myself) or to a store if I think sellers think I'm an ugly idiot (not giving a good first impression, what a shame). It's as if I had to be brave enough to do something. As if I'm confident about something Monday, but then Tuesday, when I'm supposed to do it again, I've lost my interest, motivation or «bravery»."
This seems like unbalanced Te. If you struggle to consistently balance your effect on systems in the world, you won't feel confident except when you are especially motivated.
"That's funny, people either think I have a good Ti (dom or aux)...or they just can't see it at all (and assume I'm Fi dom/aux). So that's why I'm think in any case, I'm just P. That gives me 8 possible combinations...but it's better than nothing."
I think you use Fi, but you occasionally use Ti logic to prove to yourself and others that you are able to handle yourself and that your opinions aren't nonsense.
"I read somewhere Fe is quite concerned with the social world around them, but don't know a lot about it and are, well, not really into emotions. I don't really know if I want to have friends and connect to other people. Deep down, even if I'm (in my opinion), an introverted person, I know I have to live with other people. Do I «crave» for it? That's the problem: I spend a lot of time alone and I can't even tell if I like it or not. Would I prefer it if I was more frequently surrounded by other people? Tough question. I could adapt to it, I suppose. They say Fe inferior is afraid to be seen as weird, awkward by other people, to be that «socially awkward guy who doesn't know how to interract with other people». I don't know if this is my fear, but I indeed, am not the most skilled person when it comes to social interractions: lack of eye contact (I will have to work on it, pretty hard when you assume people will think you're ugly and you would rather put a mask on your face for the rest of your life), bad conversationalist (I genuinely don't know what to talk about with other people. I'm not into sport, not into intellectual stuff..."
This seems like Fi being uncomfortable expressing their feelings in a fake way. Fe inferior usually manifests in ignorance or insecurity of social situations, not lack of ability to do things such as eye contact or talking about interests. I would ask whether you think you are insecure about your social presence or if you just feel that it's not natural for you to care about.
"I don't really know how to greet other people (when I take the time to greet them, that is: when I started my first job, I was quite shy and didn't really want to greet my coworkers, so one of them got upset and scolded me in front of everyone...there's also that one time I had to kiss a girl I know on the cheek but she told me I had a weird way to kiss people: I literally kiss people on the cheek. It's probably what makes sense to me, but I supposed you don't have to do that...then I read that you can actually kiss people ON the cheek...or just touch their cheek with yours and make a kiss noise. Two choices. And if you don't do them the «good way», some assertive people will lightly make fun of you. That's why I avoid people). I'm a pretty awkward lad. When I think about a lot of things I said, I can only smile and say ''thanks god, it's part of the past''. For example, that one time I told something to my crush (there's something that annoys me with this expression...maybe because I saw some people admit they didn't like this term) that was pretty crude or that one time I laughed at one of my shitty jokes so bad that some of my classmates laughed as well."
Once again, this seems more like Fi trying to navigate a foreign way to interpret feelings, rather than low Fe. low Fe manifests by worrying the user that they may come off in a way that they can't control and will have to abandon any efforts toward Fe. I think the way you described this situation was that you don't know how to act "normal" and how to express yourself without coming off as strange. While Fe has those insecurities, they are insecurities of stress. I think your insecurities when it comes to social behavior are more like insecurities of identity rather than inability. The other poster mentioned that it could be a sign of autism spectrum disorder, which would make sense.
"There's also this side of the descriptions that seem to make Fi users look quite irrational: even if everything seems to indicate that A = A or that you should do something you don't want to do, you will just blindly, impulsively «follow your heart» and disregard Te, even if it's «the thing to do». As far as I'm concerned, I'm able to recognize it when something is wrong (even if yes, I end up still «believing in it»), it's hard to refute some facts and reasonings. Now when it comes to what Fi is (about...75% about?) : morality, what I think is «right» and «wrong», it's true sometimes, I tend to think «this sucks, I could never do that», I don't know if I should see that as Fi. Let's say I tend to «judge actions», would I do something I judge wrong if it was a good thing for me, in the end? Stealing, cheating, lying, killing... If a high Fi user would say «I don't think so, it would make me feel horrible...» and a high Te user «definitely, as long as it helps me with my objectives», I think I'm leaning towards the high Fi side...godamnit, why would telling some lies even bother me, it's not like I kill or rape someone? And why do I make high Te users look like cold-blooded psychos who would break your legs and lend you to old vicious perverts who will rape you multiple times and let you starve to death in a cave, just for money?"
This sounds like Fi because it focuses on your personal morality and how you feel when you go against your values. Fe would be more focused on how others would feel if you went against their values or your perception of their possible values.
By the way, you don't sound very whiny to me. I think all of your explanations have a good expression of your feelings.
