[Dastan]

Every description of Fe illustrates it's relevances in social life, social behavior or morality and ethics. I want to know what the other interesting aspects of Fe-using people's behavior, thoughts, ideas, abilities and life in general are which do not directly depend on other people.


For example, how exactly works Fe when INFJs do creative activities?

Or how exactly Fe causes the stereotype judging-behavior (meeting deadlines, getting things done...) ?

 

[TaylorS]

when looking for a book online the Fe person will pay close attention to the reviews while the Fi person says "screw the reviewers, I think I will like it!"

 

[Owfin]

when looking for a book online the Fe person will pay close attention to the reviews while the Fi person says "screw the reviewers, I think I will like it!"

I read the reviews after the fact because I find them amusing, but since they don't influence my opinion on the book, the point still stands.

 

[Neon Knight]

I read the reviews after the fact because I find them amusing, but since they don't influence my opinion on the book, the point still stands.

Interesting, I've just recently started reviewing other's opinions on books before I get one, especially if it's going to be quite costly or it's something like more "serious business" kind of stuff like Jungian theory. I'm sure I'm still making the final decision myself. I do amuse myself reading comments on forums and Youtube as well looking for others' opinions on various things and comparing them to mine.

 

[SilentScream]

Well, since you asked INFJ's only , this particular Fe-dom will not answer your question

 

[shedreamt]

when looking for a book online the Fe person will pay close attention to the reviews while the Fi person says "screw the reviewers, I think I will like it!"

Not in my experience. I always rely on reviews and am hesitant to buy anything without reviews to reference! I'm kind of obsessed actually lol. It's so satifying to fantasize about what the product is like before I get it, using what people have said about it. It's sad because I have a stack of books I've accumulated based on how wonderful they sounded but I haven't had the patience to read any of them! Dang Ne.

 

[SilentScream]

when looking for a book online the Fe person will pay close attention to the reviews while the Fi person says "screw the reviewers, I think I will like it!"

Ummm. No. At least this is not true for me at all.

I've always generally liked books/movies that most people don't like therefore there's no way I'm letting someone else influence what I consume in terms of books and movies.

I let others influence other things --- but what's me time is extremely personal, and I don't give two hoots about what anyone else thinks about something that is a part of me time.

 

[TaylorS]

Not in my experience. I always rely on reviews and am hesitant to buy anything without reviews to reference! I'm kind of obsessed actually lol. It's so satifying to fantasize about what the product is like before I get it, using what people have said about it. It's sad because I have a stack of books I've accumulated based on how wonderful they sounded but I haven't had the patience to read any of them! Dang Ne.

Well that's because according to Jung you are Ne-Fe, not Ne-Fi. :wink:

 

[LiquidLight]

Well that's because according to Jung you are Ne-Fe, not Ne-Fi. :wink:

lol whole different discussion.

That being said its pretty much impossible to separate out the people related aspects of Extraverted Feeling because by nature Feeling is a people-related function and also because it is objective (meaning the thought processes are externally motivated). So, by definition Extraverted Feeling is evaluation based upon an objective standard. Essentially something is good or bad because that is what everyone (or the group of people most influential to you) has agreed upon. The key here is that the evaluation is always at surface measure, without interjecting anything from within onto it. To the Fe-type the Lamborghini is a nice car because everyone has said its a nice car for decades and who am I to say anything otherwise? In fact a Fe-type might find it odd, or maybe egocentric or selfish for someone to disagree and say Lamborghini's are ugly (even if its that person's honest opinion).

With extraverted functions the self is always downplayed in favor of the objective. This is true of Extraverted Sensation where the object is just perceived at surface value, and also Extraverted Thinking where accepted and agreed upon concept is taken as having more weight over the philosophical musings of an individual. To the Te-type, if this is what has been agreed upon as proper methodology or fact, then it doesn't matter your own ideas.

 

[Mizmar]

I've always generally liked books/movies that most people don't like therefore there's no way I'm letting someone else influence what I consume in terms of books and movies.

I let others influence other things --- but what's me time is extremely personal, and I don't give two hoots about what anyone else thinks about something that is a part of me time.

Do you feel your me time is influenced by your introverted functions?

To the Fe-type the Lamborghini is a nice car because everyone has said its a nice car for decades and who am I to say anything otherwise?

That type of thinking seems so foreign to me. I know people who think that way exist because I've known plenty of them; but their values have never made sense to me. I just can't imagine that something might look or sound good just because a bunch of other people say it does.

Do you, as a Fe-auxiliary type, actually feel something looks nice just because it's externally agreed upon that it does?

In fact a Fe-type might find it odd, or maybe egocentric or selfish for someone to disagree and say Lamborghini's are ugly (even if its that person's honest opinion).

That's totally amazing!!!

All of these recent Fi vs. Fe threads have been quite a revelation to me. Well, I've always said all cars look the same to me. I wonder how many Fe-types I've offended with that attitude.

 

[LiquidLight]

Do you feel your me time is influenced by your introverted functions?

That type of thinking seems so foreign to me. I know people who think that way exist because I've known plenty of them; but their values have never made sense to me. I just can't imagine that something might look or sound good just because a bunch of other people say it does.

Do you, as a Fe-auxiliary type, actually feel something looks nice just because it's externally agreed upon that it does?

That's totally amazing!!!

All of these recent Fi vs. Fe threads have been quite a revelation to me. Well, I've always said all cars look the same to me. I wonder how many Fe-types I've offended with that attitude.

Well the thing is most Fe-types dont recognize that "everyone agrees." Because evaluation often means something very personal to people, most people will say no these are my values. Think of the person who is say vehemently anti-abortion. Now that is, in effect, a very Fe-value often as it is portrayed (downplay of the individual over the moral ideals of the group), but if you challenge the person they may initially strike back and say "these are MY values," and then maybe realize "actually these are my church's or family's values" or whatever. But for most Fe-types this is something of an epiphany.

It's also not an issue for them. Really only the Fi-types see it as superficial. To a Extraverted Feeling type the evaluative expression is very honest. The play Fiddler on the Roof is a wonderful example of Fe vs Fi dynamic. They live in a very Fe town where everyone is expected to appeal to this objective ritual and the Fi daughters refuse to go along which creates tension because the Fe-types just cannot figure why the Fi-types would think differently. "What's wrong with you?" they might ask. "Why do you have to see the Lamborghini as ugly?" These are often the complaints of Fe-types who can't wrap their head around the idea of personal evaluation. To them all evaluation is objective.

Also this has nothing to do with where Fe is at in your function stack. Extraverted Feeling is Extraverted Feeling. ISTPs and INTPs with Inferior Feeling have the same sentiments (sometimes its really exaggerated in them, because they often do not posses the ability to filter their evaluations or evaluate properly so you get these hot/cold spells with them). My Ti-dom brother lacks for social graces but is very, deeply upset if a holiday or birthday or some other ritual is missed (he flipped out one year we didn't get a Christmas tree, to him Christmas was ruined). Now a dominant Fe-type might have a more nuanced view of this, but you can see how Inferior Fe in a Ti-dom might manifest as these black/white paradigms.

That being said the Feeling function is the one odd man out, because it touches all the other functions as well. Since the complexes are feeling-toned responses and ideas (for example an Inferiority complex is a serious of negative emotionally charged ideas about yourself) then the Feeling function will also play a role in evaluating those ideals. So in that way the Feeling function is something of a super function of sorts because of its duty of rationalizing emotional content, and emotional content might not necessarily always be egocentric. So as James Hillman writes, in practice, we actually do both Introverting and Extraverting of Feeling, its just that for the Fi-type the times of Extraversion will be very scarce. The Fe-type on the other hand has to be able to jump between their own inner emotional responses and how to properly evaluate them AND judge them against external standard, so you really have sort of a weird dynamic going on there. This can lead to a bit of a sense of inauthenticity among Fe-types where they can be on autopilot going through the motions of Feeling ritual, but whose own inner evaluations on a matter might be very different (but of course they will be downplayed). It is not uncommon to hear a Fe-type complain about not being able to be "themselves," even though they might not be able to tell you what "themselves" was in any concrete fashion.

 

[SilentScream]

It is not uncommon to hear a Fe-type complain about not being able to be "themselves," even though they might not be able to tell you what "themselves" was in any concrete fashion.

It's an automatic pull ok. However, I noticed that some of the things you wrote seemed more from a FeSi standpoint rather than the FeNi standpoint.

I feel that for me Ni is about interpretation based on unknown factors - and developing reasoning based on deviation from the expected 'norm' because of seemingly unrelated, but still related factors that result in answers that come from asking the "hard" questions.

For me, the "whys" and "why nots" are much more important than simply accepting something just because I feel inclined to accepting it, or because I'm expected to accept something just because it's supposedly a global standard. I rarely see global values as holistic, and therefore challenge them, but in a way where it's based on inclusion, rather than exclusion --- and it allows me to break away from the forced imposition of Fe-based judgements. I have an extremely hard time reasoning with FeSi where the conflict is usually with respect to how I've interpreted the same values and injunctions as an FeSi user would.

If an FeSi user says "abortion is wrong for society as a whole" ... my view is "but imposing your values on the group that would need abortion to continue to exist freely is also wrong" and therefore I accept that in some cases abortion could be wrong, and in some cases abortion could be right.

Therefore there's a clash of values with regards to putting the needs of two different groups at the forefront. The minority is also a group and since it's usually neglected/oppressed by the majority, I try to interpret rules and systems, and seek change in those systems in order to facilitate and assist the co-existence of both groups together.

As for my own values ... I don't really care - as long as I'm consistent in living my life based on my values. Being flexible is more important to me than being stringent, because by being flexible, I'm able to be more inclusive of a wider base of opinions and expectations - and that in itself is a very FeNi based judgement.

 

[Worriedfunction]

Is it possible that the view that Fe users conform to a standard set by any group could be more to do with a Fi view of Fe?

Of course it could just as easily be to do with misunderstandings of the theory and what ive just said is merely me connecting dots where there are none.

 

[SilentScream]

Is it possible that the view that Fe users conform to a standard set by any group could be more to do with a Fi view of Fe?

Of course it could just as easily be to do with misunderstandings of the theory and what ive just said is merely me connecting dots where there are none.

Speaking of connect the dots ... I'm sorry, I may not be answering your question directly - but in my typical roundabout way addressing a potential issue surrounding the view of Fe as a whole.

I think a lot, and I mean a lot of information out there about Fe is actually based on analysis and experience with Fe-Si-Ne, rather than Fe-Ni-Se - which could very simply be due to the lack of FeNi individuals in society as a whole.

It's no secret that there is a huge difference in population when it comes to FeSi versus FeNi [I think 5-12% versus 1-5% - on the lower end when it comes to FeNi males] and therefore gives more weightage to the idea that "Fe" is about setting holistic standards and sticking to stringent values.

When I think ENFJ - and deviating from the norm, I always think of Martin Luther King [and now Oprah Winfrey] - who managed to help evolve their society's standards by bringing in the values and ideals of one group to become included and accepted within the larger group.

 

[Donovan]

what @Jaws said.

for me, i may be very aware of the atmosphere and what others expect/like/think, but that doesn't mean that i myself embody it. i will downplay "what's inside" (as Liquid said), because again, for me, Fe is about an external balance which leads to an internal balance.

as far as Fe without direct human contact? well, having an aux Fe i feel that i have a pretty good handle on other people, so in a way, i can use the perspective that Fe has given/built within me all my life in my musings and contemplation--not to mention that when writing a paper or trying to figure something out i'll have an "argument" with myself in order to flush out other points, almost as if i take one side and then i also take the other. i feel i should say that this occurs in a non-crazy way. i'm not literally fighting with myself, more just proposing a question and then wondering how another would most likely attack that point of view, and then from there, i fill in those holes and start back over--kind of like engaging my Ti through an adopted Fe-mindset.

 

[Donovan]

another point of Fe that i have contention with is the thought that we're all sheep... lol.

i most likely don't have an opinion on a majority of things, as in, if i were to argue one point, i'd still be in the wrong because the core of the problem isn't being addressed or even noticed. in which case, having a strong opinion for either side is almost ignorant or childish in my opinion. it'd be easier to address the way in which both sides are wrong, and then from there go about tying that into the core of the problem, and then dealing with it--everything else is just some sort of ego-cultural based "I'M RIGHT!" argument--pointless.

and this makes me think of plenty of times when i've gone "against the grade" because i could see how everyone else was being selfish, yet they all believed the black-sheep they'd singled out was to blame. there was their perspective, and the scape-goat's--after asking "why's" and what not they finally made some half-argument that was then easily taken apart, and all that had to be done was to actually be honest in the first place--and it turns out most were just taking out their anger which had nothing to do with the actions of the accused.

it's almost as if everyone's reality is mixed with their own selfishness (mine included), and then with a part that could be made to work right along side another's. as if floating above everyone's perspective is another track that could easily hold the parts of people that matter and function as a whole while still attaining individuality/autonomy--to me, that's the ideal of Fe.

 

[JungyesMBTIno]

It seems to me that Fe, like Te, is more about not personalizing feeling or thinking data at most. I mean, since the functions play a personal role by just being compatible with the users' egos, it's not possible to think that they aren't going to have the positive emotional value of their association with the ego coloring their presence to make it feel personal just with respect to the users' lives. But, since they appeal to an external standard, their feeling experiences or thought experiences are going to be rationalized with reference to this standard. For instance, I've noticed that Fe types tend to be stubborn around feeling experiences (at least from my perspective as an Fi type) and seem to have more control over what they allow themselves to feel, based on external standards. Like, if I'm watching a movie with my INTP twin and ISFJ mom, which is a very common occurrance, if a scene is sad, for instance, they seem to have this way of formulating the appropriate reaction to it based on whatever standards they have (which are meaningful just as standards to them, I guess), while I can't really do that much - it has to be personalized in some way for me to care, usually by being relatable to personal feelings about the issue or whatever. Like, we all certainly can experience the same emotional reactions to something, but the way that the origin of these is rationalized is different. For me, it tends to take a ton of relating myself to the situation via predicting how I would feel in such a situation to evaluate it, or just relating feelings around whatever I'm watching, based on how it shaped my life (or just the idea of watching it will shape my life, based on other variables that shaped my life, opinions, etc.) to evaluate it, while for the Fe types, they don't seem to have to do that much at all, since they have some objective standard cultivated around evaluation. It seems to be this more direct and expected form of evaluation.

 

[Aelthwyn]

To the Fe-type the Lamborghini is a nice car because everyone has said its a nice car for decades and who am I to say anything otherwise? In fact a Fe-type might find it odd, or maybe egocentric or selfish for someone to disagree and say Lamborghini's are ugly (even if its that person's honest opinion).

That type of thinking seems so foreign to me. I know people who think that way exist because I've known plenty of them; but their values have never made sense to me. I just can't imagine that something might look or sound good just because a bunch of other people say it does.

Just a thought on how this might work: It seems like Fe is primarily focusing on harmonizing with the group. Being consistant with others creates a sense of connection and certainty of acceptance and where you fit in society, and this state is valued so highly it comes before any other values are determined, essentially overriding individual differences. I think it informs/determines one's oppinions before you even consider holding a different one - like more of a subconscious thing.

I'm no expert here, but I think Fi constantly runs things from the outside world through it's own personal/subjective filter - focusing on personal inner consistancy (is this really me?), while Fe runs things from inside through the outside filter of friends/family/society focusing on outer consistancy. I think for Fe it's very satisfying to know the oppinions you hold are upheld by others - thereby connecting you to that group and affirming your communal identity - it's not just you, you're part of something bigger. It values the authority of tradition or widely held support of one kind or another and wants to know it has outside back-up - or perhaps it's even the other way around, as it values the sense of communal harmony it seeks to add it's own self as additional back up to the group - it rallies to the banner. In contrast I think Fi finds it very satisfying to uphold an oppinion it believes is unique to itself, which came from nowhere but itself - thereby reinforcing it's individual identity and independence. In fact Fi might be uneasy holding an oppinion that is commonly agreed with untill it has checked and re-checked with itself that it is not in fact being influenced by this coincidence of popularity because somehow it seems less 'real' or 'genuine' to like something after everyone else liked it.

Because Fe values the harmony of the group, it may see deviation from common ways and thoughts as a disrespectfull attack on the group - you're not playing by the rules, you're trying to break up the peace. Because Fi values individuality, it may see conformity as the loss of one's own vitality and identity (Fi wants everyone to be unique, in essence - no trends, no majority). For Fi an oppinion only has meaning if it came from within, for Fe I think it can only be trusted, or at least has more meaning, if it creates a connection with others.

Does that make sense? Does it sound right?

 

[LiquidLight]

Just a thought on how this might work: It seems like Fe is primarily focusing on harmonizing with the group. Being consistant with others creates a sense of connection and certainty of acceptance and where you fit in society, and this state is valued so highly it comes before any other values are determined, essentially overriding individual differences. I think it informs/determines one's oppinions before you even consider holding a different one.

I'm no expert here, but I think Fi constantly runs things from the outside world through it's own personal/subjective filter - focusing on personal inner consistancy (is this really me?), while Fe runs things from inside through the outside filter of friends/family/society focusing on outer consistancy. I think for Fe it's very satisfying to know the oppinions you hold are upheld by others - thereby connecting you to that group and affirming your communal identity - it's not just you, you're part of something bigger. It values the authority of tradition or widely held support of one kind or another and wants to know it has outside back-up - or perhaps it's even the other way around, as it values the sense of communal harmony it seeks to add it's own self as additional back up to the group - it rallies to the banner. In contrast I think Fi finds it very satisfying to uphold an oppinion it believes is unique to itself, which came from nowhere but itself - thereby reinforcing it's individual identity and independence. In fact Fi might be uneasy holding an oppinion that is commonly agreed with untill it has checked and re-checked with itself that it is not in fact being influenced by this coincidence of popularity because somehow it seems less 'real' or 'genuine' to like something after everyone else liked it.

Because Fe values the harmony of the group, it may see deviation from common ways and thoughts as a disrespectfull attack on the group - you're not playing by the rules, you're trying to break up the peace. Because Fi values individuality, it may see conformity as the loss of one's own vitality and identity (Fi wants everyone to be unique, in essence - no trends, no majority). For Fi an oppinion only has meaning if it came from within, for Fe I think it can only be trusted, or at least has more meaning, if it creates a connection with others.

Does that make sense? Does it sound right?

These are sort of the MBTI definitions of Fi and Fe yes. But we shouldn't take this too far. Because Fi and Fe are really about evaluation and only that. Group harmony, or individualism and the like, are really constructs of other things (probably persona and ego complex, etc) that may not have to do with Fi or Fe. At the end of the day we are simply talking about external/objective vs. internal/subjective evaluations. Extraverted Feeling evaluations are measured at surface value without interjecting anything from within onto that evaluation, just like Extraverted Sensation perceives an objective without interjecting anything subjective into that perception. It is what it is. Whether or not that translates into group harmony, or group think and fitting in and the like, again, has more to do with other things (because certainly not all Fe-types are compelled to these things, but rather they are often manifestations of how Extraverted Feeling might show itself in real life). But again what MBTI does is they start with people's behaviors and then work backwards to try to make a function work (the person aspires for group harmony therefore they must be a Fe-type) but you can see how this is fraught with problems because we don't know definitively that the person's desire for group harmony or individuality is psychologically rooted in Fe or Fi. Perhaps they were just brought up in such an environment. Jung, in Psychological Types, on the other hand starts with the psychology and then gives examples of how this might look in real life (where he talks about the woman who marries the man who is the right man for family, status, etc., and not necessarily the man she would pick otherwise).

 

[JungyesMBTIno]

For further food for thought on Te and Fe (so, Je), here's the ultimate representation of how Te manifests for me (so, analogies can be drawn between this and Fe, since I'm definitely not qualified to be a spokesperson for Fe, haha).

With Te, I often find myself thinking "Will this person understand what logical point I'm trying to make if I don't connect the dots for them?" I'm inclined to draw connections of a logical nature blatantly between various elements in my communication and actively engage in tweaking another person's logic so we can arrive at a similar point of understanding - my motivations, of course, are largely subconscious in the process - it's not like I'm consciously thinking that "I need to formulate my statement in a way will make me more universally understood" - this is just the way that the Te cognitive function manifests, although for me, it's the agent of Ni, so it's to help other's "get" where I'm coming from and my subjective thought-processes and their potential for validity. Also, about Te types appealing to authorities, this probably has to do with how Te is about logically "spelling it out" for people, so they'll point to outside sources as an additional way to help people get on board with their reasoning. Te doesn't have to do this (I know I don't much), but it's goals could depend on this, particularly if the Te type is struggling to convey their subjective impression-based understanding of something from their Si or Ni, depending on the TJ type (since the Pi functions either lead or support Te and are predominate in the reasoning of these types). I think this is why Te dominants are stereotyped as "arrogant" - due to how they tend to approach helping people learn by spelling everything out for them logically, although they are actually much more fair in how they apply Te than Te inferior types, who tend to be dogmatic with it. (so, a bulk of the EXTJ "arrogant" stereotypes come from inferior Te projections, since when they resort to heavy-duty Te, it's as a form of self defense against their personal values being violated, so they'll probably project how "underestimating everyone else's logic for violating their own values in some way" is arrogant (it can be selfish), and under the assumption that Te doms operate the same way, the projection will be on them, that that's their motivation, when it isn't normally). In me, Te comes across as me lecturing like a college professor, LOL (this is what my dad always says - "There she goes, giving another lecture." - he's an ISTJ btw.)