Personality Cafe banner

1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
...This post? (I'm pretty sure that's Fi and not Fe talking there, despite all the mentions of "community" and whatnot.)

IMO, the main thing of note is how disorganized and sometimes just plain disconnected the points are:
abridged series introducing casual fans -> fan culture -> casual fans' misunderstanding of fan culture -> fandom figureheads -> fandom maturing/stabilizing -> abridged series' treatment of characters and casuals' misunderstanding -> demise of fandom -> good old days of fandom -> fandom changes -> new fans -> abridged series and gossip blog's effect on new fans -> the future of the fandom and what to do
(The biggest overall disconnect appears to be between the points about the abridged series and the points about the gossip blog that apparently incited the post.)

I can't tell if this disjointedness results from Ne throwing out various interpretations about each individual thing the ranter dislikes, unconcerned with finding a single unifying interpretation, or from Ni without T-support failing to logically organize the steps leading up to whatever single interpretation Ni generated (maybe "abridged series -> casuals -> gossip blog -> fandom decline" ?).

The last long paragraph also appears to contain a healthy dose of Si, although it's the only place in the entire post that I really see Si.

Can't see much if any Se, but maybe someone better versed in Se could argue otherwise?

At any rate, I'd like to have as many opinions as possible on which perceiving function appears to be most predominantly partnered with Fi in the blog post.

Please and thanks. <3
 

·
MOTM August 2012
Joined
·
3,467 Posts
You know you could make a very good case for this being Inferior Fe. It's all over the map and heavily Feeling infused. It might seem like Fi because it is highly egocentric, but the entire post is also oriented outwardly. We'd really have to infer Fi intuitively, really reading between the lines here. But if we take his words at face value, it just sounds like rambling Fe complaining (we had our little group and now these other people came in and now our group isn't the same anymore..blah blah blah). Also his solutions (let's come up with a way for both of us to get along) might be more Fe as well. The key here is that his argument is oriented to the outer and not to the self, even if his thoughts are presented very egocentrically. But it lacks the nuance that I think a stronger Feeling type would have. To me this sounds like some INTP fanboy complaining.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Discussion Starter #3 (Edited)
@LiquidLight: Really not seeing the argument for Fe, inferior or otherwise.

Firstly, "let's come up with a way for both of us to get along" isn't part of the rant at all, if by "both" you mean "casual fans and fandom." The whole rant from beginning to end never wavered from "I want the casual fans, who are incapable of espousing my True and Pure Values, out." I'm guessing you drew the reconciliation conclusion when you read the line "provide a positive community of fans for both veterans and newbies" and assumed that "veterans" meant "fandom"-people like the writer and "newbies" meant those "casual fans" who only liked/knew the abridged series and whom the writer had been bashing and distancing himself from in all those previous paragraphs. However, the writer never stopped bashing or isolating the "casual fans"; he considers "casual fans" and "fandom" mutually exclusive (see the first long paragraph), and believes that those he terms "newbies" in his last long paragraph are capable of becoming part of the latter precisely because he doesn't think they're already part of the former.

Meanwhile, the fact that he also considers himself part of the "fandom" group and is apparently trying to speak for them will seem like Fe only if you ignore all the preceding paragraphs indicating that he's not choosing sides because he wants an external source from which to draw his personal values, but rather because he thinks he's defending the purity of his self-determined personal values regarding character and fan culture, values that just happen to be shared by those on the side he's taken.

Take the following, for example:
In fandom, there are character idealizations, stereotypes, and interpretations. This is something unavoidable, and perhaps even necessary for fandom humour to work. A lot of fanfictions, etc. play off of those very simplifications. But we, as members of fandom also know that there are many different versions of these stereotypical interpretations, and that they are just exaggerated FACETS of the character. You know this when you actually watch the series, and understand the character as a whole. The humour comes from this part of the person being exaggerated. However, the people who watch(ed) the abridged series without that knowledge believe that this is just a humourous interpretation of what the characters ARE, which is simply untrue.
Notice the reasoning here: it's not Fe-type "understanding characters as a whole is right because my in-group does it and the other group doesn't," and attempting to claim that this is his reasoning would be confusing cause for effect. The actual reasoning is Fi-type "I count myself among the people who understand characters as a whole and not among the people who don't, because understanding characters as a whole is right and all other understandings are wrong." The writer's personal values determined his group choice; not vice versa. If we're to take his words at face value as you suggest, then we have to admit that nowhere does he indicate or even hint at any objective external sources that might've imbued the concept of "understanding the character as a whole" with value for him.

If you really stretched it, you could point to the part where he says
my home fandom. The first fandom I really felt a part of, and felt like I had a family with, if only online
and try to claim that's an indicator that he gets his values from fandom, but there's no indication that this feeling of belonging preceded his decision to value "understanding the character as a whole" like the rest of fandom did, and even if the belonging did precede the valuation, it'd be erroneous to assume that this means the belonging caused the valuation. The bottom line is that the writer simply indicates he values this concept, and unless we extrapolate far beyond what he's written, we can only conclude that he arrived at this valuation on his own, subjectively, with no external value source (unless perhaps you count the series itself as an external value source, but 1) this does not further the argument that his Fe is directed at the fandom, and 2) you'd have to ask what made him value the series enough to use it as his external source, and we'd be back to Fi).

The part where he rants about memes and shared fan culture starts off sounding very Fe, but whereas Fe has no problem with not being the source of its own values (and inferior Fe doesn't even like admitting it has its own values, let alone claiming itself as a source of those values), the writer clearly has a problem with not being at least partly the source of his own values:
And what kills me is that a lot of the jokes (at least when I still followed the series) were pulled directly from the fandom, and those are fandom jokes.
As the writer considers himself part of fandom, he must believe he had a hand in creating the memes and culture that he values. So when he's upset over people failing to give fandom due credit for being the origin of these memes he values, he's also being upset over people failing to acknowledge his part in generating his own values - this is not something Fe would ever care about, especially not inferior Fe. All Fe cares about is that these values are found somewhere in the external environment.

Also note that he never makes any explicit connection between his Fe-sounding reason for valuing the memes (i.e. they were commonalities that unified the fandom) and his claim that it's bad for one person to be mistaken as the sole originator of said memes; in fact, it would take a lot of reading between the lines to assume he even drew an implicit connection. Had his rant been Fe-based, there's no way he could've avoided making such a connection; he would've had to argue that this misattribution somehow caused the memes to lose their unifying power, flying in the face of everything Fe holds dear. Keeping to his actual text, we see that not only does he avoid claiming that the source misattribution caused the memes to lose their unifying power, but that he actually laments how the misattribution amplified the memes' unifying power to the point where the memes have since unified those who (according to him) know the true meanings/purposes/origins of the memes with those who (according to him) don't - and it's this last thing he takes greatest issue with:
Our memes were our qualifiers, and what kept our culture just that — our fan culture — not something for everyone. And every single fandom has this. It’s not “mean” it’s not “excluding;” it’s how we tell fans in the community apart from those who aren’t. It’s what seperates a fan from a member of fandom: a community of shared memes.
And his issue strikes me as very anti-Fe, because as far as Fe is concerned, the more widespread a value is, the more objective it is, and the more justified one is in adopting it. The writer, on the other hand, valued the memes precisely because he believed they were incapable of becoming widespread values. In fact, his attempt to claim that the abridged series' versions of the memes (which he acknowledges as the more accessible and therefore more widespread versions) are somehow inferior to the memes' original versions (which are the versions that he believes only he and other "true fandom fans" really understand/appreciate) reeks of defensive Fi "I know what truly matters even when other people don't."

(As an aside, those Fe-sounding reasons he gives for valuing the shared fan culture/memes may actually be Fi justifying Pe's behavior. Note how very Pe the underlined words are:
we could all tell that we knew we had seen/read the series, interpreted it [...] or simply had the same experience of interpreting the media
Seeing, reading, interpreting, experiencing are all acts of perception, and the shared quality implies that these perceptive acts take place in a reality external to any given individual.)

I'd also like to point out that although "community" seems like an Fe buzzword, it can be turned into an abstract concept that then becomes an Fi value in and of itself - which is exactly what the writer has done, especially when you take what he's said above in conjunction with this:
by its very nature has always had prevalent themes about friendship and unity. Its stories are about triumph after long struggles, a hand in the dark at the last minute, earning your happy ending
Where is our friendship and unity, our quality and our substance?
Again, he's treating "friendship" and "unity" (as well as the other thematic concepts he listed) as abstractions with intrinsic value ("quality," "substance") independent of any ties to actual external entities - in fact he accuses the only relevant external entities, i.e. fandom, of failing to value these abstractions, an accusation he couldn't make if he believed said abstraction had no inherent, fandom-independent value. For his own part, he simply indicates that he values these concepts, and without excessive extrapolation, we can only surmise that he arrived at such valuation on his own, independent of the group that he counts himself among, since he gives no indication that they influenced his values. It is therefore reasonable to assume that he counts himself among that group because their values happen to coincide with his (Fi), not because he intentionally made his coincide with theirs in order to join them (Fe).

To be fair, I do recognize that the writer's apparent need to impose his personal values - self-generated though they may be - onto those around him also seems very Fe, but I think a better explanation for this behavior that doesn't clash with his apparently Fi value espousal is that he's a Pe-dom, and the Pe-Fi axis mimics Fe as Pe's constant interaction with the world is modified by Fi's judgment (this also fits with what I said earlier about the Fe-sounding valuation of shared fan culture/memes possibly actually being Pe encouraged by Fi). This line, for instance:
I thought this fandom would drown in stupid, not burn up in flames of malice and ego.
really doesn't sound like Fe's "give me my community at all costs"; it sounds more like he had resigned himself to the demise of the community, and was only interested in stopping said demise once he realized it was heading in a direction grossly against his Fi.

Granted, he does also say:
No matter how I see the decline of the fandom, I do wish that there was a way to turn it all around, and we could all be where we once were.
But it's telling that in the very next sentence he contradicts himself:
The platform of fandom will always change, as will the times. [...] there’s no way I can expect the fandom to be stagnant for that long, and never change.
So that the little segment of hearkening back to the good old days sounds more like a random burst of Si nostalgia than a genuine attempt at Fe regulation.

The final arguably Fe-sounding bit in the entire rant is:
And isn’t that what we should be providing for our fellow fans? What’s the point of watering down content, or creating a hostile environment? What does that do for our community, and the people in it?
But if I recall correctly, most Fi's are all about helping their fellows as long as they don't have to compromise their personal values to do so, and that's exactly what's going on here; his Fi has taken an us-versus-them stance, and has focused its prosocial values on the "us" while happily condemning and rejecting the "them" that it thinks would never understand or care about said values. This isn't to say Fe never takes an us-versus-them stance, but even when it does, it usually tries to convert the "them," because again, the more widespread the value, the more objective it is, and the more justified Fe feels about holding that value. The writer, on the other hand, makes no attempt at reconciling with or converting the "them" of casual abridged-series-only fans, and only wants to toss "them" aside in the hopes of preserving the "us" so that he can be part of a community that won't try to force him to stray from his Fi (incidentally, this makes a good case for him having non-dominant Fi).

The rant taken as a whole seems to reveal the following Fi rationale:
Fi values this series -> this series emphasizes prosocial values -> Fi espouses these values as well to avoid hypocrisy -> Fi realizes that in order to really avoid hypocrisy it also needs to walk the walk in addition to talking the talk, so it expresses its prosocial values as external behaviors, but only to the extent that it doesn't sacrifice its other values
(Alternatively: Fi holds prosocial values -> this series emphasizes prosocial values -> Fi values this series -> Fi realizes that in order to avoid hypocrisy it needs to walk the walk in addition to talking the talk, so it expresses its prosocial values as external behaviors, but only to the extent that it doesn't sacrifice its other values)

Assuming we are dealing with a Pe-Fi axis mimicking Fe, that brings me back to the fact that I'm still not sure what the P in that Pe is. Or was the suggestion of INTP as opposed to ISTP an indication that you think it's N? N is the obvious answer since the whole rant is full of abstract concepts, but as the Sensors on this forum have made clear, abstract concepts and the ability to work with them are hardly the exclusive realm of iNtuitives.
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
Top