Do people who use Fe a lot have a harder time taking ownership of their own feelings?

My mom's an ENFJ and one of the big differences between the two of us is that when we get into fights, I fight to be understood whereas she fights to make me realize that I made her feel bad.

Its almost like she reduces every fight to "whoever's feelings are hurt the most is right and the other person is wrong". This baffles me, because I feel like both of our feelings are hurt equally because we're both misunderstanding eachother.



Anyways, I'm wondering if this is possibly an Fe thing, that as an Fi person I don't really get.

I think the integrity of others feelings is very important for Fe users. Basically, if we have made someone feel bad we can kind of feel like we have failed, to us equilibrium is essential for harmony and integration and therefore understanding. We are so sensitive its best sometimes to just stop and wait for the "noise" to calm down, its not that the other person is right it is that the balance has been broken. This balance is quite robust and can accommodate heated debates, its just about balance and harmony. This is why we don't like conflict and some of us can be very conflict averse.

Hmm. Thats interesting.

I don't want people's feelings to be hurt, but I'm not focused on keeping everyone feeling happy. I focus on doing happy things for/with people. I can't make anyone feel happy. All I can do, is try and provide a nice environment and do nice things for them.

But when we get into a fight, its because I want to resolve an issue, not because I want to see who's feelings were hurt the worst.

Also, when I feel like I did something wrong, I will be the first to admit it and the first to apologize. But when I don't think I did anything wrong, its hard for me to say "i'm sorry".

As a T I definitely fight to be understood, whereas my INFJ sister seems to want to let me know the effect I have on others.

I don't think it is exclusively Fe types who do that. When I am in a conflict, I feel a desperate need to communicate how bad the other person is making me feel as a way of keeping the person from continuing to do it. It is a way of setting boundaries, and has nothing to do with "ownership," because despite what it is popular to think about feelings, this idea that only we are responsible for choosing to feel is a cop-out used by people who want free licence to harm others without having to worry about the consequences of their words and actions. It bothers me that people who believe as I do about it are seen as psychologically unstable the moment we acknowledge that people affect us, and that we do influence each other emotionally. Unless we are open about such effects, others will have no way of knowing how to avoid harming us. It is absolutely necessary to do this, as a primary defense against being violated. When we are treated as though we are the ones being foolish and irresponsible for having feelings and for being affected, we are left defenseless with no way to protect ourselves. One of the most destructive lies ever spread is this idea that "Nobody can make you feel anything you don't choose to." Maybe it is true for certain kinds of people, but I know for a fact that it is not true for everyone. It isn't true for me. When others say it, they hurt me by doing so. Yes, THEY hurt me. I don't hurt myself. ...just as when someone hits you in the head with a hammer, the other person hurts you, even if your nerves are what experience the sensation of the pain.

I am certainly Fi-dominant, and being understood is important. For me, though, being understood means having the other person empathize with my feelings and understand why I am feeling them. That is often more important to me than the ideas themselves, which are usually only important to me because of their emotional impact.

That's interesting. I am constantly in the same situation as you described but I assumed it was more of an F/T thing. In my last serious conflict he(INFJ) was expressing again and again the ways he misinterpreted my words to be insults/sociopathic/etc. as a way of explaining how they hurt, and I was explaining how they were not intended that way at all (and trying to get specifics on what exactly it was so I could avoid doing it again). About a week later he caught on to the fact that he had been seriously insulting me during that whole discussion...I never thought it was that relevant to tell him that; instead I just wanted him to understand why I had said what I did and how little harm I meant.

One thing he said though, was that the intention didn't make much of a difference; rather the effect does. That in particular seems more Fe to me - I think Fi will perhaps value the intention more? although Fs with Fi may be more prone to assuming bad intent in Ts and then I get in that situation with them too....sigh. I wonder if Fi-users who feel more sure the other is well-meant intent will focus less on the game of who hurt whom more. Knowing good intent may not dissipate the hurt quite so thoroughly as it does for me, but maybe it is more effective for Fi-users.

Originally Posted by snail

I don't think it is exclusively Fe types who do that. When I am in a conflict, I feel a desperate need to communicate how bad the other person is making me feel as a way of keeping the person from continuing to do it. It is a way of setting boundaries, and has nothing to do with "ownership," because despite what it is popular to think about feelings, this idea that only we are responsible for choosing to feel is a cop-out used by people who want free licence to harm others without having to worry about the consequences of their words and actions. It bothers me that people who believe as I do about it are seen as psychologically unstable the moment we acknowledge that people affect us, and that we do influence each other emotionally. Unless we are open about such effects, others will have no way of knowing how to avoid harming us. It is absolutely necessary to do this, as a primary defense against being violated. When we are treated as though we are the ones being foolish and irresponsible for having feelings and for being affected, we are left defenseless with no way to protect ourselves. One of the most destructive lies ever spread is this idea that "Nobody can make you feel anything you don't choose to." Maybe it is true for certain kinds of people, but I know for a fact that it is not true for everyone. It isn't true for me. When others say it, they hurt me by doing so. Yes, THEY hurt me. I don't hurt myself. ...just as when someone hits you in the head with a hammer, the other person hurts you, even if your nerves are what experience the sensation of the pain.

I am certainly Fi-dominant, and being understood is important. For me, though, being understood means having the other person empathize with my feelings and understand why I am feeling them. That is often more important to me than the ideas themselves, which are usually only important to me because of their emotional impact.

I agree with some of this. I mean, if a person is saying awful things to you then, yes, they are making you feel bad. I don't think anyone has psychological problems for getting their feelings hurt. That would be a ridiculous mindset to have.

What I'm saying is that a lot of the time, both people feel bad, and therefore the real discussion should be about the misunderstanding/miscommunication, not how bad they made eachother feel. My bad feelings drastically decrease once I realize the other person understands why I'm upset, whereas some people just need to hear an apology (as an acknowledgement that you did infact hurt their feelings). Its hard to explain. I hope I'm making some kind of sense...

Originally Posted by ISFPeaceOut

My mom's an ENFJ and one of the big differences between the two of us is that when we get into fights, I fight to be understood whereas she fights to make me realize that I made her feel bad.

Its almost like she reduces every fight to "whoever's feelings are hurt the most is right and the other person is wrong". This baffles me, because I feel like both of our feelings are hurt equally because we're both misunderstanding eachother.

Anyways, I'm wondering if this is possibly an Fe thing, that as an Fi person I don't really get.

Actually you kinda sound like a T approach-- fighting to be understood.

I do know someone that I strongly suspect is ISFP who always fights to show whoever has the most hurt feelings (which is always her)

This is all very confusing how Fi works vs Fe when it comes to this stuff

Originally Posted by lirulin

One thing he said though, was that the intention didn't make much of a difference; rather the effect does. That in particular seems more Fe to me - I think Fi will perhaps value the intention more? although Fs with Fi may be more prone to assuming bad intent in Ts and then I get in that situation with them too....sigh. I wonder if Fi-users who feel more sure the other is well-meant intent will focus less on the game of who hurt whom more. Knowing good intent may not dissipate the hurt quite so thoroughly as it does for me, but maybe it is more effective for Fi-users.

I think intent matters more to Ts and effect matters more to Fs. I've seen both Fe and Fi types seem more concerned about effect. Although perceiving functions may make a difference here too.

Originally Posted by unleashthehounds

I think intent matters more to Ts and effect matters more to Fs. I've seen both Fe and Fi types seem more concerned about effect. Although perceiving functions may make a difference here too.

I always thought so too, but now I'm wondering how Fi & Fe may complicate it. Certainly F types seem to feel the effects more, but in terms of valuing it, especially re conflict resolution, I wonder if there is still a difference of emphasis in Fe/Fi. They obviously both value their feelings, but in terms of using it that way to relate to the argument... Fi in feelers may still want the hurt acknowledged or addressed, but maybe will be less likely to make it about who is hurt more. It's not so...comparative...they just hurt, themselves.

And, come to think of it, I've known a couple of unhealthy ENTPs who seem to base the argument around them getting offended and a need for an apology far more than an explanation of the real intent, which I always found weird in Ts. They can be very dismissive of intended meaning.