Personality Cafe banner

The reason why Fe and Fi users give

11K views 146 replies 34 participants last post by  madhatter 
#1 ·
So I am an Fi user, and the reason that I give to people and help them is because I can easily put myself in their shoes and can imagine what it would be like to be in their shoes. However, why do Fe users give? Is it because you feel socially obligated to? Explain this to me.
 
#2 ·
I like to alleviate others' distress when I can, because I know what it's like to need help. Seeing other people in pain or in need makes me feel pain. But I also believe that part of being a good person is giving back to others in some way, so in a sense I do feel obligated because of how I want to define myself. "Socially obligated," however, as a stand-alone phrase, is not entirely accurate. Most people who know me don't know I volunteer or give money, so it has nothing to do with what others think of me, or outside pressure. It's just that knowing people are in pain or need help, and not trying to help them, is incompatible with my idea of what it means to be a good person.
 
#4 ·
So I am an Fi user, and the reason that I give to people and help them is because I can easily put myself in their shoes and can imagine what it would be like to be in their shoes.
For me, as an Fe user, I feel the same way that you do. I help other people because I think of what it feels like when people help me. I also try to be empathetic and imagine how people feel.

For me, it definitely doesn't have anything to deal with a social obligation.


But I think this varies among different types of Fe users. I read in one MBTI book that ISFJs have a very strong empathetic tendency when dealing with people one on one, but that in group situations they get confused because they're trying to please everybody all at once. I get the impression that Fi users instead stick to what they believe is right, no matter what group they're around.
 
#5 ·
For me, as an Fe user, I feel the same way that you do. I help other people because I think of what it feels like when people help me. I also try to be empathetic and imagine how people feel.

For me, it definitely doesn't have anything to deal with a social obligation.
Me too. I get really impatient with 'social norms' -- if they don't make sense to me they get shoved to one side. I help people because I feel what they feel, put myself in their shoes and try to work out what they might need in their situation.

But Teddy is right as well, that in a group situation I'm far more reticent at offering help. I'm more likely to isolate the person who is showing the need and offer it one on one; and if it's a whole group that needs help if it's one overall need i'm all good, but if they have a variety of needs I do get stressed that I can't offer the right help to all of them at the same time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon and marzipan01
#6 ·
First, I learned a while ago that my life cannot be about purely helping other people because of the constraints of society in which we live and operate.
However, when I do give to other people it's because:
~I enjoy seeing people happy (I actually will be annoyed if I give a lot to someone and they are still complaining after I've done everything in my power to make them comfortable and I can see that I have solved every problem possible to solve)
~I help other people because I care. I see someone else's struggle and I take their burdens as my own. I see someone's situation and I have an emotional reaction.

Example, I have just read an article about a thirteen year old girl who was forced to undergo circumcision. My instant reaction is anger.
Is the girl angry? Maybe, maybe not.
Would I be angry if I were the girl? Probably not. If I were the girl I would probably be sad, initially in a great deal of pain, I might hate the people who did it to me, I might justify it with some cultural slogan of misery, I might say to myself, I can handle this, and move on, etc.
But as an outside observer I am furious, absolutely outraged. I want to kick in the teeth of the people who did that to her. If I had the ability to do something I would.

This kind of emotional response to other people's misery is actually extremely helpful to humanity at large as we turn that anger into the productive vehicle of reform.
 
#9 ·
I have more than one ENFP say the exact same thing. No matter how many times I read the same sentence it never makes a drop of sense to me. It was actually the confusion elicited by this sentence that led me to finally come to grips with the fact that I was an ENFJ.

Is Ni-Fe so different than Ne-Fi? If so, how?
There are a lot of misnomers and stereotypes flying around about ENFJs. Most of the worst stereotypes and misunderstandings about Ni-Fe have their origins in relationship issues between ENFPs and ENFJs dating (granted there are surprisingly almost as many good things said about these relationship pairings as there are bad).

The true difference between an ENFP and an ENFJ is that an ENFP's processing system has Ne-Fi on the surface and Ni-Fe in the deeper recesses of the psyche and in the ENFJ it is reversed.
So when the ENFP mind says: "Oh, look at those doughnuts. Great Aunt Sally used to eat long johns every morning. She died from a heart attack. Still those doughnuts look delicious. I bet they'd taste really good."
The ENFJ mind makes a conscious effort to say: "Look, smell, imagine but do not set a foot inside that bakery. Just keep walking."

Both thought processes can be and are happening simultaneously in both ENFP's and ENFJ's. And in case you didn't notice, these thoughts are intimately connected to each other. The ENFJ decision is based on the ENFP thought process. The ENFJ decision says: You shouldn't pig out on doughnuts. The ENFP thought stream was inspired by the Ni-Fe inner dialog that fed the Ne-Fi thought stream the lesson of Great Aunt Sally's death.

ENFJ's and ENFP's are sides of the psychological coin.

Oh, and @The Great One, MBTI is how Enneagram is why. If you want to know why different people help people, I suggest you look into the enneagram types.
Type 1's help people because it is the right thing to do and doing the right thing makes them happy and if they don't do the right thing they feel awful.
Type 2's help people because they love to be loved, they love to be needed, they love to give love, they love connecting with people (most common MBTI function associated with type 2 is Fe).
Type 3's help people for several reasons: 1st in order to demonstrate or flaunt something, 2nd in their higher levels they're likely to develop the teams manship of the type 6 and view others as their team mates that they want to share the limelight with.
Type 4's help people if it's part of their unique identity to do so. They also get overly generous when they're stressed.
Type 5's help people by giving insight. I read that social/sexual fives are likely to want to go to the party but they want to be the DJ or have something to do. They help the most often by taking charge when they're integrating at 8.
Type 6's help people because they want certainty. Helping people for 6's is about duty but if we don't fulfill our duties we feel pain and guilt and often we feel good and happy when we have fulfilled our duties. It brings me a level of personal satisfaction and happiness when I know I was able to do so much to get it all done.
Type 7's help people because they want people around them at the movies or the concert. It's no fun by themselves.
Type 8's help people because a truly powerful person is powerful enough to take care of themselves and other people. And when you bring home the bacon it's your house and everyone must abide by your law.
Type 9's help people because when someone is in their presence they have difficulty distinguishing between themselves and the other person. They help people by calming them down and giving reassurance. This is natural to them because they want peace and sometimes they have to calm you down and/or give to people in order to obtain that peace.

That's just my theory on it anyway.
 
#10 ·
Ever thought that what you refer to is your Ne? Fi does not work like Fe, in fact Fi can be quite selfish when it comes to others:
Introverted feeling is determined principally by the subjective factor. This means that the feeling-judgment differs quite as essentially from extraverted feeling as does the introversion of thinking from extraversion. It is unquestionably difficult to give an intellectual presentation of the introverted feeling process, or even an approximate [p. 490] description of it, although the peculiar character of this kind of feeling simply stands out as soon as one becomes aware of it at all. Since it is primarily controlled by subjective preconditions, and is only secondarily concerned with the object, this feeling appears much less upon the surface and is, as a rule, misunderstood. It is a feeling which apparently depreciates the object; hence it usually becomes noticeable in its negative manifestations. The existence of a positive feeling can be inferred only indirectly, as it were. Its aim is not so much to accommodate to the objective fact as to stand above it, since its whole unconscious effort is to give reality to the underlying images.
 
#19 ·
Well let me tell you a little story and then say again, Fi is selfish when it comes to other people.

I was in line at the liquor store yesterday. A boy of about 18 was in front of me. He had 4 bottles of wine, expensive wine.
He turned my way and smiled. We started to talk while waiting for time to pass. I could sense he was shy, he wouldn't
even look at me in the eyes when speaking. I could also sense he didn't come from a home that had much money. He told me
he worked for 2 Mts doing odd jobs to save up to buy his grandparents /parents Christmas gifts ( which was the wine he was about
to purchase ). He needed a haircut, to see a dentist, and many other things i observed in my short time communicating with him. When he paid for his wine he was all smiles. I could somehow imagine his family hugging him and appreciating he took the only money he
had to buy them these gifts, and even if that didn't happen i wanted to believe it would. I watched him leave the store almost skipping
with joy, so proud of himself. It make me smile, huge. He didn't get to his car door when he tripped on a piece of ice. His bag went flying, the bottles smashed everywhere. My heart sunk to my feet. I left my order there, i ran out to help him. He was crying :(. He told me how stupid he felt at that moment. I reminded him he wasn't stupid, it was accident, a very sad accident.


I could let him leave without the Christmas presents he came for. I took him back into the store and we picked up all the wine he originally purchased, i payed for them. The look on his face was so worth it. Would i have done that for just anyone, no.

Fi like Fe can be selfish. Although we do things out of the kindness of our hearts without expecting anything in return. Yes, we may be selective with what is morally right or wrong for us personally, but that doesn't mean we don't think about humanity. Fi is private, and we don't feel the need to express everything we are feeling. We do small subtle things for humanity often, we just don't feel the need to talk about it, or have them validated. This is just a small example of the things i do personally towards human kind. So please, before you judge Fi users, keep in mind that Fi is our private world, a place we justify what we consider good or bad. Fi will take on a personal investment with people case by case. For me personally i either have a strong connection to help, or i don't. I don't do it for the sake of it, i do it because my core is really invested.
 
#11 ·
Well, I use my N to intui/empathize as well, so I feel bad for people; but there's another component to it, where I just feel like it's the "right thing" to do.

It's almost a rational process -- people are people, none of us is any better than the other, and community can be very powerful, and if we expect to take from the community than we also need to give to it so that it continues to function properly and can serve everyone who is a part of it. It's kind of my duty to give back, if I want to be a part of it. And realistically, in today's dependent world, we can't really perfectly remove ourselves from society; we're always benefiting, therefore we need to put back in.

I feel the same way about my parents, at least my mom. We aren't really that close, and why I sympathize with her as a person, it doesn't really motivate me to want to do anything for her; I can sympathize with anyone. However, she took care of me when growing up, even when I wasn't exactly contributing much back; I always had food, clothes, rides, music lessons, playdates with friends, toys, books, a car to drive, etc.; she helped me find a good college, and after I graduated, she helped pay off my student loans without me asking. She never asked openly for anything in return, but I feel indebted to her (not in a bad way, just a simple acknowledgement that she did look out for me in those regards), and so I feel like I need to invest back in that relationship to some degree, even looking out for her now that she is older and might need my help.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lirulin
#12 ·
Fe and Fi are both the humanely focused judgment processes, and can do the same things. The difference is, that for Fi, it will be more about, as the OP said, "put myself in their shoes and can imagine what it would be like to be in their shoes". This is the process of "abstracting", or could be called "subtracting" or "splitting". You take a given situation, and reference an internal standard of what is relevant, (with all else being subtracted or split off). And that is the universal feeling of human need.

Fe differs by focusing more directly on a stated or otherwise set need of the external source. Hence, adds itself to or merges with the external object. Even without a need being stated every time, they might perceive an ongoing or whatever need through their Si or Ni.
 
#17 ·
Fe and Fi are both the humanely focused judgment processes, and can do the same things. The difference is, that for Fi, it will be more about, as the OP said, "put myself in their shoes and can imagine what it would be like to be in their shoes". This is the process of "abstracting", or could be called "subtracting" or "splitting". You take a given situation, and reference an internal standard of what is relevant, (with all else being subtracted or split off). And that is the universal feeling of human need.
I would have to disagree with this notion, based on principles of type. First has anyone considered what it means to “walk in another’s shoes”? This entails a focus on the object. Although introverting functions can focus on the object, it’s not their first inclination. The first act is to consider the Self and how the object will affect the Self. Even if Fi does consider the object, they will conclude how the Self is affected.

Secondly “walking in another’s shoes” at least requires a need to take in information about the person. There seems to be an implication being made that you can use Fi to do one or both these things. I am not sure how this is being implied.

Finally, I know this is a hair-split and off topic, but the notion of walking in another’s shoes does not necessarily imply being empathetic. It could just as easily mean seeing another’s perspective. So the notion itself may not be related to either feeling function.

But back to the subject and based on my original post, I think the confusion by the OP may be limited to their understanding of Ne. As Berens and Nardi indicate in their definitions of function similarities and differences:
Ne and Fe often focus on people and their interactions. With Ne, it is the meanings and inferences that come to mind relative to people and their interactions. With Fe, it is the actions that keep people connected or disconnected that matter.
Where someone using Ne may see something from another’s perspective but not take action, Fe will take some action. Specifically Ne is:
Extraverted iNtuiting involves realizing that there is always another view. An example is when you listen to one friend tell about an argument and understand perfectly and then listen to another friend tell a contradictory story and understand that view also. Then you wonder what the real story is because there are always so many different possible meanings.
This in my opinion is where “walking a mile in another’s shoes” comes into play.
 
#16 ·
To Functionalysist:

Ever thought that what you refer to is your Ne? Fi does not work like Fe, in fact Fi can be quite selfish when it comes to others:
Yes, I have recently heard this from another ENFP friend of mine. According to her, first ENFP's use their Ne which automaticallyallows them to view the other person's perspective on an issue. Then, the Fi acquaints it with their moral values. According to her though, it can take a while for the Fi to kick in.
 
#18 ·
That's true; I was only building upon that familiar expression that is often associated with Fi.
The point is, the internal reference; abstracting the object's need through the universals stored within. Yes, directly putting yourself in the person's shoes would be more of the external "merging/adding".

And also, as I did allude to, the perception function (in the opposite attitude) will also supply that opposite orientation to the evaluation.
 
#24 ·
I just came up with a bit of a new theory on this. I don't know how accurate it is, so I'll offer it up and let others decide how well it fits.


This is the theory that introverted functions are "deeper" and that extroverted functions are "broader". I prefer to use the word broad rather than "shallow", because I think talking about extroverted functions as shallow is negatively comparing them to the depth of introverted functions. "Shallow" is a relative term; it's saying what extroverted functions are not when compared to introverted ones, not what they are in themselves. In addition, the word "shallow" has some negative connotations.


For example, I view Si as looking at one particular sensory experience in great detail and depth. It focuses on and uses many details, but it only does it for one thing at a time. Se, on the other hand, can bounce quickly from one sensory experience to the next...it's almost like it's looking at a lot at once. But, it doesn't internalize any of them in the same way Si does.


I look at Fi and Fe as being the same, but with personal values rather than sensory experiences.

I think Fi is really good at focusing inward on one's personal values (and maybe emotional responses) in great detail and depth. It's deep, so it's un-moving. If an Fi user believes something is right, it's going to take a whole lot to get them to move on it. Just like Si can be very rigid in terms of actual sensory beliefs and understanding, Fi can be very rigid in terms of one's personal values. However, the flip-side is that Si is very strong and deeply rooted...it's very committed. Likewise, Fi users will be very committed in their personal values, so they won't be swayed from them easily.

Fe, on the other hand, is very good at bouncing back and forth between outside external values.


So I think Fi can be extremely empathetic when it aligns with the Fi user's own personal values. This is why it can be very selfless and helpful and compassionate...because it's so deep.


However, I think Fi will have a much harder time being compassionate and empathetic to anyone who has values that contrast the Fi user's own. They won't waver from their own values.

An Fe user is more likely to be able to put aside their own values and support someone who has different ones. The Fe user probably won't relate to others as strongly or as deeply as an Fi user would, but they would be able to relate to more different types of beliefs and values.

I think this is why the two functions may believe the other one is less empathetic; an Fi user might see Fe as a shallow way of being empathetic, while an Fe user might see an Fi user as being too isolated in which values it shows empathy for.



I think it's interesting because neither of these are negative or positive, but each function might look at the other in negative ways. For example, I think Fe is accused of being two-faced, or dishonest, or as having no opinion (or as being shallow). An Fi user might believe an Fe user doesn't really believe anything, because the Fe user's values don't run as deeply. The Fe user can bounce around back and forth between different values based on the situation.


But at the same time, the Fe user might view Fi as being unwilling to put aside their own personal values for the sake of a lot of different people. This can strike Fe users as selfish and stubborn, because for certain things, Fe users don't view it as a big deal to put aside those values.



But I don't think either one is "worse" than the other; they just operate differently. Neither one is more selfish than the other, and neither one is less empathetic than the other. They are equally, but in different ways.




I don't know how accurate this is, but it makes sense to me.
 
#25 ·
I feel like this post should end all of the confusion people have with the judging functions. This is ABSOLUTELY spot on in my opinion.

The same thing I think happens with Ti vs. Te. You take a person like an INTP. They more often than not, nitpick at things for the sake of definitional specificity whereas someone like an ESTJ does not necessarily nitpick at bits of logic, but applies it more broadly to make things happen. It's a good thing and a bad thing. Good because it makes things happen and bad because it does not get down to the root of things. Likewise, if you are an ISFJ, you're probably more concerned about how to apply ethics as opposed to gaining a profound connection onto something specific. I don't really think too deeply about ethics until something is really upsetting the harmony in the grand scheme of things. Then I jump in and try to stop it.

If you were an Fi user, I'm pretty sure that you would spend more time trying to analyze what ethics means to you and to feel a more profound connection with certain people. I guess all introverted functions are pretty nitpicky. I know my Si is because I know based on my own impressions that something does not quite match up.
 
#26 ·
@teddy564339 if anything, I envy the Fe user's ability to be able to bounce between values without the annoying need to personalize everything. It seems like it would make it a lot easier to allow for viewing others' viewpoints.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HandiAce
#35 ·
I'm new to cognitive functions and am still learning. However, would Fe/Fi usage be the answer to the OP question?
So I am an Fi user, and the reason that I give to people and help them is because I can easily put myself in their shoes and can imagine what it would be like to be in their shoes. However, why do Fe users give? Is it because you feel socially obligated to? Explain this to me.
In other words, would Fe/Fi functions alone influence why a person gives? I guess I see why a person gives to be based more on an individual choice and/or the extenuating circumstances more so than Fe/Fi usage.

Although, I am enjoying the discussion of Fe/Fi usage. Which leads me to my next question.... can you really isolate the cognitive functions in this way? In other words, would there be shades of difference in usage depending on if it is your dom, aux, tert, or inferior function? For instance would Fi usage vary between an ISFP, ENFP, ISTJ, and ENTJ? And, do the other functions influence the usage of Fe/Fi? For instance would an ISTJ and an ESTJ use Fi in the same manner?
 
#53 ·
I'm new to cognitive functions and am still learning. However, would Fe/Fi usage be the answer to the OP question? In other words, would Fe/Fi functions alone influence why a person gives? I guess I see why a person gives to be based more on an individual choice and/or the extenuating circumstances more so than Fe/Fi usage.

Although, I am enjoying the discussion of Fe/Fi usage. Which leads me to my next question.... can you really isolate the cognitive functions in this way? In other words, would there be shades of difference in usage depending on if it is your dom, aux, tert, or inferior function? For instance would Fi usage vary between an ISFP, ENFP, ISTJ, and ENTJ? And, do the other functions influence the usage of Fe/Fi? For instance would an ISTJ and an ESTJ use Fi in the same manner?
Enneagram is why. MBTI is how.
The reasons we give are due to motive.
We will see how we give related to MBTI.
NF's and SF's are more likely to admit to being helpful because they're more sensitive to the emotions of others and that's just part of how our minds are built. We process information through feeling tones. Feeling is a function that makes sense of reality based on the way something makes us feel. So we are most likely to help via empathy, concern, and direct channels of helpfulness.

Thinking types might say they don't care or that they aren't generous. But even a 378 ENTJ can be generous in his/her own way.
I was asked recently how Steve Jobs helped the world in anyway--compared to Bill Gates he wasn't a philanthropist and he seemed purely and absolutely selfish in every way. I argued that Steve Jobs got people excited about computers and it was largely due to his success that Bill Gates became the wealthiest man in the world. Let's face it, while Bill Gates may have made the computers most people could actually afford, actually worked, and were the practical option, if Steve Jobs hadn't made the computer "cool" it would not have taken off as quickly as it did.

All I'm trying to say is that we all give back in our own way. Even if it doesn't look like someone is being generous, often times, they are without anyone realizing it. :)
 
#43 ·
It is principally among women that I have found the priority of introverted feeling. The proverb 'Still waters run deep' is very true of such women. They are mostly silent, inaccessible, and hard to understand; often they hide behind a childish or banal mask, and not infrequently their temperament is melancholic. They neither shine nor reveal themselves. Since they submit the control of their lives to their subjectively orientated feeling, their true motives generally remain concealed. Their outward demeanour is harmonious and inconspicuous; they reveal a delightful repose, a sympathetic parallelism, which has no desire to affect others, either to impress, influence, or change them in any way. Should this outer side be somewhat emphasized, a suspicion of neglectfulness and coldness may easily obtrude itself, which not seldom increases to a real indifference for the comfort and well-being of others. One distinctly feels the movement of feeling away from the object. With the normal type, however, such an event only occurs when the object has in some way too strong an effect. The harmonious feeling atmosphere rules only so long as the object moves upon its own way with a moderate feeling intensity, and makes no attempt to cross the other's path.
I'm glad this information was shared. The bolded part especially the red part reminds me greatly of my ISFP friend. And, several INFP and ENFP members on this forum. It seems to be a hard function to describe in words but I think I'm starting to see the differences between Fe/Fi. Thanks for sharing this reference material @Funtianalyst. I learn so much about the cognitive functions from your posts.
 
#45 ·
Fe expects a feedback when offering goodness in others (usually secretly without revealing). And once they receive a positive feedback, they tend to glow on their face. Meanwhile, Fi does not expect anything in return and they tend to be more emotionally overwhelmed when being thanked by others.

One thing is that many Fe users got confused with being empathetically influenced, when really it all stems out from sympathy. This is why Fe users have an immediate urge to give immediately; whereas Fi users tend to bury it inside their heart when they empathized with others, and that it takes a while for them to share their inner-appreciation when opportunity comes (usually in written forms for NFs).
 
#49 ·
Fi: I help because it's the correct thing to do. (based on an internal set of moral standards.)
Fe: I help because then I don't have to feel bad (because I feel what they feel.)

Does that make any sense?
 
#55 ·
I personally don't see Fe as necessarily doing whatever society says.

I see Fe as objectively looking at all the data perceived and creating the value rule that fits everything. Naturally though, a lot of the data comes from trusted people close to the Fe person since they are who the Fe person pays more attention to.
(Similar to how a Te person will spend more time reading articles written by experts instead of by crackpots.)

If the Fe person spends enough time seeking objective data with their perceiving functions from all sorts of sources, and not just one side, then I think it can end up looking quite like Fi.

Since Fe is an objective rule, it needs feedback and data to confirm it. Creating a value rule that says, "Calling people fat is bad." with underlying thinking of perhaps, "People feel hurt when they are called fat." cannot be confirmed when people don't react to you calling them fat or if they chuckle with glee when you do.

If the latter happens, then this kind of ruins Fe since it breaks the rule. What happens is that perhaps Pi/Pe is used to see that perhaps the person is just putting on a mask and the rule is still true. Or Pi/Pe comes in to see that the person really is happy and Ti gets activated and says no then, your rule does not make sense and Ti runs around trying to figure out how you derived the Fe rule when there is data here that suggests it is wrong. "Maybe that person is stupid." or "Maybe being fat isn't so bad." "Maybe they think I smell like a sewerpipe." and that's why they are laughing when I called them fat.
 
#57 ·
If you don't mind me asking what do you mean by rules ? Correct me if i am misunderstanding you, do you believe that there is a set of rules with our morals and values ? Or do you mean rules according to what society would believe, what is universal ?
 
#56 ·
From what I've read on PerC, there seems to be a general glorification of Fi and resentment toward Fe. I don't really understand how one can be seen as better than the other. I also don't understand why people assume Te or Ti users can't be empathetic or caring. We each posses a feeling function, and it expresses itself differently in each of us. I've seen both selfish and selfless acts from people of every type. It's more a matter of personal maturity and the ability to see from other perspectives, not so much which function you happen to use as your dom/aux. I'm not saying that JCF are completely unrelated to "why people give" (the topic of this discussion), but that the answers to why depend on so much more than simply Fi vs Fe.

And no, having Fi does not automatically make one more "deep" than an Fe user.
 
#58 ·
From what I've read on PerC, there seems to be a general glorification of Fi and resentment toward Fe. I don't really understand how one can be seen as better than the other. I also don't understand why people assume Te or Ti users can't be empathetic or caring. We each posses a feeling function, and it expresses itself differently in each of us. I've seen both selfish and selfless acts from people of every type. It's more a matter of personal maturity and the ability to see from other perspectives, not so much which function you happen to use as your dom/aux. I'm not saying that JCF are completely unrelated to "why people give" (the topic of this discussion), but that the answers to why depend on so much more than simply Fi vs Fe.
Really good post. Sometimes I think we fall into a habit of forgetting about the Eneagram and other environmental factors, not to mention the place everyone is in life...how much growth and maturity they have gained.


I really like the part I bolded in your post too. My ESTJ friend is maybe the most compassionate and caring person I know. My ISTJ mom is very much the same way. Strong Te users, but I view them as more compassionate and caring than many feelers.

However, I generally have a harder time seeing this in NTJs. But they have the same placement of Te and Fi as the STJs I know. What I've learned is that my perception of them through my Si vs. their Ni makes it harder for me to see and understand their emotions. But it's all based on my perceptions, not their intentions. I'm the one who's wrong about them because I have a harder time understanding them due to this confusion.

But I've learned that the way they show their caring is very different than the way I do. From what I've observed, very quick problem solving is the way an NTJ cares, because that's what they're passionate about. If they don't take the time to do it with someone, it means they don't care. However, because I have different values, it comes across as abrasive to me. But this doesn't mean that they are mean-spirited...in fact, it may be the opposite. We just have different values and goals, and I'm the one at fault if I assume they don't care simply because they don't care in the same way that I do.


I think it's possible that sometimes Fe and Fi users feel the same about each other. They have trouble understanding the way the other person cares, so sometimes they don't view it as caring at all.
 
#67 ·
For me, you can't really see that I use Fi in terms of how I treat people.
I see Fi as more of an idealistic outline in the back of my mind for what values I firmly believe in. There are some darker lines and some are lighter. This outline never changes over time. Each little segment of line represents something I believe in, and the darkest lines are my core values - the things that really trigger me to initiate change, etc. The lighter lines are my own personal beliefs for who I want to be (treat everyone with a friendly manner, for example), but things that I do not apply to everyone else, and will not bother to try to change someone over.

I imagine that Fe also has some sort of little diagram indicating the values, but the Fe values just... aren't outlines in the back of the head. It seems like Fe values would be centered more around what is actually happening, and reacting to that, rather than focusing on what should be, the way Fi does? Also, Fe values could be more of ... guidelines that direct them, instead of Fi's uncompromising set standard
 
#73 ·
Okay this thread really caused me to frantically read and research other sites to get a better understanding of Fe vs Fi judgment functions. I found the following information by Linda V. Berens to very user friendly. I wanted to share it in hopes that it also helps another member who may similar to me and has had a challenging time understanding the differences. According to Linda V. Berens.....
Fe theme: Everything can be considered in terms of how it affects others
Fi theme: Everything can be in harmony and congruence

Extroverted Feeling Process Highlights:

  • involves a process of arranging the external world according to interpersonal importance
  • considers what is important to others and what is appropriate to the situation
  • process is used in relation to particular people and situations and so has a more here and now quality than a universal, future, or past quality
  • seems to involve a desire to connect with (or disconnect from) others and is often evidence by expressions of warmth (or displeasure) and self-disclosure.
  • associated behaviors might include remembering birthdays, finding just the right card for a person selecting a gift based on what a person likes.
  • using this process, we respond to expressed or even unexpressed wants and needs of others


Introverted Feeling Process Highlights:

  • involves a process of deciding and evaluating according to importance
  • can be decided on the basis of personal values such as "I want" or I don't want", "I like" or "I don't like" or universal feelings such as "this is good" or "this is bad"
  • involves checking a proposed action against a persona or universal value to see if it is congruent
  • being in touch with our values and beliefs allows us to respond congruently to any situation no matter what happens. Loyalty and commitment can stem from decisions made during this process since these values are not bound to a particular time, context, or situation
  • often serves as a filter for information that matters is valued and wanted
Okay now that I have a better understanding of the functions in question. I would venture to say making the decision to give using Fe would involve questions that determine how giving would affects others and it's appropriateness to the situation. For instance.....drawing a blank and need an assist here????



Whereas making the decision to give using Fi would involve questions that determine the importance of giving as it relates to being congruent with the personal and/or universal value held by the individual. For instance, do I like this organization? Is the benevolence of this organization really important and/or worthwhile?


As far as any group hating on another group, I think discussions get derailed by members who lose sight of the fact that cognitive functions and/or MBTI are theories that are used to describe how we behave and is not to be confused with who we are.



In other words, behavior does not necessarily translate to identity. Therefore, I really don't understand it when I see overtures of superiority where it relates to cognitive functions and/or MBTI theory. Especially cognitive functions because from my understanding we use all of the functions, and it really boils down to which ones are easier and/or more comfortable for us to use.



So, hating on the use of a particular cognitive function, pitting one function against the other, or anything remotely close to those types of actions, is futile in my opinion and are a complete waste of time.


This thread has been very informative. Thanks to the OP for starting a thought provoking thread.
 
#75 ·
Okay this thread really caused me to frantically read and research other sites to get a better understanding of Fe vs Fi judgment functions. I found the following information by Linda V. Berens to very user friendly. I wanted to share it in hopes that it also helps another member who may similar to me and has had a challenging time understanding the differences. According to Linda V. Berens.....

[/LIST]
Okay now that I have a better understanding of the functions in question. I would venture to say making the decision to give using Fe would involve questions that determine how giving would affects others and it's appropriateness to the situation. For instance.....drawing a blank and need an assist here????



Whereas making the decision to give using Fi would involve questions that determine the importance of giving as it relates to being congruent with the personal and/or universal value held by the individual. For instance, do I like this organization? Is the benevolence of this organization really important and/or worthwhile?


As far as any group hating on another group, I think discussions get derailed by members who lose sight of the fact that cognitive functions and/or MBTI are theories that are used to describe how we behave and is not to be confused with who we are.



In other words, behavior does not necessarily translate to identity. Therefore, I really don't understand it when I see overtures of superiority where it relates to cognitive functions and/or MBTI theory. Especially cognitive functions because from my understanding we use all of the functions, and it really boils down to which ones are easier and/or more comfortable for us to use.



So, hating on the use of a particular cognitive function, pitting one function against the other, or anything remotely close to those types of actions, is futile in my opinion and are a complete waste of time.


This thread has been very informative. Thanks to the OP for starting a thought provoking thread.
I don't know, most of those Fe examples would apply to Fi users as well. Most of the people I'm closest to happen to be Fi users (especially dom - both ISFP and INFP) and we would all exhibit most of those behaviors.

I'm not sure that's a great distinction between the two functions.
 
#77 ·
Extroverted Feeling Process Highlights:

  • involves a process of arranging the external world according to interpersonal importance
  • considers what is important to others and what is appropriate to the situation
  • process is used in relation to particular people and situations and so has a more here and now quality than a universal, future, or past quality
  • seems to involve a desire to connect with (or disconnect from) others and is often evidence by expressions of warmth (or displeasure) and self-disclosure.
  • associated behaviors might include remembering birthdays, finding just the right card for a person selecting a gift based on what a person likes.
  • using this process, we respond to expressed or even unexpressed wants and needs of others

Introverted Feeling Process Highlights:

  • involves a process of deciding and evaluating according to importance
  • can be decided on the basis of personal values such as "I want" or I don't want", "I like" or "I don't like" or universal feelings such as "this is good" or "this is bad"
  • involves checking a proposed action against a persona or universal value to see if it is congruent
  • being in touch with our values and beliefs allows us to respond congruently to any situation no matter what happens. Loyalty and commitment can stem from decisions made during this process since these values are not bound to a particular time, context, or situation
  • often serves as a filter for information that matters is valued and wanted
Okay, it seems as though I use both?
 
#78 ·
I do this as well:

using this process, we respond to expressed or even unexpressed wants and needs of others
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top