# Is Fi self centered?



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

In the dominant Fi types it can be if these types don't have much of a grip over Te (some of these Fi doms can be "belief bulldogs" and look a lot like what they stereotype Te doms to be).


----------



## mental blockstack (Dec 15, 2011)

I think that Fi can have a hard time empathizing with a Ti/Fe's values, and vice versa, except with Ti it's about understanding.

Ti seeks to understand objectively, and so will look at a Fi's values, compartmentalize and break them down to their fundamental parts, and be able to relate through "understanding." Fi seeks to empathize, and so will (I could be wrong about this) expect the Ti person to have "values" in the way that the Fi does. If the Fi does not find this, they will just see an absence of the type of values they know, and see that the Ti is lacking in depth etc; while the Ti might think that the Fi is incapable of their own type of rationality, and believe the Fi to be dogmatic.

Personally I've felt before that Fi people projected often, probably because of their Te. Maybe I'm just bitter that they've never been able to understand me past a certain point.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

KateMarie999 said:


> My boyfriend has it in his head that Fi is entirely self serving. Fi users may display compassion and deep caring but it's only because it makes _them_ feel better. Aside from Fi-users not emoting as much as Fe-users, I've never really understood Fi all that well but I think he's wrong. I think being self serving could be a sign of unhealthy Fi but it could be a sign of almost any unhealthy function as well.
> 
> Admittedly, I'm very aloof in social situations and I don't really care about social rules but I hardly think that makes me self serving, especially since I care very deeply for those around me and I do my best to make them as happy as possible. It kind of hurts that he's made this assumption about half the MBTI types, especially since 2 of my best friends are strong Fi-users.
> 
> I know Fi is about values as well, but are they really so self serving or is my boyfriend crazy?


Sounds like Jung agreed with you boyfriend in his depiction of Fi.

from *Chapter 10 of Psychological Types*



> Whereas subjective thinking, on account of its unrelatedness, finds great difficulty in arousing an adequate understanding, the same, though in perhaps even higher degree, holds good for *subjective feeling*. In order to communicate with others it has to find an external form which is not only fitted to absorb the subjective feeling in a satisfying expression, but which must also convey it to one's fellowman in such a way that a parallel process takes place in him. Thanks to the relatively great internal (as well as external) similarity of the human being, this effect can actually be achieved, although a form acceptable to feeling is extremely difficult to find, so long as it is still mainly orientated by the fathomless store of primordial images. *But, when it becomes falsified by an egocentric attitude, it at once grows unsympathetic, since then its major concern is still with the ego. Such a case never fails to create an impression of sentimental self-love, with its constant effort to arouse interest and even morbid self-admiration just as the subjectified consciousness of the introverted thinker, striving after an abstraction of abstractions, only attains a supreme intensity of a thought-process in itself quite empty, so the intensification of egocentric feeling only leads to a contentless passionateness, which merely feels itself*. This is the mystical, ecstatic stage, which prepares the way over into the extraverted functions repressed by feeling, just as introverted thinking is pitted against a primitive feeling, to which objects attach themselves with magical force, so introverted feeling is counterbalanced by a primitive thinking, whose concretism and slavery to facts passes all bounds.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

In principle, no Fi is not selfish. In practice, a lot of people do not develop enough functions to support their dominants, hence the dominant itself remains frequently used but poorly used nonetheless. So, they wind up relying on reasoning from inside making faulty leaps. So yes, they do wind up excessively, intolerably selfish.

I mean, much in the sense that a lot of Fe-doms just go with the crowd. That isn't what Fe is. I don't even see Fe as about values. But nonetheless, it _can_ use the surface to reason towards what should be. In the absence of developing some introverted functions, Fe can take on an unthoughtful, frustrating flavor that it is so often stereotyped as. 

And yes, I think @_kasthu_ said Ti is equally selfish in a way (it reasons with reference to self-created models, and when this is overdone, it can turn people off...)

I mean, anything without the requisite complements is going to be frustrating. Fe-doms can rush to do things with no sense of self and thus no real personal thoughts, Te-doms can be a real exceptional pain with their fixation being so super objective, Ti/Fi doms can be frustrating with compulsive reasoning using an inner framework that really others may not identify with or even find accurate in the slightest, Ni-doms...oh god what a disaster those can be, Si-doms can be thick-skulled, ...

Really depends how one usees the functions. I think Fe can be used in exceptionally selfish ways, while Fi can be used in selfless ways. Just because the ideal came from the self doesn't mean the ideal doesn't lead the user to ultimately genuinely look after the other's well-being. In fact, if the feeling to look after the other's well-being was _rooted_ in the self, then it's almost a much more "pure" form of selflessness. Or the argument can at least be made. Whilst if the conclusion as to how to treat someone was derived based on observation of the surface, perhaps this is colder in a way, and more practical. 

One could go on and turn this on its head and go the other way, etc etc.


----------



## MuChApArAdOx (Jan 24, 2011)

cyamitide said:


> Sounds like Jung agreed with you boyfriend in his depiction of Fi.
> 
> from *Chapter 10 of Psychological Types*


I thought i had this bookmarked. I wanted to post this, so thanks for getting it out there. I describe my Fi this way. If my Fi is agreeing, it is very warm and loving. If it isn't in agreement, it does/can/will look self absorbed. I understand exactly what Jung is saying in this quote, i also can relate and understand the process as to why it happens.

All introverted functions reason with reference to self models. Ni Ti Si like Fi have this in common.

*Whereas subjective thinking, on account of its unrelatedness, finds great difficulty in arousing an adequate understanding, the same, though in perhaps even higher degree, holds good for subjective feeling. In order to communicate with others it has to find an external form which is not only fitted to absorb the subjective feeling in a satisfying expression, but which must also convey it to one's fellowman in such a way that a parallel process takes place in him. Thanks to the relatively great internal (as well as external) similarity of the human being, this effect can actually be achieved, although a form acceptable to feeling is extremely difficult to find, so long as it is still mainly orientated by the fathomless store of primordial images. But, when it becomes falsified by an egocentric attitude, it at once grows unsympathetic, since then its major concern is still with the ego. Such a case never fails to create an impression of sentimental self-love, with its constant effort to arouse interest and even morbid self-admiration just as the subjectified consciousness of the introverted thinker, striving after an abstraction of abstractions, only attains a supreme intensity of a thought-process in itself quite empty, so the intensification of egocentric feeling only leads to a contentless passionateness, which merely feels itself. This is the mystical, ecstatic stage, which prepares the way over into the extraverted functions repressed by feeling, just as introverted thinking is pitted against a primitive feeling, to which objects attach themselves with magical force, so introverted feeling is counterbalanced by a primitive thinking, whose concretism and slavery to facts passes all bounds.*


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

Imo all introverted functions can be called "selfish" since they demand that the mind detaches from its environment and others. When you hear someone express something related to an introverted function, be it Si, Ni, Fi, or Ti, there is always a sense of separation and self-reference that may seem egoistic.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

As I said, I think enneagram explains it all. The way we reason about something is very much related to our desires and what we want in this world. So that ENTP enneagram 3w4 with strong 8/1 and 5 fixes could be as heartless and bulldover-esque as the ExTJ is stereotyped to be, especially if you couple that with a dominant so/sx persona. Good luck trying to convince less healthy people of this type that they are arrogant and materialistic.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

Yeah, like my tritype partially explains why I use Fe mostly selfishly, and my sx-dom explains why a very few get me to use it unselfishly and shower them with understanding and affection and advice if they want it. I use Fe to protect from the fundamental unreasonableness of people...


----------



## uncertain (May 26, 2012)

KateMarie999 said:


> My boyfriend has it in his head that Fi is entirely self serving. Fi users may display compassion and deep caring but it's only because it makes _them_ feel better. Aside from Fi-users not emoting as much as Fe-users, I've never really understood Fi all that well but I think he's wrong. I think being self serving could be a sign of unhealthy Fi but it could be a sign of almost any unhealthy function as well.
> 
> Admittedly, I'm very aloof in social situations and I don't really care about social rules but I hardly think that makes me self serving, especially since I care very deeply for those around me and I do my best to make them as happy as possible. It kind of hurts that he's made this assumption about half the MBTI types, especially since 2 of my best friends are strong Fi-users.
> 
> I know Fi is about values as well, but are they really so self serving or is my boyfriend crazy?


I guess your boyfriend is Fe?? I never understand Fe quite well. Sometimes I think Fe is fake and not true emotion, not truly themselves, just as your boyfriend see Fi as self serving. 

I see Fi as genuine. Fi care about those whom they want to care for good and personal reasons, and often care very deeply. On the other hand, to me Fe like to please everyone whether the Fe like them or not. It's like a Fe care about people not because he/ she like them but because the Fe is supposed to care about them according to some social norms. Fe's feeling doesn't come from within the individual but from someone else. Other's emotion is Fe's emotion. I'm sure Fe can be genuine too but definitely not in the same sense as the Fi authenticity I'm talking about here.

I can never make myself a Fe, not even slightly. According to my little understanding of Fe, it is pretty against my way of being human.

There are a lot of Fi. I'm sure that not everyone of them would agree that he cares about X because it makes him feel better. But it's often the case for me. I feel happy to see my friend becoming happy because of something I do or say to him/her. How about this, it's X's birthday and I buy a cake for X so that X will feel happy. Do you think I do it for myself or for X? (Seriously I have no answer). I believe that I'm selfish, and maybe everyone is selfish in different way.


----------



## uncertain (May 26, 2012)

cyamitide said:


> Imo all introverted functions can be called "selfish" since they demand that the mind detaches from its environment and others. When you hear someone express something related to an introverted function, be it Si, Ni, Fi, or Ti, there is always a sense of separation and self-reference that may seem egoistic.


And I think one the reasons why ISFP and INFP are generally reserved is because of their Fi-dom.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

> Fi care about those whom they want to care for good and personal reasons, and often care very deeply.


Well, technically, Fi doesn't really "care" about anything (they can be immoral jackasses or psychopaths for all is possible at the very worst), as it is just the process of merging one's feelings with one's own subjective evaluative constructs (which might sound non-sensical to the outside world - for example, you might get the Fi type who likes to call him/herself a "bitch" for some reason that only makes sense with reference to an inner ideal the person has which has taken on a personal nature, because on an objective level to outsiders, the person may certainly not register "bitch" in the feelings department at all, so some Fe types will just think the person is being inane from what they can qualify from their own experiences with the person - rather extreme example, but these kinds of examples definitely exist). If a person cares about something, they will either rationalize it through Fi or Fe, which can produce the same results of goal accomplishments and understanding, but just in very different ways (much like the Ti and Te processes).


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

uncertain said:


> And I think one the reasons why ISFP and INFP are generally reserved is because of their Fi-dom.


That depends too much on the individual imo. On this forum there are INFPs who will regularly message others and have 70+ friends on their friend lists, and don't make an impression of being generally "reserved".


----------



## marzipan01 (Jun 6, 2010)

GYX_Kid said:


> I think that Fi can have a hard time empathizing with a Ti/Fe's values, and vice versa, except with Ti it's about understanding.
> 
> Ti seeks to understand objectively, and so will look at a Fi's values, compartmentalize and break them down to their fundamental parts, and be able to relate through "understanding." Fi seeks to empathize, and so will (I could be wrong about this) expect the Ti person to have "values" in the way that the Fi does. If the Fi does not find this, they will just see an absence of the type of values they know, and see that the Ti is lacking in depth etc; while the Ti might think that the Fi is incapable of their own type of rationality, and believe the Fi to be dogmatic.
> 
> Personally I've felt before that Fi people projected often, probably because of their Te. Maybe I'm just bitter that they've never been able to understand me past a certain point.


The more and more I see of the functions playing out in real life, the more I see that while the means through which we arrive at the same distinctions are very different we can often land on the same goal. 

I'll give you an example...

An Fi user, a Ti user, an Fe user, and a Te user can all arrive at the decision to become a vegetarian. 
Fi user decides to become a vegetarian (for example) because they would rather not put "evil" into their body. Seeing that an animal is under the trustful supervision of a human caretaker who destroyed that trust by committing murder of an innocent, the Fi user may conclude that meat is murder (through imagining ones self as the animal in that position) and therefore evil and not wanting to put evil into their body, they decide not to eat it anymore. 

A Ti user may arrive at the same conclusion by contemplating the question of whether or not an animal has consciousness. Logically, meat is only murder if the animal is conscious and capable of the experience of "trust" they may logically come to the conclusion after contemplation that it is impossible to know if the animal has consciousness or not and therefore, it is a spiritual grey area and it's better not to eat meat. However, they will likely make distinctions among different animals which are more or less likely to have consciousness (example: based on the evidence, pigs are more intelligent than fish; fish are less likely to be intelligent; therefore, it is okay for me to eat fish.) 

A Fe user is more likely to become a vegetarian because of group values of murder being evil and then being around other people who are vegetarians because "meat is murder" they may be drawn to wonder if that decision is right for them. They may feel influenced by the social shaming that goes on between them and their loved ones who are vegetarians and they may gradually come to see the others' reasoning and come to the conclusion on their own. 

A Te user may see meat as expensive and a chore to really prepare and cook. They may also see it as environmentally and energetically inefficient. And if a logical argument were made as to why it would be more efficient and more productive and generally healthier for them to stop eating meat they likely would. (For example, I know an ENTj who, after seeing his father die from a heart attack, became a vegetarian.)

My point is, while we all have our own way of processing information and coming to conclusions, we may all end up deciding to do the same thing. Four different "rational" functions means four different arguments. None are "better" or more/less "selfish" than any of the others. They are simply different arguments. And I would like to point out, that none of these functions exist in a vacuum. 

An Fi user who is actually very worried about his/her health on a subconscious level may decide to become a vegetarian and claim it is for moral reasons when in actuality, they arrived at the decision after reading that vegetarianism was better for the environment, easier and more efficient (Te). Similarly, a Ti user may be surrounded by a social environment which frowns and shames people who are meat eaters (Fe) and may be inspired to read about and contemplate animal consciousness in response to that social shame....etc. 

The truth is, all the arguments are going on in our heads at all times it's merely a matter of which ones you're conscious of.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

@_marzipan01_

I'm not really so sure most of those type examples are function-related (I mean, I'm pretty sure my ISFJ mom came to similar food conclusions in what is represented as the Te style with eating meat - I agree with both the Te and Fi ones (and have basically argued from all, but the Fe perspective before in a vague sense), hypothetically, although I eat meat anyway, and my INTP twin would find making an intellectual argument out of an obvious issue stupid, I think (she sure acts this way anyway) - I'm pretty sure she just thinks that it sucks, but she likes meat anyway, so she'll just eat humanely treated meat or take chances).


----------



## marzipan01 (Jun 6, 2010)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> I'm pretty sure my ISFJ mom came to similar food conclusions in what is represented as the Te style with eating meat


That's because Si is concerned about health and nutrition. That doesn't mean that they always make healthy choices but it does mean that they are in tune with the differences that foods have on their physical well being. So it might sound the same. 

Te can be concerned about health and nutrition, too, in the sense that you get more work done when you're healthy. 



> - I agree with both the Te and Fi ones (and have basically argued from all, but the Fe perspective before in a vague sense), hypothetically, although I eat meat anyway, and my INTP twin would find making an intellectual argument out of an obvious issue stupid, I think (she sure acts this way anyway) - I'm pretty sure she just thinks that it sucks, but she likes meat anyway, so she'll just eat humanely treated meat or take chances).


I think you're missing the point of what I was saying. I did not mean to say that everyone decides to be a vegetarian. Obviously not. My only point is that we can all do the same thing outwardly even if we are doing it for different reasons. In the same vein, we can do very different things for the same reasons...


----------



## Raichan (Jul 15, 2010)

Healthy Fi isn't necessarily a 'bad' 'selfish' thing. I am of opinion a healthy Fi user can be a strong advocate in values (as in for example they view that some things just have to be said no matter what) and can be a good example if they derive understanding from their own personal ideals. 

No function is inherently bad or good. It matters how you balance it with other functions. For example, me being an Fe user -- Fe doesn't always mean 'selfless'. Unhealthy or an extreme form of Fe can be self destructive and promoting a bad, inconsistent example in striving for perfection for others. So what matters is how you balance it out..For example, an INFP balances Fi with Ne, etc.


----------



## ElectricHead (Jun 3, 2011)

It all really isn't shellfish unless the person is shellfish. Introverted feeling is somewhat self-absorbed, but it's really about personal values which can vary greatly from one Fi user to another. Some can harness their Fi easily and not let it affect those around them too much, if they can. Others have no net and just turn into emotional balls of "I I I/me me me". They then go on to write horrible poetry and then create a band called Staind and whine about their Fi in every song. 

If it's a personal value to actually be aware of inner shellfishness and not be that way outwardly, or if it's a value of yours that makes you go out and do selfless deeds all across the land, and it's gotten to the point that those values have actually taken root into your overall character, then you can actually _thank _the shellfishness of the Fi for making you so selfless.


----------



## uncertain (May 26, 2012)

rejectedreality said:


> If it's a personal value to actually be aware of inner shellfishness and not be that way outwardly, or if it's a value of yours that makes you go out and do selfless deeds all across the land, and it's gotten to the point that those values have actually taken root into your overall character, *then you can actually thank the shellfishness of the Fi for making you so selfless.*


Yes. Exactly


----------



## Ellis Bell (Mar 16, 2012)

rejectedreality said:


> It all really isn't shellfish unless the person is shellfish. Introverted feeling is somewhat self-absorbed, but it's really about personal values which can vary greatly from one Fi user to another. Some can harness their Fi easily and not let it affect those around them too much, if they can. Others have no net and just turn into emotional balls of "I I I/me me me". They then go on to write horrible poetry and then create a band called Staind and whine about their Fi in every song.
> 
> If it's a personal value to actually be aware of inner shellfishness and not be that way outwardly, or if it's a value of yours that makes you go out and do selfless deeds all across the land, and it's gotten to the point that those values have actually taken root into your overall character, then you can actually _thank _the shellfishness of the Fi for making you so selfless.


I have a shellfish allergy, sorry.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Does this sound self-centered (http://www.hpsys.com/Articles/Emotional_Intelligence_Implications_for_Type.htm):



> According to Jung, "feeling is a kind of judgment, differing from intellectual judgment in that its aim is not to establish conceptual relations, but to set up a subjective criterion of acceptance or rejection."


It would only be self-centered if the person gets overly egotistical about it.


----------



## crocodilescry (Apr 29, 2012)

I've wondered about this same thing but about all of humanity. I depress myself thinking about that. Nihilist thoughts make me sad, but I always go back to thinking that nobody does anything for selfless reasons.


----------



## Luanne (Jul 6, 2012)

I think people do things for selfless reasons. To me a selfless good deed is one that you do where the aim is not to benefit you (even if it does, if that's not what you're aiming to get out of it, then to me it's selfless) and that's something I've always held. So I definitely believe that selfless good deeds can occur. 
And to me, Fi means evaluating what matters and what's important to the self, it doesn't make it selfish. To me it's important to be kind to others, and to try to see things from their point of view if I struggle to be kind. That's something I've decided to be important to me. The selfishness only really occurs when the persons values are... whatever the word is. I guess you know what I'm talking about...


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

cyamitide said:


> Sounds like Jung agreed with you boyfriend in his depiction of Fi.
> 
> from *Chapter 10 of Psychological Types*


That's not what Jung is discussing in that quote. It has nothing to do with being selfish.


----------



## Mammon (Jul 12, 2012)

I get called selfish/self centered sometimes. I usually don't look at others to much basicly, impulsively I look first at myself. My father thinks *I* think the world evolves around me.

dat employer comz knocking at mah door askin' if I wud laik to work at theys plais 
or the
Oh, hello sir! Seems like you have some trouble, let me lend you a helping hand.-kind of world view. Basicly, the naive one.

I do kinda realise this is not the fact but I fail to actually care... 
Old lady standing when I'm seated? Take my seat! 
Someone short on money for a bus ride? Take this! *hands over €2*

Saving the world, one step at a time!!


----------



## Nowhere Man (Apr 22, 2012)

Fi may have self-centered motives, but so does everyone. At least we're genuine about it and don't try to sugarcoat it like other types. =P


----------



## ParetoCaretheStare (Jan 18, 2012)

Yes. I don't even take time out to reach out to others unless I feel as though I need them in my life in that particular moment. Fi is my strongest function, and has been since I learned about this stuff. I've been called materialistic and selfish by people, and my English teacher in high school scarred me for life by saying that I needed to "stop feeling sorry for myself" all the time. I also used the word/letter "I" all the time. I notice that by focusing on myself, it gives other people something to talk about, haha, literally.


----------



## ParetoCaretheStare (Jan 18, 2012)

Yes. I don't even take time out to reach out to others unless I feel as though I need them in my life in that particular moment. Fi is my strongest function, and has been since I learned about this stuff. I've been called materialistic and selfish by people, and my English teacher in high school scarred me for life by saying that I needed to "stop feeling sorry for myself" all the time. I also used the word/letter "I" all the time. I notice that by focusing on myself, it gives other people something to talk about, haha, literally.


----------



## Fridays (Jul 12, 2012)

Perhaps said:


> I would say Fi is _self-oriented_, as it focuses on values pertaining to the self, with less regard for the collective.
> 
> Whereas, Fe is _group-oriented_, because its values are determined by the collective.
> 
> ...


Wow!!! Goooooood!!!!


----------



## Haydn (Sep 20, 2012)

Nowhere Man said:


> Fi may have self-centered motives, but so does everyone. At least we're genuine about it and don't try to sugarcoat it like other types. =P


Actually, no, you are wrong and your comment in my mind kind of lends support to the idea that Fi might actually be self-centered in a certain way. Believe it or not there are people that do things purely altruistically and may derive nothing in particular for themselves for doing so. Like a poster before me mentions, Fi types often do a lot of projecting and some do seem to really struggle with the idea that someone could actually do something for someone else with no self motive at all. 

Fi brings certain strengths and so does Fe. I think in general, Fe is a far less self centered function because by nature of what it is, it is naturally extrovertedly/externally directed to others rather than self and in that lies the strength of Fe and sometimes its weakness. Fe is not always about group think and Fe types do have strongly defended values too (maybe not as many as your average Fi type) and there are generous Fi types but they do seem to me to do things for others because it makes them feel good inside (Fi) more often than not.


----------



## Nowhere Man (Apr 22, 2012)

Haydn said:


> Actually, no, you are wrong and your comment in my mind kind of lends support to the idea that Fi might actually be self-centered in a certain way. Believe it or not there are people that do things purely altruistically and may derive nothing in particular for themselves for doing so. Like a poster before me mentions, Fi types often do a lot of projecting and some do seem to really struggle with the idea that someone could actually do something for someone else with no self motive at all.
> 
> Fi brings certain strengths and so does Fe. I think in general, Fe is a far less self centered function because by nature of what it is, it is naturally extrovertedly/externally directed to others rather than self and in that lies the strength of Fe and sometimes its weakness. Fe is not always about group think and Fe types do have strongly defended values too (maybe not as many as your average Fi type) and there are generous Fi types but they do seem to me to do things for others because it makes them feel good inside (Fi) more often than not.


Chill dawg, it was a joke.

Also, most people who aren't psychopaths are capable of pure altruism, not because they're so good and special and moral, but because it's been programmed into our nature due to being advantageous from an evolutionary perspective. Nothing to do with personality types really.


----------



## Haydn (Sep 20, 2012)

Nowhere Man said:


> Chill dawg, it was a joke.


Are you ISFP? I have noticed that they like to tell people to chill a lot even when the person did not feel particularly hot. Hmmm, I wonder why that is? 

I wish I could ban the words chill and chillax etc from the human vocabulary.


----------



## Nowhere Man (Apr 22, 2012)

Haydn said:


> Are you ISFP? I have noticed that they like to tell people to chill a lot even when the person did not feel particularly hot. Hmmm, I wonder why that is?
> 
> I wish I could ban the words chill and chillax etc from the human vocabulary.


I didn't think you were angry or anything, you just seemed to take my post more seriously, though I actually intended for it to just be a counter-joke to Fi types being selfish. I don't actually think non-Fi types are disingenuous, just as I don't think Fi types are more selfish.

I'm either an INFP or INTP btw. I've been debating for awhile whether I use Fi or Ti as my dominant function/Fe or Te as my inferior function.


----------



## Haydn (Sep 20, 2012)

Nowhere Man said:


> I didn't think you were angry or anything, you just seemed to take my post more seriously, though I actually intended for it to just be a counter-joke to Fi types being selfish. I don't actually think non-Fi types are disingenuous, just as I don't think Fi types are more selfish.
> 
> I'm either an INFP or INTP btw. I've been debating for awhile whether I use Fi or Ti as my dominant function/Fe or Te as my inferior function.


O.K

Hope you find your type soon. Fi and Ti are rather different functions.


----------



## Nowhere Man (Apr 22, 2012)

Haydn said:


> O.K
> 
> Hope you find your type soon. Fi and Ti are rather different functions.


Yeah, that's what has me so puzzled. I once was certain about being an INFP, but after a bit of reflection, I'm less sure about my dominant function.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

My ESFP has very self-centered Fi, and really it's enough to make me very angry sometimes. Usually I respect him because he can be an empathetic individual and he is definitely an individual, to the point of resisting other people, but a lot of times it's like he has feelings but no one else matters.

The stereotypical immature Fi type who is so "sensitive" about himself and his own pain, but is rude, inconsiderate or flat out nasty to other people. And by "other people" I mean loved ones, people one would think would matter, I'm not talking about strangers on the Internet or political enemies.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

I think the more unconscious Fi gets in someone, the more self-centered it gets. Aux/tert. Fi types are probably going to (whether or not superficially or actually) come off as more self-centered around this function than the dominants will, I think (it seems like I know a lot of overly self-sacrificing Fi doms IRL for some reason - the aux/tert ones I know tend to just do their own thing via Fi, since they're not actually influenced by it much in an ego-conscious way, as it's not their dom). Inferior Fi type are actually probably going to vacillate between looking like cartoon versions of the dominants (as in, kind of blissfully unaware of it) or otherwise be quite self-centered looking (all-or-nothing inferior).


----------



## Cajole (Jul 15, 2012)

I always get an icky feeling when I hear that Fi only does good things for other people in order to make itself feel good. I can be very giving and I do it to make the object feel better. Where subjective feeling comes into play for me is in the understanding of the human condition based on deep subjective feeling. Not assuming they feel the same as I do, but tapping into some fundamental truths of human feeling, my actions are guided. Fi puts me in the figurative shoes of other people so easily that I do things to make them feel better because I so understand feeling. Fi is an inherent wide reaching understanding of myself, the world and others. Gasp....Fi can include value judgments on objective factors. :shocked:

Wha? Okay...example:
Patient on an imaging table, claustrophobic, embarrassed about it and sweating profusely asks for a fan. Don't have one so I grab a magazine and fan the patient for the remainder of the scan. Actually hurt my hands/arms after a few minutes. Could have said, nope and sat at my desk reading the magazine while the guy struggled with his fear, that would have avoided my physical discomfort and slight embarrassment.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Yeah. Fi is not a substitute term for altruism (or self-seeking altruism for that matter). Nor does Fi make one especially comforting to be around (actually, Jung implies the contrary for various reasons, including how "hard to reach" these types come off like). I don't think most people would notice an Fi dom if they were forced to guess with a gun to their head. I used to have a strong tendency to mistype Pi doms as Fi doms or vice-versa, since Si, Ni, and Fi are all functions that tend to make a person seem "self-absorbed," wrapped-up in their own little universe, or distant, as well as perhaps irrational, as the Pi functions are irrational in what they do with information (even though they can produce completely acceptable results), while feeling is stereotypically typecast as irrational and viewed that way in the dominantly thinking society we call home.


----------



## Fridays (Jul 12, 2012)

LeaT said:


> I also wish to point out that Fe can equally be used to break group harmony or pit groups against each other, or for the matter, refuse to be a part of the group. In the end, no function can be selfish or not, then we ascribe values to the functions. Functions simply decribe how we operate and that operation can be interpreted in many more ways true to the actual context in which they were expressed. The tl;dr is that no function is selfish - that just depends on your _perspective_.










Thank you! Great description of different functions.


----------



## Haydn (Sep 20, 2012)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> Yeah. Fi is not a substitute term for altruism (or self-seeking altruism for that matter). *Nor does Fi make one especially comforting to be around (actually,* *Jung implies the contrary for various reasons, including how "hard to reach" these types come off like*).


Jung might be right, I find Fi really hard to be around even here I have a very strong sense of when it is present. I find Fi feelings difficult to read, with Fe types I can look at their faces/body language and overtime I get an idea of what they feel/value. 

Fi dominants have a whole lot of internal value judgements and I do feel silently judged around them. I am never really sure if it is my own paranoia or something else, then one day they [irrationally] spill on me usually from built up anger because I was not reading their silent signals or I expressed some value that they really disagree with and I am left shocked and feel betrayed amongst other things. I feel betrayed by Fi types a lot but the truly profound intelligence of my ESFP friend is revealed when she explodes. 

TBH, all the incidences of seeming gross selfishness I have seen has come from an Fi type who was valuing their own feelings but not those of others but then some of what seem like extreme great kindness has also come from them as well.


Fi types seem to be able to pick up on what other Fi types are feeling consistently. I try to hide my feelings sometimes for various reasons but I just cannot do it long term.


----------

