# Is this inferior Fi?



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

I have no idea why but whenever someone has a sense of individuality, it always frustrates me to some degree? What's the use of being unique? What does it do or achieve? I never understood why a lot of people are so focused on feeling like individuals. Is it because it feels good? I consider myself exactly like everyone else and it doesn't bother me at all. The differences between people are so little to me and I honestly don't care. Is this inferior Fi?


----------



## drumsensei29 (Mar 30, 2012)

I'd assume so, although somebody who was really clever could tell you how that is inferior in all of the functions. Its not an inferior thought though, my point is MBTI is hard to be objective on


----------



## Ellis Bell (Mar 16, 2012)

Honestly it sounds more like Fe, but tertiary or even inferior. Inferior Fi would result in a more black-and-white expression of literal feeling or hypersensitivity to emotional states (don't take it from me, though).

http://personalitycafe.com/entj-articles/95932-form-inferior-function-fi.html


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Well it certainly indicates extraversion. It could be inferior Fi, or just super extraversion. Inferior Fi tends to take more the character of indignation, sometimes resentment and jealousy. The person who says "i worked for mine you work for yours" or "because you don't think the way I do you're an idiot." Jung associated narcissism as a common pathology related to Extraverted Thinking types. Fi in general tends to have a self-righteousness to it that in a poor manifestation can lead a person to be the one who harbors intense secret rivalries, or tyrannizes by having extremely high expectations but never expressing fully what those expectations are. 

The stereotypical Te-type father is the person for whom the child only knows when he has misstepped or fallen short of the father's lofty expectations (you didn't go to Princeton, you didn't get straight A's, etc). Fi evaluates against an internal standard so it may be hard for the outside world to be relate to it. The son may know that he has disappointed his father or feel that he let him down, but not necessarily know why. Jung also speaks of Fi as often having a tendency to pour cold water on situations that are too good. The "eh I've seen better," or "wasn't as good as I hoped," kind of thing. Again this is a subtle way of exercising a high ideal without expressly coming out and demonstrating exactly what the standard is in an objective sense. Its as if the person has this notion of how things ought to be and holds the world accountable for it, but never actually explains to the world what he expects of it. Also Thinking types, not spending the time to evaluate what is truly important to them (which would come from the feeling function largely) may go well into their life, perhaps even into retirement before asking the question 'what the hell have they been doing with their life.' Te pulls people toward a formulaic way of looking at things (get the job, get out of debt, run and manage the business, pay the bills, keep the credit score high, obey the chain of command, stick to the law, etc - a very formula driven approach dictated by the constructs of the world around us -- classic extraversion). Naturally when the time to retire on that yacht comes around (that's a stereotype but its one many people recognize) the person goes through a period where they are then forced to evaluate (feeling function) and it leaves them somewhat lost and out of sorts. This is a common theme in literature and drama (Carter Pewterschmidt on Family Guy is a classic example of Te/raging Inferior Fi). 

Inferior Fi is on full display on the cable news/talk radio circuit in America.


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

LiquidLight said:


> Well it certainly indicates extraversion. It could be inferior Fi, or just super extraversion. Inferior Fi tends to take more the character of indignation, sometimes resentment and jealousy. The person who says "i worked for mine you work for yours" or "because you don't think the way I do you're an idiot." Jung associated narcissism as a common pathology related to Extraverted Thinking types. Fi in general tends to have a self-righteousness to it that in a poor manifestation can lead a person to be the one who harbors intense secret rivalries, or tyrannizes by having extremely high expectations but never expressing fully what those expectations are.
> 
> The stereotypical Te-type father is the person for whom the child only knows when he has misstepped or fallen short of the father's lofty expectations (you didn't go to Princeton, you didn't get straight A's, etc). Fi evaluates against an internal standard so it may be hard for the outside world to be relate to it. The son may know that he has disappointed his father or feel that he let him down, but not necessarily know why. Jung also speaks of Fi as often having a tendency to pour cold water on situations that are too good. The "eh I've seen better," or "wasn't as good as I hoped," kind of thing. Again this is a subtle way of exercising a high ideal without expressly coming out and demonstrating exactly what the standard is in an objective sense. Its as if the person has this notion of how things ought to be and holds the world accountable for it, but never actually explains to the world what he expects of it. Also Thinking types, not spending the time to evaluate what is truly important to them (which would come from the feeling function largely) may go well into their life, perhaps even into retirement before asking the question 'what the hell have they been doing with their life.' Te pulls people toward a formulaic way of looking at things (get the job, get out of debt, run and manage the business, pay the bills, keep the credit score high, obey the chain of command, stick to the law, etc - a very formula driven approach dictated by the constructs of the world around us -- classic extraversion). Naturally when the time to retire on that yacht comes around (that's a stereotype but its one many people recognize) the person goes through a period where they are then forced to evaluate (feeling function) and it leaves them somewhat lost and out of sorts. This is a common theme in literature and drama (Carter Pewterschmidt on Family Guy is a classic example of Te/raging Inferior Fi).
> 
> Inferior Fi is on full display on the cable news/talk radio circuit in America.


Thank you for such a good answer. I'm not too extraverted, I have fairly good Ni to back up my Te and my Se isn't really developed. At my worst, I can be exactly like that, no exaggeration. I intensely hate people for no reason and I never tell people what I want from them yet still "punish" them for not meeting my unspoken expectations. 

I don't have expectations for others anymore, but I have a lot for myself. I am my own achievements/talents/skills. I guess that applies to me to an extent because I have a lot of ideals that I want to live up to that are not based on reality. I want to become my ideal of perfection, I want to make things my ideal of perfection, and most things are "just okay" to me. Yup, looking at things in a formulaic way is what I'm about. I have quite a few planning journals dedicated to my formula for life. I used to be incapable of evaluating what drives me in life not long ago. 

Could you explain more?


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Definitely Fi-related over Fe-related (I mean, I recall Nardi pointing out from his studies that Fe types generally tend to show somewhat of a lack of a sense of identity boundaries).


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

NerdyCool5EVAH said:


> I have no idea why but whenever someone has a sense of individuality, it always frustrates me to some degree? What's the use of being unique? What does it do or achieve? I never understood why a lot of people are so focused on feeling like individuals. Is it because it feels good? I consider myself exactly like everyone else and it doesn't bother me at all. The differences between people are so little to me and I honestly don't care. Is this inferior Fi?


Definitely sounds like an inferior feeling function.
Inferior Fe is a lot more about "hating the collective", one of the most common comments that my INTP friend repeats is "YOU ARE ALL SHEEP!", so I'd say that since inferior Fe seems to be angered by a sense of collectivism then inferior Fi would be angered by a sense of individuality.

Then again, people who go around telling others how unique they are probably annoy most people.


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Definitely sounds like an inferior feeling function.
> Inferior Fe is a lot more about "hating the collective", one of the most common comments that my INTP friend repeats is "YOU ARE ALL SHEEP!", so I'd say that since inferior Fe seems to be angered by a sense of collectivism then inferior Fi would be angered by a sense of individuality.
> 
> Then again, people who go around telling others how unique they are probably annoy most people.


Hmm that would make sense. It's not just those kind of people though, it's anyone who takes pride in being "an individual" or being "unique". I find it both frustrating and confusing.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

NerdyCool5EVAH said:


> Hmm that would make sense. It's not just those kind of people though, it's anyone who takes pride in being "an individual" or being "unique". I find it both frustrating and confusing.


Yea, then it's still definitely inferior Fi.

To put it in black and white then the world got 4 groups of people in this area.
The FJs are the collectivists, they want to create a strong community that works together.
The FPs are the individualists, they want everyone to be treated like individuals and to pursue their own goals.
The ITJs and the ETPs simply don't have strong opinion in the subject and might like both sides equally or the opposite of what they "should like".
The ITPs and the ETJs strongly dislike everything that has to do with their inferior function - ITPs hate collectivism and ETJs hate individualism.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

NerdyCool5EVAH said:


> I have no idea why but whenever someone has a sense of individuality, it always frustrates me to some degree? What's the use of being unique? What does it do or achieve? I never understood why a lot of people are so focused on feeling like individuals. Is it because it feels good? I consider myself exactly like everyone else and it doesn't bother me at all. The differences between people are so little to me and I honestly don't care. Is this inferior Fi?


This sounds like Fi reasoning but whether the actual sentiments are truly expressive of inferior Fi or not I am not as sure.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

NerdyCool5EVAH said:


> I have no idea why but whenever someone has a sense of individuality, it always frustrates me to some degree? What's the use of being unique? What does it do or achieve? I never understood why a lot of people are so focused on feeling like individuals. Is it because it feels good? I consider myself exactly like everyone else and it doesn't bother me at all. The differences between people are so little to me and I honestly don't care. Is this inferior Fi?


To be in touch with yourself rather than have others impose their impressions of who you're supposed to be.

Desire to be a unique individual is also attributed to type 4 in enneagram, and there are many "unique snowflakes" among the Fe-types (just look at the entertainment business) so I don't think this has to do with Fi per se. May be partially. I think Fi is about being sensitive to yourself, as a person. This is an important quality for being able to sympathize with others and bond with them.


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Yea, then it's still definitely inferior Fi.
> 
> To put it in black and white then the world got 4 groups of people in this area.
> The FJs are the collectivists, they want to create a strong community that works together.
> ...


That actually makes a lot of sense.


----------



## Sinthemoon (Jan 9, 2013)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Yea, then it's still definitely inferior Fi.
> 
> *To put it in black and white* then the world got 4 groups of people in this area.
> The FJs are the collectivists, they want to create a strong community that works together.
> ...


Yes, this is indeed very black and white.

While I'm not much of an individualist nor of a collectivist myself, I don't mind people who are individualists. In fact, I find them way easier to deal with than collectivists - because in principle individualists shouldn't want to change you. That said, people who insist that you're not listening to yourself enough to be happy annoy me to no end, but this is something I blame their self-contradictory attitude for more than the "individualism". I can get along pretty well with anyone who has an internally valid worldview.

Meanwhile, I am myself of liberal political opinion, i.e. I view the role of the government as: a safety net to allow risk-taking, a catalyst for individual creativity and a way to accomplish things that can't be done otherwise due to scale. Inividualism is fundamental and should be nourrished in everyone - it's just that individuals shouldn't have the power to make harmful decisions for the collectivity.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Sinthemoon said:


> Yes, this is indeed very black and white.
> 
> While I'm not much of an individualist nor of a collectivist myself, I don't mind people who are individualists. In fact, I find them way easier to deal with than collectivists - because in principle individualists shouldn't want to change you. That said, people who insist that you're not listening to yourself enough to be happy annoy me to no end, but this is something I blame their self-contradictory attitude for more than the "individualism". I can get along pretty well with anyone who has an internally valid worldview.
> 
> Meanwhile, I am myself of liberal political opinion, i.e. I view the role of the government as: a safety net to allow risk-taking, a catalyst for individual creativity and a way to accomplish things that can't be done otherwise due to scale. Inividualism is fundamental and should be nourrished in everyone - it's just that individuals shouldn't have the power to make harmful decisions for the collectivity.


To be fair tho, the personal experience of 1 person does little to change my opinion since my opinions is founded on an objective collection of data on the subject of functions and inferior functions.

Then there's also the part about Fi being inferior.

Also like you said


> I can get along pretty well with anyone who has an internally valid worldview.


Meaning that you're alright as long as it makes sense to your Te.

I don't care about your political opinion, it's not the kind of collectivism vs individuality I was talking about. What I was talking about was "a group of people" vs "a group of individuals".

It's logical that TJs and TPs in general aren't on either side as hard as FPs and FJs, but the inferior functions do have an impact on things.


----------



## Sinthemoon (Jan 9, 2013)

Acerbusvenator said:


> To be fair tho, the personal experience of 1 person does little to change my opinion since my opinions is founded on an objective collection of data on the subject of functions and inferior functions.
> 
> Then there's also the part about Fi being inferior.
> 
> ...


Now that my opinion is officially unimportant, I have another question touching your perpective directly.

Why would inferior Fe be against collectivism, and inferior Fi against individualism? I would expect the opposite. An inferior function still looks for the same thing, Fi for individuality and Fe for collectivity, even if it's inferior. The big difference is how it would react to negative evaluation of what it looks for.

For example, Fi is oriented toward feeling in peace with oneself as a person. Therefore, if it is inferior, it will react strongly to negative evaluation of your worth as a person (which is what Dario Nardi's research has shown for ENTJs: strong reaction to negative evaluative words of the same region used by Fi dominants with positive evaluative words). So Fi really wants to defend individuality, and it will react to what threatens individuality: i.e. collectivism.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Sinthemoon said:


> Why would inferior Fe be against collectivism, and inferior Fi against individualism? I would expect the opposite. An inferior function still looks for the same thing, Fi for individuality and Fe for collectivity, even if it's inferior. The big difference is how it would react to negative evaluation of what it looks for.


Because the complex that surrounds the inferior surrounds the inferior, not the opposite attitude.
But ofc. inferior functions are known for being all in or nothing which would mean that inferior Fi is either overly excited/emotional about individuality or hate it. But people generally hate what they got problems with, that's why people tend to dislike what is connected to their inferior.

The inferior function is the symbol of our imperfection, it is what reminds us that we aren't good enough (in some aspects of life).

The inferior function itself is prone to create a complex. Inferiority complex as it is called: Inferiority complex - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ofc. they don't talk about the typological inferior, but it's just about the same.


----------



## Sinthemoon (Jan 9, 2013)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Because the complex that surrounds the inferior surrounds the inferior, not the opposite attitude.
> But ofc. inferior functions are known for being all in or nothing which would mean that inferior Fi is either overly excited/emotional about individuality or hate it. But people generally hate what they got problems with, that's why people tend to dislike what is connected to their inferior.
> 
> The inferior function is the symbol of our imperfection, it is what reminds us that we aren't good enough (in some aspects of life).
> ...


I'm not sure I understand much about your explanation, but you answered well enough to my objection. I have a poor grasp of the concept of complex and I understand functions in terms of behavioral neurology rather than psychodynamics, so it might explains part of my confusion here.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Complexes are emotionally charged ideas about a subject. Typically they are unconscious though. Basically if you have ever 'stepped on a nerve' with someone, or hit a 'sore spot' there's a good chance you have hit one of their complexes. Much of what we now call depth psychology is built around the idea of people's complexes and the term is basically widespread. You might hear people talk of inferiority complexes for example, probably the most common. But people also have hero complexes (where they feel compelled to always 'save the day') or quite commonly parental (mother, father or both) complexes where there is some deep seeded emotion that relates to their parents or upbringing. You hear people talk about 'daddy issues.' That's a vernacular way of saying father complex.

The ego itself is a complex, though not necessarily negative, the ego consists of ideas about how you see yourself. The persona or the mask you wear out in public is a complex fueled largely by social demands and formed before even you were self-aware. People have complexes over all kinds of things, MIchael Jackson seemed taken by a Puer or eternal child complex. A Peter Pan syndrome where there is a refusal to grow up (same would be true for Family Guy's Peter Griffin). 

But the big ones that have some effect on just about everyone are:
ª Ego - who we think we are (when inflated turns into egocentricity)
• Shadow - who we don't know ourselves to be or refuse to admit we are
• Persona - what society expects us to be
• Anima/Animus - how we conceptualize the opposite gender
• Mother/Father (these can manifest as how we respond to authority figures in general, or even how we view religious deities - many people conceive God as a more powerful version of their own father for instance)
• Inferiority - series of negative ideas one has about themselves
• Puer or Puella Aeternus - child who won't grow up (can be an archetype or manifest as a complex, everyone seems to have that one part of them that refuses to mature).

There are a number of other archetypes that can manifest themselves as complexes in people. Everyone for example knows what a witch is or grumpy old man. Beebe also felt that people generally got wound up when there was a feeling of being opposed as well. That opposition itself could hit a nerve. I would argue most people have a pretty strong death complex as well that drives a number of fears like not wanting to ride roller coasters or airplanes (the latter might be related more to a lack of control too which might be another issue). 

But the thing to understand is all of these complexes are unconscious. You only know one has been constellated by the strong affective or emotional reaction you have to it. You can't control complexes, they control you. But what one can do is to recognize when one is being constellated and perhaps mitigate the effects of it. For example when a person is smitten by someone of the opposite sex that he doesn't know, that is almost certainly a surefire sign that this is his anima complex (his ideal of the opposite sex) being constellated. The person just experiences it as lust or attraction (or repulsion in some cases), but doesn't realize this is actually all a projection of his own mind. He doesn't actually know the woman, he's projecting his own ideas about her onto her. Once you are able to recognize this people can withdraw projections and not fall into the traps that come with them (like getting married only to find out once all the projections wear off she's not at all what you thought she was).


----------



## Sinthemoon (Jan 9, 2013)

@LiquidLight

Alright. So basically, a complex is a theoretical construct used to explain transference. There seems to be a discrepency then between complex in the freudian sense, i.e. something that needs to be solved, and what you explain (which I assume comes from Jung) as an explanation which much less of a pathological undertone. That would explain why it's not used much in psychiatry's psychotherapeutic talk - which is the less deep psychology you can get since it measures against evidence-based alternatives.


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Because the complex that surrounds the inferior surrounds the inferior, not the opposite attitude.
> But ofc. inferior functions are known for being all in or nothing which would mean that inferior Fi is either overly excited/emotional about individuality or hate it. But people generally hate what they got problems with, that's why people tend to dislike what is connected to their inferior.
> 
> The inferior function is the symbol of our imperfection, it is what reminds us that we aren't good enough (in some aspects of life).
> ...


I agree with this post. Interesting link. I'm fairly apathetic towards collectivism. I'm really okay with it as long as it achieves some goal. Individualism just rubs me the wrong way.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

NerdyCool5EVAH said:


> Se doms would withdraw into themselves and it wouldn't be as obvious?
> 
> Ah okay, I see.


I don't know if they truly withdraw maybe later in life (maybe). I mean there is the tendency, at least behaviorally for introverts and extraverts to sort of switch as they get older. The extravert becomes more self-oriented the introvert branches out. But in the case of a Se-dom I think the general tendency is perhaps for them to think they are more insightful than they really are (in fairness a number of them are quite insightful, but often because of their acute sensation oriented focus -- I've seen people who by visual or behavioral cues can tell a lot about someone or a situation. Different road from an intuitive, same result). 

The inferior function is usually black and white. Platitudes. All or nothing propositions. Always emotional, always tender. You can really manipulate someone via their inferior function. The language of the demagouge is definitely the inferior function. Know how to press people's buttons (especially in a way that they don't know their being pressed, which is often the case with complexes and the inferior) and you can have them on a string. Von Franz talks about how Hitler being very intuitive used this to great effect. He would rile up feeling types with appeals to party doctrine and cohesion. The fear that if everyone thought for themselves there would be no fabric to tie things together appealing to inferior Ti. Te-type businessmen he would threaten that their 'hard earned' money was going to be given away to people who didn't deserve it (classic appeal to inferior Fi and one that never goes away mind you). Sensation types would be filled with stories of what was secretly being plotted against them, and Intuitives with how unstable the world really was and so on. He would feel out a crowd, find where the spot was they responded to and then attack there. That's the danger of the projected inferior function. When all of the things one doesn't see or own up to in themselves, many of them which might be quite negative, get projected onto 'others' and heaven forbid you get someone with a microphone who feeds it rather than challenges it (there's much more money to be made in appealing to people's vanity than challenging it).


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

LiquidLight said:


> I don't know if they truly withdraw maybe later in life (maybe). I mean there is the tendency, at least behaviorally for introverts and extraverts to sort of switch as they get older. The extravert becomes more self-oriented the introvert branches out. But in the case of a Se-dom I think the general tendency is perhaps for them to think they are more insightful than they really are (in fairness a number of them are quite insightful, but often because of their acute sensation oriented focus -- I've seen people who by visual or behavioral cues can tell a lot about someone or a situation. Different road from an intuitive, same result).
> 
> The inferior function is usually black and white. Platitudes. All or nothing propositions. Always emotional, always tender. You can really manipulate someone via their inferior function. The language of the demagouge is definitely the inferior function. Know how to press people's buttons (especially in a way that they don't know their being pressed, which is often the case with complexes and the inferior) and you can have them on a string. Von Franz talks about how Hitler being very intuitive used this to great effect. He would rile up feeling types with appeals to party doctrine and cohesion. The fear that if everyone thought for themselves there would be no fabric to tie things together appealing to inferior Ti. Te-type businessmen he would threaten that their 'hard earned' money was going to be given away to people who didn't deserve it (classic appeal to inferior Fi and one that never goes away mind you). Sensation types would be filled with stories of what was secretly being plotted against them, and Intuitives with how unstable the world really was and so on. He would feel out a crowd, find where the spot was they responded to and then attack there. That's the danger of the projected inferior function. When all of the things one doesn't see or own up to in themselves, many of them which might be quite negative, get projected onto 'others' and heaven forbid you get someone with a microphone who feeds it rather than challenges it (there's much more money to be made in appealing to people's vanity than challenging it).


Ah okay, I've actually seen that IRL. Se doms that make an "insightful" comment and keep patting themselves on the back for it.

That's very fascinating. Yeah, Hitler was very great at doing those sort of things. Kind of frightening to hear about. 

Sorry to change the topic, but from what I have said in this thread, do I seem like an inferior Fi type?


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Lol I don't know. I mean it would take a bit of interaction to have a good guess for sure. Obviously introverted functions do not announce themselves you have to infer them. But what you can do is sort of look at those areas where there are some tender spots, or things that kind of get on your nerves or really vex you. They may not all relate to the same thing, one might be because of some unresolved anger with parents or whatever. But for me personally, its pretty evident that of the four functions, the one I struggle with the most is Sensation. Even more than thinking (I have some issues around thinking too, but nothing like Sensation). So you can do the self work to figure out, of the four, which do you think you have the hardest time with and then begin the process of discovering how you handle it.


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

LiquidLight said:


> Lol I don't know. I mean it would take a bit of interaction to have a good guess for sure. Obviously introverted functions do not announce themselves you have to infer them. But what you can do is sort of look at those areas where there are some tender spots, or things that kind of get on your nerves or really vex you. They may not all relate to the same thing, one might be because of some unresolved anger with parents or whatever. But for me personally, its pretty evident that of the four functions, the one I struggle with the most is Sensation. Even more than thinking (I have some issues around thinking too, but nothing like Sensation). So you can do the self work to figure out, of the four, which do you think you have the hardest time with and then begin the process of discovering how you handle it.


Yeah, that's understandable. What are your tender spots that have to do with Se? Hmm like things I feel insecure about or things that really anger me? I definitely will.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

NerdyCool5EVAH said:


> Interesting, could you give me an example? Oh okay, I can see that happening.


Often in art classes, when talking about the aesthetic significance of something, it's hard for me to really focus on WHAT that is - half the time, I'm mentally sarcastically picking apart the work when I'm not trying to appreciate it (I do this with movies ALL the time as well for my own entertainment). I just see a bunch of concrete details that make up a work (I did this thread here started by the Si doms where you had to describe the concrete essence of the work, and I was pretty basic next to them, lol) When I see it aesthetically, I'm usually at a loss of how to describe it non-intuitively. Sometimes, I feel like the terminology I use around practical matters or aesthetic matters sounds dumb if I'm just talking about what's there - it just sounds unrefined (sort of like "Oh look at all of these similarly colored dots!" - basic in a hard-to-take seriously way). Sometimes, superficial judgments of mine are wonky or even freak me out a bit (like, judging appearances against the more "metaphysical" qualities of a person sort of leads me to rather strange ideas). Working on this is a great thing though.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Distortion of detail would probably be common for inferior sensation (probably unthinkable to S doms). Their views of appearances might never really "get off of the ground," so-to-speak. Like I always had a weird thing with aesthetics, where sometimes, I see aesthetics into everything, but then when something actually REALLY appeals to me, it's like "how the hell is this possible?" The sensation ideas just kind of take on a negative bent.


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> Often in art classes, when talking about the aesthetic significance of something, it's hard for me to really focus on WHAT that is - half the time, I'm mentally sarcastically picking apart the work when I'm not trying to appreciate it (I do this with movies ALL the time as well for my own entertainment). I just see a bunch of concrete details that make up a work (I did this thread here started by the Si doms where you had to describe the concrete essence of the work, and I was pretty basic next to them, lol) When I see it aesthetically, I'm usually at a loss of how to describe it non-intuitively. Sometimes, I feel like the terminology I use around practical matters or aesthetic matters sounds dumb if I'm just talking about what's there - it just sounds unrefined (sort of like "Oh look at all of these similarly colored dots!" - basic in a hard-to-take seriously way). Sometimes, superficial judgments of mine are wonky or even freak me out a bit (like, judging appearances against the more "metaphysical" qualities of a person sort of leads me to rather strange ideas). Working on this is a great thing though.


Really? How interesting. Does it feel like it's not good enough? Like there's always something inadequate about your observations?


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

NerdyCool5EVAH said:


> Really? How interesting. Does it feel like it's not good enough? Like there's always something inadequate about your observations?


Sometimes, I might not get the hype. Other times, I always feel like I can't really hone in on the noteworthy details at once (can't really immerse myself in the experience - it's a bit all-or-nothing for me) - it's too overwhelming - my observations tend to feel inadequate against outer expectation, although there might be times to myself where I think they are soooo significant for probably no reason. This isn't always true, but it's kind of where encountering my inferior becomes unavoidable.


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> Sometimes, I might not get the hype. Other times, I always feel like I can't really hone in on the noteworthy details at once (can't really immerse myself in the experience - it's a bit all-or-nothing for me) - it's too overwhelming - my observations tend to feel inadequate against outer expectation, although there might be times to myself where I think they are soooo significant for probably no reason. This isn't always true, but it's kind of where encountering my inferior becomes unavoidable.


All-or-nothing? How so? 

I actually really relate to you. I cannot describe things as they are, I have to get all poetic and go on about what so-and-so symbolizes. It's somewhat awkward.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

NerdyCool5EVAH said:


> All-or-nothing? How so?
> 
> I actually really relate to you. I cannot describe things as they are, I have to get all poetic and go on about what so-and-so symbolizes. It's somewhat awkward.


Good question, really. My guess there would be that it's very mood-dependent, which suggests lack of differentiation from emotions and the unconscious, complexes, etc. It ignites the unconscious ideas a lot about the appearances of stuff...hard to explain, but yea, I totally find that supportive of what Jung might've been getting at. Just engaging with stuff superficially is kind of rough because it's really probably about impossible for anything to initially leave a superficial impression on me - it's not easy to get me to bubble up in giggles over superficial observations without always thinking there's something more to it or just distrust that there's anything to the surface of any value...yea, admittedly, my biases lie there.


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> Good question, really. My guess there would be that it's very mood-dependent, which suggests lack of differentiation from emotions and the unconscious, complexes, etc. It ignites the unconscious ideas a lot about the appearances of stuff...hard to explain, but yea, I totally find that supportive of what Jung might've been getting at. Just engaging with stuff superficially is kind of rough because it's really probably about impossible for anything to initially leave a superficial impression on me - it's not easy to get me to bubble up in giggles over superficial observations without always thinking there's something more to it or just distrust that there's anything to the surface of any value...yea, admittedly, my biases lie there.


Hmm how so? Ah, interesting, definitely makes a lot of sense. 

One thing I'm really curious about it is whether INxJs ever truly live in the moment?


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

NerdyCool5EVAH said:


> Hmm how so? Ah, interesting, definitely makes a lot of sense.
> 
> One thing I'm really curious about it is whether INxJs ever truly live in the moment?


Well, I don't use that phrase loosely, but I suppose they would have their own kind of way of doing it at times. I suppose under stressful circumstances (real or perceived), the INXJ might revert to that mode of operation sort of unconsciously...maybe out of the public eye, they might (depends on where they are in terms of "ownership"). I mean, they're present, but not really for the sake of the moment as is (when they are, things get weird and wonky with the inferior - the person might physically feel very naked and exposed - they might not have a grasp of what impressions they give off - they might be easily physically irritated and think the outside world is obnoxiously oblivious to them - they might say things that sound like off-color superficial judgments, etc. It's not a bad thing exactly (unless perhaps the person is extremely egotistical, so they suddenly turn into a complete volatile road-wreck of issues when the inferior comes up), but far enough down, the person might be acting on whims and prone to foolishness.


----------



## Aelthwyn (Oct 27, 2010)

One thought I have in regards to the original post is that while I do view myself and others as 'unique' I don't like the attitude of wanting to be different _just for the sake of being different_. And I do think some people over-exaggerate their differentness and fail to see all the ways that they are similar to others. I don't really understand feeling threatened by the idea of being the same, or of other people being able to actually understand you to a great extent. I suppose perhaps someone might start to wonder if he has an identity or free will or personal value if everyone else is making the same choices, or if he feels interchangable with any other person. I can understand that. But... Personally, I don't feel like my identity is threatened by being just like a lot of other people - as long as those similarities are genuinely true about each of us as individuals and not simply a set of traits that have been adopted or imposed on the surface. 

I think what bothers me when people seem obsessed with the idea that they are totally different from everyone else is that it seems like an act of rejection of other people, a refusal to attempt to connect and relate to others. I appreciate and respect differences, but I feel it's also very important to seek comonality, to attempt to understand and identify with one-another. Without comonality it's hard to work together or help eachother. It's very usefull to have a similar frame of reference in ones-self to aid in understanding and interacting with other people. 



Ellis Bell said:


> Honestly it sounds more like Fe, but tertiary or even inferior. Inferior Fi would result in a more black-and-white expression of literal feeling or hypersensitivity to emotional states (don't take it from me, though).


I agree. I'm certainly no expert, but my experience with others and what I've read about Fe gives me the impression that it tends to value consensis, comonality, conformity for the sake of harmony a lot more than Fi does. It's my impression that Fe is most likely to say we're all the same, or to expect everyone to opporate on the same general principles and to get a bit offended when people don't fit the expectations, and feel a neeeeed to induct them into what they perceive as the propper flow of interaction/comunication/thinking/feeling. It seems to me that it's Fe that feels uncomfortable when someone doesn't enter into the spirit of the moment or the values of whatver group they may be with, while it seems to me that Fi is more likely to be the one to say 'cool, whatever' and move on without you if you don't want to be a part of whatever it is. But maybe this is more Je vs. Ji in general? 



LiquidLight said:


> Inferior Fi tends to take more the character of indignation, sometimes resentment and jealousy. The person who says "i worked for mine you work for yours" or "because you don't think the way I do you're an idiot." Jung associated narcissism as a common pathology related to Extraverted Thinking types. Fi in general tends to have a self-righteousness to it that in a poor manifestation can lead a person to be the one who harbors intense secret rivalries, or tyrannizes by having extremely high expectations but never expressing fully what those expectations are.
> 
> Fi evaluates against an internal standard so it may be hard for the outside world to be relate to it. Jung also speaks of Fi as often having a tendency to pour cold water on situations that are too good. The "eh I've seen better," or "wasn't as good as I hoped," kind of thing. Again this is a subtle way of exercising a high ideal without expressly coming out and demonstrating exactly what the standard is in an objective sense. Its as if the person has this notion of how things ought to be and holds the world accountable for it, but never actually explains to the world what he expects of it.
> 
> Also Thinking types, not spending the time to evaluate what is truly important to them (which would come from the feeling function largely) may go well into their life, perhaps even into retirement before asking the question 'what the hell have they been doing with their life.' Te pulls people toward a formulaic way of looking at things (get the job, get out of debt, run and manage the business, pay the bills, keep the credit score high, obey the chain of command, stick to the law, etc - a very formula driven approach dictated by the constructs of the world around us -- classic extraversion).


I agree with a lot of this for Fi when it's not dominant or auxiliary (which I've highlighted in green). However, in my personal experience I wouldn't say that Fi necessarily expects the outside world to conform to its inside standards. But then, perhaps this is different in dominant Fi? For me I am very aware that I can't expect the world to meet my expectations because they are _internal_ and not something projected onto the outside world. I _wish_ the world was different, but I don't hold it accountable for not meeting my standards. To me it seems like Fi has a strong sense of individuality which applies not only to itself but to everyone else, making it obvious that they will each be opperating under their own individual values - so differences and 'disappointment' is expected, a fact of life, the nature of reality. Similarities are a convenient coincidence, though they happen quite frequently. You can't just make everyone else conform to your values, because even if you succeed in making them appear to externally, you can have no actual power over their inner thoughts.

Perhaps inferior Fi doesn't apply the concept to others outside itself though? Perhaps it does just assume it's values apply to everyone? Somehow it seems to me more like Fe to expect widespread unspoken agreement on certain values, however.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

Actually those passages about Fi were written about the Introverted Feeling type.



> ...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. It is, as it were, continually seeking an image which has no existence in reality,..





> ...It makes men silent and difficult of access; with the sensitiveness of the mimosa, it shrinks from the brutality of the object, in order to expand into the depths of the subject. It puts forward negative feeling-judgments or assumes an air of profound indifference, as a measure of self-defence.





> 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.





> There is little effort to accompany the real emotions of the object, which tend to be damped and rebuffed, or to put it more aptly, are 'cooled off' by a negative feeling-judgment. Although one may find a constant readiness for a peaceful and harmonious companionship, the unfamiliar object is shown no touch of amiability, no gleam of responding warmth, but is met by a manner of apparent indifference or repelling coldness.
> One may even be made to feel the superfluousness of one's own existence. In the presence of something that might carry one away or arouse enthusiasm, this type observes a benevolent neutrality, tempered with an occasional trace of superiority and criticism that soon takes the wind out of the sails of a sensitive object.





> ssailed by rumours, he must make convulsive efforts to convert, if possible, a threatened inferiority into a superiority. Innumerable secret rivalries develop, and in these embittered struggles not only will no base or evil means be disdained, but even virtues will be misused and tampered with in order to play the trump card.


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

I'm very sure that I use Te/Fi. Nobody ever understands why I'm feeling the way I do even if I think it's obvious. I don't mean that in a whiny way, I'm just saying. Even when I'm extremely unhealthy, people still can't figure it out. My feelings are buried even more underneath the surface when I'm completely healthy. 

Also, my morals are based on how I feel. I never really think of how others feel when I'm thinking about my values. My morals have to make sense to only me although everything else has to make sense to others. 

I'm not sure what this is but when I was younger, I used to be an aggressive bully. I loved conflict and I loved picking fights for the sake of it just for the thrill. I was so easily bored with stability in relationships and I also chose a few people to hate every year. I also had this 2 year revenge plan based on a lot of research that was dedicated to getting back to my old friends who had "abandoned" and offended me the year before. I was very concerned with one-upping others. 

Obviously, I'm much more mature now, but I'm very curious about what functions I was using back then? 

What does this sound like?


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

Aelthwyn said:


> One thought I have in regards to the original post is that while I do view myself and others as 'unique' I don't like the attitude of wanting to be different _just for the sake of being different_. And I do think some people over-exaggerate their differentness and fail to see all the ways that they are similar to others. I don't really understand feeling threatened by the idea of being the same, or of other people being able to actually understand you to a great extent. I suppose perhaps someone might start to wonder if he has an identity or free will or personal value if everyone else is making the same choices, or if he feels interchangable with any other person. I can understand that. But... Personally, I don't feel like my identity is threatened by being just like a lot of other people - as long as those similarities are genuinely true about each of us as individuals and not simply a set of traits that have been adopted or imposed on the surface.
> 
> I think what bothers me when people seem obsessed with the idea that they are totally different from everyone else is that it seems like an act of rejection of other people, a refusal to attempt to connect and relate to others. I appreciate and respect differences, but I feel it's also very important to seek comonality, to attempt to understand and identify with one-another. Without comonality it's hard to work together or help eachother. It's very usefull to have a similar frame of reference in ones-self to aid in understanding and interacting with other people.


Interesting, what do you think about your individuality? 

I actually completely agree with what you said.


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

NerdyCool5EVAH said:


> I'm very sure that I use Te/Fi. Nobody ever understands why I'm feeling the way I do even if I think it's obvious. I don't mean that in a whiny way, I'm just saying. Even when I'm extremely unhealthy, people still can't figure it out. My feelings are buried even more underneath the surface when I'm completely healthy.
> 
> Also, my morals are based on how I feel. I never really think of how others feel when I'm thinking about my values. My morals have to make sense to only me although everything else has to make sense to others.
> 
> ...


Now that I've looked at descriptions of looping, I'm very sure that I was Te-Se looping with gripping episodes.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

LiquidLight said:


> I don't know if they truly withdraw maybe later in life (maybe). I mean there is the tendency, at least behaviorally for introverts and extraverts to sort of switch as they get older. The extravert becomes more self-oriented the introvert branches out. But in the case of a Se-dom I think the general tendency is perhaps for them to think they are more insightful than they really are (in fairness a number of them are quite insightful, but often because of their acute sensation oriented focus -- I've seen people who by visual or behavioral cues can tell a lot about someone or a situation. Different road from an intuitive, same result).
> 
> The inferior function is usually black and white. Platitudes. All or nothing propositions. Always emotional, always tender. You can really manipulate someone via their inferior function. The language of the demagouge is definitely the inferior function. Know how to press people's buttons (especially in a way that they don't know their being pressed, which is often the case with complexes and the inferior) and you can have them on a string. Von Franz talks about how Hitler being very intuitive used this to great effect. He would rile up feeling types with appeals to party doctrine and cohesion. The fear that if everyone thought for themselves there would be no fabric to tie things together appealing to inferior Ti. Te-type businessmen he would threaten that their 'hard earned' money was going to be given away to people who didn't deserve it (classic appeal to inferior Fi and one that never goes away mind you). Sensation types would be filled with stories of what was secretly being plotted against them, and Intuitives with how unstable the world really was and so on. He would feel out a crowd, find where the spot was they responded to and then attack there. That's the danger of the projected inferior function. When all of the things one doesn't see or own up to in themselves, many of them which might be quite negative, get projected onto 'others' and heaven forbid you get someone with a microphone who feeds it rather than challenges it (there's much more money to be made in appealing to people's vanity than challenging it).


Do you know what an inferior sensation platitude would be by chance?


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

This is definitely inferior Fi though or at least, some sort of Fi. I remember earlier in 9th grade, whenever I would get into an argument regarding my morals, I would always end up saying something like, "This is what you're doing and that's why it's everything wrong in the world!" or something dramatic like that. I also ended up ignoring nearly everyone because none of them met my moral standards. I'd imagine a higher Fi type would be more accepting.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> Do you know what an inferior sensation platitude would be by chance?


An example I can definitely think of would be the need for meaning. Things just cannot be what they appear to be. I think a possible scenario would be to have someone speak upon the rights and meaning of the arts and what it provides society. Taking art away would mean to take some of what it means to be human away and so on as a possible platitute that speaks to intuition (and perhaps feeling).


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

Flatliner said:


> Eh. I mean whatever, I never really cared about that sort of thing but I guess some people do.


I'm almost a Je-Pe looper so I'm nearly always focused on the external world lol. And I don't really understand what makes me perceived as odd anyway. 



Flatliner said:


> Not professionally yet. At some point I will publish.


What do you like to write? Interesting to hear!


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

QueenOfCats said:


> I have no idea why but whenever someone has a sense of individuality, it always frustrates me to some degree? What's the use of being unique? What does it do or achieve? I never understood why a lot of people are so focused on feeling like individuals. Is it because it feels good? I consider myself exactly like everyone else and it doesn't bother me at all. The differences between people are so little to me and I honestly don't care. Is this inferior Fi?


Could be, sounds like inferior Fi. I mean I can't see other people as anything other then themselves and everyone is different, yet the same if we look at certain objective criteria such as being human for example. As for being "speshul", well its not that big of a deal. Imo its inescapable and there, people are who they are, not even 2 cats are the same, not even twins. 

Its these things that help me navigate individuals and allows me to understand them / cope with the differences.

People who flaunt their individuality and spout nonsense like "You would never understand! *writes bad poem*"...are pretty much effing annoying I agree.

Since you are manifesting a negative subjective personal opinion by attributing such a value to these people..o.o yeah its Fi.

^^; thou having Fi as a dominant function doesn't stop my Te from calling such people effing morons when I'm stressed. *shrug* When I'm stressed...everyone is a fucking incompetent idiot...myself included. (inferior Te)


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

FreeBeer said:


> Could be, sounds like inferior Fi. I mean I can't see other people as anything other then themselves and everyone is different, yet the same if we look at certain objective criteria such as being human for example. As for being "speshul", well its not that big of a deal. Imo its inescapable and there, people are who they are, not even 2 cats are the same, not even twins.


How is everyone different? For the most part, it seems like people are the same though. 



FreeBeer said:


> Its these things that help me navigate individuals and allows me to understand them / cope with the differences.
> 
> People who flaunt their individuality and spout nonsense like "You would never understand! *writes bad poem*"...are pretty much effing annoying I agree.


Interesting, how does that help you navigate individuals? And yes, they definitely are. 



FreeBeer said:


> Since you are manifesting a negative subjective personal opinion by attributing such a value to these people..o.o yeah its Fi, not very good use of it thou....(to be expected).
> 
> ^^; thou having Fi as a dominant function doesn't stop my Te from calling such people effing morons when I'm stressed. *shrug*


Yeah, I think so too. And my Fi, I think, is very all or nothing. I'm either being completely judgmental and condescending or I'm defending others and standing up for what I believe in because of my personal values. And interesting! Why do you call other people morons when you're stressed?


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

QueenOfCats said:


> How is everyone different? For the most part, it seems like people are the same though.


You can group people according to commonalities, but they are different from each other. We can start with the genetic makeup, then go into inborn personality, life experience will differ as well. No matter how similar people are genetically and personality-wise, they will still experience life differently due to their subjective perception. You can only experience reality through your mind, is pain real or just in your mind, is the spring sun warm or is it just your mind's interpretation that makes it so. Does strawberry jam taste good or does it only taste good because you think it does?

Since people see things through their own subjective lens (their mind) their experiences will differ and they develop different values, thoughts. Interaction with reality colors them differently.




> Interesting, how does that help you navigate individuals? And yes, they definitely are.


It allows me to make way for their idiosyncrasies, to cope by understanding why they are the way they are. Being different is also valuable. If we'd all be the same, that would reduce survival chance. Diversity means different people will see the same situation differently. Where I may fail to notice something, the other person won't, where he fails to act on something I won't and so on. Different perception, different reaction, which lead to different results. Some cope more efficiently in some situations while others don't but cope better in another situation.

There is value in differences, value one can make use of to reach more optimal results. We can make use of each other and that is what I do by accepting that they are different and valuing that. By knowing who does what and why, who they are and how they tend to react etc.. Through this the following quote gains a deeper meaning:

For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack. - Rudyard Kipling (1865-1936)



> Yeah, I think so too. And my Fi, I think, is very all or nothing. I'm either being completely judgmental and condescending or I'm defending others and standing up for what I believe in because of my personal values. And interesting! Why do you call other people morons when you're stressed?


When I'm stressed I tend to blame myself and others for incompetence, inefficiency, not doing things correctly, not making any damn logical sense.


----------



## Flatlander (Feb 25, 2012)

QueenOfCats said:


> What do you like to write? Interesting to hear!


I don't write to any specific genre, but I tend to go for books or ideas that warp reality. For instance, one of my ideas was about a person who found a way to jump into a realized version of his mental reality and couldn't get out.


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

Flatliner said:


> I don't write to any specific genre, but I tend to go for books or ideas that warp reality. For instance, one of my ideas was about a person who found a way to jump into a realized version of his mental reality and couldn't get out.


Interesting, how did that work?


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

FreeBeer said:


> You can group people according to commonalities, but they are different from each other. We can start with the genetic makeup, then go into inborn personality, life experience will differ as well. No matter how similar people are genetically and personality-wise, they will still experience life differently due to their subjective perception. You can only experience reality through your mind, is pain real or just in your mind, is the spring sun warm or is it just your mind's interpretation that makes it so. Does strawberry jam taste good or does it only taste good because you think it does?
> 
> Since people see things through their own subjective lens (their mind) their experiences will differ and they develop different values, thoughts. Interaction with reality colors them differently.



Interesting though what's the use of that? 




FreeBeer said:


> It allows me to make way for their idiosyncrasies, to cope by understanding why they are the way they are. Being different is also valuable. If we'd all be the same, that would reduce survival chance. Diversity means different people will see the same situation differently. Where I may fail to notice something, the other person won't, where he fails to act on something I won't and so on. Different perception, different reaction, which lead to different results. Some cope more efficiently in some situations while others don't but cope better in another situation.
> 
> There is value in differences, value one can make use of to reach more optimal results. We can make use of each other and that is what I do by accepting that they are different and valuing that. By knowing who does what and why, who they are and how they tend to react etc.. Through this the following quote gains a deeper meaning:
> 
> For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack. - Rudyard Kipling (1865-1936)


I think I can wrap my mind around that, using people's strengths to achieve some goal that wouldn't be possible without that. We're not too different personality-wise though. 




FreeBeer said:


> When I'm stressed I tend to blame myself and others for incompetence, inefficiency, not doing things correctly, not making any damn logical sense.


That sounds pretty inferior Te.


----------



## Flatlander (Feb 25, 2012)

QueenOfCats said:


> Interesting, how did that work?


He found a special kind of paint which opened as a portal.

I might have to finish writing that one as a short story, I think. I doubt in its current form it will make a novel.


----------



## chwoey (Mar 29, 2012)

@QueenOfCats you seem to have a hard time understanding how people work. Wouldn't a te-dom have been able to rationally find the answers to the questions that you keep asking? Maybe its the lack of ni....


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

chwoey said:


> @_QueenOfCats_ you seem to have a hard time understanding how people work. Wouldn't a te-dom have been able to rationally find the answers to the questions that you keep asking? Maybe its the lack of ni....


I relate everything back to what I feel lol. I could care less about how people work unless it has to do with some goal or efficiency, not to sound like a stereotypical Te dom. Through doing what? I'm not sure, xNTJs don't seem that great with people either.


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

Flatliner said:


> He found a special kind of paint which opened as a portal.
> 
> I might have to finish writing that one as a short story, I think. I doubt in its current form it will make a novel.


What's it's current format like?


----------



## Flatlander (Feb 25, 2012)

QueenOfCats said:


> What's it's current format like?


Short. Compact. I don't do the best writing for a novel, because of the lack of detail/breadth.


----------



## chwoey (Mar 29, 2012)

QueenOfCats said:


> I relate everything back to what I feel lol. I could care less about how people work unless it has to do with some goal or efficiency, not to sound like a stereotypical Te dom. Through doing what? I'm not sure, xNTJs don't seem that great with people either.


I suppose what really prompted me to say that was how you needed to ask _how people are different_. It seemed like such an intuitive answer, I couldn't grasp how you didn't already know the answer. Honestly, I find that was the case with many of the questions you asked, and it was mind boggling to me. 

I suppose the aux-si could cause that.


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

chwoey said:


> I suppose what really prompted me to say that was how you needed to ask _how people are different_. It seemed like such an intuitive answer, I couldn't grasp how you didn't already know the answer. Honestly, I find that was the case with many of the questions you asked, and it was mind boggling to me.
> 
> I suppose the aux-si could cause that.


I appreciate your honesty. Though I wasn't asking how people were different, I was asking what the use of individuality was and why it mattered so much to some people. I know that people are different but I don't think people are that different, personality-wise especially. 

How so? I think it's more inferior feeling than anything.


----------



## Moss Icon (Mar 29, 2011)

QueenOfCats said:


> The strangest thing I'm not very aware of how I'm so weird/odd. I seem very normal to me. It's just something everyone says. Yeah, I'm the same. Definitely! I hate that vanilla version of odd, the sort of oddness that's pleasantly quirky and light instead of something that's real and almost uncomfortable to deal with. Yes, agreed.


I wasn't sure either, to be honest. I even asked at times, "what exactly makes me weird?" I did live in a very low-education area and for the most part all I got was "you just.... _are!_" Brilliantly justified. Eventually I learnt it was "the way I talked" which I learnt translated to "uses words with more than 3 syllables". I think I was perceived as aloof too because of my introversion. 

Yeah, the kind I hate, it's like when girls say "I like awkward, geeky guys", but what they mean is "I like shy, pretty boys who wear glasses". 



QueenOfCats said:


> What do you know about yourself? I can never look too deep into myself for some reason. I guess that makes sense. What else do you do with what you know about yourself?


It's tricky to put into words. I guess it's less about knowing specific information, like "I don't like mustard" (I don't), and more about understanding why you feel certain ways about things, understanding what your motivations are, how things affect you, stuff like that. 

For example, I understand that I'm rather sensitive to criticism. That may be because of how often I was criticised as a child and teenager, it may just be part and parcel of me being Fi-Dom. It's probably a mixture of both. Having acknowledged this fact about myself, I now can objectify it more easily. As a teen I just got upset and sulky, sometimes very angry. I still do blow up in Te explosions at times, but the more I understand my feelings and behaviour, the more I can objectify it and work on controlling it. It's like you have to know you have an alcohol problem to get over it. You can't work on what you don't know. 

The mere fact you are here on PerC, and have investigated the MBTI, suggests to me that you at least want to learn something about yourself and what makes you tick. You don't have to be this uber-reflective person or anything. I know many people and types aren't. Everyone doesn't have to be "deep". But it's like, well, everyone doesn't have to be a car-mechanic or know the workings of an engine. But it's still handy for everyone to know how to change a tyre!


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

QueenOfCats said:


> Interesting though what's the use of that?


I answered that question in the post you quoted. Its just below your question. That one would be one of the more practical benefits that you can relate to through Te, which is why I mentioned it.

Many uses for understanding people, I don't quite understand yet as to why you need it explained as the answers are very obvious, but since you need andswers...

I think there is more going on here, but F dom and aux ppl generally have higher EQ, which may be something that you need to develop in order to understand fully:


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

FreeBeer said:


> I answered that question in the post you quoted. Its just below your question. That one would be one of the more practical benefits that you can relate to through Te, which is why I mentioned it.
> 
> Many uses for understanding people, I don't quite understand yet as to why you need it explained as the answers are very obvious, but since you need andswers...


Sorry, just noticed. And I'm talking about actual practical reasons than rather than those emotional reasons like improving your relationships, etc. But thanks for answering my questions! 



FreeBeer said:


> I think there is more going on here, but F dom and aux ppl generally have higher EQ, which may be something that you need to develop in order to understand fully:


This chart definitely makes me understand better. Thanks! I think I'll try to improve my EQ since it will probably help my career goals.


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

Moss Icon said:


> I wasn't sure either, to be honest. I even asked at times, "what exactly makes me weird?" I did live in a very low-education area and for the most part all I got was "you just.... _are!_" Brilliantly justified. Eventually I learnt it was "the way I talked" which I learnt translated to "uses words with more than 3 syllables". I think I was perceived as aloof too because of my introversion.
> 
> Yeah, the kind I hate, it's like when girls say "I like awkward, geeky guys", but what they mean is "I like shy, pretty boys who wear glasses".


I did too. Interesting, how did you deal with it?

Lol yes, they always end up disliking actual awkward boys. 



Moss Icon said:


> It's tricky to put into words. I guess it's less about knowing specific information, like "I don't like mustard" (I don't), and more about understanding why you feel certain ways about things, understanding what your motivations are, how things affect you, stuff like that.


Sometimes I understand how I feel about things and that helps me develop my moral/behavior rules so I can be true to myself. Though that could probably just be an Fi thing. 



Moss Icon said:


> For example, I understand that I'm rather sensitive to criticism. That may be because of how often I was criticised as a child and teenager, it may just be part and parcel of me being Fi-Dom. It's probably a mixture of both. Having acknowledged this fact about myself, I now can objectify it more easily. As a teen I just got upset and sulky, sometimes very angry. I still do blow up in Te explosions at times, but the more I understand my feelings and behaviour, the more I can objectify it and work on controlling it. It's like you have to know you have an alcohol problem to get over it. You can't work on what you don't know.


Interesting, I understand that! I had anger problems when I was a very young child too and I had to look within and realize it in order to fix it. 



Moss Icon said:


> The mere fact you are here on PerC, and have investigated the MBTI, suggests to me that you at least want to learn something about yourself and what makes you tick. You don't have to be this uber-reflective person or anything. I know many people and types aren't. Everyone doesn't have to be "deep". But it's like, well, everyone doesn't have to be a car-mechanic or know the workings of an engine. But it's still handy for everyone to know how to change a tyre!



Yeah, being a person who was never really good at being self-aware or looking within made me join this community. I wanted to know myself to a certain extent for once. Makes sense!


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Kamishi said:


> An example I can definitely think of would be the need for meaning. Things just cannot be what they appear to be. I think a possible scenario would be to have someone speak upon the rights and meaning of the arts and what it provides society. Taking art away would mean to take some of what it means to be human away and so on as a possible platitute that speaks to intuition (and perhaps feeling).


I'd say that's more feeling>intuition. Intuition is pretty much the mental act of reading into anything without evidence from which the hunch is drawn. It might speak to inferior intuition though, indeed (the N that's poorly adapted to reality).


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> I'd say that's more feeling>intuition. Intuition is pretty much the mental act of reading into anything without evidence from which the hunch is drawn. It might speak to inferior intuition though, indeed (the N that's poorly adapted to reality).


Depends on how you define meaning in this scenario.


----------



## Frenetic Tranquility (Aug 5, 2011)

QueenOfCats said:


> I have no idea why but whenever someone has a sense of individuality, it always frustrates me to some degree? What's the use of being unique? What does it do or achieve? I never understood why a lot of people are so focused on feeling like individuals. Is it because it feels good? I consider myself exactly like everyone else and it doesn't bother me at all. The differences between people are so little to me and I honestly don't care. Is this inferior Fi?


It's a combination of inferior Fi and tertiary Ne. Basically, since you haven't developed these functions much, it's harder for you to distinguish the finely discerned characteristics of what makes a person unique and independently useful, which stems at least partially from your natural approach to getting things done. ESTJ's and also somewhat ENTJ's, have a very "charge" attitude towards life in general, as this is the nature of dom Te - charge in, and find a way to make it work later as problems crop up - a sort of natural impatience. It's what makes the two types (and most likely you) so good at getting things done - albeit perhaps not always the *best* way to get it done, there is alot to be said for the approach nonetheless. So it is a very common ESTJ thing, especially in youth. After all, spending all the time understanding people seems inefficient!


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

Frenetic Tranquility said:


> It's a combination of inferior Fi and tertiary Ne. Basically, since you haven't developed these functions much, it's harder for you to distinguish the finely discerned characteristics of what makes a person unique and independently useful, which stems at least partially from your natural approach to getting things done. ESTJ's and also somewhat ENTJ's, have a very "charge" attitude towards life in general, as this is the nature of dom Te - charge in, and find a way to make it work later as problems crop up - a sort of natural impatience. It's what makes the two types (and most likely you) so good at getting things done - albeit perhaps not always the *best* way to get it done, there is alot to be said for the approach nonetheless. So it is a very common ESTJ thing, especially in youth. After all, spending all the time understanding people seems inefficient!


Interesting! That all sounds about right.


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

I projected so much in this thread lol


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Bad inferior Fi is pretty much on display in talk radio, politics, etc. (you can argue inferior intuition is as well - some of the big talkers I think fall into the former more though). Adapted inferior Fi might likely be found among those who have learned to laugh at themselves once-in-a-while or those who can navigate new POVs openly.


----------

