# I don't understand Fi!



## Max (Aug 14, 2014)

What is it?

I don't understand the actual logic behind it. 

How do you use it?


----------



## Liove (Sep 16, 2017)

Fi: Intrinsic intrapersonal motivation in which causation is assigned to the individual user's self.

The above definition is the sine qua non definition. Every other definition you'll see is either a needlessly convoluted version or an obnoxiously romanticized version of the function.


----------



## OliveBranch (Aug 30, 2017)

"The logic behind it" haha oh Ti... but actually, it works a lot like Ti. The content is quite different, and so I understand why Fi seems confusing to some people. It is an understanding of one's own values (likes/dislikes), and it categorizes those things. Due to this, Fi users can seem sensitive. If you spend so much time understanding who you are deeply, it feels like an infringement when someone else steps on that, whether intended or not. Ultimately, in order to understand each other, Fi has to look at it from their perspective and attempt to understand how the other person is feeling. Whereas Ti users need to realize emotions are not something you can simplify into a framework, trust me, it won't always work out.


----------



## Stevester (Feb 28, 2016)

What is Fi?

That's such a stupid question. You don't get me at all! You never will! You're not the Boss of me!


----------



## Max (Aug 14, 2014)

Liove said:


> Fi: Intrinsic intrapersonal motivation in which causation is assigned to the individual user's self.
> 
> The above definition is the sine qua non definition. Every other definition you'll see is either a needlessly convoluted version or an obnoxiously romanticized version of the function.


Basically, the views of the internal self from its point of view?



OliveBranch said:


> "The logic behind it" haha oh Ti... but actually, it works a lot like Ti. The content is quite different, and so I understand why Fi seems confusing to some people. It is an understanding of one's own values (likes/dislikes), and it categorizes those things. Due to this, Fi users can seem sensitive. If you spend so much time understanding who you are deeply, it feels like an infringement when someone else steps on that, whether intended or not. Ultimately, in order to understand each other, Fi has to look at it from their perspective and attempt to understand how the other person is feeling. Whereas Ti users need to realize emotions are not something you can simplify into a framework, trust me, it won't always work out.


I guess I can respect Fi from how you described it to be, but that sounds really tiring, in a sense. I find it easier to just generalize everyone's likes/interests and side with the majority most of the time. How do you keep track of everything you like/dislike? How do you individualize and narrow down perspectives? Is it instinctual



Stevester said:


> What is Fi?
> 
> That's such a stupid question. You don't get me at all! You never will! You're not the Boss of me!


Noooooo D: But we share mutual interests as human beings seeking higher knowledge through MBTI


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

Self-oriented judgment on the basis of personal (rather than impersonal) criteria (basically likes and dislikes, like someone else said).


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Stevester said:


> What is Fi?
> 
> That's such a stupid question. You don't get me at all! You never will! You're not the Boss of me!


Finally! Somebody gets it!


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

Introverted Feeling is an exclusive decision making process concerned primarily with subjective evaluation of information.

*Definitions.*
_Exclusive _- excluding of others (not including).
_See: monopolize, perquisite, elitism, ostracism, solitary clique, 'on my own'._

_Subjective _- relating to or arising from the individual self or mind rather than observable external reality; influenced by emotion or personal preference or involvement, and hence often unfounded or bias.

_Evaluation:_ - estimation of the value, or subjective worth of something.
_See: appraise, value, assess._

_Information:_ - see: everything.


ime imo


----------



## incision (May 23, 2010)

Imagine a data base of personal morals. Now apply a flow chart of whether or not something agrees with, violates or has no relevance to your morals. If it agrees with personal morals, then it's good. If it violates them, then it's bad. If the issue is absent from the database, no fucks are given.


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

Duo said:


> Imagine a data base of personal morals. Now apply a flow chart of whether or not something agrees with, violates or has no relevance to your morals. If it agrees with personal morals, then it's good. If it violates them, then it's bad. If the issue is absent from the database, no fucks are given.


A whole cognitive function devoted entirely to morality?


----------



## incision (May 23, 2010)

Jeux de Silence said:


> A whole cognitive function devoted entirely to morality?


Fe and Fi are values oriented functions. Weren't you aware of that?


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

Duo said:


> Fe and Fi are values oriented functions. Weren't you aware of that?


Yes I was, but having values is not the same thing as morality.


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

Jeux de Silence said:


> Yes I was, but having values is not the same thing as morality.


Actually, "values" is a poor way to phrase Fe and Fi. Everybody follows what they value. Thinkers value impersonal reasoning and Feelers value personal reasoning.


----------



## incision (May 23, 2010)

Jeux de Silence said:


> Yes I was, but having values is not the same thing as morality.


Depends on what definition you're applying.

val·ue
ˈvalyo͞o/





*2*.
a person's principles or standards of behavior; one's judgment of what is important in life.
"they internalize their parents' rules and values"

synonyms:principles, ethics, *moral code, morals*, standards, code of behavior"society's values are passed on to us as children"


----------



## BlueRaspberry (Dec 19, 2017)

VirtualInsanity said:


> I guess I can respect Fi from how you described it to be, but that sounds really tiring, in a sense. I find it easier to just generalize everyone's likes/interests and side with the majority most of the time. How do you keep track of everything you like/dislike? How do you individualize and narrow down perspectives? Is it instinctual?


Fi doesn't need to _consciously _keep track of likes/dislikes because things just _feel_ right or wrong. My Fi-dom friends tend to wait to make decisions until they are sure of how they "feel about" it; just like Ti looks for internal logical consistency, Fi looks for internal moral consistency. I've heard others say that Fi is a scale that weighs decisions based whether or not they are congruent with one's personal values, which I agree with. The strength of Fi is its ability to form moral judgements independent of societal standards; Fe tend to get their values from the people around them. Like you said, Fe has a harder time separating its opinions from the opinions of the group.


VirtualInsanity said:


> How do you individualize and narrow down perspectives? Is it instinctual?


Actually, Fi has the opposite problem. Being an extroverted function, Fe starts by examining external perspectives, and then narrowing them down using Ti. Fi naturally starts from its own perspective, and has to use Te and Se/Ne to expand from it's original point of cognition, and include outside perspectives into their understanding of things. This is why unhealthy Fi-users are so annoyingly self-righteous; Fi has to learn not to see everything solely from its own perspective.


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

VirtualInsanity said:


> sounds really tiring, in a sense. I find it easier to just generalize everyone's likes/interests and side with the majority most of the time. How do you keep track of everything you like/dislike? How do you individualize and narrow down perspectives? Is it instinctual


Yes. It's very visceral. It often presents itself as instinctual feelings of serenity/wholeness/warmth versus disgust/repulsion/violation. It is generally much easier to quickly identify and explain _how_ something makes one feel rather than _why_, despite there being an extensive and fine-tuned reasoning process involved. Why takes a lot of tracing the subconscious mental progression backwards.

Personally I don't find Fi tiring most of the time (mostly only when under much stress/extensive exposure to situations that test or oppose my values), but I do find others' questioning of my judgment very tiring - even though I understand that they are just looking for the objective/concrete evidence to support it. I will often quietly make a decision in private after much mulling over so as to avoid scrutiny, particularly because the opinions of people I am very close to can strongly influence my own.


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Compared to Fe, it's simply self-referencing. I don't mean it's all about what I like and my personal preferences. What I mean is that it doesn't look outside of itself for the ideal standard and settle for that external standard. It looks for consistency from one value to another and assesses each situation on an individual basis. 

It might be easier to say specifically what you don't understand about it


----------



## iblameyou (Oct 1, 2016)

BlueRaspberry said:


> Fe tend to get their values from the people around them. Like you said, Fe has a harder time separating its opinions from the opinions of the group.


No. I do not get my values from the people around me. I can read the values from people around me easier than I can read my own values and make things work. There is a difference there. And yes, I do agree with Fe separating opinions. Speaking for myself, I am sensitive about sharing my opinions conflicting with others. 



> This is why unhealthy Fi-users are so annoyingly self-righteous; Fi has to learn not to see everything solely from its own perspective.


Combined unhealthy Fi-users with enneagram type 1. I just came back from my vacation with my roommate and I don't think I have ever been this annoyed. Mind you, I am venting here. Someone mention Fi-users are not expressive with their face (which is true and I agree) but they express that through non-verbal language and I am quite observant about this. Our friendship is usually low-key but this trip open my eyes about her Fi and 1. There were times when I don't want to do things with her and she would slowly shake her head as if she's disappointed that I'm not being considerate. She shook her head at me for a lot of reasons. To me, that kind of body language and the things you say speaks of shaming others for not living up to your standard and expectations. 

At first, it didn't bother me because I thought I was just being rude but I experience this almost every single day while on our vacation. It is exhausting.

Her parents gave her money to buy gifts for our friends and we stopped at GAP. She saw a shirt _she liked_ and thought it would be nice for our friend. I disagreed and told her that our friend doesn't like that kind of style. I had imagine that she would prefer this and my roommate said to me _she doesn't like it_. Girl, I know it's your money but when you are asking me for my opinion on what *our friend likes*, not what you like, i will tell you what I think regardless of your likes/dislikes. And guess what? Our friend told us she's been eyeing on the shirt we gave her. Fi-users, if unaware, are blinded by their own perspective and personal taste on everything. This kind of situation happened a few times and doesn't bother me like what i mention up there.

*edit


----------



## Liove (Sep 16, 2017)

VirtualInsanity said:


> Basically, the views of the internal self from its point of view?


No.

It's not a view or a perspective, it's *motivation* that's intrinsic; directed at the self.

Despite the word 'feeling', it's not about feelings or emotions. That's a misnomer. 
Fe and Fi are not about values, morals, principles, ethics, etc. either, _per se_.
Rather, it's the *motivation* that drives the values, etc. 

The confusion you and a lot of other people have regarding the functions is that many people give them human traits or behaviors (anthropomorphizing). Individual functions don't *do* anything. They are *reasoning mechanisms*.

Once you treat "Intrinsic Intrapersonal Motivation" as the _sine qua non_ definition, every description you'll see is an *application* of the aforementioned definition. 

Fi = *Intrinsic Intrapersonal Motivation* = _sine qua non_

values
principles
ethics
morals
beliefs
feelings / emotions

Fe = *Extrinsic Interpersonal Motivation* = _sine qua non_

values
principles
ethics
morals
beliefs
feelings / emotions


----------



## gillbatesthehobo (Apr 2, 2018)

Fi is a subjective judgement function that forms values, beliefs, opinions based on individual experiences and from their own interests. The higher the function is in the stack, the more conflict that exists for oneself to express themselves and their values in congruency to the world. Healthy Fi users typically have a lot of integrity, and can express/articulate their values well, while taking action to actualize and put into effect their beliefs (congruency between oneself and the external world). The lower the function is in the stack and the more deeply embedded in the unconscious, the more likely it is going to manifest in dysfunctional ways in servitude to the higher Te function, i.e. making harsh moral judgements against people and their incompetence, justifying one's own morally questionable actions for the sake of reaching goal/s, too aggressively striving for goals and external rewards/achievements without questioning their importance/meaning behind one's actions, the list goes on.


----------



## Conscience Killer (Sep 4, 2017)

Fi values internally consistent ethical systems. Ti values internally consistent logical systems. Depending on what the person values, these two things can seem to overlap. I tend to score high on Feeling in dichotomy tests because I logically value ethics. A person could ethically value logic. But how you approach it alters how you express these things.


----------



## gillbatesthehobo (Apr 2, 2018)

Fi doesn't necessarily have to be consistent. Neither does Ti.


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

Conscience Killer said:


> Fi values internally consistent ethical systems. Ti values internally consistent logical systems. Depending on what the person values, these two things can seem to overlap. I tend to score high on Feeling in dichotomy tests because I logically value ethics. A person could ethically value logic. But how you approach it alters how you express these things.


Yes. I have wondered how to explain the compassion I see in my INTP daughter looking at how she words it, but often when she hears of someone being rude or violating someone's rights she will say, "That made no sense! There was NO reason to do that!" And since my Fi can't help but drill my Fi moral values into my kids, it's super cute to know my efforts are working out! =)


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

VirtualInsanity said:


> Basically, the views of the internal self from its point of view?
> 
> I guess I can respect Fi from how you described it to be, but that sounds really tiring, in a sense. I find it easier to just generalize everyone's likes/interests and side with the majority most of the time. How do you keep track of everything you like/dislike? How do you individualize and narrow down perspectives? Is it instinctual
> 
> Noooooo D: But we share mutual interests as human beings seeking higher knowledge through MBTI


Ask more cool questions that help me understand the Fe perspective. It's from a different sister planet, I tell you! I always wonder how you keep track of other people's feelings and morals. My feelings? Easy. I'm just 1 person and when I'm alone my Fi checks in on my Fi constantly. What I wonder is... isn't it quite easy for Fe to feel our Fi? Like when I'm happy and feeling all over the place or when I stand up for other's rights or when I see the kindness of others, can't Fe feel all that in me? Of course, right? Strongly? Or if it's negative, I would think you'd be able to feel that too, you'd probably hate it. lol We can detect this in others using the Ne-Fi combo and then use our personal experience to understand them on our terms. We become better with this the older we get and the more we are able to observe. We also imagine that a rich Fi world is going on in everyone, but if not Fi then whatever rich world they've got. lol 

It's moral values, basically, yes, but they spring up from inside and are tempered and adjusted and basically grow like a tree inside of me. They happened based on strong feelings I had as a Fi aux even early in my life. The morals of those around me were understood, right? But ultimately their morals are not part of my tree. Just acknowledged. "Oh you feel like that?" "Oh, well, I don't I feel like this." And that's considered okay. I can actually trace my Fi back to my first memories when I felt strong love for my baby sister. Fi cares that other people to be able to follow their own Fi. So freedom and individual rights is extremely important to us and we will fight for ours or for the rights of others and we will fight long and hard. I've always thought I'd get killed right away if I had been around in Germany during the rise of Nazi power. Beheaded or off to a gulag with me! And I wouldn't be able to help it. I'd rather be killed then feel like I can't follow my Fi and I am not over-exaggerating. I mean, what the heck would I even be? I can't really be happy or even function if i'm not following my Fi. Growing up I followed my own morals against the group plenty of times and you can get to feeling lonely. Which is why it seems so important to encourage other people to follow theirs. We high Fi users (Fi with finesse) will look (using Ne or Ni) for the Fi in other people so that we can give them space and (maybe this part is learned? encouragement and compassion) and so that we can basically say to others "Follow your conscience". We also look for Fi to see if there are shared values so that we don't feel so alone and gauge compatibility in the friendship. So now, I notice that I'm looking for Fi to make sure it has room and to feel this solid dependability. Like basically, I can trust this person because I've figured out their Fi morals and I can depend on them. Maybe this is very true for ENFPs who people think are so inconsistent and changing, but we are very consistent in our Fi values so to me I always feel very consistent. Figuring out each other's Fi creates trust in between Fi users. 
To tell you the truth, I love INFJs so much but there are all these moments when I'm searching for their Fi (which is not something I can turn off) and it feels sometimes like this mysterious vast universe inside of you instead of the dependable tree that I'm talking about. I can't gauge your loyalty, you have to show it to me over time. I can't gauge your morals either, you have to show me over time and I have an idea that if I watch my INFJ friend get influenced by others I will then understand more what to expect, as I see the people in her world and their Fi or Fe or Te or Ti. There is also a big resistance in me to influence others. It's turf issues and although I can give my perspective, whenever someone comes to me saying, "Whatever you say to do, I'll do." Then i want to run! Like, follow your own conscience, not mine!!! I will not be responsible for what you decide to do! This would be an infrigment of freedom and reads as if someone is asking me flat-out to manipulate them. This is still something that I don't know if I'll ever decide to be okay with in my life. It is often why ENFJs and I don't get along. I don't want my thoughts to influence them. It seems so absolutely wrong-- almost like as if I was trying to mind control someone. No! I'm not evil! (That's how it feels).

One more thought. Fi does consider itself very kind in dom and aux, after all aren't we supporting each other's Fi's? However i had to learn that Fe doesn't always recognize this as kind or as anything really. lol Also, I sometimes see Fe users saying things like "I'm SO kind! I feel EVERYONE's feelings. I'm TOO kind." However to a Fi user this sounds very pompous. Kind of like, "Hey, if you're saying you are too kind then you haven't figured out that kindness is infinite. Also, you don't realize you are ostracizing the Fi user next to you who you feel so much better than." Since Fi pushes outwards it can feel infinite. 

The way I started to understand Fe was to think of my tert function Te and then put values into it. And I think that might be a possible way for you to understand Fi. Think of Ti and put values and feelings into it. 

Too long, but I don't feel like editing. Send.


----------



## Eset (Jun 7, 2016)

> I don't understand Fi!


Well you would if you looked at more resources.


----------



## Conscience Killer (Sep 4, 2017)

Alesha said:


> Yes. I have wondered how to explain the compassion I see in my INTP daughter looking at how she words it, but often when she hears of someone being rude or violating someone's rights she will say, "That made no sense! There was NO reason to do that!" And since my Fi can't help but drill my Fi moral values into my kids, it's super cute to know my efforts are working out! =)


 Absolutely. 

Honestly, it sounds like you're noticing a thing that tends to pop up in mistype threads. People _can_ consider ethics/logic or objectivity/subjectivity via _either_ Thinking or Feeling. They don't necessarily have to rule one another out. Someone with Ti+Fe may very well appear to be utilizing Fi, although they actually are simply using their preferred functions in a manner that looks similar. 

e.g. I can't use Fi very well, because I simply don't purely value ethics. I don't spend a lot of time on _what I feel_ and _what I believe_, but I'm obligated to study ethical systems so that I can understand _the most_ logically. Your kid actually sounds like they're using Ti, but that their Ti is being informed by _data_ presented to them from you. _That doesn't make sense. There's no reason for that._ Very Ti-esque. 

When I consider ethics, I'm more interested in their application (Fe) than their analysis (Fi). That's the interplay between Ti+Fe. In INFJs this is reversed (Fe+Ti) so INFJs seem much less _ethically analytical_ because Fe is not their inferior function like it is for an IXTP. INFJs are more action oriented, outwardly oriented, and seek to apply ethical information in their lives.


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

Conscience Killer said:


> Absolutely.
> 
> Honestly, it sounds like you're noticing a thing that tends to pop up in mistype threads. People _can_ consider ethics/logic or objectivity/subjectivity via _either_ Thinking or Feeling. They don't necessarily have to rule one another out. Someone with Ti+Fe may very well appear to be utilizing Fi, although they actually are simply using their preferred functions in a manner that looks similar.
> 
> ...


I often feel like the reverse is true in me too, like that emotions can be logical, especially since I think there is a cause and effect to emotions and that they are usually pretty dependable. I do think I treat emotions as facts or things that are included in my decision making. So logic can be ethical and morals can be logical. That's what I think. btw, My beloved father is a kind and fair ISTP =)


----------



## Silwin (Aug 16, 2017)

I think that the easiest way to understand Fi is by relating it to Ti. If Ti chooses through logic, Fi chooses through personal preferences.
Fi is bent on the inside, I always think about my own feelings, about why I behaved in that way and stuff like that.
I don't care about social harmony, not because I like to argue with people, but (for example) because those lunch with all your family, uncles, aunts etc. are stupid since Aunt X and Uncle Y can't stand each other so why on earth are now sitting side by side like they're the best buddies??? (Maybe a Fe would say that they're respecting social harmony, that they don't want to spoil the amosphere of the lunch with their problems).
I am very welcoming, it's very hard for me to actually hate someone, but if you hate someone why do you have to show that you are friends? If you're not feeling something, why do you have to pretend you are?
We yearn for authenticity, we'll hardly do something we don't think it's right.


> I tend to score high on Feeling in dichotomy tests because I logically value ethics. A person could ethically value logic. But how you approach it alters how you express these things.


Yep, the same goes for me. I highly value logic and this lead people to believe I'm a thinking type.


----------



## heavydirtysoul (Jan 13, 2012)

You don't use Fi, Fi uses you, it wears you out :laughing:


----------



## tarmonk (Nov 21, 2017)

VirtualInsanity said:


> What is it?
> 
> I don't understand the actual logic behind it.
> 
> How do you use it?


Hello,

I'd describe it that way: it's a "truth validation" function F(x1,x2,...xn) which takes all known information as input and finds out if that situation/statement/feeling/... is true or false based on your own personal feeling about that. It's not based on logic but rather just a gut feeling which says so. That internal filter system may or may not overlap with other peoples. That's why underdeveloped Fi can make us look awkward in social situations, especially at younger ages.

One of my Fi-dom friends got another interesting explanation for that: he's always right - if Fi says he's right then he's right and if Fi 
says he's wrong but he accepts that the statement/idea is actually still true, he'll apply new conditions to that internal filter and then he's still right 

It's important to understand it's your own personal values system not a somewhat "shared" system like Fe. But the difference isn't necessarily obvious at first sight.

Practical example of Fi/Fe usage: as a child your mom says you need to put on a suit not sportswear to go to church because of X. Here X is a set of reasons widely accepted by community: you need to look good, it's not right to go there with dirty or inappropriate clothes etc. Stronger Fe user seems to accept that more easily as this is "shared truth".

Now imagine that from Fi user's personal viewpoint that statement doesn't necessarily feel true if he/she doesn't just feel it's true for them and then they decide to not do that and still use sportswear instead 

Not sure if the examples were good enough to explain but it works something like this by my understanding so far. What's most interesting is that despite of that, developed Fi user doesn't look awkward nor selfish as their Fi is flexible enough for additions/improvements to make necessary corrections to their beliefs/truths if there's a need for that


----------



## tarmonk (Nov 21, 2017)

Silwin said:


> I don't care about social harmony, not because I like to argue with people, but (for example) because those lunch with all your family, uncles, aunts etc. are stupid since Aunt X and Uncle Y can't stand each other so why on earth are now sitting side by side like they're the best buddies??? (Maybe a Fe would say that they're respecting social harmony, that they don't want to spoil the amosphere of the lunch with their problems).
> I am very welcoming, it's very hard for me to actually hate someone, but if you hate someone why do you have to show that you are friends? If you're not feeling something, why do you have to pretend you are?


I can strongly relate to that and think this is a good explanation of the difference of Fe/Fi! 

One in that example is acting that way because of harmony/social acceptance, other just feels it's not right and wouldn't do that. 

Although your statement about "if I don't feel that way why I have to pretend I do" could actually be Ti already but that's not important from the viewpoint of the example Fi plays role in "if I don't feel" part and the "why" part maybe explains it better to those not using Fi so strongly.


----------



## Blacteco (Oct 9, 2016)

> If you're not feeling something, why do you have to pretend you are?
> We yearn for authenticity, we'll hardly do something we don't think it's right.


Why not? If situation needs your acting skill then just do it. I rather fooling people with my acting than revealing my real feeling (don't let yourself caught). Its not a wise step to reveal your feeling to people *you really don't know*, you only make your enemy/opponent easy to read you. I rather being fake than being transparent. This is coming from a Fi user.


----------



## LeSangDeCentAns (Apr 10, 2018)

Fi = what matters to me
Fe = what matters for the tribe

ENFP: Lets do Ne things and see how Fi thinks of it.
ENTP: Lets do Ne things and see how Ti thinks of it.


----------



## adumbrate (Feb 13, 2017)

Interesting question. I also find intriguing the Fi and how it operates is mysterious to me. I know it is comparable to Ti, but Ti is much less visceral than Fi imo. Ti to me, depending on Fe will observe the environment and find the consistent patterns out of it which can be used elsewhere. Fi on the other hand seems out of nowhere, coming from the beat of the heart, but what is heart? how can one define the perimeter of feelings and be sure that their judgment is right according to it? A very curious case.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

adumbrate said:


> Interesting question. I also find intriguing the Fi and how it operates is mysterious to me. I know it is comparable to Ti, but Ti is much less visceral than Fi imo. Ti to me, depending on Fe will observe the environment and find the consistent patterns out of it which can be used elsewhere. Fi on the other hand seems out of nowhere, coming from the beat of the heart, but what is heart? how can one define the perimeter of feelings and be sure that their judgment is right according to it? A very curious case.


That's your Ni, most likely.


----------



## adumbrate (Feb 13, 2017)

Red Panda said:


> That's your Ni, most likely.


It's probably pretty much Ni-induced, since I'm not Ti dom, but Ti is something that has to do with natural phenomena, such as the way Einstein was intrigued about light and such, but differently from Ni is that it is bounded by logical frameworks of how things are put together. That's why ISTPs for example are good problem solvers, because they can see how each mental framework can be used for something else. I notice Ti use in myself too when I worked on electronic devices and see the consistent patterns of them.


----------



## Silwin (Aug 16, 2017)

Blacteco said:


> Why not? If situation needs your acting skill then just do it. I rather fooling people with my acting than revealing my real feeling (don't let yourself caught). Its not a wise step to reveal your feeling to people *you really don't know*, you only make your enemy/opponent easy to read you. I rather being fake than being transparent. This is coming from a Fi user.


You're talking to one of the best poker face in the world ahahahah
I was explaining how a Fi (me in particular) feel in certain situations: that doesn't mean that I'm stupid and I start criticising everyone outloud or let people understand what I feel/think, and I mean it's not like it's difficult for me to fool other people, it's my natural behaviour to hide my feelings, besides it's an introverted function.


----------



## tarmonk (Nov 21, 2017)

adumbrate said:


> Interesting question. I also find intriguing the Fi and how it operates is mysterious to me. I know it is comparable to Ti, but Ti is much less visceral than Fi imo. Ti to me, depending on Fe will observe the environment and find the consistent patterns out of it which can be used elsewhere. Fi on the other hand seems out of nowhere, coming from the beat of the heart, but what is heart? how can one define the perimeter of feelings and be sure that their judgment is right according to it? A very curious case.


In fact, this is an interesting question  I'd bet nobody actually knows why we actually are so different and operate that way and if anybody knew, they would be already either rich or very famous at least 

Yes, it's coming "out of nowhere" but I guess any other function looks actually the same if you don't personally possess it in concious part of the stack.

I think Fi is doing judgements right out of nowhere for yourself and is in sync with yourself but that doesn't mean that the judgement is always absolute truth for the external observer. That's actually very subjective judgement and I'd guess it has something to do with evolution - look at the cats for example - they seem to be mostly quite Fi beings to me.

Now that would be interesting if anybody knew why that out of nowhere Fi judgement is still mostly true for matured users  It's definitely not always true for underdeveloped Fi users as I've experienced that myself at younger ages many times.


----------



## Moo Rice (Apr 9, 2018)

VirtualInsanity said:


> What is it?
> 
> I don't understand the actual logic behind it.
> 
> How do you use it?



The way I understand it is that Fi is a function used to judge/decide the _value_ of things based on individual experiences.

The logic is very simple. Just put introversion (focus on the subject/observer) and feeling (judgment of value) together and that's Fi! 

I use it basically the way I just described.




I hope this was helpful...


----------



## JaguarPap (Mar 26, 2016)

Personalized feelings, convictions, and values anchored within the individual.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Fi is pain/pleasure elevated to consciousness.
If you don't have these up in dom/aux, 
you are partly/fully unconscious about what is right for you.
A great example is an EXTP with Fi PoLR, total loss about what is right for the individual.
IXTP is similar, but isn't shut down in the same way as ESTP is when considering it,
just finds it boring as fuck.
Ti can get similar results as Fi, but it is always dispasionate and cold.
While Fi is actively "warmly" seeking the pleasure or intensely rejecting the pain.
Because it doesn't feel good.
Not because it makes sense, so say an ISFP and an ISTP, might end up doing the same thing,
but one does it because it feels right while the other does it because it makes sense.
This doesn't mean that either of them can't flip and the ISFP does something because it makes sense,
and the ISTP does something because it feels good, but this more rare and also takes more effort on the part of the person.
Dom function is more or less effortless while the bottom feels like a chore.
Hence one will usually reserve this for special cases where it feels absolutely worth it for the ISFP 
and it makes total sense for the ISTP, whatever the area is that one is willing to go the extra mile 
to make sure one has it covered from all angles.

An good example I have as an ISFP with playing a computer game with an INTP.
The INTP analyzes the game up, down and sideways looking for optimal advantages,
while I run around in the game doing whatever feels right.
Then some problem comes around and the INTP tells me that I'm doing it ineffective.
Most of the time I just Te copy the INTPs work.
I have major resistance towards using Ti on problems, 
unless there is a massive reward on the other end, and there is no established shortcut solution on hand.
If there isn't I can set myself down and figure it out.
But I do find it painful and feel tired after.


----------



## Max (Aug 14, 2014)

*VI Finally Logs On and Responds, like a MONTH LATER xD*



Duo said:


> *2*.
> a person's principles or standards of behavior; one's judgment of what is important in life.
> "they internalize their parents' rules and values"
> 
> synonyms:principles, ethics, *moral code, morals*, standards, code of behavior "society's values are passed on to us as children"


Then doesn't everyone technically use Fi? 



BlueRaspberry said:


> Fi doesn't need to _consciously _keep track of likes/dislikes because things just _feel_ right or wrong. My Fi-dom friends tend to wait to make decisions until they are sure of how they "feel about" it; just like Ti looks for internal logical consistency, Fi looks for internal moral consistency.
> 
> Actually, Fi has the opposite problem. Being an extroverted function, Fe starts by examining external perspectives, and then narrowing them down using Ti. Fi naturally starts from its own perspective, and has to use Te and Se/Ne to expand from it's original point of cognition, and include outside perspectives into their understanding of things. This is why unhealthy Fi-users are so annoyingly self-righteous; Fi has to learn not to see everything solely from its own perspective.


So for your friends, it's engrained into them, like the insanity is engrained into me? Like, the concept of their inner morals/values judging the things in their lives? 



angelfish said:


> Yes. It's very visceral. It often presents itself as instinctual feelings of serenity/wholeness/warmth versus disgust/repulsion/violation. It is generally much easier to quickly identify and explain _how_ something makes one feel rather than _why_, despite there being an extensive and fine-tuned reasoning process involved. Why takes a lot of tracing the subconscious mental progression backwards.
> 
> Personally I don't find Fi tiring most of the time (mostly only when under much stress/extensive exposure to situations that test or oppose my values), but I do find others' questioning of my judgment very tiring - even though I understand that they are just looking for the objective/concrete evidence to support it. I will often quietly make a decision in private after much mulling over so as to avoid scrutiny, particularly because the opinions of people I am very close to can strongly influence my own.


So it's like you know how you feel, and you can justify things from that? 




Kynx said:


> Compared to Fe, it's simply self-referencing. I don't mean it's all about what I like and my personal preferences. What I mean is that it doesn't look outside of itself for the ideal standard and settle for that external standard. It looks for consistency from one value to another and assesses each situation on an individual basis.
> 
> It might be easier to say specifically what you don't understand about it


So... it's like you think about what your ideal standards are and reference it based on your internal self? 

Nah, sorry. I'm just trying to understand your perspective. Understand how it works. 



Liove said:


> No.
> 
> It's not a view or a perspective, it's *motivation* that's intrinsic; directed at the self.
> 
> ...


So... basically it's the motivation behind the decisions based on your values? 



Alesha said:


> Practical example of Fi/Fe usage: as a child your mom says you need to put on a suit not sportswear to go to church because of X. Here X is a set of reasons widely accepted by community: you need to look good, it's not right to go there with dirty or inappropriate clothes etc. Stronger Fe user seems to accept that more easily as this is "shared truth".
> 
> Now imagine that from Fi user's personal viewpoint that statement doesn't necessarily feel true if he/she doesn't just feel it's true for them and then they decide to not do that and still use sportswear instead
> 
> What's most interesting is that despite of that, developed Fi user doesn't look awkward nor selfish as their Fi is flexible enough for additions/improvements to make necessary corrections to their beliefs/truths if there's a need for that


Basically, it's what's truw for them? 

Oh cool. 



Moo Rice said:


> The way I understand it is that Fi is a function used to judge/decide the _value_ of things based on individual experiences.
> 
> The logic is very simple. Just put introversion (focus on the subject/observer) and feeling (judgment of value) together and that's Fi!


Internal judgement? Ji?


----------



## incision (May 23, 2010)

VirtualInsanity said:


> Then doesn't everyone technically use Fi?


Nope. Fe users have an external normalization process. Fi users don't care about externalities, relative to values violation or not.


----------



## Moo Rice (Apr 9, 2018)

VirtualInsanity said:


> Internal judgement? Ji?


Yes... but feeling is responsible for judging how *desirable* or *valuable* something is, while thinking is responsible for judging how *useful* or *functional* something is.

Introverted functions are based on (and consistent with) the subject/observer.
Extroverted functions are based on (and consistent with) the object/situation.


----------



## BlueRaspberry (Dec 19, 2017)

VirtualInsanity said:


> So for your friends, it's engrained into them, like the insanity is engrained into me? Like, the concept of their inner morals/values judging the things in their lives?


Yes. Fi makes personal value judgements about the worth of something, but it often operates at a subconscious level. I've heard other FPs compare their Fi to an iceberg of which their moral principles are just the tip. I wouldn't be able to list my morals off the top of my head, but I have a very strong internal reaction when my unconscious values are violated, I'll just _know_ when something is ethically wrong. Since Fi is my dominant function, I'm often unaware of my values/morals until I bump into something that goes against them. For example, I didn't realize I valued freedom of individual expression until I began working for a journal that refused to publish overly controversial or dissentious submissions


----------



## Max (Aug 14, 2014)

Duo said:


> Nope. Fe users have an external normalization process. Fi users don't care about externalities, relative to values violation or not.


Ahh, aight. I get you know. 



Moo Rice said:


> Yes... but feeling is responsible for judging how *desirable* or *valuable* something is, while thinking is responsible for judging how *useful* or *functional* something is.
> 
> Introverted functions are based on (and consistent with) the subject/observer.
> Extroverted functions are based on (and consistent with) the object/situation.


So it's like:


> Ti= 'Is this useful/functional to me? Does this line up with my subjective sense of functionality/usefulness?'
> Fi= 'Do I value/desire this? Does it line up with my subjective sense of values/desires?'





BlueRaspberry said:


> Yes. Fi makes personal value judgements about the worth of something, but it often operates at a subconscious level. I've heard other FPs compare their Fi to an iceberg of which their moral principles are just the tip. I wouldn't be able to list my morals off the top of my head, but I have a very strong internal reaction when my unconscious values are violated, I'll just _know_ when something is ethically wrong. Since Fi is my dominant function, I'm often unaware of my values/morals until I bump into something that goes against them. For example, I didn't realize I valued freedom of individual expression until I began working for a journal that refused to publish overly controversial or dissentious submissions


Random question: If your internal sense of morals agreed with the majority of Fe users/ was similar to the majority, how does that make you feel? Do you feel harmony? Do you feel accomplished or just view it as a co-incidence?


----------



## Moo Rice (Apr 9, 2018)

VirtualInsanity said:


> So it's like:
> 
> *Ti= 'Is this useful/functional to me? Does this line up with my subjective sense of functionality/usefulness?'
> Fi= 'Do I value/desire this? Does it line up with my subjective sense of values/desires?'*



Yes


----------



## Max (Aug 14, 2014)

Moo Rice said:


> Yes


Then I am so Ti, it hurts xD


----------



## The red spirit (Sep 29, 2015)

Moo Rice said:


> Yes


But what if it's I value and desire this, but not only that, it's very useful for me.


----------



## Moo Rice (Apr 9, 2018)

The red spirit said:


> But what is it's I value and desire this, but not only that, it's very useful for me.


Te-Fi axis, I guess?

If you judge how useful something is by looking at information related to the situation, that's Te
If you judge how useful something is by looking at information related to yourself, that's Ti.

(It's the same logic for feeling, except feeling is about value)


----------



## The red spirit (Sep 29, 2015)

Moo Rice said:


> If you judge how useful something is by looking at information related to the situation, that's Te
> If you judge how useful something is by looking at information related to yourself, that's Ti.


I don't get it. Let's say my PC broke down and I need new parts, would it be "by situation" or "related to yourself"? Also I like PC hardware, then what?


----------



## Moo Rice (Apr 9, 2018)

The red spirit said:


> I don't get it. Let's say my PC broke down and I need new parts, would it be "by situation" or "related to yourself"? Also I like PC hardware, then what?


Both Ti and Te would judge what is more useful to fix the computer (and might get the same result), but a Te user would use external/objective criteria to do it, while a Ti user would use internal/subjective criteria.


----------



## The red spirit (Sep 29, 2015)

Moo Rice said:


> Both Ti and Te would judge what is more useful to fix the computer (and might get the same result), but a Te user would use external/objective criteria to do it, while a Ti user would use internal/subjective criteria.


I need example of external and internal criteria. Also it feels like Fi-Ti users will do the same, just like Fe-Te.


----------



## Moo Rice (Apr 9, 2018)

The red spirit said:


> I need example of external and internal criteria. Also it feels like Fi-Ti users will do the same, just like Fe-Te.


Internal criteria: you "look inwards" and use information you already had before. It depends on (and is consistent with) the subject.
External criteria: you "look outwards" and use information you get from the situation. It depends on (and is consistent with) the object. 

I don't understand what you mean by *Also it feels like Fi-Ti users will do the same, just like Fe-Te.* Sorry


----------



## The red spirit (Sep 29, 2015)

Moo Rice said:


> Internal criteria: you "look inwards" and use information you already had before. It depends on (and is consistent with) the subject.
> External criteria: you "look outwards" and use information you get from the situation. It depends on (and is consistent with) the object.


What I'm asking is, what happens if both criterias are used? From before and from situation, from inwards and from outwards.





Moo Rice said:


> I don't understand what you mean by *Also it feels like Fi-Ti users will do the same, just like Fe-Te.* Sorry


Ti = Fi and Fe = Te in terms of approach. Ji looks inwards, Je looks outwards.


----------



## Moo Rice (Apr 9, 2018)

The red spirit said:


> What I'm asking is, what happens if both criterias are used? From before and from situation, from inwards and from outwards.


I would say both can be used, but we have a natural preference for one over the other.




> Ti = Fi and Fe = Te in terms of approach. Ji looks inwards, Je looks outwards.


Ok, I think I get it now.
They may arrive at the same conclusion, but Ji would unconsciously choose to take the internal/subjective "path" and Je would unconsciously choose to take the external/objective "path".


----------



## BlueRaspberry (Dec 19, 2017)

VirtualInsanity said:


> Random question: If your internal sense of morals agreed with the majority of Fe users/ was similar to the majority, how does that make you feel? Do you feel harmony? Do you feel accomplished or just view it as a co-incidence?


I view it as coincidence. Other people's opinions don't factor into what _I_ decide is right or wrong; I make my internal judgement first, and then retroactively incorporate other's perspectives via Te. If my personal morals aligned with the opinions of the majority, then great, I'm glad that other people share my values, but ultimately, it's irrelevant to my decision-making progress. I would hold these values whether or not one person or 1 million people agreed with me, but of course life is easier/more harmonious if your values align with the majority (less internal and external strife)


----------



## The red spirit (Sep 29, 2015)

Moo Rice said:


> I would say both can be used, but we have a natural preference for one over the other.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I personally think that in those situations both are used simultaneously. Else I see flaw in your definitions or we have to believe in model A.


----------



## Felipe (Feb 25, 2016)

Fi is like a more subtle showing of emotions.

Fe is more like "in your face" emotions.


----------

