# Ti and Fe Working Togther



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

So recently I was thinking about the idea of introverted functions being "subjective" and extroverted functions being "objective". I did a few searches and came across a few threads about Ti being subjective:

http://personalitycafe.com/intp-forum-thinkers/47531-subjective-introverted-thinking.html

http://personalitycafe.com/nts-temperament-forum-intellects/37292-how-ti-subjective.html


I started piecing together some of things I read with some other things I had heard from Ti users. I can see how Ti can be "subjective" in some ways....I've heard NTPs often say that they enjoy arguing a perspective completely different from their own just for the fun of it, and just to be able to study that perspective in more detail. It didn't mean that they actually believed it...they just liked the idea of looking into it deeply.

So to me, this is in tune with the idea that everyone has their own personal logic that leads them to their own conclusions...and I think NTPs have a particularly good way of recognizing this. Te users, on the other hand, always seem to be striving to get a universal logic that everyone can apply in the same way.


I don't know much about STPs, but I can see the same thing playing out with them in its own way. I can picture ISTPs (the "mechanics") being interested in a variety of physical structures...whether it's studying deeply the physical layout of a piece of art they're creating or understanding the intricacies of how to fix an engine. 

For ESTPs, I find it even more fascinating. The stereotype of an ESTP is that they're a good salesperson; they could take any product, no matter how they personally feel about it...and make it seem like the best product ever. It's like they're able to get into the mind of their customer, understand why the customer would want the product, and study that mentality deeply. It's like they're removing their own personal logic and temporarily adopting the mindset of their customer. 

To me, this lines up very well with the idea of an NTP wanting to do the same thing with a more theoretical situation, just to discuss a topic for the fun of it...not for any direct practical purpose like an STP would.


So here's what I find interesting about this...I do the same thing myself...but this works in tandem with my Fe. My Fe drives me to want to understand where other people are coming from....and I use my Ti to gain that understanding. My goal is to gain Fe harmony...but I use my Ti to help with that goal.


So for me, my Fe and Ti work together very well. What I find so funny about this is that I believe in the idea of "opposite" functions suppressing each other...because I see it all of the time with Si and Ne. Si and Ne seem to be entire worlds apart to me. But I think this is largely because one is dominant and one is inferior for me. To me, it makes perfect sense that my Fe and Ti can work together so well because they're my middle functions.


That's why it's so interesting to me to see how it's kind of the opposite with an INTP...that they can reconcile their Ne and Si (or at least I think they can), but that their Ti and Fe are entire worlds apart.



So I'm wondering how this works for other people as well.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Yeah, this makes me think of one of @pneumcoceptor's (sp?) videos where she was describing being able to switch between Fe and Ti depending on who she was with - I think this is essentially the same with me with Te and Fi (or T and F in general) - around the inferior F types, I'll downplay my evaluations to go along with what they're more comfortable with, generally, while around the dominant F types, I'll keep my thinking under wraps more and play up feeling more, generally (evaluation - the word feeling is just so misleading when it comes to talking about this function based on erroneous connotations, ugghh). But most of the time, I think these functions in me are largely irrelevant to my relationships with anyone 99% of the time. Sensation and intuition is a different story - I tend to hand the reigns in sensation to the S dominants (a certain ESTP friend of mine and I tend to joke with each other about how we find each other weird, but we're still close anyway - and fuel each other's egos with our dominants, essentially, lol).


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

I think very human is capable of compartmentalizing so I am not entirely sure what is being said here, to be honest. Around other people I always downplay my Ti because I have to unless I know they appreciate it, for example. If anything, I openly repress Si more.


----------



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

LeaT said:


> I think very human is capable of compartmentalizing so I am not entirely sure what is being said here, to be honest.


Well, I think everyone is capable of it, but different people have different preferences in terms of how they do it. I really do think that Te users have a harder time viewing logic as subjective to each person, and I think Fe users have a harder time doing it with moral values. 

In my experience with a number of Te users, especially dominant Te users...is that they almost feel as though everything else succumbs to a universal logic. I think when I express some of my more emotional needs to Te users, I tend to get a response that the way to fix a problem is to put aside those needs and appeal to logic. With Ti users, it seems like more often they see it like I do...that my logic changes because I'm using it to support a different need than they do.

I think the same thing happens with Fe and Fi. I personally have a harder time with people all being on a different page socially...I like the idea of everyone connecting. 

That's not to say I'm not capable of valuing the differences in uniqueness in people and accepting people being different. As pneumoceptor described it in our video chat, Fe is better served to understand people than it is to control them. But at the same time, I think it takes more effort for me to do so than it would for an Fi user.



LeaT said:


> Around other people I always downplay my Ti because I have to unless I know they appreciate it, for example. If anything, I openly repress Si more.


It's hard for me to say without hearing more specifics about the situations, but this may be very environmentally based. But like I said, it may be different for you reconciling Ti and Fe than it is for me because you have them as dominant and inferior. 

But I'd have to hear more. It seemed like earlier that you said everyone is capable of compartmentalizing, but here you also say that you have to downplay your Ti. I think that may be a result of your inferior Fe, which makes your Ti serve a different purpose than mine. For me, my goal is to understand where someone is coming from, so my Ti helps me to understand their perspective...so it doesn't feel downplayed to me. 

So my question would be...does you Ti lead you to want to completely understand someone else's logic, even if it's vastly different than yours...or does it not?


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

teddy564339 said:


> It's hard for me to say without hearing more specifics about the situations, but this may be very environmentally based. But like I said, it may be different for you reconciling Ti and Fe than it is for me because you have them as dominant and inferior.
> 
> But I'd have to hear more. It seemed like earlier that you said everyone is capable of compartmentalizing, but here you also say that you have to downplay your Ti. I think that may be a result of your inferior Fe, which makes your Ti serve a different purpose than mine. For me, my goal is to understand where someone is coming from, so my Ti helps me to understand their perspective...so it doesn't feel downplayed to me.
> 
> So my question would be...does you Ti lead you to want to completely understand someone else's logic, even if it's vastly different than yours...or does it not?


What I mean here is that downplaying Ti around people who I do not know will readily accept Ti is compartmentalizing to me.


----------



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

LeaT said:


> What I mean here is that downplaying Ti around people who I do not know will readily accept Ti is compartmentalizing to me.


Ah...so you're referring to compartmentalizing more out of necessity rather than active choice. I think what I was referring to in the OP is more of an active desire to do so, no matter what the environment dictates.

It is possible that that this is stronger some ways in judgers than perceivers.

That being said...I still think that Te/Fi users might compartmentalize more begrudgingly. I've talked to Fi users who seem to be very frustrated not being able to be exactly who they are, regardless of who they are around. Of course, everyone feels that way to a degree....but I think my Fe kind of motivates me to compromise my values around people for the sake of getting along. 

So it's all relative.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

teddy564339 said:


> Ah...so you're referring to compartmentalizing more out of necessity rather than active choice. I think what I was referring to in the OP is more of an active desire to do so, no matter what the environment dictates.
> 
> It is possible that that this is stronger some ways in judgers than perceivers.
> 
> ...


I can't speak for judgers and perceivers because I haven't met that many strong Fe uers to dicsuss this with. They tend to exhaust me a lot IRL so I rather avoid them, generally. In this sense I suppose you can actually see it as a refusal to compartmentalize because I don't want to do it, simply. Easier to avoid the situation all together. It's better than sitting and being annoyed over having to pretend to be someone I'm not. I just don't like when I can't be true enough to myself. It certainly doesn't sit right with me. 

I agree with that strong Fe users might feel more motivated and yes, I do it not out of what can appear to be choice, but I do it more as a form of necessity. I see it as a way to socially survive, I guess. Ideally I would not want to do this at all and indeed just be myself, and this desire was even stronger when I was younger and I often refused to adapt or conform to the group. 

I think Ji users might be more frustrated in general though, as I think the source of all the functions ultimately comes from sensing and feeling. We must first sense the world in order to begin to experience it abstractly by rejecting reality simply as it is, and we can only motivate our preferences with feelings at the end of the day. There is no rational logic behind that more than we think what's wrong and what's wrong and what we like and dislike.


----------



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

LeaT said:


> I can't speak for judgers and perceivers because I haven't met that many strong Fe uers to dicsuss this with. They tend to exhaust me a lot IRL so I rather avoid them, generally. In this sense I suppose you can actually see it as a refusal to compartmentalize because I don't want to do it, simply. Easier to avoid the situation all together. It's better than sitting and being annoyed over having to pretend to be someone I'm not. I just don't like when I can't be true enough to myself. It certainly doesn't sit right with me.
> 
> I agree with that strong Fe users might feel more motivated and yes, I do it not out of what can appear to be choice, but I do it more as a form of necessity. I see it as a way to socially survive, I guess. Ideally I would not want to do this at all and indeed just be myself, and this desire was even stronger when I was younger and I often refused to adapt or conform to the group.



So given all of that, here's my question for you: how do you view your actions differently than those of Fi/Te users? How would you compare your mentality to that of an INTJ, for example?

It's interesting, because I have definitely seen dom Fi users say that Fe strikes them as controlling, where they feel forced to change who they are in group situations. So I would imagine that Ti users would feel the same about Te. 

Basically, it seems like to me that the relationship of dom Fi users with Fe would be very similar to the relationship of dom Ti users with Te, and the same would also be true of Fi vs. Te and Ti vs. Fe. 


If this is not the case, then I would want to understand why it would be that Te wouldn't cause the same friction as Fe. Because for me, Te definitely has ways of causing a lot of friction...I can clearly see how it clashes with my Fe/Ti. 



LeaT said:


> I think Ji users might be more frustrated in general though, as I think the source of all the functions ultimately comes from sensing and feeling. We must first sense the world in order to begin to experience it abstractly by rejecting reality simply as it is, and we can only motivate our preferences with feelings at the end of the day. There is no rational logic behind that more than we think what's wrong and what's wrong and what we like and dislike.


I may be misunderstanding you, but this would almost seem to explain a lot of the frustrations that NTs in general feel. But the last sentence you posted strikes me as something that a Ti user would be much more likely to agree with than a Te user, but I might be wrong about that.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

I actually don't believe people repress the tert. - I think it might be played up less (less conscious emphasis on it), if anything, due to the fact that controlling it and dominant would just make a person too one-sided in terms of extraversion/introversion, so interacting in a clear way with their inner/outer worlds would be challenging. Otherwise, it and the aux. are basically one-in-the-same together in principle and supporting each other (e.g. noticing Ne in most INXPs to me is almost impossible without inferring it from their Si, I noticed, unless they're super extraverted, where you'll see raging inferior as well, since after all, intuition geared toward the environment is by nature, almost invisible when you think about it, and if you don't lead with it, people won't notice what you're doing with it). Any aux. Ne type is probably also pretty extraverted in order for this to repress the introverted perception counterpart.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

teddy564339 said:


> So given all of that, here's my question for you: how do you view your actions differently than those of Fi/Te users? How would you compare your mentality to that of an INTJ, for example?


Good question. I have a very easy time identifying with INFPs for example, so I can't really say how I differ from them more than how I differ from other INTPs. Compared to an INTJ, I think I am a little more easy-going though, but that's just because I'm a perceiver I think. I'm more likely to just go with the flow if I see no point to resist. But similar to an INTJ, I might also try to manipulate the situaiton to meet my ends better, so I honestly don't know. I haven't met many people I can clearly say are INTJs in real life, and the ones I have probably met I have not been close enough with so I can study how their behavior differs to mine. But I think enneagram plays a large role here too.


> It's interesting, because I have definitely seen dom Fi users say that Fe strikes them as controlling, where they feel forced to change who they are in group situations. So I would imagine that Ti users would feel the same about Te.


It really depends on the Te. I think for a Ji user, either Je function can come off as controlling. I don't like how my ESFJ grandmother tries to manipulate me to do her biddings by making me feel bad for example, but I don't like how my ESTJ stepmother tries to impose control upon me either. Socially, I don't like uncontrolled and what I find to be irrational use of Je in general. Irrational use to me is simply Je for the sake of Je, which is usually the case with Je dominants. There has to be some kind of purpose to it for than the use itself. I just want people to let me be essentially, and let me decide on what to think and behave on my own. I think my thinking here is just what most INxPs might experience in general when it comes to dominant Je users, especially ESxJs.


> Basically, it seems like to me that the relationship of dom Fi users with Fe would be very similar to the relationship of dom Ti users with Te, and the same would also be true of Fi vs. Te and Ti vs. Fe.


As I said, I think it's just Je in general more than a specific function. I have no problem with Te in academia for example, as I recognize the importance of Te in academia. Let's look at academic writing for example. Obviously I must cite and properly refer to my sources when I write a scientific article and I must present my findings and logic in a way that makes it clear to everyone. Anything else would just be intellectual dishonesty. These are Te core values I can accept without questioning them further because I see and understand their uses in order to promote good science. 


> If this is not the case, then I would want to understand why it would be that Te wouldn't cause the same friction as Fe. Because for me, Te definitely has ways of causing a lot of friction...I can clearly see how it clashes with my Fe/Ti.


Explain what you mean better with this. How does it cause friction with you? Are you thinking about social settings in general that are Te-imposed or are you thinking about dealing with strong Te users?


> I may be misunderstanding you, but this would almost seem to explain a lot of the frustrations that NTs in general feel. But the last sentence you posted strikes me as something that a Ti user would be much more likely to agree with than a Te user, but I might be wrong about that.


Well, I was thinking about this paragraph before I wrote it. While I can see what you mean with Te users disagreeing with the last statement, I think it ultimately boils down to the ability to recognize that humans are not as rational as we NTs like to think, and we are definitely not as intuitive either as we like to think. If we have to look at the most primitive form of our psyche, where it all comes from, then I identify those cores being SeFi, would I have to boil it down into cognitive functions. There are people who might disagree with me here, but as I said - we must first be able to experience the world at all before we can start extrapolating what it means to us, and how we decide to extrapolate this must stem from some basic and innate Fi desire of how to ultimately understand the world. How did we as human beings decide on what functions we like and prefer over other functions? How did we decide that function preference over another preference? 

While this is certainly not a common thought but has been expressed by a few other than myself, I think Fi is for example the backbone of Ti. Ti values must ultimately stem from Fi influence, working as a shadow behind Ti. Ti just manifests this Fi in a way that it removes the subjectivity of Fi by masking it into objectivity, but it is nevertheless as subjective as Fi. It pretends to ignore Fi value systems but I think Ti operates very much the same. I see a similar dichotomy being true for Fe and Te, where Fe is the backbone for Te. I was thinking it can't just be an conscious desire of repressing feelings, but more of how our alignments came to be. This is where I see Fi in particular having its role.


----------



## appleton4 (May 16, 2012)

I have some pretty shitty Fe, and never am entirely sure what anyone wants from me at any given time. So I have a kind of conscientiousness switch. In an uncertain situation I am extremely polite, formal, unassuming, etc. But can also be incredibly casual, somewhat vulgar, unintentionally offensive. When people see that disparity I imagine it could be disconcerting. Not entirely sure function wise what is happening here, I suppose it's about giving Ti or Si the reins when determining conduct.


----------



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

LeaT said:


> Good question. I have a very easy time identifying with INFPs for example, so I can't really say how I differ from them more than how I differ from other INTPs. Compared to an INTJ, I think I am a little more easy-going though, but that's just because I'm a perceiver I think. I'm more likely to just go with the flow if I see no point to resist. But similar to an INTJ, I might also try to manipulate the situaiton to meet my ends better, so I honestly don't know. I haven't met many people I can clearly say are INTJs in real life, and the ones I have probably met I have not been close enough with so I can study how their behavior differs to mine. But I think enneagram plays a large role here too.


I find it interesting that you identify pretty well with INFPs. I get along with both types just fine for the most part. However, I think I can see a very strong difference in how deeply INFPs are attached to their values and how passionate they feel about them. INTPs strike me as just more curious to study information.



LeaT said:


> It really depends on the Te. I think for a Ji user, either Je function can come off as controlling. I don't like how my ESFJ grandmother tries to manipulate me to do her biddings by making me feel bad for example, but I don't like how my ESTJ stepmother tries to impose control upon me either. Socially, I don't like uncontrolled and what I find to be irrational use of Je in general. Irrational use to me is simply Je for the sake of Je, which is usually the case with Je dominants. There has to be some kind of purpose to it for than the use itself. I just want people to let me be essentially, and let me decide on what to think and behave on my own. I think my thinking here is just what most INxPs might experience in general when it comes to dominant Je users, especially ESxJs.


I do think the Si vs. Ne part of it does have an impact. I personally get along better with ESTJs than I do ENTJs, because I have an Si connection with ESTJs. 

But I think it's largely because Si is always looking for consistency and security of having things set into place, and this doesn't seem to vibe well with Se, Ni or Ne. 



LeaT said:


> As I said, I think it's just Je in general more than a specific function. I have no problem with Te in academia for example, as I recognize the importance of Te in academia. Let's look at academic writing for example. Obviously I must cite and properly refer to my sources when I write a scientific article and I must present my findings and logic in a way that makes it clear to everyone. Anything else would just be intellectual dishonesty. These are Te core values I can accept without questioning them further because I see and understand their uses in order to promote good science.


I agree that in many contexts Te is valuable. I actually tend to get along with STJs just fine, because when I see their Te play out in a work environment, I feel like I can understand the need for the structure.

However, I also see many cases where I believe Fe is valuable. I honestly believe Fe helps people in social situations to adapt to not get on each others' nerves. I'm not saying that Fi tells people to always do what they want...but I think Fi does drive people to dig their heels into the things that they care about. Sometimes I think compromise is the only way for people to accomplish things together. 


I think what frustrates me is when anyone values Te but not Fe. I think it's fine to find it easier to get along and jive with one function more...but sometimes I feel like people don't give Fe a chance.

It may be that people accept that in more "work" related environments they have to sacrifice things, but they may feel socially they shouldn't have to because it's their own time. So that may explain why people may feel more comfortable succumbing to Te as opposed to Fe. 



LeaT said:


> Explain what you mean better with this. How does it cause friction with you? Are you thinking about social settings in general that are Te-imposed or are you thinking about dealing with strong Te users?


It's kind of both.

As I briefly mentioned before, I actually don't tend to have much of an issue with STJs. I think it's because I know where they stand with their Te. I think both of our bits of Si let us know where our structure begins and ends, and it's easy for me to accept their Te because I feel like it's not going to surprise me or push me out of where I need to be.


Where I find Te imposing is when people tell me how I'm supposed to think...or what decision I'm supposed to make. I have a problem with Te when it acts like I'm stupid for not agreeing to do things a particular way. As I mentioned briefly before, this happens the most I think when someone doesn't understand that I have needs and values that are different than theirs, and that my logic is set to support those needs and values. I think some people's Te tells them that I shouldn't have those values in the first place, so their logic is telling me I should get rid of them.


I think it's kind of like how some people feel like Fe tells how they're supposed to act in one particular way, and then Fe tells them that they're mean, or "cold", or rude, or anything else for not abiding by the rules that Fe sets up. For me, I feel the same ay when Te tells me I'm supposed to *think* in one particular way, and that I'm stupid, or illogical, or irrational, for not abiding by the rules that Te sets up.

So that's the parallel that I see between how the two Je functions can control people. 



LeaT said:


> Well, I was thinking about this paragraph before I wrote it. While I can see what you mean with Te users disagreeing with the last statement, I think it ultimately boils down to the ability to recognize that humans are not as rational as we NTs like to think, and we are definitely not as intuitive either as we like to think. If we have to look at the most primitive form of our psyche, where it all comes from, then I identify those cores being SeFi, would I have to boil it down into cognitive functions. There are people who might disagree with me here, but as I said - we must first be able to experience the world at all before we can start extrapolating what it means to us, and how we decide to extrapolate this must stem from some basic and innate Fi desire of how to ultimately understand the world. How did we as human beings decide on what functions we like and prefer over other functions? How did we decide that function preference over another preference?
> 
> While this is certainly not a common thought but has been expressed by a few other than myself, I think Fi is for example the backbone of Ti. Ti values must ultimately stem from Fi influence, working as a shadow behind Ti. Ti just manifests this Fi in a way that it removes the subjectivity of Fi by masking it into objectivity, but it is nevertheless as subjective as Fi. It pretends to ignore Fi value systems but I think Ti operates very much the same. I see a similar dichotomy being true for Fe and Te, where Fe is the backbone for Te. I was thinking it can't just be an conscious desire of repressing feelings, but more of how our alignments came to be. This is where I see Fi in particular having its role.



I agree with you in some ways...in the regard that it seems to me like logic is almost designed to serve our emotions. That's the way that I feel personally; for me, my emotions tell me what my goal is, and my logic tells me how I'm going to achieve it. But I didn't want to assume that others automatically feel the same way. I was talking to one INTJ recently who described something that I viewed as an emotion instead as a "bodily state". So the way that she distinguished between the two showed the differences in how we look at "emotions". 


I also sometimes feel like Fe is the backbone of Te in the regard that a lot of Je rules are designed just so that we don't get on each others' nerves and can co-exist/get along. Even just general, basic actions of respect. If I'm on a bus, I'm going to talk at a reasonable volume so I don't bother other people. Is this Fe or Te? Likewise, if I go into a sports bar (or even more fitting, a live sports event), it's completely fine to yell and make as much noise as you want. Is this Fe or Te? I think in both cases, it's kind of both...the purpose is to support the correct emotional environment, but the logic tells you that this is ok.


But maybe that's just how my Fe and Ti perceive the situation.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

INTPs and INFPs: the only connection I can see here would be more on a surface level (auxiliaries and how they deal with the outer world with them or personal threats with them). Past the surface, these two types couldn't be more different - one does everything the other would identify as being the opposite of him/herself. The shared Ji mode of operating might look mildly similar to outsiders and the fact that they default to judgment over perception, but that's it (the Fe in INTPs gives them away big time from INFPs - they're much more open people in the opinion/evaluation department, let alone, the INTPs usually don't have a persona built around the inferior, so they can look a bit raging and uber obvious in this department, while the Fi doms tend to have a strong persona built around evaluation, so this might not even stand out about them, let alone, is introverted to make it even less detectable). They otherwise do everything the other would refuse to identify with. I'm talking psychology here, not friendships and whathaveyou.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

teddy564339 said:


> I find it interesting that you identify pretty well with INFPs. I get along with both types just fine for the most part. However, I think I can see a very strong difference in how deeply INFPs are attached to their values and how passionate they feel about them. INTPs strike me as just more curious to study information.


I identify strongly with INFPs because I can't identify with the whole INTP thing that INTPs are emotional robots that repress their emotions as much as humanly possible and refuse admit they have emotions. There is for example a thread in the INFP forum dedicated to songs that currently fit your emotional state for example, but there is no counter-part in the INTP forum. Yet I like to post in the INFP thread once in a while, because this is how I also experience the world. There is usually a song for everyone of my emotional states. I just need to find them sometimes. So generally speaking, I strongly recognize and relate to how INFPs think (I can quite easily mimic the writings of an obnoxious Fi dom as well) because I don't feel the need to repress my emotions like that. It's hard to express it really. I just strongly identify with INFPs but I am fairly certain I am not an INFP. Their mode of operation is just something I can recognize and relate to. 

Instead what you see in the INTP forum are a lot of threads in the likes of "The rare INTP feels thread". No, it's not rare that I feel. I have a lot of feelings and I recognize and understand most of them well and what cause them and why and what they mean to me. I don't have to like all of them but I do not repress them either, even though uncomfortable emotions are of course uncomfortable and sometimes I wish I wouldn't feel like this right now in this very moment, but I think that's hardly unique to those with inferior F functions. But do I have a problem dealing with my emotions generally speaking? No, I don't. I don't see that to be a problem more than that I sometimes feel I lack a bit of emotional control socially, and socially I might repress my emotions a fair bit. That has more to do with who I think I am as a person and how I want others to perceive me though, as I think people who make decisions solely and always based on emotions as weak-willed and wishy-washy. I think this is more related to how I perceive Fe than Fi though, as Fi users tend to not express emotions as much as Fe users do. I want people to be able to stand up for themselves and their opinions and be who they are. I admire inner strength in people. Opinions like these are opinions that have sometimes made me confused if I am a mistype and I am really an INFP, but in the end no, my systems are ultimately not based on values what is right and wrong, although I also have those systems and they become very apparent when people step on my toes.

I want to add here though that when it comes down to very important decisions and I can't logically conclude what the best deicision is when looking at it from a cost-benefit analysis, I WILL do what I think is right rather than what is logically correct. So when I for example take an MBTI questionnaire I honestly don't know what to answer on questions like these. I think both are prevalent in me and what I run with is just highly contextual. I am also very passionate about my values I should add, when it does come to think I do care about. My ability to feel passion is also what sets me off to other INTPs as I find that they do not seem to share this experience with me but I do share it with INFPs, but in contrast to INFPs, I appear to not experience _enough_ of it. It's more than the common INTP, but less than the common INFP. I remember I for example I shared this video that I am very passionate about:






I don't think it even got any comments. Suffice to say, I was disappointed. Same thing with this one:






Of course, I am biased here as I am an anthropologist but in my narrow-minded world, how can one NOT see how amazing these videos are? I am just very passionate about this stuff. Other passions I have are music, and of course analysis. Instead what I find on the INTP subforum for most of the part are people succumbed to SiTi apathy. Yes, I understand that too, but when you share something you really care about you just get a "what?" reaction. Maybe it's just Si clash, sigh.


> I do think the Si vs. Ne part of it does have an impact. I personally get along better with ESTJs than I do ENTJs, because I have an Si connection with ESTJs.


Curiously enough, I get along quite well with INTJs that I have met online (I can't say much for IRL more than the husband to my cousin, but we do get along quite well even though we're not very close). ESTJ is often an instant reaction of being repulsed. ENTJs are quirky but it depends on the ENTJ. I think I have grown in this department though, where I have started to be able to look beyond the immediate Te surface of Te doms. Their Te is always initially very abrasive to me, but once I hang around a little more I find that they are usually not that bad as people, but of course it depends on the person.


> I agree that in many contexts Te is valuable. I actually tend to get along with STJs just fine, because when I see their Te play out in a work environment, I feel like I can understand the need for the structure.
> 
> However, I also see many cases where I believe Fe is valuable. I honestly believe Fe helps people in social situations to adapt to not get on each others' nerves. I'm not saying that Fi tells people to always do what they want...but I think Fi does drive people to dig their heels into the things that they care about. Sometimes I think compromise is the only way for people to accomplish things together.
> 
> ...


Te and Fe are good at different things and honestly that's all there is to it. Fe can unite people but it can also divide people. Te can also unite people but it can also divide people. I agree with that I am concerned with how society as a whole has become predominantly biased towards Te think though, where efficiency is valued more the human experience, to the point efficiency occurs at the expense _of _the human experience.


> It's kind of both.
> 
> As I briefly mentioned before, I actually don't tend to have much of an issue with STJs. I think it's because I know where they stand with their Te. I think both of our bits of Si let us know where our structure begins and ends, and it's easy for me to accept their Te because I feel like it's not going to surprise me or push me out of where I need to be.
> 
> ...


I feel that Te and Fe can operate very similar in this regard. Fe users can also have a tendency to tell you how to think. I find that Te is also very much the way you act. Fe is concerned with the way people act too but in a different manner. But looking at my ESFJ grandmother for example, she often manipulates me and my father in trying to keep contact with her at a level she finds more comfortable (we're both introverts so we don't want much contact), but she also tries to manipulate us according to her FeSi values so when she calls me, she might say that my other grandmother called her today and she "reminds me" that I should maybe call my other grandmother in this very "innocent" manner. She doesn't do it purposefully, but it's fairly easy to spot since she makes it in such a way that it's supposed to create guilt tripping in you. Dad for example told me that when she manipulates him, she makes him feel that he's a bad father because most of her guilt tripping comments are about me and his relationship to me. I find that almost more despisable than the way my ESTJ stepmother tries to enforce her rules on me when I am home. At least she doesn't try to make me feel bad for doing things a certain way. It just upsets her because it breaks routine and she can't see the efficiency of my actions. However, in contrast to dominant Fe users, she is _honest_. She will tell you what she thinks without warping it to you, and I appreciate that thousand times more than trying to make into manipulative guilt tripping. If you think I am not taking care enough of my other grandmother because I don't call her enough according to your standards then please tell that in my face instead of trying to make me feel bad about it.



> I agree with you in some ways...in the regard that it seems to me like logic is almost designed to serve our emotions. That's the way that I feel personally; for me, my emotions tell me what my goal is, and my logic tells me how I'm going to achieve it. But I didn't want to assume that others automatically feel the same way. I was talking to one INTJ recently who described something that I viewed as an emotion instead as a "bodily state". So the way that she distinguished between the two showed the differences in how we look at "emotions".


I understand how an INTJ can experience it like that due to inferior Se.


> I also sometimes feel like Fe is the backbone of Te in the regard that a lot of Je rules are designed just so that we don't get on each others' nerves and can co-exist/get along. Even just general, basic actions of respect. If I'm on a bus, I'm going to talk at a reasonable volume so I don't bother other people. Is this Fe or Te? Likewise, if I go into a sports bar (or even more fitting, a live sports event), it's completely fine to yell and make as much noise as you want. Is this Fe or Te? I think in both cases, it's kind of both...the purpose is to support the correct emotional environment, but the logic tells you that this is ok.
> 
> 
> But maybe that's just how my Fe and Ti perceive the situation.


In that case I am also biased in my perception. I just can't see how humans, ultimately being irrational beings, can be rational just because we want to be though. Does this need for rationality still not stem out of irrational thinking in the end? What determined what is irrational and rational? Certainly not rational thinking, since rational thinking assumes there is already an existing mode of operation. I see it that irrational thinking as correlated to F in this case, must thus be the backbone for what we ultimately decide what is rational and irrational. There is no underlying logic here more than what feels right in the end. I would be curious to hear how a Te or Fi user would think of this.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

@_LeaT_

Never fear, the MBTI persona stuff is just stupid (those look like hopeless personality disorders). That's not to say this can't hold true for some people or that it's not worth looking into, but to presume that type constitutes persona the way MBTI does is totally ridiculous and defies Jung's principles to a great extent, let alone wouldn't tell you anything about yourself anyway.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> @_LeaT_
> 
> Never fear, the MBTI persona stuff is just stupid (those look like hopeless personality disorders). That's not to say this can't hold true for some people or that it's not worth looking into, but to presume that type constitutes persona the way MBTI does is totally ridiculous and defies Jung's principles to a great extent, let alone wouldn't tell you anything about yourself anyway.


With that said, I don't agree with Jung on everything either although I agree with him more than with Myers/Briggs and others who have tried to base models around the functions.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

@_LeaT_

Well, MBTI isn't about persona either, but the way most of the type descriptions that exist out there are written makes this seem to be so, so if one's not being discerning around this stuff, it's very easy to take it that way (also, there's a ton of internet myth out there that makes this stuff all the worse in this regard, even thought most, or maybe even 99% of it isn't true at all with regards to the way it gets conveyed). Jung...it takes time for him to sink in (and I do find him mildly sexist at times - just a product of his times, I suppose), but once he does, the reality he conveys makes a lot of sense (there's almost no way around his concepts and how he's specifying their roles in his theory - it's as inherently logical as reasoning can get and put firmly into perspective with plenty of room for ambiguity to exist, as well as for various types and functions to have different functional natures in how they're rooted in the psyche from other functions. He leaves his reasoning extremely open to present implications where it's impossible to realistically box this stuff in the way MBTI does, while also, much of what I interpret from Jung runs totally counter to some of MBTI's propositions/implications (e.g. he says that the aux. is favored toward the dominant, but that's because it's defending it from the inferior anyway, so really, that doesn't make you your aux. function - he never says anything about the tert. being opposed to the dominant in any ways either so far as I've read, which totally throws the implications behind MBTI's organization of type out of the water). He presents this stuff in a much more big-picture fashion than MBTI by defining phenomena, rather than by approaching this stuff in a pseudo-concrete way. I find his description of Ni strikes a really strong emotional chord in me. Also, the fact that he was working with patients who most likely had no personal identity left (psychotic, severely mentally ill to a dysfunctional level) really convinces me that he was able to get a clear picture of the inner workings of these individuals' minds, since they had so little control over them and couldn't hide this stuff through persona management - no one can fake such complicated rational phenomena and consistent rational tendencies as seen in functions and such - I believe that in that way, his discoveries/theories vindicate the mentally ill (severely) - I find it all truly remarkable, whether or not our understanding from Jung could be considered "good enough." The MBTI imo is just the tool to the tool (Jung), although it ends up being a derivative of it in a lot of ways due to its methodology.


----------



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

LeaT said:


> I feel that Te and Fe can operate very similar in this regard. Fe users can also have a tendency to tell you how to think. I find that Te is also very much the way you act. Fe is concerned with the way people act too but in a different manner. But looking at my ESFJ grandmother for example, she often manipulates me and my father in trying to keep contact with her at a level she finds more comfortable (we're both introverts so we don't want much contact), but she also tries to manipulate us according to her FeSi values so when she calls me, she might say that my other grandmother called her today and she "reminds me" that I should maybe call my other grandmother in this very "innocent" manner. She doesn't do it purposefully, but it's fairly easy to spot since she makes it in such a way that it's supposed to create guilt tripping in you. Dad for example told me that when she manipulates him, she makes him feel that he's a bad father because most of her guilt tripping comments are about me and his relationship to me. I find that almost more despisable than the way my ESTJ stepmother tries to enforce her rules on me when I am home. At least she doesn't try to make me feel bad for doing things a certain way. It just upsets her because it breaks routine and she can't see the efficiency of my actions. However, in contrast to dominant Fe users, she is _honest_. She will tell you what she thinks without warping it to you, and I appreciate that thousand times more than trying to make into manipulative guilt tripping. If you think I am not taking care enough of my other grandmother because I don't call her enough according to your standards then please tell that in my face instead of trying to make me feel bad about it.



I've heard many similar stories from Ts, particularly NTs (and sometimes Fs) about Fe being manipulative. And after reading your description, it makes me wonder if there's not a difference based on what kind of force/manipulation different types are sensitive to or bothered more by.

Maybe I'm just blind to it, but I really don't see much emotional manipulation in my life. Or, when I do see it, it doesn't even register with me or bother me. I very rarely feel emotional guilt over something if I feel like I made the right decision. If I feel like I made a caring yet logical decision, and someone is trying to make me feel emotionally guilty for making it...I don't really care what they think. I just blow them off and ignore them, and I don't even stop to think about it. 

I think for NTs, they tend to be sensitive to dishonesty, since they tend to value truth more than anything else. They also may be more susceptible to emotional manipulation and more apt to feel guilt. But maybe no, I don't know, I'm just thinking out loud.

For me, I'm more sensitive to someone making me feel stupid or inferior intellectually. I'm really bothered by someone thinking I'm stupid, especially if I feel like they don't know a lot of the facts of a situation that I do know...and they don't know how my logic is taking that into account. I also feel stupid when they downplay my emotions and act like they're not important. 

I get the impression with most NTs that this doesn't bother them and they can easily blow off this sort of thing. They either feel like the other person's opinion doesn't matter because they don't know all of the facts, or they feel like they can argue their position well, or they feel like they can always learn more about the situation...I don't know. 

I think NTs usually don't seem to care as much if other people think they're stupid. They just view it as a sort of juvenile insult that they can brush off because it's not worth their time. If that's the case, then that is pretty much exactly how I feel about emotional manipulation. 


So I have to wonder if we don't have different soft spots in this regard.


----------



## Pyroscope (Apr 8, 2010)

@LeaT, I feel quite strongly in agreement wth you about what your ESFJ grandmother doing is manipulative. It's interesting hearing the language you use to describe it. You talk about the dishonesty bothering you most (I hope I've got that right?) whereas I personally find it more repulsive because it's an attempt to dictate how others feel and appears belittling to a person's own rights over their actions. I don't know what it means in terms of cognitive functions, but I just feel indignation and resentment against anyone who tries to tell someone else how to feel. Mostly because it seems insulting to an individual to claim that some overarching system of expected behaviour is worth more than understanding what's going on with them personally.

Sometimes I find Fe bothers me more than Te because it seems disingenuous. As though it's a robot programmed to react in a way to certain stimulus, but that can't actually FEEL what it presents, which just rankles me. Te may be blunt and feel like it doesn't value people in the end, but at least it doesn't feel like it tricks people into valuing false-but-well-executed-sympathy over genuine-but-flawed-sympathy. I'm not saying that Fe-users don't care, because they clearly do. However it's how it comes off to me sometimes even if I believe on another level that they ARE being genuine.

I find it hard to answer the question on whether humans are rational. I'd say that there are genuinely reasons why people are irrational, but who is to say where they come from? We're imperfect organisms after all so it's quite likely that we just misfire into irrationality a lot of the time and struggle with this susceptability. I find it fascinating that we spend so much time trying to make sense out our existence when it's utterly inconceivable to us. Logic only exists because we need it to. We can hypothetically argue that logic would continue to govern everything if we weren't around to observe it but that's not strictly true, because logic needs minds to create it. 

At least, that's how I see it... :laughing:



teddy564339 said:


> I've heard many similar stories from Ts, particularly NTs (and sometimes Fs) about Fe being manipulative. And after reading your description, it makes me wonder if there's not a difference based on what kind of force/manipulation different types are sensitive to or bothered more by.
> 
> Maybe I'm just blind to it, but I really don't see much emotional manipulation in my life. Or, when I do see it, it doesn't even register with me or bother me. I very rarely feel emotional guilt over  something if I feel like I made the right decision. If I feel like I made a caring yet logical decision, and someone is trying to make me feel emotionally guilty for making it...I don't really care what they think. I just blow them off and ignore them, and I don't even stop to think about it.
> 
> ...


It's often not dishonesty that bothers me about Fe-style manipulation of that kind, so much as the insistence that certain responses are better than others because they supposedly mean that the person has 'proved' what they're feeling. I think it's emotionally brutal to value people's reactions over their actual feelings. It's definitely only unhealhy Fe-users who are the type to refuse to accept other ways of feeling. It's not so bad if they're receptive to the possibility of different ways of feeling after their initial surprise over not getting the reaction they expected.

Furthermore it rubs me the wrong way to be reminded that some manipulative people like that can almost be seen as paragons of virtue who're needed to gently badger the types who might 'stray'. I hold issue with the fact that they're not held accountable for behaviour that seems unwarranted and misguidedly righteous-feeling.


----------



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

Pyroscope said:


> I feel quite strongly in agreement wth you about what your ESFJ grandmother doing is manipulative. It's interesting hearing the language you use to describe it. You talk about the dishonesty bothering you most (I hope I've got that right?) whereas I personally find it more repulsive because it's an attempt to dictate how others feel and appears belittling to a person's own rights over their actions. I don't know what it means in terms of cognitive functions, but I just feel indignation and resentment against anyone who tries to tell someone else how to feel. Mostly because it seems insulting to an individual to claim that some overarching system of expected behaviour is worth more than understanding what's going on with them personally.
> 
> Sometimes I find Fe bothers me more than Te because it seems disingenuous. As though it's a robot programmed to react in a way to certain stimulus, but that can't actually FEEL what it presents, which just rankles me. Te may be blunt and feel like it doesn't value people in the end, but at least it doesn't feel like it tricks people into valuing false-but-well-executed-sympathy over genuine-but-flawed-sympathy. I'm not saying that Fe-users don't care, because they clearly do. However it's how it comes off to me sometimes even if I believe on another level that they ARE being genuine.


See, this is the kind of answer that makes sense to me. I've heard very similar things from Fi users in the past, and it makes sense to me. 

Basically, it's the idea that Fe creates a sense of "objective" and universal morals/ethics/values, while Fi creates a sense of "subjective", individualistic morals/ethics/values. It makes sense to me that Fi users feel like they want to be themselves and they feel that Fe is forcing everyone to be the same socially. It makes sense to me that there would be a strong clash here...Fe making everyone want to be on the same page, Fi wanting everyone to have individual freedom. 

What particularly stands out is the idea of Fi users having a problem with being labeled "immoral" for not following the set of moral guidelines that Fe would want to create.


But to me, it would seem like the same thing should apply to Ti and Te users, but with an objective set of logic instead. To me, Ti users would feel like they have the right to their own personal set of logic, while Te forces them to be in a box of logic. Instead of Te viewing Ti as "immoral" the way Fe would, it would view the logic of Ti as "stupid" or "illogical" because it doesn't align with Te logic.

LeaT touched on this a bit in regards to economic efficiency, but I see another huge problem with it in education and having "standards". Currently we expect every single person to take the exact same core classes to graduate and to know the exact same things in the exact same timeframe. I think it's better to have different students doing different things and learning at their own paces, instead of shoehorning them all into the same mold. My INFP friend is also in education, and he agrees with me....this is an example of he and I agreeing on how Te can be very invasive and controlling.


It just frustrates me when it ever comes across that it's ok for Te to do this and not ok for Fe to do it. It goes back to what I said before...it's easier to argue that socially people should be free to do things than it is to argue that they should be free to think logically in a way that makes sense to them. 



All of that being said, I don't think either Fe or Te should be demonized either. I think if anyone really investigates it, they can see how there are times when both functions are very important. While I do have some problems with Te, I definitely see where it's needed. I think to a certain degree we do need logical "standards", and there are certain aspects of logic that should be universally held.

I would hope that Fi and Ti users would see some of the same things with Fe. As individualistic as Fi users may feel the need to be, I would hope they would see that it's impossible to get along in a group if everyone always did whatever they wanted all of the time. I certainly know Fi users who are very caring of others and are able to make sacrifices for the sake of getting along with others. While I don't believe in the strictest of social manners, I do think that the idea of generally showing respect for others in many of these situations is a structure that is largely set up due to Fe. I understand that for deeply held core values an Fi user would not be willing to budge on, and I value that. However, for minor things, I do know Fi users who understand the need to put aside some of their personal feelings for the sake of cooperation. 




Pyroscope said:


> It's often not dishonesty that bothers me about Fe-style manipulation of that kind, so much as the insistence that certain responses are better than others because they supposedly mean that the person has 'proved' what they're feeling. I think it's emotionally brutal to value people's reactions over their actual feelings. It's definitely only unhealhy Fe-users who are the type to refuse to accept other ways of feeling. It's not so bad if they're receptive to the possibility of different ways of feeling after their initial surprise over not getting the reaction they expected.
> 
> Furthermore it rubs me the wrong way to be reminded that some manipulative people like that can almost be seen as paragons of virtue who're needed to gently badger the types who might 'stray'. I hold issue with the fact that they're not held accountable for behaviour that seems unwarranted and misguidedly righteous-feeling.



This adds on to what I was saying earlier about Fe, but I think your point about unhealthy Fe users refusing to accept differences in other people that is key. I had a video chat with the INFJ PerC member pneumoceptor about Fe, and she gave a really good description of its positives and negatives:




pneumoceptor said:


> When Fe is at its best, it makes the other person feel very known, and heard, and cared for…because it displays that care. So when it’s not being used to fix or change, but when it’s in more of an ‘I care about you’ mode, it’s very, very good at expressing that.
> 
> As an extraverted judging function, it wants to structure, so it’s easy to fall into the ‘I’m gonna fix your problems’, or ‘I’m going to change you’, or ‘I’m going to make you better’, and I think that that’s where we miss the mark, because you can’t. People are way too complex for that type of manipulation. But for me personally…what I love about Fi is that you can tell there’s a really swelling depth of care there, if you know the person well. What I love about Fe is that you can also see that in small amounts, whereas with an Fi user you might not see that.




So I honestly believe that we can all make some adjustments to better understand one another, and we can all find ways to study our behavior to see how our functions can sometimes get us in trouble. With Fe, I think pneumoceptor is dead on in saying that we have to be careful not to let it control others. And I always hope that Te users can see the same thing.


----------

