# Fi vs. Fe



## jocr1627 (Jun 23, 2013)

So I'm not actually interesting in participating in this discussion as much as I am in having people post their theories. 

The differences between Fi and Fe seems to be a well-frequented topic, so please, if you'd like, offer up what you've gathered about the concepts. I'll kick it off with everything I think:

Fi 
Social driver- sociable and artistic
Seeks emotional stability or 'Peace'

Fe
Sexual driver- moralistic and helpful
Seeks emotional benefit or 'Love'


In my experience I expect the following behaviors out of each:

Fi
Has a more static attitude concerning art, raw emotional judgment and people.
Is unlikely to express emotions in a combative way, and will, if anything, flee from conflict if it comes up.
Prefers a stable, cooperative environment where emotions are respected and not questioned.

Fe
Has a more dynamic attitude toward emotional judgment, and expects variation and impulsivity/subjectivity. 
Is likely to express emotions in a combative manner when someone or something does not comply with them.
Prefers some emotional instability in the environment such as friend who is upset or forcing emotional revelations.

I understand there is some suggestion that the Fi/Te combo is more likely to disregard the emotions of others than the Ti/Fe combo. While I think this statement on its own is valid, I think the interpretation that Fi doms will then assert their emotional judgments is off. I see Fi's will be stubborn internally toward things that do not settle with their Fi, but externally they tend to yield to the social setting. Fe's tend to be stubborn outwardly if something does not jive with their feelings, but more compliant toward new ideas inwardly. Ok. Let's read what you think.


----------



## Meadow (Sep 11, 2012)

I've been waiting for people to post on this thread so I can better understand Fi and Fe. I don't have anything new to add, but want to bump the thread before it disappears. I'm not yet positive I'm ENFP, still trying it on for size.

In my experience, Fe's have been more strident in their efforts to get me to conform to whatever group they believe in. I've been disapproved of and lectured to by an aux Si for not aligning with mainstream and aux Ni's for not aligning with their religion or group of choice. When the subject veers away from areas they're most judgmental, they go out of their way to best align with what we're discussing, since at that point it seems their main group consists of the two of us.

I've found dom Fi's to be loving and accepting people but more difficult to argue with and work things out because their beliefs are more personal as well as frequently hidden. Even though Fi's have been some of my best friends, I've found myself needing to tiptoe around at times because I'm not sure if I'm stepping on their toes with a careless remark or strongly differing opinion, and unless they say something, our relationship might become imperiled without me even knowing what went wrong.

Edit to add: For whatever reason most of my friends have been T's, so outside multiple F relatives, my knowledge of F's is somewhat superficial. I love the caring I get from F's, but also wanted to post the main areas of conflict within the small circle of F's I know well.


----------



## armyofdreamers (May 31, 2012)

I found this rather interesting, as I'm pretty sure I'm an INFJ (my only doubt comes from that I'm on the younger side of my teenage years, so maybe my functions are still developing) and I fit a part of how you described Fi to behave better than a part of how you described Fe to behave.

Two of my friends who are so INFP it isn't even funny fit part of your description of how Fe behaves better than they fit part of how Fi behaves. Am I just misunderstanding you, then?

I'm still learning about and studying the functions, so maybe I don't have as good of a grasp on them as I think I do, and that's what my confusion stems from. XD


You described one of Fi's behaviors as:

"Is unlikely to express emotions in a combative way, and will, if anything, flee from conflict if it comes up." 

I find that I do that quite often with everyone except an INTP I'm very close with (because I know I can't offend him). My reason for fleeing from combat and expressing my own emotions passively is because I'm absolutely terrified of hurting other people. I just want to make them happy, so when I want to express my feelings, I worry a lot about what the other person is feeling. _

"Do they think that I'm being combative? Do they think that I'm being aggressive, and trying to tell them to cater to me? Are they offended because I said this? Are they hurt because I was hurt because they did this? Are they going to be mad at me if I'm a bit more pushy?"_ I want others to be happy and I want to make others happy, so I'm very tentative with expressing my own emotions in case they're bothersome to the other person in some way. 


My Fi-dom friends are the exact opposite. 

You described one part of Fe as:

"Is likely to express emotions in a combative manner when someone or something does not comply with them."

My INFP friends do this, because they're _so _convinced that their moral compass is right and then their Te kicks in and tries to harshly express their feelings--at least, that's my take on it. 

For example, I showed my INFP friend a clip from a show called "What Would You Do?" and this conversation followed:

Her: "I'm so annoyed."

Me: "... why?"

Her: "This is war porn. This is almost like propaganda. All they're doing is trying to get an emotional reaction and I'm annoyed by it."

Me: "I think that they're trying to show that a lot of people would do a good--"

Her: "Well, they're not. It's war porn."


I wonder if perhaps it's the reasoning behind it, and not the Fi or Fe itself. Like how I withdraw from expressing feelings aggressively and combatively _because_ I'm afraid I'm being bothersome to the other person's emotions. My Fi-dom friends are combative when expressing emotions _because _they're convinced their strong internal moral compass is completely correct.

Or maybe I'm completely wrong. 


I was tentative to post this because I'm not yet comfortable in my knowledge of the functions to start debating them, analyzing them and discussing them, but like @Meadow said, I didn't want it to die, so I figured I'd go ahead and post my own take. The worst that can happen is someone who has a better grasp of the functions corrects me, right?


----------



## Aquarian (Jun 17, 2012)

jocr1627 said:


> Is unlikely to express emotions in a combative way, and will, if anything, flee from conflict if it comes up.


Unless and until something threatens an internal Fi value. Then all hell breaks loose.

Edited to add - I want to explicitly agree with armyofdreamers here:



armyofdreamers said:


> "Is likely to express emotions in a combative manner when someone or something does not comply with them."
> 
> My INFP friends do this, because they're _so _convinced that their moral compass is right and then their Te kicks in and tries to harshly express their feelings--at least, that's my take on it.
> 
> ...


From my experience, it seems like INFPs can be mellow and not into conflict and open to all sorts of perspectives _unless _they feel their core values are violated. When that happens - watch out. They're incredibly inflexible and there's this emotional change that to me feels _really_ aggressive.



Infrared said:


> They can be inflexible when it comes to their values and strongly held beliefs because there is usually a strong emotional charge behind their values.


----------



## jocr1627 (Jun 23, 2013)

armyofdreamers said:


> I found this rather interesting, as I'm pretty sure I'm an INFJ (my only doubt comes from that I'm on the younger side of my teenage years, so maybe my functions are still developing) and I fit a part of how you described Fi to behave better than a part of how you described Fe to behave.
> 
> Two of my friends who are so INFP it isn't even funny fit part of your description of how Fe behaves better than they fit part of how Fi behaves. Am I just misunderstanding you, then?
> 
> ...


lol don't feel nervous- your just sharing your experiences. No one can be offended by that, you're only adding information. It's interesting you describe it that way. For one, you are correct in saying that if you are in your younger years it's waaay harder to tell specifically which type you are. Also, I couldn't guarantee I know exactly how an Fi vs. Fe would behave at that age in particular. But certainly in my experience looking at ages 17-27 about, I would definitely expect the Fi to behave more like you describe yourself and vice versa.

Here are some thoughts I have about the differing perspectives:

INFJ's / ISFJ's probably get typed as P's a decent amount. The reason is that they are functionally primary perceivers (Ni/Si). They consider themselves open-minded and flexible in that respect. Their Fe only adds to this perspective, because they consider themselves in tune with other's emotions and sensitive/respectful in that regard. I regularly type as an NFP- though anyone who knows me sees that I'm clearly a J. 

Another thing I'm considering is that people who are particularly worried about what others think and hyper sensitive/accommodating are more likely to be simply F doms rather than Fi or Fe. In other words, an ESFJ/ENFJ/INFP/ISFP (in my experience) is more likely to be comparatively more sensitive to other's feelings (though the perceiver F's are also so) than the ISFJ/INFJ/ENFP/ESFP. These types seem to have more of the aggressive streak. Every ISFJ/INFJ I know gets very aggressive and combative if they disagree with a situation emotionally. My INFP/ISFP friends are gentle and accomadating. They have that 'stubborn' streak, but I've never seen them take it out on anyone else, as much as retreat to themselves.


----------



## armyofdreamers (May 31, 2012)

jocr1627 said:


> Another thing I'm considering is that people who are particularly worried about what others think and hyper sensitive/accommodating are more likely to be simply F doms rather than Fi or Fe. In other words, an ESFJ/ENFJ/INFP/ISFP (in my experience) is more likely to be comparatively more sensitive to other's feelings (though the perceiver F's are also so) than the ISFJ/INFJ/ENFP/ESFP. These types seem to have more of the aggressive streak. Every ISFJ/INFJ I know gets very aggressive and combative if they disagree with a situation emotionally. My INFP/ISFP friends are gentle and accomadating. They have that 'stubborn' streak, but I've never seen them take it out on anyone else, as much as retreat to themselves.


That's interesting. One of my INFP friends completely cut off contact with one of her best friends because she was frustrated with that friend for something upsetting that friend said, and she's still being frustrated and taking it out on him a little--she's my age, though, so maybe her Fi hasn't quite developed to the "turning in on itself" part, and is only at the "I know what my moral compass is and things that cross it upset me" part. 

Maybe that's the deal with me, as well--maybe my Fe hasn't yet matured to the point past noticing what others feel and wanting to make them happy, thus I can't bring myself to discuss my emotions aggressively quite yet. Perhaps I've not learned yet how to realize that sometimes my emotions should take the first spot on the list of people's feelings that are important, or something.


----------



## jocr1627 (Jun 23, 2013)

armyofdreamers said:


> That's interesting. One of my INFP friends completely cut off contact with one of her best friends because she was frustrated with that friend for something upsetting that friend said, and she's still being frustrated and taking it out on him a little--she's my age, though, so maybe her Fi hasn't quite developed to the "turning in on itself" part, and is only at the "I know what my moral compass is and things that cross it upset me" part.
> 
> Maybe that's the deal with me, as well--maybe my Fe hasn't yet matured to the point past noticing what others feel and wanting to make them happy, thus I can't bring myself to discuss my emotions aggressively quite yet. Perhaps I've not learned yet how to realize that sometimes my emotions should take the first spot on the list of people's feelings that are important, or something.


That sounds like it could be very very accurate to me.


----------



## danny.leach.52 (Jun 5, 2013)

This is a really a good informative thread for comparing the 2, I didn't really understand the difference between them before this. I have an INFP boss and the peace seeking makes a lot of sense. He is focused on keeping everybody from fighting regardless of what happened. There have been incidents where people have verbally attacked others and his focus is on restoring the peace. My focus was, you hurt my friend = I want to hurt you. Completely different mindset, he (for the most part) doesn't want anyone to be hurt, I don't want the ones I love to be hurt.


----------



## jocr1627 (Jun 23, 2013)

danny.leach.52 said:


> This is a really a good informative thread for comparing the 2, I didn't really understand the difference between them before this. I have an INFP boss and the peace seeking makes a lot of sense. He is focused on keeping everybody from fighting regardless of what happened. There have been incidents where people have verbally attacked others and his focus is on restoring the peace. My focus was, you hurt my friend = I want to hurt you. Completely different mindset, he (for the most part) doesn't want anyone to be hurt, I don't want the ones I love to be hurt.


Really good point! See everyone always talks about the outward focus on other's emotions that Fe exhibits as if they are nice and respectful all the time. The 'you hurt my friend = I want to hurt you' example is good explanation of how Fe can be totally protective and such. So like: 

Happy Fe = Supportive/Giving
Angry Fe = Protective/Angry
Happy Fi = Nice/Respectful
Angry Fi = Stubborn/Distanced


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

jocr1627 said:


> Fi
> Social driver- sociable and artistic
> Seeks emotional stability or 'Peace'
> 
> ...


This depends more on the sx, so, sp instincts of the person (this theory is part of enneagram). If Fi-person is has sexual instinct as their first one, they will be much more engaged in the area of relationships and feelings. And vice versa, if the Fe-person has social instinct first then they will be more engaged in social activities. 

I'll provide a few corrections to the other comments which I understand are only a rough draft.

*Fi - Has a more static attitude concerning art, raw emotional judgment and people.*
True. This also applies to Ti to some extent both of these functions being introverted "judgements" independent of external opinions (unless strongly directed by Te/Fe).

*Fi - Is unlikely to express emotions in a combative way, and will, if anything, flee from conflict if it comes up.*
I'm guessing you haven't met INFPs and ISFPs type 1 or ESFPs 2s and 7w8s? They are quite assertive with their Fi values and assessments and can be quite stubborn and "combative". INFPs are especially keen on asserting their values in online debates. 

Too many other factors influence this (this person's prior experiences, confidence levels, their enneagram type, circumstances of the situation) besides MBTI type, so this generalization falls short -- how contentious a person has only a weak correlation to their functional preferences.

*Fi - Prefers a stable, cooperative environment where emotions are respected and not questioned.*
Not particularly. If Fi people happen to disagree with each other's then they will argue and cause all sorts of "instability" and drama. I know an ENFP girl and INFP girl who don't mesh well, often verbally challenge and attack one another pulling their other friends into their fights.

*Fe - Has a more dynamic attitude toward emotional judgment, and expects variation and impulsivity/subjectivity.* 
True. Fe makes evaluations based on dynamics that happen between people -- on what has visibly occurred. When Fi valuers come up with their Fi judgements, Fe people can feel at a loss where those came from because often they sound unsupported by anything that has actually happened in reality. And that's the only way Fe will accept information.

*Fe - Is likely to express emotions in a combative manner when someone or something does not comply with them.*
Same comment as for Fi -- how "combative" someone is in their expression is affected by too many other factors besides their MBTI functional preferences. 

Fe may _seem_ aggressive to Fi because Fe expressions are outwardly directing and orienting, instead of serving as personal orientation points. This "directing" is what some Fi valuers perceive as pushy -- in the area where they require ultimate personal freedom (F) here comes somebody else and tries to direct and manage them. Same happens between Ti and Te -- Ti sees Te as infringing on their person space and aggressive, trying to tell Ti what to think in areas where Ti requires individual freedom.

*Fe - Prefers some emotional instability in the environment such as friend who is upset or forcing emotional revelations.*
Not really. You can as well argue that someone with Fi would enjoy forcing emotional revelation out of others because it lets them to more accurately judge that person or establish a deeper personal bond with them. And since Te is also a dynamic function like Fe, then you could also say that Te "prefers logical instability". There is something to this, both Fe and Te being dynamic functions, but overall it's poorly phrased.

In socionics the Fe and Te dominants are paired up with Fi and Ti dominants, because while they see their surroundings in very dynamic way and can reinforce this dynamicity, what they really need is someone who is stable like a rock, which is a role that Fi and Ti dominant types easily fulfill.


----------



## danny.leach.52 (Jun 5, 2013)

jocr1627 said:


> Happy Fe = Supportive/Giving
> Angry Fe = Protective/Angry
> Happy Fi = Nice/Respectful
> Angry Fi = Stubborn/Distanced


Thank you! You have a really good point as well, this seemed to really click for me. They both fit the general description of Fe vs Fi from what I understand. I use Stubborn/Distanced when somebody I love attacks me. I wonder if that's a shadow function or if the difference is on who's being attacked?


----------



## jocr1627 (Jun 23, 2013)

danny.leach.52 said:


> Thank you! You have a really good point as well, this seemed to really click for me. They both fit the general description of Fe vs Fi from what I understand. I use Stubborn/Distanced when somebody I love attacks me. I wonder if that's a shadow function or if the difference is on who's being attacked?


Sounds like shadow function to me. Specifically because you say when somebody you love attacks you. I would be the same cause that's a more high stress shadowy situation. The protective/angry deal is in a more normal situation like 'that guy was rude to my friend, or my friend is uncomfortable right now'.


----------



## jocr1627 (Jun 23, 2013)

cyamitide said:


> This depends more on the sx, so, sp instincts of the person (this theory is part of enneagram). If Fi-person is has sexual instinct as their first one, they will be much more engaged in the area of relationships and feelings. And vice versa, if the Fe-person has social instinct first then they will be more engaged in social activities.


Right, I actually pull the terms from instinctual variants. Not that I disregard Fi-Sx or Fe-So, but I think conceptually they are somewhat linked the other way.

Instinctual variants

If we look at the sx descriptor it says they seek 'intimacy' and are 'temperamental'. Whereas the so is 'nice' and 'concerned with status'. The theory of MBTI naturally lends itself to Fe, who is a Je user that prefers closed, decisive environments, and is more directly expressive of their dynamic emotions, being the more 'intimate' and 'temperamental' one. And then the Fi, who is a Pe user concerned with the social experience/image being presented, and who prefers an environment where their emotions can be private, to be 'nice' and 'concerned with status'.

Another thing I'd bring up is that a solid piece of the definitions of J vs. P tend to be partly that J's are more actively contentious. I actually think the statement of Te's preferring a 'logically unstable' environment is potentially very valid. They like their to be competition and debate- which is far less stable than the cooperative, thoughtful environment you typical see Ti's maintaining. 

Interesting points. It gets a lot muddier when it's opened up to many slight type variants. I have my whole philosophy on that that I won't get to. There isn't really a solid definition for any of the functions cross the boundaries of enneagram/socionics etc. Then they become much more vague concepts that are a product of the statistical correlations that these tests happen to produce, rather than conceptual fixed points.

So I should add, that when I give my descriptions of Fi vs Fe I'm coming way more from a conceptual fixed point that is attempting to ignore specific variation that is a product of the tests being used (since people get types which may or may not be accurate and then color the definitions of the concepts in the tests that they just took). (I'm an Ni, it's what I do).


----------



## Meadow (Sep 11, 2012)

Is there a connection between dom Fe or Fi and wanting to quickly work out interpersonal problems or would it more likely be extroversion, another function or something outside type that pushes for quick resolution?


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

jocr1627 said:


> Right, I actually pull the terms from instinctual variants. Not that I disregard Fi-Sx or Fe-So, but I think conceptually they are somewhat linked the other way.
> 
> Instinctual variants
> 
> If we look at the sx descriptor it says they seek 'intimacy' and are 'temperamental'. Whereas the so is 'nice' and 'concerned with status'. The theory of MBTI naturally lends itself to Fe, who is a Je user that prefers closed, decisive environments, and is more directly expressive of their dynamic emotions, being the more 'intimate' and 'temperamental' one. And then the Fi, who is a Pe user concerned with the social experience/image being presented, and who prefers an environment where their emotions can be private, to be 'nice' and 'concerned with status'.


"The theory of MBTI naturally lends itself to Fe ... " -- The instincts and jungian types are independent theories. Some of the enneagram and instinct concepts have _leaked_ into MBTI and became enmeshed with the common understanding of MBTI's functions and part of type descriptions (for example many of IxFx profiles sound like they belong to type 4). But they actually have nothing to do with each other and should be analyzed separately -- Fe isn't the function of "intensity" and "passion" nor the function of "social status" and "good social skills". If you want to define what Fe is, you need to separate it from these other theories and decide what are distinct properties of Fe and Fe only, which would be very difficult to do since any person is a combination of all these traits.



> Another thing I'd bring up is that a solid piece of the definitions of J vs. P tend to be partly that J's are more actively contentious.


Have you taken a look at that link I provided concerning the correlations of MBTI and big 5 paramenters? What is shows is that the research done on jungian dichotomies indicates that J/P has no correlation to Agreebleness -- in other words, J's _aren't_ "more actively contentious".



> I actually think the statement of Te's preferring a 'logically unstable' environment is potentially very valid. They like their to be competition and debate-* which is far less stable than the cooperative, thoughtful environment you typical see Ti's maintaining*.


And xNTPs don't like debate? I think some ENTPs are probably some of the best debaters out there. T of any orientation make people somewhat less sensitive to the feelings of others and thus more inclined to argue instead of smoothing things over.



> Interesting points. It gets a lot muddier when it's opened up to many slight type variants. I have my whole philosophy on that that I won't get to. There isn't really a solid definition for any of the functions cross the boundaries of enneagram/socionics etc. Then they become much more vague concepts that are a product of the statistical correlations that these tests happen to produce, rather than conceptual fixed points.
> 
> So I should add, that when I give my descriptions of Fi vs Fe I'm coming way more from a conceptual fixed point that is attempting to ignore specific variation that is a product of the tests being used (since people get types which may or may not be accurate and then color the definitions of the concepts in the tests that they just took). (I'm an Ni, it's what I do).


Enneagram and instinct variants should nevertheless be kept in mind if one is trying to define what kind of attitudes are circumscribed by jungian functions. Some material for further thought.


----------



## Meadow (Sep 11, 2012)

This video has been floating around for a while, so maybe everyone has seen it. It's not the best comparison since it's dom Fi vs. aux Fe.


----------



## Aquarian (Jun 17, 2012)

jocr1627 said:


> Happy Fe = Supportive/Giving
> Angry Fe = Protective/Angry
> Happy Fi = Nice/Respectful
> Angry Fi = Stubborn/Distanced


This is wonderful!

!

Really useful and accurate distinctions there.


----------



## jocr1627 (Jun 23, 2013)

Meadow said:


> This video has been floating around for a while, so maybe everyone has seen it. It's not the best comparison since it's dom Fi vs. aux Fe.


I think this video makes some really good points. I agree with everything it says/shows. Aside from the end where it attempts to characterize Fe as likely to 'lie' for the sake of other's feelings. As an Fe, I do not believe that is a poor characterization. This is my breakdown of what they are describing there:

1) Someone in the room makes a socially unacceptable comment or decision.
2) I recognize others may be offended/have an adverse reaction.
3) _If_ I think that the adverse reaction from others is likely to be disproportionate to what the person said, I will leap to defend/justify them.
4) However, if I think that the adverse reaction is justified (that person meant to upset others/is behaving unjustly) than I won't defend them.
5) In other words, I apply my empathy to determine whether I think their behavior is understandable and potentially going to elicit an overreaction, and mediate accordingly.

The characterization shown here makes it sound like Carey is simply justifying him even if she disagrees, just so that there is no conflict. I think that that does not give Fe credit for being pretty picky/incisive about what they do or do not believe is right. Hence why I think it's important to note the supportive-protective behaviors of Fe compared to the friendly-stubborn behaviors of Fi. Emphasis on different emotions, really.


----------



## All in Twilight (Oct 12, 2012)

Fi and Fe are both rational functions as in they take place in the mind, the process of information.

Fi = subjective→inwardly
Fe = objective→outwardly

Fi→how does x make me feel→(looks for something to relate to followed by a objective form of reasoning like Te)→what do I/him/her need?
Fe→how does x make him/her feel(looks for something that is just there followed by a subjective form of reasoning like Ti)→what do I/him/her want?

Since there is always a subjective function involved in MBTI, neither of them are able to perceive reality for what it really is though→a split between subject and object.

Unhealthy Fi can lead to Apathy (ignores object, problem or person)
Unhealthy Fe can lead to Meddlesomeness (tries to interfere too much with object, problem or person)


----------



## Recede (Nov 23, 2011)

Fi is about having a strong sense of one's ideal relationships with objects/situations (Fi-Se) or concepts (Fi-Ne). How these things should be treated, and how one should feel about them ideally. Like Ti, Fi is logical and analytical. Fi seeks to be internally consistent but may appear externally adaptable in the sense that they don't impose their ideals on others. 

Fe is about maintaining good relationships with people and upholding values and ethics. Like Te, Fe is practical and tied to external reality. Fe generally seeks to create an atmosphere where people can cooperate respectfully with shared values, and compared with Fi is more likely to express their values and to want to see them upheld by others. 

Fi and Fe may get into conflicts because of their differing views and methods. Fe users may see Fi users as selfish, distant, and unwilling to compromise. Ironically, Fi users may see Fe users as selfish as well because they seem to ignore individual needs in favor of compromise. Fe users may find Fi ideals impractical because they aren't necessarily rooted in external reality, while Fi users may find Fe values pointless because they don't find them inherently valuable within their complex system of ideals.


----------

