# Fi vs Fe and showing emotions?



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

Quick question - which one is _"wear your heart on your sleeve"_ and which one is hard for other people to read?



(i.e. *Person A* and *Person B* both get bad news. *Person A* bursts into tears whereas *Person B* is feeling just as sad, but nobody could tell because *Person B* is not externally showing their emotions)


In this scenario, which person is Fe and which person is Fi?


----------



## Octavian (Nov 24, 2013)

The feeling function equates to values not likelihood of crying during disney movies. You cannot discern the feeling function through level of emotionalism because human emotion is something else entirely.

Fe has to do with collective ethics, Fi has to do with personal values. Literal emotion is only valuable in the context of reaction to something violating their value set. THEN extroversion or introversion of the feeling function becomes apparent.


----------



## SilverRain (May 15, 2014)

Octavian said:


> The feeling function equates to values not likelihood of crying during disney movies. You cannot discern the feeling function through level of emotionalism because human emotion is something else entirely.
> 
> Fe has to do with collective ethics, Fi has to do with personal values. Literal emotion is only valuable in the context of reaction to something violating their value set. THEN extroversion or introversion of the feeling function becomes apparent.


So does that mean not only do Fe's look outward to sort out their values while Fi's look inward, but Fe's also express emotion outwardly, where Fi's tend not to? If so, what if Fe is the tertiary function, such as with ENTP, since the function is lower on the list would the person appear to be more like an Fi or an Fe when it comes to expressing emotion?


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

"Both [extraverts and introverts] are capable of _enthusiasm_. What fills the extravert's heart flows out of his mouth, but the enthusiasm of the introvert is the very thing that seals his lips."

— Carl Jung​


----------



## ferroequinologist (Jul 27, 2012)

My INTP wife would never burst into crying, and she has inferior Fe. I would probably do the same thing, so looking at us, what would you conclude? This isn't the best way to figure such things out. I'm sure there are ISFPs who would quite readily burst into tears, and ESFJs who would be stoic as well... There are too many variables at play here.

If you were looking purely at the functions, Fe is expressive, and Fi is intensive... Neither of which and both of which may be visible externally... 

But if you want to know which function a person has, the trick is to find which scenario is more true. Does a person feel more violated or more shame in compromising their own values for the sake of the group, or compromising the values of the group for the sake of self. This simple test seems to be the most reliable I've discovered. I wish I could find something similar for the other functions... ;-) (it seems to work, whether I ask F-doms, aux, tert or inferiors--regardless of where feeling is in the stack, they tend to answer the same--if it's Fi, they answer the first, if Fe, they answer the second)


----------



## HumanBeing (May 28, 2014)

Showing emotions is separate thing. There could be a correlation between it and MBTI types, but it doesn't appear to be part of it. The closest thing is Jungian "Feeling", which is rational subjective judgement based either on internal factors or external factors, which is independent of emotions. Emotions are simply associated with certain thoughts. When something happens, you judge it and based on that judgement an emotion may or may not appear (for more detailed explanation, look for the ABC-model which is typically associated with cognitive behavior therapy).


----------



## SilverRain (May 15, 2014)

@ferroequinologist, I'm still trying to figure out my type and it's been difficult to pin down whether Ti or Fi is aux. I'm an extrovert and tend to be vocal about feelings in that I talk them through. An INFP I talked to said she cries almost every day, where it's maybe 2 or 3 times a year for me, typically over some major life frustration, then I'm cleaned out and ready to move on. As with all functions and behaviors, it's difficult to see where I stand with regard to others, as in how sensing am I, how intuitive, how do others see the world compared to the way I do, what MBTI/function slot am I most like?

As for the group scenario, the rare times I connect with a group for any length of time, I choose groups with my same life outlook, for example biologists or people wanting to discuss psychology or philosophy, so clashing values don't come up in any serious way. Typically I'm just moving through groups, temporarily engaging with them for fun, work or learning purposes, so I'm not taking them seriously enough for a clash. Except for getting many of my values from spiritual groups/practices in the past, I can't picture taking on anything serious from a group, either values or information, other than having something trigger me to do some research and work it through for myself. But according to the theory, it must be one or the other, and I'm not sure which it is.

Anyway, I've done enough derailing of the thread. Thanks for the explanation -- I'd been wondering.


----------



## HumanBeing (May 28, 2014)

Octavian said:


> The feeling function equates to values not likelihood of crying during disney movies. You cannot discern the feeling function through level of emotionalism because human emotion is something else entirely.
> 
> Fe has to do with collective ethics, Fi has to do with personal values. Literal emotion is only valuable in the context of reaction to something violating their value set. THEN extroversion or introversion of the feeling function becomes apparent.


Are you certain you need Fe to visibly show emotion?


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

It is holistic, and depends on the individual. Nearly every thinker I know is more outwardly emotional than me. 

When people think of emotion, for some reason, they always think of crying, and sadness. But emotion is also bitching people out, laughing, enthusiasm, getting angry, etc. But a person who cries, for whatever reason, is considered more emotional than somebody who laughs. Some emotions are less acceptable, and stick out more.

I am across the board unemotional. But T and F types, and individuals in general, do tend to manifest different emotions. But only some of those emotions, get you the classification "emotional".


----------



## Alaya (Nov 11, 2009)

With Fe, you'll have to look at the collective-driven values, and with Fi, the individual-driven values. You could have a male Fe user that will not show any emotion because in that culture it's not right for the male to show any of it, while the male Fi user will be more likely to show it if he feels that he has a right to be expressive of his emotions with absolutely no regard if it's culturally valued or not. On the other hand, you could have an Fi user that will not show any emotion even if it's appropriate to do so.

Of course, there could be a myriad of reasons why a person would be more or less likely to show emotion regardless of functions.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Gnothi Seauton said:


> With Fe, you'll have to look at the collective-driven values, and with Fi, the individual-driven values. You could have a male Fe user that will not show any emotion because in that culture it's not right for the male to show any of it, while the male Fi user will be more likely to show it if he feels that he has a right to be expressive of his emotions with absolutely no regard if it's culturally valued or not. On the other hand, you could have an Fi user that will not show any emotion even if it's appropriate to do so.
> 
> Of course, there could be a myriad of reasons why a person would be more or less likely to show emotion regardless of functions.


Yeah, the stereotype is that women are more emotional than men. But they aren't. They just show different outward emotions. Men are just as outwardly emotional, but they must do it within the acceptable male spectrum. I actually get criticized for being too unemotional, by other men. But they wouldn't call it that, and wouldn't think what they are doing, is showing emotion. They don't know what real lack of emotion looks like. It actually makes them uncomfortable. But their emotions are making me uncomfortable.. I'm always hearing people tell me to lighten up, and stop being so serious.


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

I think this is more related to stacking. F inferiors are maybe less inclined to be emotional in public than F dom. Of either kind.

As Fi-inf, I tend not to outwardly react if I get bad news, UNLESS the bad news demands an angry response. That's pretty much the one emotion I happily wear all over my sleeve and shirt and pants and shoes.

Sad news? I tend put myself aside and think first about who else it will impact negatively, and how to assist them in dealing with it.


----------



## Octavian (Nov 24, 2013)

Seagreen said:


> So does that mean not only do Fe's look outward to sort out their values while Fi's look inward, but Fe's also express emotion outwardly, where Fi's tend not to?





HumanBeing said:


> Are you certain you need Fe to visibly show emotion?


Jesus christ. My first statement was that the feeling function equates to values. The only time it's worth noting emotion when typing someone, is when the emotion is _related to values._ 

Fe = Collective Ethics
Fi = Personal Morals

If someone has an emotional response to a violation of collective ethics, that hints at Fe.

If someone has an emotional response to a violation of personal morals, that hints at Fi.

If someone has an emotional response to Simba's dad dying, that doesn't mean shit in relation to JCF.

Neither is _more likely_ than the other to be more emotional, or to express emotion outwardly, that is entirely dependent upon context and what you are doing to them. Fe desires external harmony, Fi desires internal harmony. Obviously if you disturb the sort of harmony that each values, you'll get some sort of reaction out of them.

Emotion does not = F. You have to stop thinking that way and understand that it has to do with *values.* Even an inferior Fi user will show emotion under the right circumstances because to be human is to _experience emotion._ The brain is designed to trigger emotion and has been for hundreds of thousands of years.

Emotion is a biological and physiological response to stimuli.

Jungian feeling is a mode of processing via value orientation. 



> what if Fe is the tertiary function, such as with ENTP


The tertiary function is decidedly MBTI and not Jung. In that context the tertiary is subdued and kept out of the way of the dom+aux, or made to support it. For example:

INTJ = Ni-Te-Fi

INTJ Fi valuation will place further emphasis on their standard Ni-Te activities, and not the typical Fi values of INFP, ISFP, ENFP, and ESFP. "I value being a sarcastic asshole and only concerning myself with intellectual endeavors."

Later in life the tertiary gains more influence and drags attention over to areas that the type had previously ignored, while encouraging skills that it had previously looked down upon. For ENTP the "devil may care / screw society" attitude calms down and they begin to concern themselves with collective ethics and what they can contribute to society.


----------



## HumanBeing (May 28, 2014)

Octavian said:


> Jesus christ. My first statement was that the feeling function equates to values. The only time it's worth noting emotion when typing someone, is when the emotion is _related to values._


To clarify, I misread your post and (as a result of misreading it) found it confusing that you seemed to relate Fe to emotion.
That's why I asked for conformation.


----------



## SilverRain (May 15, 2014)

Octavian said:


> Jesus christ. My first statement was that the feeling function equates to values. The only time it's worth noting emotion when typing someone, is when the emotion is _related to values._


This is what you said: "Literal emotion is only valuable in the context of reaction to something violating their value set. THEN extroversion or introversion of the feeling function becomes apparent." That's what I was asking, but since I didn't specifically reference emotions with regard to values only, it sounded as if I was leaving it open to any emotions. Thanks for the rest of the info, and btw, I can understand trying but I've found that biblical figures are of no help when it comes to personality typing issues.


----------

