# People who don't share their opinions are Fe, right?



## VoodooDolls (Jul 30, 2013)

FearAndTrembling said:


> I mean, you could serve me the worst food in the world, and I wouldn't complain.


i love food in all its forms.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Ye probably Fe in the same way as Te don't want to discuss other solutions to a problem when one solution works.  All about whats working and not much how or why.


----------



## Pelopra (May 21, 2013)

Sixty Nein said:


> Fe is evaluating nonfactually through a consensus. Example - "This song is good because Anthony Fantano gave the song a good score."


Haha nope. 
Best way to see this is watch an Fe - lead (ie dom/aux) arguing with a roomful of TeFi users.

.... Although afterwards the Fe -lead will possibly cry about the whole incident.


---

(remember that any Fe user has Ti in their stack. Think about that for a few seconds.) 

(argument from authority is probably Ti's least favorite thing in the world. So "it is so because Mr Somebody said it was so" is the kind of statement that makes a Ti user break out in hives. (see: Te vs Ti approaches to quoting Jung as an argument - stopper) 

"we should do this because otherwise Mr somebody will feel bad" is a much more likely Fe type argument) 

In fact, additional thought:

Fe and Te are much more about opinions regarding behaviour. Fi and Ti are about opinions regarding thought/belief. Thus, in any case Fe wouldn't be involved in saying "this song is good because". That's a ti/Fi type statement. "we should play this song on the radio because" is te/Fe.


----------



## pmj85 (Jul 31, 2010)

(I skipped to the end).

As an INFJ, I only voice my opinion on topics which matter to me personally; anything else is a waste of time and energy. I experience an incredible apathy towards people who demand my opinion on matters I do not care for - expressing views on something which I perceive to be inane can be tough.

I like to sit back and let people go about their business.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Pelopra said:


> Haha nope.
> Best way to see this is watch an Fe - lead (ie dom/aux) arguing with a roomful of TeFi users.
> 
> .... Although afterwards the Fe -lead will possibly cry about the whole incident.
> ...


Well said. Fe does not want to get into the origin of things. It just wants them to happen, and tries to make them happen. I was thinking that Fe is similar to Skinner's "empty organism" claim. Skinner bragged that he does not need to know a thing about the internal processes of a human, to understand and modify his behavior. Actually, he had no interest in even understanding internal processes. The individual, the soul, the uniqueness of a person, is irrelevant. Humanity is best tackled as a system, as a whole. Nobody has time to peer into the soul of every person, and help them become themselves. That is too inefficient. We find the collective soul, and try to shape that.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

@FearAndTrembling


> Like Te can knock over beautiful theories with a simply ugly fact, so can Fe.


I love doing this (though I suppose these theories would only be "beautiful" to a Ti user. I usually find the theories I knock over utterly ridiculous and platitudinous)



> I think X should happen, not because of consensus, but because it is the best objective thing for the universe. Doesn't matter what the consensus. Fe users are always breaking consensus. But they want to replace it with another one. A shared value system. The correct one. So, yes, we want everyone to be on board. But with what is supposed to happen, not the whim of public opinion.


I've noticed this too, particularly with NFJs. this is where their tendency to censor comes from. "it's a _bad influence_, so it should be banned" (I've noticed many take awhile to grasp the concept of freedom of speech for this reason lol)


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> @FearAndTrembling
> I love doing this (though I suppose these theories would only be "beautiful" to a Ti user. I usually find the theories I knock over utterly ridiculous and platitudinous)


Ye, enfp did this to me at math lecture before, he sat next to me. I was taking notes and everything went fine, then he asked the lecturer some questions and I lost all my flow. He probably did Te pwned me.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> @_FearAndTrembling_
> 
> I love doing this (though I suppose these theories would only be "beautiful" to a Ti user. I usually find the theories I knock over utterly ridiculous and platitudinous)
> 
> ...


I think that is one of the main differences between NFP and NFJ. They are both considered "helper" types, or diplomats. And are supposed to be good with people. But the NFP is less concerned that everybody is on board. NFJ don't like stragglers. We see, like one larger, big plan. And we need other people, or it won't work. Everybody can't just be doing their own thing. NFP wants to help individuals find their own path. NFJ wants to help humanity find its path, often at the expense of the individual. That's actually my main problem with this world. There is no purpose. Humanity has no larger goal. Everybody is just doing their own thing. We aren't striving towards anything collectively. There is absolutely no order, or structure. Or purpose. I need clarity. I need a mission. We need leadership. We need inspiration.

I've brought up that Fe is the "ethic of responsibility" as proposed by Weber. We are more concerned that the world is running properly. NFP is more concerned that authenticity is being expressed. 

For example, I don't value "free speech" in itself. I don't see it as an end in itself. It is less important than the true end, and is mutable. Like when there were those riots about people showing Mohammed, and all these Western guys behind their computers are throwing gas on a fire, they never have to worry getting burned by. Cuz free speech is important. So, they knowingly are inciting people, that they know will probably lead to violence, all to champion free speech. They put an ideology over facts on the ground, and people's lives. They are willing to let others die, and cause a bunch of trouble, just because they have the freedom to speak their piece. So freedom of speech becomes a guiding intellectual superstition, like any other.

I mean, I obviously believe in democratic principles, but they aren't holy. And they can blind people.


----------



## Kavik (Apr 3, 2014)

I'm wondering if Fe-dom allows users to detachedly sense others emotions and it tells them how to reconcile the problem or adapt around it. It's impersonal. Fe can harmonize because of its knowledge but it doesn't mean it has to, or feels compelled to fix what it senses. Do Fe-doms consciously 'see' with Fe, as in consciously think about it, or is it more like a sense? I'm curious, I'm trying to understand as it's my inferior function.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

FearAndTrembling said:


> I think that is one of the main differences between NFP and NFJ. They are both considered "helper" types, or diplomats. And are supposed to be good with people. But the NFP is less concerned that everybody is on board. NFJ don't like stragglers. We see, like one larger, big plan. And we need other people, or it won't work. Everybody can't just be doing their own thing. NFP wants to help individuals find their own path. NFJ wants to help humanity find its path, often at the expense of the individual. That's actually my main problem with this world. There is no purpose. Humanity has no larger goal. Everybody is just doing their own thing. We aren't striving towards anything collectively. There is absolutely no order, or structure. Or purpose. I need clarity. I need a mission. We need leadership. We need inspiration.
> I've brought up that Fe is the "ethic of responsibility" as proposed by Weber. We are more concerned that the world is running properly. NFP is more concerned that authenticity is being expressed.
> For example, I don't value "free speech" in itself. I don't see it as an end in itself. It is less important than the true end, and is mutable. Like when there were those riots about people showing Mohammed, and all these Western guys behind their computers are throwing gas on a fire, they never have to worry getting burned by. Cuz free speech is important. So, they knowingly are inciting people, that they know will probably lead to violence, all to champion free speech. They put an ideology over facts on the ground, and people's lives. They are willing to let others die, and cause a bunch of trouble, just because they have the freedom to speak their piece. So freedom of speech becomes a guiding intellectual superstition, like any other.
> I mean, I obviously believe in democratic principles, but they aren't holy. And they can blind people.


you mirrored the exact opposite of my own thoughts and tendencies so well it's not even funny (okay, it is a bit :laughing: )
but yeah, I'm a fierce individualist, all about freedom>"public order", helping people find their own individual paths and authenticity>harmony and I believe the biggest problem in the world is that everyone _doesn't_ do their own thing (instead, they live life trying to make others happy and bend over backwards for dumb social constructs which don't actually exist)


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Fe, is like Te. I often find myself going against consensus, because everyone can't see the objective truth. Well, from my INFJ perspective may be a little different. Like Te can knock over beautiful theories with a simply ugly fact, so can Fe. Te sees physical facts. These are objective truths. Fe sees value "facts". They aren't ours, and they aren't the consensus. The same way scientific facts aren't created by scientists, they are discovered, and applied. They are inherent in nature. They just reveal them, the way Te does. It's just the way it is.
> 
> I think X should happen, not because of consensus, but because it is the best objective thing for the universe. Doesn't matter what the consensus. Fe users are always breaking consensus. But they want to replace it with another one. A shared value system. The correct one. So, yes, we want everyone to be on board. But with what is supposed to happen, not the whim of public opinion.


My Fi just curled up and died at the suggestion of value "facts." 


That said, well written post. And the one about NFP/NFJ straggler/group differences. Gives me a much clearer picture of Fe (although I can't imagine for the life of me thinking in Fe terms).

To the OP: no, that's not necessarily Fe. It depends on the motivation behind the silence. Personally, I try not to die on every hill I cross. It's just not worth it.


----------



## Octavian (Nov 24, 2013)

This isn't a good way to discern which feeling function is being used.


----------



## dulcinea (Aug 22, 2011)

Satan Claus said:


> So I know a lot of people who don't like to argue, debate or avoid certain topics in discussion because they like to keep a peace through out the group. This is Fe because Fe strives for harmony. Or am I wrong?


 Pssst... tell that to the 50 bagillion INFJs on here that are probably some of the most vocal on their opinions. (granted, though, we will share our opinions politely, and when one has a different opinion, will politely say "I disagree" )


----------

