# what is the most admired function in each country?



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2012)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> How is that "objective" feeling over "subjective?" I can see that going either way (especially with some Fi types who have inner ideals of people not having to feel the pains that they have). I'm not saying PC is necessarily type-related, but the way it gets presented looks like this rough Fi - sort of an overprotection of the individual feelings of people because we're all "different" and should be allowed to be "special snowflakes" and appreciated merely for this, rather than our specific achievements. What about those loud-and-proud "us against them" Fe types who wear their cultural norms on their sleeves? I do agree it can be Fe as well (the whole making everyone feel included by honoring everyone for no reason), but I often see it get turned into this kind of downplay of achievements that looks a bit suspciously inferior Te. Perhaps the way I'm seeing it is influenced by my type. I've been the victim of political correctness in Middle School for reasons that were downplaying achievements that were actually relevant to school success in favor of those who did the most community service (that had nothing to do with the school), or those who did more on an ethical level than actual academic achievement (that's not to say these people shouldn't get attention (does it even have to be a school thing though - I mean, hello, some of it had zilch to do with the school and teachers and was just parents playing politics with their favorite students), but my school was PC nuts with ignoring obvious academic achievements that students haven't managed to pull off in the last 15 years of the school, let alone, to bring a lot of special attention to the school and TEACHERS!).


I don't think that we're talking about the same thing. You sound like you have a chip on your shoulder about being overshadowed by do-gooders when you were a kid, and your bias may be partly due to preferring Te to Fe. ... But I graduated from a rigorous academic program, and we had to do 150+ hours of community service just to get our diplomas. So I'm afraid that I have my own bias on the subject.

Anyway, I think that the downplay of individual achievements is more about Fe than inferior Te. If someone is the winner, then others must be losers. So the solution is to wipe out competition as a way of determining status, which ensures that nobody feels bad and left out. But that's more about social coddling than political correctness. (The former is part of the latter, but they're not the same thing.)

Political correctness is about minimizing differences between people in order to buy a cheap harmony. On one end of the spectrum, you get things like, "I don't see skin color." On the other end is, "Well, I can clearly see that you're of a different ethnic background, but hey, that's totally awesome!" That's why you have the celebration of "multiculturalism" that's become mandatory throughout most of the United States. It's like a new, PC-charged form of "separate but equal."

If you want to address the loud-and-proud "us against them" mentality, think about how superior many liberal urbanites feel when faced with the "close-minded ignorance" of social conservatives, and how quickly they'll defend themselves if you doubt their commitment to egalitarianism. They're defining themselves as part of the educated segment of society that knows better than to care about silly things like skin color. But when faced with differences that aren't so socially acceptable (like smoking or being overweight), then those liberals are just as judgmental as the conservatives. They simply prefer a different poison.

I also believe that inferior Te may be more likely to _reduce_ PC tendencies. I'm thinking about the Moral-Majority followers who are paranoid that other people's lifestyles are somehow going to subvert their own religious convictions. From the way some of them talk, you'd think that Gays & Co. are part of some evil plot to destroy the "good folk." There's a sense of persecution that seems to pervade their worldviews, and political correctness is seen as just another form of oppression.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Coyote said:


> I don't think that we're talking about the same thing. You sound like you have a chip on your shoulder about being overshadowed by do-gooders when you were a kid, and your bias may be partly due to preferring Te to Fe. ... But I graduated from a rigorous academic program, and we had to do 150+ hours of community service just to get our diplomas. So I'm afraid that I have my own bias on the subject.
> 
> Anyway, I think that the downplay of individual achievements is more about Fe than inferior Te. If someone is the winner, then others must be losers. So the solution is to wipe out competition as a way of determining status, which ensures that nobody feels bad and left out. But that's more about social coddling than political correctness. (The former is part of the latter, but they're not the same thing.)
> 
> ...


I'm pretty sure it's more stereotypically Fe that gets associated with moral majority followers (after all, objective feeling would be more threatend by adaptation to these kinds of changes, since it derives from the external, so if something being promoted outside of them goes against their will, they're obviously going to be reactive). You can ask someone like @_LiquidLight_, who I've heard speak of this before and is probably more familiar with this than I am. Inferior Te is mainly just going to stand for dominant Fi in these types, so these types on the conscious level are probably not going to even be that concerned with the outside world, because they will have confidence with their beliefs from the inside mostly (dominant Te is likely to be very anti-PC - these people tend to even be stereotyped as un-PC, probably from inferior Fi, where standing up for their personal feelings is hard for them to take seriously against the value they place on the organization of the outside world to reach their goals from). Actually, I think the social coddling is more of a side-effect of PC (means to an end), but I don't think it has that much to do with the origins of most of the ideas behind it (most of the ideas behind it sound like someone who downplays taking competence seriously (so, stereotypical Te), so instead, it's more about "who you are" (stereotypical Fi) that counts in everything for no reason rather than "what you do" (Te) that counts. I don't have a chip on my shoulder anymore (as best as I can handle this). I moved on. And it's possible that there can be different type manifestations of it (I mean, on her blog, Lenore Thompson was arguing that Ni-Fi loops might sometimes overlap with this if perhaps this person has succumbed to personal Te wounds of sorts, who knows). But since she suggested Fi, well, maybe you'll have to take it up with her.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

Germany: Si, Te as in ISTJ
England: generally Fe as in ISFJ, in some administrative organizations: Te as in ESTJ


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2012)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> I'm pretty sure it's more stereotypically Fe that gets associated with moral majority followers


Key word: stereotypically.



> (after all, objective feeling would be more threatend by adaptation to these kinds of changes, since it derives from the external, so if something being promoted outside of them goes against their will, they're obviously going to be reactive).


I don't understand what you're saying. If Fe is marked by adaptation to social conditions, then why would social conditions be viewed as a threat? It seems like Fe-doms try to harmonize with the external world. If that fails or if the external world is too complex to harmonize with, then wouldn't the Fe-dom simply narrow his scope and focus on a sub-culture with which to identify?



> You can ask someone like @LiquidLight, who I've heard speak of this before and is probably more familiar with this than I am.


Nah. I'm not too interested in someone else's "right" answer. I've spent most of my life watching people and trying to understand social dynamics, so my understanding is based more on how I've interpreted the data. Debate and additional information can clarify issues, but I'm not going to change my opinion on a whim.



> Inferior Te is mainly just going to stand for dominant Fi,


The inferior isn't there to serve the dominant. 



> so these types on the conscious level are probably not going to even be that concerned with the outside world, because they will have confidence with their beliefs from the inside mostly


That's not contradictory to what I said. I simply elaborated on how inferior Te would imagine "opponents."



> (dominant Te is likely to be very anti-PC - these people tend to even be stereotyped as un-PC, probably from inferior Fi, where standing up for their personal feelings is hard for them to take seriously against the value they place on the organization of the outside world to reach their goals from).


Te-doms can be very un-PC because they sometimes create a worldview that precludes any alternatives. Either you follow their rules, or you're immoral (inferior Fi).



> Actually, I think the social coddling is more of a side-effect of PC (means to an end), but I don't think it has that much to do with the origins of most of the ideas behind it (most of the ideas behind it sound like someone who downplays taking competence seriously (so, stereotypical Te), so instead, it's more about "who you are" (stereotypical Fi) that counts in everything for no reason rather than "what you do" that counts. I don't have a chip on my shoulder anymore. I moved on.


You must have encountered a different sort of political correctness than I have. I can't say that the vehement PC proponents care "who" you are, as long as you feel okay with "what" you are. It's like it absolves them of some deep-rooted guilt.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

> I don't understand what you're saying. If Fe is marked by adaptation to social conditions, then why would social conditions be viewed as a threat? It seems like Fe-doms try to harmonize with the external world. If that fails or if the external world is too complex to harmonize with, then wouldn't the Fe-dom simply narrow his scope and focus on a sub-culture with which to identify?


Because obviously, these are people with their own self-derived beliefs (oriented on a data basis moreso toward temporary conditions). Fe is about the process. Saying these people actually identify with other cultures would be as stupid as saying Te types identify with the data they seek - totally untrue. They're both just means to an end for data referencing - not features of a person's personal identity.



> The inferior isn't there to serve the dominant.


The dominant uses it this way (on an unconscious level that a person wouldn't even know about directly, the inferior uses the dominant in a sense).



> Te-doms can be very un-PC because they sometimes create a worldview that precludes any alternatives. Either you follow their rules, or you're immoral (inferior Fi).


Totally untrue. I have no idea where you got this out of your ass. Anything related to personal opinions is going to come from feeling, not thinking. People's worldviews are not their functions. Why would these people not have alternatives? They would be a mess if they didn't. Of course they have alternatives - what you're talking about has nothing to do with anything. In fact, it's downright bigoted (you can't speak for their inferior function - don't even try). People who think like your example are just run-of-the-mill jackasses, not a personality type. You seem to be very biased from your views I can see right now.

Frankly, I'm beginning to suspect you have zero real understanding of Fi, so I think I'll just stop right here with the debate (after all, there is no one right answer to this question of Fe and Fi when PC, so why even bother).


----------



## Velasquez (Jul 3, 2012)

Here in England, it's all about Se and Te. Nobody here has any time at all for any form of Fe, Fi, or Ti.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2012)

@JungyesMBTIno

Why does it seem like if I don't do the stupid social dance, people get all pissy? I'm so tired of swallowing my opinions or wrapping them up with, "Well, I could be wrong, so what do _you_ think?" I do it enough in real life, so I don't need to waste time on an internet forum doing the same darn thing. 

And frankly, the biggest sign that someone can't hold their own in a debate is when they toss around some personal insults, and then say that there's no point in discussing the matter further because you don't understand anything anyway. It's like throwing a fit because you didn't get your way.

So, what, you don't want to play with me anymore? Fine. But in parting, I'll offer you a Jung quote, since that seems to be the only thing that you pretend to respect.



Jung said:


> This type of man elevates objective reality, or an objectively oriented intellectual formula, into the ruling principle not only for himself but for his whole environment. By this formula good and evil are measured, and beauty and ugliness determined. Everything that agrees with this formula is right, everything that contradicts it is wrong, and anything that passes by it indifferently is merely incidental. Because this formula seems to embody the entire meaning of life, it is made into a universal law which must be put into effect everywhere all the time, both individually and collectively. Just as the extraverted thinking type subordinates himself to his formula, so, for their own good, everybody round him must obey it too, for whoever refuses to obey it is wrong -- he is resisting the universal law, and is therefore unreasonable, immoral, and without a conscience. His moral code forbids him to tolerate exceptions.


And hey, this sounds familiar:


Jung said:


> Because of the highly impersonal character of the conscious attitude, the unconscious feelings are extremely personal and oversensitive, giving rise to secret prejudices -- a readiness, for instance, to misconstrue any opposition to his formula as personal ill-will, or a constant tendency to make negative assumptions about other people in order to invalidate their arguments in advance -- in defense, naturally, of his own touchiness. His unconscious sensitivity makes him sharp in tone, acrimonious, aggressive. Insinuations multiply. His feelings have a sultry and resentful character -- always the mark of the inferior function.


Well, that's all I'm willing to type up for you. Good night, dear friend.

P.S. Kudos on learning how to break the WOTs.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Coyote said:


> @_JungyesMBTIno_
> 
> Why does it seem like if I don't do the stupid social dance, people get all pissy? I'm so tired of swallowing my opinions or wrapping them up with, "Well, I could be wrong, so what do _you_ think?" I do it enough in real life, so I don't need to waste time on an internet forum doing the same darn thing.
> 
> ...


I think you're just any old victim of PC-ness is all - I wouldn't relate this to type (in my case, I largely wouldn't either - I was just taking a daring guess is all). I don't think you're wrong - I just think this topic is literally up for debate (and on the Te dom stuff, I think you might be taking it a bit too literally - Jung was describing how they orient their thinking, not that these peoples' Te is some kind of vacuum on their ability to be impartial).


----------



## timeless (Mar 20, 2010)

The US is such a huge country with many culturally distinct areas. It's really hard to ascribe a cognitive function to the whole place.


----------



## adumbrate (Feb 13, 2017)

I don't think Ni is most valued anywhere in a mainstream sense. First, it's super hard to understand, second, it's the most intangible function, ever, third, it leaves most people scratching their heads and writing it off as some snowflake hype. Ni is mostly valued in religious and metaphysical groups and that's it. Zen is the closest thing to Ni, and we all know not everyone uses zen philosophy in everyday life, and not that zen is the mainstream thing anywhere outside Japan (which is also not actually mainstream, just an influential school of thinking). For many modern Japaneses, zen is also kinda highbrow and cliche.

It's suffice to say that the most valued & admired functions anywhere are extroverts functions, especially Te, Fe and Se (respectively).


----------

