# Do people with Fe even have feelings of their own?



## littleredstreak (Jan 14, 2014)

I'm an INFJ, ( so I have auxillary Fe) and I feel soooo lost. I feel like I'm fake? I thought we were supposed to be authentic.

I'm dating an ENFP who's Fi is very apparent to me. I feel like he deeply feels things, very genuine. Fi seems very genuine to me. But sometimes I feel like I need to be told how I should feel about something??

I know this is an Fe, Fi issue. 

*Extraverted Feeling (Fe)* is making decisions based on a value system that is concerned with the well being of people. These values are more global and cultural than personal.

*Introverted Feeling (Fi)* is about making decisions based on your personal values and being concerned more with how things impact you personally than how the group is impacted.

For example: Enfp boyfriend gets mad at me and says all these really hateful word vomits (Te probs). And I feel bad but I didn't feel that bad until I told my ESFJ friend and she was shocked at how mean his words were. And then a day later I thought about it some more and those were really hurtful words. 

Maybe I was just too busy trying to analyze how he was feeling. I'm not sure. 

I'd really appreciate feedback on the genuinity of Fe versus Fi.


----------



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

Here's the way I tend to feel about the functions: Extroverted functions are broader, introverted functions are deeper. 

The advantage to extroverted functions is that they're more flexible, and the weakness is that they're more shallow. The advantage to introverted functions is that they're deeper/more stable, but the disadvantage is that they're more rigid.


So I wouldn't say that Fe users don't have their own emotions/values....I would say that they tend to have a wider variety of of them that branch out a lot. So they feel a lot of different things, and depending on who they're with, different ones become highlighted and become stronger. Fi users tend to feel/value fewer things, but they're very attached to those things.

So I think that Fe users still have genuine values, they're just more spread out and can shift more. But all of them are still their own. It's not black and white, it's like a scale. And that scale can shift back and forth more. Fi users are more locked into place, and that makes their values stronger...but also more rigid.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

The mistake is thinking that "authenticity", or to bring it down to everyday usage, "keeping it real", has any value in itself. It doesn't. A person fully expressing themselves has no value, by virtue of it being authentic. Authenticity is not some cover that justifies something. I mean, if killing 100 people is being true to yourself, and your worldview, nobody is going to accept it because you are being you. 

Someone makes a point, it is wrong. "Well, that is just how I feel." Ok, fine. Your authenticity does not make it any more valuable, or somehow worthy of expression. It is much larger than that. Most people have no right to impose their values on the group. I am very happy to personally nullify the personal feelings of others. It is my obligation, and I get pleasure from it.


----------



## littleredstreak (Jan 14, 2014)

Wow teddy bear I feel like you hit the nail on the head


----------



## Jennywocky (Aug 7, 2009)

it might help to consider them in the same way you'd consider ANY function when compared the introverted form to the extraverted form (Se - Si, Ne - Ni, Te - Ti). All functions and approaches are authentic. But it's the focus that shifts. 

Also, just because you might prefer Se doesn't mean you have no Si sense.

Fe values think about values in a broad sense (looking outwardly at the culture and climate and group view), Fi values are geared more toward the individual as the locus of the value.

Fe people in my experience have feelings, but typically they can set aside their own feelings and focus on other's feelings and what everyone 'deserves' within the rules and agreements of the group. One is thinking broadly.

Fi is tending to describe the individual's perception of the world and valueset, not the group rules, and also looking at all the people as individuals as well rather than as members of the collective. It's a subtle difference that can sometimes be substantial.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

Truthfully, l've experienced a pattern of not feeling my ''own'' feelings over a number of years that has started to creep me out, only recently.

l had to see how many times l've repeated it. 

l wrote it off as a teenage insecurity thing when it was a teenage thing, but l was always told l seemed confident, smart and self-assured. l didn't see that as a part of myself, though, it was something outside of me.

lt's like l can't really feel the core of the ''self assurance'' l project. l haven't quite reconciled this disconnect. lt just feels big and unknown.

lt's a complicated issue that l could speak at length about, l just don't want to, l guess. 

The most significant effect has been periods of social withdraw when l've had to step back and look at my life, even when it seems good and normal, because l'm just not sure if l ''identify'' with it.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Think of it like this:

A human in relationship with the Earth. In the context of a greater ecosystem. That is what Fe is. I am not in a vacuum. I belong to something greater. I cannot define myself without it. 

As the great Chief Seattle said:

“The earth does not belong to man, man belongs to the earth. All things are connected like the blood that unites us all. Man did not weave the web of life, he is merely a strand in it. Whatever he does to the web, he does to himself.”

So, Fe is the keeper of the greater structure, which demands the dissolution of the individual. As the web is more important than the threads.


----------



## d e c a d e n t (Apr 21, 2013)

littleredstreak said:


> I'm an INFJ, ( so I have auxillary Fe) and I feel soooo lost. I feel like I'm fake? I thought we were supposed to be authentic.


Well, if you worry about being fake, you must have at least some feelings. Right?


----------



## juilorain (Oct 29, 2013)

I have feelings. I never share them openly (except for excitement).

Otherwise I'm stoic.

Fe is "feeling" therefore feeling. We just respond to others and their emotional states emotionally and gradually "communicate" by establishing an exchange of light, good feelings. I usually get confused on how to handle myself in high Fi-environments only because the feelings are introverted and not shared, and when they are it is an orgasmic flow of mushiness I cannot comprehend and makes me cringe a little.

Fe is light and superficial and I also hate it. (Lightness I am fine with.)


----------



## Pelopra (May 21, 2013)

i think we have feelings of our own but
1. often closely attached to a relationship (okay, maybe that's just... humans)
2. often more... fluid
3. not always so easy to access by ourselves

says the Fe-tert.


sometimes i experience feelings as clothing i can change as i wish, assuming wardrobe of alternate garb available. sometimes it's weird how easy i go from sad to, say, amused.
but deep deep down there's also a small, hard core of feelings that i... can't consciously access, usually, but they're there and they're permanent and very intense? I call it my Fi. =)


----------



## Seeker (Aug 12, 2010)

Well, I've been thinking about this dilemma today. I can be very aware of my own feelings, but I have trouble getting help with them. Since my dominant function is Fe, I am very concerned with others' feelings. I spend a lot of time taking care of others' feelings. And it does spring in large part from a belief that feelings are important and that people SHOULD help each other with feelings. But as a dominant Fe, that means that Fi is five for me. So my own feelings are like a neglected step-child shoved to the side. I still think they are important, but I have trouble tending to them on my own and neglect them. As I have grown, I think I have developed a stronger Fi in some ways and have stood up for my Fi. But it's sooooo hard. 

In any case, I think I need a fellow Fe user to help take care of my neglected Fi. At the same time, if this fellow Fe user is a partner rather than one of my many high Fe friends, then it seems that this persons' Fi can't be too low either or he won't be able to appreciate me for my greatest strength---my Fe. I think that's part of why ENFJ's and INFP's are initially drawn to each other. The INFP loves our Fe and wants it to take care of their Fi. We love their loving of our Fe. But their Fi is too high (reads as selfish), and their Fe is too low to help us with our neglected Fi.


----------



## Agg Herbor (Jun 30, 2013)

If you are an INFJ, most of your time will be spent mentally coasting on the wispy, mystical wings of your Introverted Intuition. This is a perceiving function, indicating that you primarily take in this abstract data intuitively, rather than projecting judgement on the outside world. You use feelings as a means of communication, but not necessarily interpretation. It is more a language and a tool for you than a reflection of your inward mind. Ni is about coming to understand the essence or truth of something or someone, regardless of how it impacts you emotionally. Therefore, you aren't really expected to feel anything about everything like an Fi dom.

now to actually answer the question...

as an Fe dom, I can basically say the same about myself in respect to Fe in communication. Fe is both a consciously accessed mechanism employed to control a social interaction, as well as an unconscious and fundamental characteristic of who and why we are who we are. Maintaing social harmony is essential the nature of the Fe-dom (or IxFJ). Fi doms, however are so engulfed in their usually melancholy emotional atmosphere, that there need not be a progenitor to said feelings. They are always emotionally self-aware and emotionally self-absorbed (in a literal sense, not a colloquial negative sense). 

point being, Fe doms are NOT Fi doms. Fe doms (as well as IxFJs) are often incredibly sensitive and emotionally intelligent like Fi doms, but these play incredibly different roles in each type. The mood and emotions of the self are absolutely paramount to the Fi dom. The mood and emotions of others are absolutely paramount to Fe doms.


----------



## LostFavor (Aug 18, 2011)

littleredstreak said:


> For example: Enfp boyfriend gets mad at me and says all these really hateful word vomits (Te probs). And I feel bad but I didn't feel that bad until I told my ESFJ friend and she was shocked at how mean his words were. And then a day later I thought about it some more and those were really hurtful words.


Honestly, this sounds more like you're out of touch with your emotions than anything to do with functions. No one who is emotionally healthy should need to be told how to feel. 

Fe users do have feelings of their own. And they do have value systems of their own, too. This is a big misconception; that Fe users are somehow lacking in values or deep emotions. It couldn't be more false. 

The difference that I've noticed with some consistency is that Fi users tend to have greater strength in supporting a cause/ideal without moral support from anyone (see: The portrayal of Thomas Moore in _A Man For All Seasons_). Fe users can also have great strength in supporting a cause/ideal, but I think they're more likely to have (or gather, if they don't have) some support to strengthen the sense of what they're doing. This is why it appears like Fe users are concerned with "the group" and Fi users are not; Fe users rely more closely on "the group" for support.

If you look at in basic terms of external vs. internal, it makes sense. Fi users are talented at drawing a certain level of strength from the inside while Fe users are talented at drawing a certain level of strength from the outside. Neither is inauthentic in this way by default. It's simply a matter of where the strength comes from. It's also not a blanket dictation that Fe users are incapable of drawing strength from inside or Fi users are incapable of drawing strength from outside.

These are preferences, tendencies, talents, etc., not dogma.


----------



## Aelthwyn (Oct 27, 2010)

I'm no expert, so beware I could be totally wrong, but personally I think that people who use Fe Do have their own values and feelings, but they have a greater need than someone with Fi to check and link with values and feelings expressed outside themselves. 

In observing others who I think use Fe, I feel like they kind of go through a process of:
1) I have a feeling/value
2) glance around to see if people (especially important/respected ones) are reflecting this feeling/value
3) if Yes the feeling/value is confirmed, if no the feeling/value is questioned
4) if internally the feeling/value cannot be adjusted (or if one's connection to the people who disagree does not outweigh it) a new external audience/environment is sought out where it fits in, if it can be adjusted without undoing one's sense of integrity (or if one's connection to the people who disagree _does_ outweigh it) then a different feeling/value will be adopted which fits the people/relationships/group affiliations/environment in which you are or wish to remain a part of. 

A) whenever in doubt of how one feels or what one values, outside confirmation is sought to help clarify and sort it out.
B) whenever presented with feelings/values from outside sources which are important to you before you have thought about it yourself, you are _generally_ (of course not always) inclined to go with it without a great deal of personal questioning of it, and likely to feel very troubled if you find yourself unable to agree with a person/group that you normally feel in sync with. 
C) External verification and congruency seems pretty important, but only from people/groups you choose to align yourself with, it Doesn't mean that your feelings/values are completely chameleon in nature and adjust to whomever you are around, it's more a matter of looking for the reflection of your own feelings/values in outside places where you can fit. 
Possibly, (I'm making a big guess here) Fe views feelings/values as more of something one chooses. 

Naturally everyone likes to be around people who agree with them, but I get the impression that finding and/or creating external agreement is a more central concern for Fe, while Fi seems to be pleasantly surprised when the outside matches the inside, but seems less thrown into doubt/confusion by a lack of external confirmation of their values and more readily shrugs off disagreement, going very much by the motto 'to each his own' - because feelings/values are seen as very personal/individual, not something that an external source has any right (or hope) to attempt to change. I think Fi (though maybe it's not exclusive to Fi) views feelings/values more as something that just _Is_, who one is. When faced with an outside value, Fi frequently has an instant reaction of 'yes that's me' or 'that's not me'. 

I think Fi compares outside input against an internal 'standard', while it seems more like Fe compares internal input against an external 'standard'. Thus Fi doesn't necessarily seek out something to compare their internal state to, just waits until it comes to them. But until the external checks have been conducted, Fe may feel uncertain, vague, not fully solidified. This might explain why your emotions seem to become more clear only after you've spoken with someone else. It's not that your feelings aren't 'yours', but that an external sounding board helps you to discover them and sort them out.

does any of this seem correct in other's experiences?


----------



## LostFavor (Aug 18, 2011)

I will add, because I think it's important: Leaning on "the group" for support is a bit of a double-edged sword. On the one hand, if you're surrounded by the right kind of attitudes/people, it can be affirming and empowering in a really powerful way. On the other hand, if you're surrounded by the wrong kind of attitudes/people, it can be draining and tear apart your emotional well-being. This is true for everyone to some degree, but I think it's worst for FJs.

I say this from observing a number of FJs, many of whom seem to have frequent issues with their emotional states being significantly impacted by the attitudes/emotions of others in a bad way.

Compared to someone like me, who is affected, but can instinctively detach and separate myself to a large extent.


----------



## littleredstreak (Jan 14, 2014)

Aelthwyn said:


> I think Fi compares outside input against an internal 'standard', while it seems more like Fe compares internal input against an external 'standard'. Thus Fi doesn't necessarily seek out something to compare their internal state to, just waits until it comes to them. But until the external checks have been conducted, Fe may feel uncertain, vague, not fully solidified. This might explain why your emotions seem to become more clear only after you've spoken with someone else. It's not that your feelings aren't 'yours', but that an external sounding board helps you to discover them and sort them out.
> 
> does any of this seem correct in other's experiences?


This sounds accurate. That makes me feel better. Lol I was thinking I was just shallow or something.. I think I even recall someone mentioning that 

Fe will know, but need it verified 
while Fi will just *know* and they don't need someone else to tell them they are right


----------



## Aha (Mar 6, 2014)

What a great qustion!
The answer is YES

My example:
I feel a lot while being alone - yes
When I am interacting with a group of people - no. I feel only their emotions. 

Moreover, when you feel anxiety from a group of people - you wallow in it first, then pull strings to discharge the atmosphere for what you deem is best for everyone. Again, it is what I feel.


----------



## Pelopra (May 21, 2013)

Aelthwyn said:


> I'm no expert, so beware I could be totally wrong, but personally I think that people who use Fe Do have their own values and feelings, but they have a greater need than someone with Fi to check and link with values and feelings expressed outside themselves.
> 
> In observing others who I think use Fe, I feel like they kind of go through a process of:
> 1) I have a feeling/value
> ...


matches my personal experience. also seems to fit an ENFJ friend. 
infj friend... we haven't had this conversation, so dunno. 

think emotional feedback important to Fe. possibly explains the need to give in higher-level Fe users. the give-and-take involved in relationship, the feedback from the other person in response to receiving, is what strengthens/reconfirms relationship in their eyes? Possibly?




LostFavor said:


> Honestly, this sounds more like you're out of touch with your emotions than anything to do with functions. No one who is emotionally healthy should need to be told how to feel.




Says the Fi user to the Fe user. Hope you recognize that you just passed a judgement on her emotional health on the basis of what _you_ are comfortably capable of.

Personally, I've encountered many Fe users who had difficulty identifying their own emotions with certainty. Ti can help-- giving a label to an emotion gives it a "handle". But yeah, I've encountered awareness/certainty of own emotions as a problem repeatedly in FJs and TPs, _including perfectly healthy ones_.
Emotional state is a fluid thing, and also something we feel we have control over, so it can be hard to tell-- especially in any more confusing situation, like if we have conflicting motives etc-- what the core emotion underneath the choice of framework and fluid changeableness is. Actually Aelthwyn was spot-on, I think, in describing it as something Fe perceives as more of a "choice", and of course once it's a choice, it becomes more confusing. Am I overreacting to his words, or were they really hurtful? How should I approach this? 
And then if someone says "you're feeling such and such", we think about it, and _it's true_, and we're like "oh, you're right, we didn't realize that".


----------



## Wolfskralle (Nov 29, 2013)

I've spent quite a lot of time with my INFJ friend in various social settings, and I've noticed two patterns:

1. He is indeed always looking for an external validation, for his broadly defined "judgements".
2. I see his social interactions as totally ruled by his dominant function (Ni). 

This sometimes creates somewhat strange results, but I really enjoy his company roud: Let me explain.

He usually has inside-his-head model for everything that happen, mostly regarding people and social interactions, people's nature, general nature of humanity, philosophy, historical events, etc. He is kind of philosopher in general. But at the same time he is very stubborn in his opinions and rarely wants to change, or even slightly reshape them. You might say he has very defined values, but in a very abstract way. He is usually explaining his views in a logical way, but you can easy tell that most of them were"created" more by insight, or that they are some kind of convictions, more than judgements created by actual reasoning (at the same time they are usually very interesting and even inspiring).

Now, when he enters some social setting he is always, soon or later, trying to "inquire" people's opinions or judgements regarding different subjects. When his own ideas met criticism or negative responses from others, or sometimes even when they are simply different than ideas adopted in groups, he becomes deeply disturbed.
At this state he is torn apart by being part of the group (which he obviously crave), versus defending what he considers "truth".
Usually his convictions wins though, and he ends up being unable to abandon what he considers "truth", even if it means social isolation.

----

I personally consider myself low-rank Fe user (for sure), so I don't have Fe as my main or aux function, and non-Ni user (probably, but yet to reconsider), and I don't have such strong convictions regarding morals, people, and other judgements. I definitely have feelings, regarding myself and others (I'm pretty sure everybody, except psychopaths, has own feelings), but I don't have any internal, unchangeable set of morals. I feel sympathy or antipathy in a quite basic and naive way. Like, usually I don't even think about it, nor count others/my own feelings in decisions/choices (though I work on it) but I often feel sympathy or sorrow when I see someones pain or misery. It's like I don't need, nor want to, any internal compass or some unchangeable believes in order to "be good" and avoid hurting people. If in group somene will made weird, let's say immoral comment, I would wonder _why_ he says it, what motivates _him_, instead of defending what I consider "proper judgement". I won't feel internally disturbed by his comment either.

Strangely, I also sometimes experience feelings of oneness with people in a abstract way. For instance, I've just watched last episode of "Vikings" where was the scene of two marriages, in different cultures. My mind quickly interpreted given symbols (ring - commitment, fidelity; marriage vows - social obligation, etc.), connected it with civilization as a whole and with modern times when those symbols are still in use, and then I felt sth like connection with, I don't know, archetype or idea of humanity.
I think this kind of stuff is not created by one function, it is at least three of them (N - Si - Fe).

----- 

My point is
/
*TLDR version
*

It's not only if it's Fi or Fe, it is mostly dependent by function rank and, first of all, by the dominant function. It defines how other functions work, IMHO. Lower functions usually work along with dominant function, but sometimes it may create some kind of conflict, which is not a very good thing.
Generally speaking, dominant or aux Fe users should be more considered with group values, while for tertiary or inferior users it should be of much less concern.
Everybody has "own feelings", although Fi users seem more attached to their personal values. Fe users seem more concerned simply with well-being of others.


----------



## Seeker (Aug 12, 2010)

I feel rather understood by other types in this thread. Thank you.

Interestingly, INFJ's have a tendency to pass a negative onto themselves.

But to our INFJ OP, I wouldn't flagellate yourself as being shallow--INFJ's are not shallow. You all are some of the world's kindest and most giving human beings. 

Frankly, people with strong Fi often come across to me as being selfish because they won't put aside their own irritation, etc., for the sake of others. On the one hand, I think I have something to learn from them because my Fi is not non-existent, and they can remind me to stand up for myself. 

But on the other hand, I get annoyed with one if we are partners in a group setting--like--ugh--why do you have to make everything uncomfortable for the group and embarrass me---can't you just get along with everyone--quit being so selfish. 

And when their needs conflict with mine--good Lord! When that happens, I feel that they are the most selfish human beings on the planet---and, yes, I've screamed it out at the top of my lungs too. Once that happens, of course, a strong Fi will hate me forever. How dare I criticize their po' wittle baby feelings? And then because I am Fe that snarky question makes me feel terrible too--because I do believe in taking care of other people's feelings. But gosh dammit! Why is it always about their feelings? When do I get my turn? I am not a prostitute--I don't exist solely to soothe their wounds. I have my own wounds too. And the thing is--I have trouble taking care of my wounds and need help with that because I don't put my own feelings first. So someone whose Fi is stronger than mine has typically reinforced the idea that my feelings are less important than theirs. 

Okay, venting over--if I keep Fi's at arms length, we are able to enjoy a loving and mutually beneficial relationship for life. I have numerous Fi friends--both INTJ's and INFP's who fall into that category. I just can't get too close to them because their feelings are usually going to come before mine--and I have a hard time prioritizing my feelings over theirs. They don't help me out in that department.


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

-Alpha- said:


> Agreed. Definitely not an Fe user, but the same could be said for Te/Ti (do Te users have opinions and thoughts of their own?) and people have definitely accused me of not having faith in my opinions. I just adjust them to whatever is the most objectively true. The same can be said for Fe users who adjust their ethical code based on what keeps the people around them in harmony.


Yes, I really appreciate you saying this. I've heard comparable arguments... that Te is somehow less legitimate, or less substantial, because it's "based on outside factors". But, just as Fe-users definitely have their own feelings, it would be silly to say that Te-users don't have their own thoughts. 

As a Te-user, I learn to understand things as I go along, sometimes adjusting or developing my thoughts based on new information or perspectives. Things don't make sense to me without that flexibility. It's kind of like putting together a puzzle based on touch alone...? Like feeling all the edges to see what might fit where, trying different things until it all goes together. Whereas perhaps Ti is more like being able to actually *see* the puzzle pieces from the start, visibly narrow down all the shapes and contours into a condensed pattern, and kind of already know how the puzzle is going to piece together prior to actually doing it.

You still end up with a finished product, either way... it's just you have different tools on how to get there. 

Again just speaking for myself. Te is my inferior function and I am not very comfortable with it, so, I could be not making any sense here.


----------



## -Alpha- (Dec 30, 2013)

alexibaka said:


> Extraverted and introverted in the functions sense are not the same as they are in the actual quiet-loud introvert-extravert sense. Cognitive functions arent necessarily introverted or extraverted they are more subjective or objective.


Stealing from a completely different thread.

Fi basically says: "What are _my_ morals and ethics?"

While Fe says: "What are _the_ morals and ethics?"

Where I'll say "What will benefit the group most?" and hold their well being like, in my heart, an INFJ will ask "what does this group value?" and will hold the group harmony in their heads.

The mistake is believing that authenticity is of any merit in and of itself. The Unabomber was an Fi user. I hope you wouldn't tell me that his ethical code was valid because it was authentic. As a Te user, if you can't show me why a moral or ethical code is useful, it doesn't make sense to me.


----------



## KCfox (Mar 4, 2014)

spectralsparrow said:


> Yes, I really appreciate you saying this. I've heard comparable arguments... that Te is somehow less legitimate, or less substantial, because it's "based on outside factors". But, just as Fe-users definitely have their own feelings, it would be silly to say that Te-users don't have their own thoughts.
> 
> As a Te-user, I learn to understand things as I go along, sometimes adjusting or developing my thoughts based on new information or perspectives. Things don't make sense to me without that flexibility. It's kind of like putting together a puzzle based on touch alone...? Like feeling all the edges to see what might fit where, trying different things until it all goes together. Whereas perhaps Ti is more like being able to actually *see* the puzzle pieces from the start, visibly narrow down all the shapes and contours into a condensed pattern, and kind of already know how the puzzle is going to piece together prior to actually doing it.
> 
> ...


Well you have Fi which deals with the more ethical end. Te deals with people and also things in terms of their role, like A should do 1, B should do 3, it's assertive and makes plans. Te and Fe are both surface efficient, Ti and Fi are both deep and very much critical on a subjective level where crossed.

Fi Te doesn't need Fe, it isn't surface efficient with ethics but Te can logically test the values objectively and act as a safeguard for appropriate response but may else not. Fe Ti doesn't need Fi because Ti can argue that the surface level response isn't logically taken enough from a subjective point, yet Fe can miss out the Ti. Inferior Te is going to struggle more to surface check values unless Fi matches the surface value with the inner one anyway or is being deliberately conscious yet this is draining. My Te is a little stronger, however. Seeing in socionics, in terms of egos, the case can effect the function usage.

I find thinking like this draining so this would indicate I'm not very energised by logically analysing the various blocks lol. See it's all to do with preference, everyone uses all the functions and conscious effort while draining or even energising depending on the functions naturally preferred enables you to deal with things, however. Certainly, my head has been seeing things and working differently since I discovered the MBTI, etc.

As an Fi user, I elect Fe-esque stereotyped moral preference.
I also elect critical Ti to help me work with Te and explore the various perspectives of how things work. Te-Ti is basically thinking out loud.


----------



## Seeker (Aug 12, 2010)

KCfox said:


> Fe I'm pretty sure involves roughly the same process as Te, Fi involves the near same as Ti.
> 
> Fe evaluates the outer harmony first and then references the inner harmony, it then compromises.
> Fi feels it may or may not evaluate with the outer harmony and references the inner harmony.
> ...


Aha! God damn smokers! Selfish. (Insert satire font--well--half-way) :laughing: 

Of course, unless everyone is smoker in which case, God damn me and my health needs. Why am I interfering with these poor smokers and their needs to smoke? I should go away.


----------



## Mutant Hive Queen (Oct 29, 2013)

Seeker said:


> Aha! God damn smokers! Selfish. (Insert satire font--well--half-way) :laughing:
> 
> Of course, unless everyone is smoker in which case, God damn me and my health needs. Why am I interfering with these poor smokers and their needs to smoke? I should go away.


Or, "[other person] and their health needs". :tongue:


----------



## -Alpha- (Dec 30, 2013)

Seeker said:


> Aha! God damn smokers! Selfish. (Insert satire font--well--half-way) :laughing:
> 
> Of course, unless everyone is smoker in which case, God damn me and my health needs. Why am I interfering with these poor smokers and their needs to smoke? I should go away.


I vape constantly and my Fi goes crazy when a person asks me to not do it indoors. I've read studies upon studies that suggest there's no harm whatsoever to bystanders. Still, enough places don't allow it that I've learned to just save myself the trouble and just vape outside and in the car.

Still, I can't practically assume that every person has read as much about vaping as I have and expect them to all have informed opinions about such a specific facet. Politeness comes from just 'getting it'.

Also, not being a fucking dick.


----------



## Mutant Hive Queen (Oct 29, 2013)

-Alpha- said:


> I vape constantly and my Fi goes crazy when a person asks me to not do it indoors. I've read studies upon studies that suggest there's no harm whatsoever to bystanders. Still, enough places don't allow it that I've learned to just save myself the trouble and just vape outside and in the car.


I would...actually like to see these studies, as they contradict most things I've heard on the topic. XD

(Also, funny note, there's a 50% chance I use Fi and I will happily let other people smoke around me even though I hate cigarettes because telling people what to do goes against my core values. So there. :tongue


----------



## AddictiveMuse (Nov 14, 2013)

No Fe users are robots..:tongue:
As an Fi user I tend to have no need to be told how to feel, sympathizing and empathizing is something that has always been easy when I think about their feelings/problems from MY view, what would I do?
Although sometimes I don't understand their logic behind why their feeling like that or their values and feeling don't quite make sense or match up to mine

Honestly both Fi and Fe have their pros and cons 
I find that Fi gets in the way, if I want to detach from my own feelings, Fe would be easier as it's extroverted and cares more about others and sees both sides while Fi is more concered with what it feels, of course the stronger your Fi is the worse this problem is going to be.

Don't worry about whether your feelings are genuine or not.
You're still human so wouldn't all feelings be genuine? You still feel emotions.


----------



## Seeker (Aug 12, 2010)

Robots, f'ing robots, does this post sound like an f'ing robot to you? 

We DON'T have other people tell us what to feel. Rather, it's that we worry about OTHER people's feelings and try to take care of them. We give a crap about others and their feelings and can put them ahead of our own. We have our own feelings which are unique and individual. We work to overcome our own feeling of irritation or dismay as we are empathizing with others and are often able to get past it. But our feelings do get shoved to the side in the process at other times. And if we get around another Fe user--a freaking sympathetic person who is not all about his or her own feelings--then we get some help with taking care of our own feelings. 

Arghhh! SELFISH! SELFISH! SELFISH! Damn INTJ's and INFP's and ISFP's! 

Okay, sorry, I love you guys--except for the ISFP's--freaking drama queens. I know that's mean of me. But I've been pushed too far by a few of those types a few times. We're like the hulk. We set our own feelings aside again and again until final we get pushed too far--and then it's like--don't make me angry--you wouldn't like me when I'm angry. G'dnmit, you made me angry.


----------



## Mutant Hive Queen (Oct 29, 2013)

Seeker said:


> Robots, f'ing robots, does this post sound like an f'ing robot to you?
> 
> We DON'T have other people tell us what to feel. Rather, it's that we worry about OTHER people's feelings and try to take care of them. We give a crap about others and their feelings and can put them ahead of our own. We have our own feelings which are unique and individual. And if we get around another Fe user--a freaking sympathetic person who is not all about his or her own feelings--then we get some help with taking care of our own feelings.
> 
> ...


See, the funny thing is, I wouldn't refrain from calling Fe-users I've known to be _very_ selfish. Just in a different sort of way--rather than thinking about their own needs ahead of the needs of the group, they'll think of group harmony ahead of people's needs in the group. Individuals _do_ have needs separate from that, you know. They _are_ people, rather than cogs to be used. 

And of course, many Fi values involve valuing _people_ outside the "social" setting--not just things! Where's the Fe consideration for that when they try to make you hurry up with that waste disposal, because doing it the _proper_ way so seals don't die eating bottle caps is obviously not as important as a couple minutes wait.


----------



## Seeker (Aug 12, 2010)

Not true--I juggle the needs of multiple people in a large group on a weekly basis. I am working to find a way to meet each person's need. Unfortunately, it's not possible to meet all of them. And it is rather draining. As a result of the whole thing, I need to be around another Fe user to help me with my own feelings that have gotten shunted in the process of juggling everyone else's.

And I totally would want to protect the seals. I was a freaking Vegan for seven years until I got too hypoglycemic--a lot of INFJ's and ENFJ's are Vegans and vegetarians because they get so upset about things happening to animals and the environment. Of course, I am happy to inconvenience myself for the animals and the trees and so on. It seems that I know more Fi users who don't want to do that if they don't feel like it. 

And I'm sorry for screaming. This thread raises some past trauma with Fi's. 

I am just fine with Fi users if they are colleagues, people whom I am taking care of in my role at work, or second circle friends. I even love many of them. I just can't have them in my inner circle which is a place where I am the most intimate---a place where I get help with my own feelings--from other Fe doms or Fe secondary users.


----------



## Wellsy (Oct 24, 2011)

Seeker said:


> Robots, f'ing robots, does this post sound like an f'ing robot to you?


Would you hate me if I admitted to getting a giggle out of that sentence?


----------



## Seeker (Aug 12, 2010)

That was part of the point. As long as it wasn't a giggle because you thought it was robotic. 

Oh, and you are totally exempted from any of the yelling and accusations above by the way because I like you lots. You are not and will never be a first circle person because you would be dangerous to me there--and you'd wind up hating me in the end. But you are well-loved nonetheless. Hugs!


----------



## candiemerald (Jan 26, 2014)

Chained Divinity said:


> See, the funny thing is, I wouldn't refrain from calling Fe-users I've known to be _very_ selfish. Just in a different sort of way--rather than thinking about their own needs ahead of the needs of the group, they'll think of group harmony ahead of people's needs in the group. Individuals _do_ have needs separate from that, you know. They _are_ people, rather than cogs to be used.
> 
> And of course, many Fi values involve valuing _people_ outside the "social" setting--not just things! Where's the Fe consideration for that when they try to make you hurry up with that waste disposal, because doing it the _proper_ way so seals don't die eating bottle caps is obviously not as important as a couple minutes wait.


Personally I have to kind of agree. Not that Fe users don't value individuality over the group, because they certainly can (I'm Fe aux, and I tend to be the lone wolf, the person who never fits in, the person who doesn't want to fit in, who doesn't conform and doesn't socialize that well and will fight you if you try to conform me), but I have met with Fe "the group interests outweigh personal interests", which can be more than irritating. So I find both Fe and Fi irritating to about equal degrees, dependent on the situation. I'm just a tad tired of hearing that Fi is so selfish. Of course, I'm also tired of hearing that Fe is all about herd mentality...


----------



## Mutant Hive Queen (Oct 29, 2013)

candiemerald said:


> Personally I have to kind of agree. Not that Fe users don't value individuality over the group, because they certainly can (I'm Fe aux, and I tend to be the lone wolf, the person who never fits in, the person who doesn't want to fit in, who doesn't conform and doesn't socialize that well and will fight you if you try to conform me), but I have met with Fe "the group interests outweigh personal interests", which can be more than irritating. So I find both Fe and Fi irritating to about equal degrees, dependent on the situation. I'm just a tad tired of hearing that Fi is so selfish. Of course, I'm also tired of hearing that Fe is all about herd mentality...


Oh, Fe isn't _always_ horrid in this regard. :happy:

S'all about how you use it, I think. XD


----------



## Seeker (Aug 12, 2010)

Mmmm, at least from an ENFJ standpoint, it's not THE GROUP'S feelings. It's the feelings of each person in the group. We are focused on all of those. That's why so many of us teach. We are looking to see what each individual needs and trying to fill all of those needs. In so doing, we may wind up asking some people to compromise--but not to give away everything. We are mediators in that sense. We are looking for win-win compromises not looking to sacrifice one individual's needs up to the whole group's desires. 

What can be distressing is that we do tend to compromise a lot with our own feelings and can run into issues with some types that keep taking more than their share in the process until finally we've just been pushed over the edge.

Anyhoo, I think that INFJ's are too hard on themselves about this whole thing. You all are so willing to find fault in yourselves when it's not warranted. That's your biggest fault. I can't think of almost anyone I'd rather be around than an INFJ. You all are some of the most unselfish humans I've ever met in my life, and you are always giving. I LOVE YOU!


----------



## candiemerald (Jan 26, 2014)

Seeker said:


> Mmmm, at least from an ENFJ standpoint, it's not THE GROUP'S feelings. It's the feelings of each person in the group. We are focused on all of those. That's why so many of us teach. We are looking to see what each individual needs and trying to fill all of those needs. In so doing, we may wind up asking some people to compromise--but not to give away everything. We are mediators in that sense. We are looking for win-win compromises not looking to sacrifice one individual's needs up to the whole group's desires.
> 
> What can be distressing is that we do tend to compromise a lot with our own feelings and can run into issues with some types that keep taking more than their share in the process until finally we've just been pushed over the edge.
> 
> Anyhoo, I think that INFJ's are too hard on themselves about this whole thing. You all are so willing to find fault in yourselves when it's not warranted. That's your biggest fault. I can't think of almost anyone I'd rather be around than an INFJ. You all are some of the most unselfish humans I've ever met in my life, and you are always giving. I LOVE YOU!


Yes, I think that's very true for me, as well. Fe for me really doesn't have anything to do with the crowd, or the majority, or whatever. I only care if you're being socially acceptable if I think you'll be injuring someone else if you aren't, or if by dissing the rules you'll be hurting others more than you would be hurt by following the rules. If you're going to disrupt the peace, you should have a good reason for it - otherwise, why injure others? Otherwise I don't give a damn about social convention, and will be the first to break the rules (if that won't hurt anyone and the rules don't make sense to me). 

Yes, Fe users often make great diplomats, because they want to diffuse the situation and create social harmony, want to make sure everyone comes out happy, yet accept the fact that compromise is sometimes necessary for the greater good. I see Fi users dissing that, saying that everyone should do their own thing...but if we did, there would be no society whatsoever, it would be every man for himself, and I can't see that as a good thing. There has to be balance. So Fi and Fe are both worthwhile, and really rely on each other to some extent. I'm sick of seeing all the Fe/Fi squabbling, really, because neither function is less than the other - in fact, they oft come to the same conclusions, just through different means.

Aw, hugs  I've actually never known an ENFJ personally very well, but you seem like very caring people. And it wasn't ENFJs I was complaining about that are too apt to try and get me to conform to the group, either.


----------



## Seeker (Aug 12, 2010)

I don't like squabbling and am sorry for that. I've just had some deeply hurtful experiences with INTJ exes and an INFP ex and with a couple of INFP ex friends and an ISFP ex friend. The Fe dom Fi dom conflict was at the root of the I_FP conflicts that came to a head. The all around low F and superior Fi and super low Fe was at the root of intractable conflicts with the INTJ exes. 

INTJ: It is your fault that I totaled your car while I was driving it and made an illegal turn while you were a passenger who was sent to the hospital. [I kid not. Like, I can set myself aside, but there is a line--and that line was stomped all over.] 

But I should not be screaming about it on the forum and taking it out on poor people who were not a part of these conflicts. 

Still, I just wish that Fi users would stop and think more about how they are hurting other people and try to take care of other people more. But I suppose that's like saying, "I wish Fe doms would quit worrying about other people so much." 

Anyway, one of my best friends is an INFj. She is so self-critical, and I am always working on getting her to stop that and take care of herself more. She gets taken advantage of by people who--well--honestly--I don't know how to describe them other than to say that they are selfish. And she still blames herself. But their expectations of her are so unreasonable. And she's like the sweetest person I've ever met. We used to live with each other, and she was the most considerate housemate ever. She's just a font of kind feelings and helpfulness--but she deserves someone to take care of her too. You all do, INFJ's. Hugs!


----------



## candiemerald (Jan 26, 2014)

Seeker said:


> I don't like squabbling and am sorry for that. I've just had some deeply hurtful experiences with INTJ exes and an INFP ex and with a couple of INFP ex friends and an ISFP ex friend. The Fe dom Fi dom conflict was at the root of the I_FP conflicts that came to a head. The all around low F and superior Fi and super low Fe was at the root of intractable conflicts with the INTJ exes.
> 
> INTJ: It is your fault that I totaled your car while I was driving it and made an illegal turn while you were a passenger who was sent to the hospital. [I kid not. Like, I can set myself aside, but there is a line--and that line was stomped all over.]
> 
> ...


Ah, I'm sorry about that. I know, I have definitely had bad experiences with Fi myself, especially since Fi users at times have a tendency to devalue Fe more than Fe users devalue Fi...perhaps. Not all the time, of course, but I've certainly met with people who devalue my Fe and tell me about how I should change that about myself. So I can definitely relate to where you are coming from. Of course, I've also seem people devalue Fi and try to make Fi users conform to the group, which annoys me (I'm not talking about ENFJs, or about you. Just things I've observed), so I suppose it's just that some Fi users I know have devalued my Fe, while I tend to value and even aspire to their Fi. So, I'm sorry for your bad experiences with Fi, and I can relate, though I actually get along great with mature Fi users - for me it really depends on the person, and an unhealthy Fe user is just as damaging to me as an unhealthy Fi user. And that INTJ was way out of line. Seriously.

Yes, we do have that tendency, and I guess we could all use some ENFJs around to remind us not to be so hard on ourselves.


----------



## Wellsy (Oct 24, 2011)

Seeker said:


> That was part of the point. As long as it wasn't a giggle because you thought it was robotic.
> 
> Oh, and you are totally exempted from any of the yelling and accusations above by the way because I like you lots. You are not and will never be a first circle person because you would be dangerous to me there--and you'd wind up hating me in the end. But you are well-loved nonetheless. Hugs!


Awwww yeah, Seeker likes me LOTS hahaha
Me hate people? Never, I only dislike


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

Seeker said:


> Robots, f'ing robots, does this post sound like an f'ing robot to you?
> 
> We DON'T have other people tell us what to feel. Rather, it's that we worry about OTHER people's feelings and try to take care of them. We give a crap about others and their feelings and can put them ahead of our own. We have our own feelings which are unique and individual. We work to overcome our own feeling of irritation or dismay as we are empathizing with others and are often able to get past it. But our feelings do get shoved to the side in the process at other times. And if we get around another Fe user--a freaking sympathetic person who is not all about his or her own feelings--then we get some help with taking care of our own feelings.
> 
> ...




Hahaha
This selfishness thing is baffling to me. I'm really into my core values and all, but my core values very much involve kindness, consideration and empathy for others. I'm also capable of temporarily setting aside my own needs to take care of someone else - though I strive to do so only in healthy ways, as self-denial helps no one, ultimately. I'm more focused on individuals though, not groups. And I do draw a line somewhere. I may not go along with the group, or with what other people might want, but this is because I assume people are independent and autonomous enough to be okay without me... Doing that. Like if it about something that truly affects other people I will give it sincere consideration, but if it is just peer pressure... Forget it.

In contrast, I could argue that Fe users often cater to group dynamics and the expectations of other people, or whatever, in order to get what they want. The manipulation thing can be very real, conscious or not. I've SEEN IT. 

I think any individual can be selfish and fi/Fe ain't the determining factor. I could be viewing this from a self-pres lens, but I think everyone has different ways of getting what they need or want, and that's always at play, no matter the form it takes on the surface.


----------



## Branden (Dec 24, 2009)

I do not believe Fe people lack feelings.

I do not think the cognitive functions account for feelings themselves, only what triggers them. Fe users in my experience look out for everyone in group situations. They seem to believe that unpleasantness is avoidable with certain diplomacy. Of course this can make them seem shallow due to their regard for broadness rather than specifics in order to maintain group harmony. Truthfully I doubt there is a great difference in the range of their ability to experience deep feelings though. I have an INFJ friend and he certainly seems to experience a great deal of stronger emotions than I. His judgement of my feelings is also amusing to me because he doesn't recognize Fi, which he views as selfish. This is of course the other side of the coin. 

From my experience I would agree that Fi is a much more self-involved function. I am of the firm belief that how I feel is my responsibility and that everyone else should act under the same principal. I do not feel responsible for other people's feelings and I do not sugar coat things for others benefit. I do it that way because I feel anything less would compromise my personal integrity. This is why my INFJ friend and I quarrel. He believes I am being selfish in pointing out the flaws of others or their plans openly. He believes hurting others feelings is not okay without some great reason. I do not seek to hurt others, but I will not change myself to make others feel okay. I do often have trouble trusting Fe types due to these differences, despite my conscious recognition of them.

I should note I am describing tertiary Fi here as that is my experience, and thus my inherent bias.


----------



## littleredstreak (Jan 14, 2014)

Branden said:


> I do not seek to hurt others, but I will not change myself to make others feel okay.


lol my dad is an INTJ and before we ever started learning cognitive functions, I've heard him express this so many times.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

spectralsparrow said:


> Hahaha
> This selfishness thing is baffling to me. I'm really into my core values and all, but my core values very much involve kindness, consideration and empathy for others. I'm also capable of temporarily setting aside my own needs to take care of someone else - though I strive to do so only in healthy ways, as self-denial helps no one, ultimately. I'm more focused on individuals though, not groups. And I do draw a line somewhere. I may not go along with the group, or with what other people might want, but this is because I assume people are independent and autonomous enough to be okay without me... Doing that. Like if it about something that truly affects other people I will give it sincere consideration, but if it is just peer pressure... Forget it.
> 
> In contrast, I could argue that Fe users often cater to group dynamics and the expectations of other people, or whatever, in order to get what they want. The manipulation thing can be very real, conscious or not. I've SEEN IT.
> ...


I am focused on individuals too, as that is what constitutes a group. Fe is a mediator, as has been mentioned. A mediator in a sea of Fi. The only land. A small island. The last rock. We are the universal point of reference, the universal frame. A God's eye view.

I "manipulate" people, in that I direct their behavior to something more in accord with the environment. I am having to juggle a lot of people here... A generic example I have used, is a time I was at a pub. Some sentimental guy starts telling the bartender how beautiful she is. He is being very nice, heart on his sleeve, good natured, most certainly using Fi....but he is making this woman uncomfortable, and therefore making me uncomfortable. So I just try to change the subject, or advise him that she isn't in to that kind of thing. But in a way that lets him keep his pride. 

I see the environment as flesh. People cause a laceration in the environment. Fe comes along and patches it up. The scar tissue is noticeable, and not as smooth as the previous environment, but it will work. So, Fe is kind of like the immune system of the environment. It kills whatever shouldn't be there.


----------



## Aelthwyn (Oct 27, 2010)

Seeker said:


> Frankly, people with strong Fi often come across to me as being selfish because they won't put aside their own irritation, etc., for the sake of others. . . . . . And when their needs conflict with mine--good Lord! When that happens, I feel that they are the most selfish human beings on the planet---and, yes, I've screamed it out at the top of my lungs too. Once that happens, of course, a strong Fi will hate me forever.


I understand the rant and hurt feelings, and I can see why Fi sometimes 'comes across as' selfish, but Fi doesn't = selfish, and Fe doesn't = selflessness. Being selfish and self-centered is a flaw that every type can be guilty of. This isn't to discount your own experiences with other people, of course. Perhaps Fi lends it's own distinct flavor to selfishness, as I imagine other functions could as well. 

Being an Fi dominant I just have to chime in and say that at least the INFPs and ISFPs I know are very good at putting aside their own feelings/needs momentarily for the needs of someone else. (They may not easily adapt their values and opinions, but they are softies when it comes to dealing with other's emotions). I've seen them become totally distracted from their own problems the moment someone else's need becomes apparent, because they greatly value compassion and respecting _individuals_. It's true, Fi is likely to not be bothered about social etiquette that dictates they can't have a personal melt-down at someone else's party, for instance, but it _does_ put itself in other people's shoes (constantly in my experience) and is concerned about their individual feelings and how they will be affected. Fi definitely feels others' feelings with them, and can be very understanding and supportive of those feelings even when they do not personally identify. I admit it can become very defensive and adamant when it feels rejected or under attack, but at least with mature Fi it can also be amazingly concerned about the emotional needs of the person who is actively attacking them. Fe is known for being a 'martyr' but I believe Fi is equally capable, and prone to, self-sacrifice. One thing that comes to mind is that Fi can be pretty reserved, keeping it's feelings to itself, which could possibly lead to it being less apparent that it is in fact sacrificing those feelings. (I think this may actually be a significant part of troubles I've gone through with my INTJ best friend, both of us having no idea how much the other was silently giving, and thus feeling resentful of eachother's failure to appreciate that). 

Personally, I'm frequently putting aside my feelings for other people - because caring for others and making good relationships is a high value of mine (not valuing that will obviously make a difference here), one that surpasses expressing my own feelings in many cases. I can put my feelings on hold when someone else needs my attention and doesn't need to listen to me express stuff at the moment. I can put my feelings on hold when someone approaches me in the middle of a crisis with their own concerns because whatever is bothering me isn't their fault and thus they don't deserve to receive my reactions to something else, so I can flip off the fuming and speak kindly to them for a moment, and then go back to cursing at my computer afterwards. I'm not saying that everyone who prefers Fi does this, just saying it's quite possible, and not something that was a struggle personally for me to learn, it's always been rather natural. 




> On the one hand, I think I have something to learn from them because my Fi is not non-existent, and *they can remind me to stand up for myself*. . . . . And the thing is--*I have trouble taking care of my wounds and need help with tha*t because I don't put my own feelings first. So someone whose Fi is stronger than mine has typically reinforced the idea that my feelings are less important than theirs.


These are important points, ones I've observed in others, though most notably in my ISTJ mother (who would have tertiary Fi actually). Again, I think at least Fi dominants can be very naturally perceptive of other people's feelings and needs, but it is a point of maturity or immaturity whether they choose to take responsibility with these insights and act in other people's best interest, or to choose not to bother. For myself, I feel like it's a compulsive purpose in life to tend and nurture the emotional state of those around me, but somehow despite making personal sacrifices for this purpose, I don't usually forget to take care of myself too - which often means asking for support from others. Fe may be more prone to forgetting to take care of it's own emotions (but it seems to also be a _relatively_ common problem for Ts in general), and in this _I heartily agree that others need to step up and help with that_. I learned early on in childhood that if I simply voiced my preference without actually demanding it be met (something I think Fi tends to do and be misunderstood over), my mom would feel obligated to please me and always sacrifice what she wanted unless I took the initiative to say 'no let's do what you want this time.' I believe I've seen this same type of thing with ISFJs. My mom always seemed to feel guilty about doing something that was just for herself and not for someone else, and I eventually realized that meant she needed other people to do things for _her_. I definitely don't think you should just 'learn to take care of yourself better' or just 'learn to stand up for yourself' (even if there may be some merit to working on that), _but I do feel that others should also learn to look after eachother._


----------



## Seeker (Aug 12, 2010)

spectralsparrow said:


> I'm also capable of temporarily setting aside my own needs to take care of someone else


Temporarily, yes--that's why ultimately I think that INFP's are basically good people. It's also why I love my second circle INFP friends and will always be friends with them--at arms length. They really bring something to the table.

But it's also why they are a bad match for me in a romantic relationship and don't belong in what I call "the inner circle," a place for INFJ's and ENFJ's. For me, my default is to set aside my needs for others. So my own feelings, which are still five on a ten function scale are left kicking around. I need a fellow Fe--a strong Fe to help me with my own feelings. I don't have to fight so uncomfortably for my own feelings. With an Fi, I will try to get my needs taken care of. An inevitable conflict with their needs arises. They stand up so strongly for theirs, and I back down---or feel guilty for standing up for core needs. In contrast, with a fellow strong Fe, we both negotiate so that each of our needs gets attention. And when the needs aren't directly in conflict, they allow hours of emotional sharing where they empathize with me. They may feel put upon, but they work through that and ultimately feel good for having given. I do the same for them.

So, in any case, it's not that INFP's are selfish per se. It's that in an intimate or first circle relationship with me they can become so. It's not good for either of us.

But when I keep them at arms length in the second circle, it is truly a beautiful thing. The INFP will come through for me with selfless help at unexpected moments. They will give me bursts of complete understanding. I do the same back for the INFP. These are people with whom I've been friends for decades, and I've helped them through some real hard times. They have done the same for me. It's just that they are not on the hotline list or the call list when things are going wrong. That would be waaaayyyy too draining for them---it is too draining for them when it happens. It's why my other ENFJ friend and I are no longer speaking to our former INFP friend and housemate.

*Now ISFP's I don't trust because I knew one who was essentially a Salem witch hunter--charmer who takes you in, gossip, drama queen, selfish, crazy, narcissist. But I haven't known many so I probably shouldn't judge them all on one drama queen narcissist who wrought havoc in my life at the worst possible time and upset the whole apple cart at work causing others to be fired, etc. 

INTJ's are great colleagues. If they are particularly mature, they can even be giving at times. My INTj exes though---super selfish little pricks.

ESTJ's and ISTJ's are unselfish in their own duty fulfilling sort of way--it's just not a good idea to come to them for help with emotions. My parents--an ESTJ and ISTJ with moderate Fi and virtually nonexistent Fe--Oi! Soul-crushing people. I loved my mom, but she was a real piece of work. I love my dad and have a great relationship with him. But it isn't a close relationship on my end. He thinks I am awesome because I know not to talk about my emotions around him and know how to be around him. But man, it was not easy to be around him when my mom was dying and was newly dead. My mom was screaming in pain, and he just said not to give her pain medication because he thought she was sleeping. He was just that oblivious to the suffering. Once I got clarification on the dosage from the hospice nurse, I ignored him. Then there wasn't even a funeral--too much emotional sharing. It was awful.

Overall, this thread and this post are hard for me. I feel bad because I did not take care of other people's feelings in this thread--I said things that could likely be hurtful and don't feel good about that. I feel guilty for expressing my own feelings so strongly and feel embarrassed about that. That is Fe at work. I would feel comfortable expressing these feelings if I were on the phone with an ENFJ or INFJ right now because they would be actively empathizing. 

My Ni experiences are also kicking in--because of Ni--I am frequently misunderstood. So right now, I worry a lot about being misunderstand in this thread.


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Seeker said:


> I feel rather understood by other types in this thread. Thank you.
> 
> Interestingly, INFJ's have a tendency to pass a negative onto themselves.
> 
> ...


How is Fi more selfish than Fe then? 
Both types place the highest importance on their own values, both types have a hard time going against their values. It's equally as uncomfortable for a Fi type to ignore their own values and go along with the group, as it is for a Fe type to ignore their values and go against the group. 
My decisions are not made according to my personal feelings, they're made according to my personal values regarding what I believe is the right thing to do. With a dominant Feeling function, both Fe and Fi, judgements go over and above personal feelings about a situation. The same can't be said for the Feeling function if it's not in the dominant position. 

A typical Fe-Fi conflict is essentially a difference of opinion. Having a different opinion doesn't make somebody more selfish. Fi types only appear that way sometimes to Fe types, because the decisive factor guiding their perspective is outside of Fe's awareness, leaving them with the impression it must be selfishly motivated. 
If a group situation seriously conflicts with my core values, everything inside of me screams to make it stop. It has to be extremely important to me though, because even though other peoples emotional comfort isn't the decisive factor guiding my judgement, it is still important to me too. Disturbing that external emotional harmony isn't something that I want to do, at all, but I won't feel uncomfortable about doing it, if and when I deem something else to be more important. 
Fi receives the same conformation from within as Fe receives from without. They both aim to 'do what's right' as they see it from their own perspective. 
*Basically, both types are doing exactly the same thing, only from a different standpoint.*


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

I find it so ironic how feelers are discussing which feeling function is better or worse. 

*This gave me a question - what do Fe users think of zero tolerance policy?* I, as an Fi dom, cannot understand zero tolerance policy and the lack of human judgement in a situation where maybe the bigger ethical idea is that a certain action is wrong but someone commits it coming from a good place. Not talking about destructive actions, but ones that do not follow the rules and maybe erases group harmony for a moment. This is how I see Fi - looking at people as individuals, making judgements on individual cases. I also do not understand how some action can be taken because it serves the good of the majority and the well being of the minority is simply ignored. It is wrong in my eyes and this is where human judgement needs to take place. 
I see Fe as the doctor and Fi as the nurse.


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

Ohh, with that comes another question just to see if there is a pattern between one type people. *What kind of tragic stories move more the Fe and Fi users?* At the moment, I would imagine that Fe would be moved more by big tragedies, like the missing plane, 9/11 would move you more and individual tragedies would move an Fi user more. Not saying that I won't feel empathy towards a big scale tragedy, but if I see an article with the headline ''1000 people died from this or that'' I relate to it less than an article ''Here's a story of one of the victims of this and that''. We, of course, most likely will all feel for both situations, but what would we relate to more.....


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

Well look at Ti and Te. Te users can think for themselves. The difference is Te users like to obtain references and facts from others. Top scientist puts out a chart about this, Te user may say "hey we should listen to this" the Ti user will say "well what about xyz, this is not logical lalalalalalalalaalallaa go away!" Fe will be concerned with the feelings of others and express emotions. Fe user may say "(I have no idea sorry)" but the Fi user will say "inauthentic!, manipulative!"


----------



## Branden (Dec 24, 2009)

SplitTheAtom said:


> Ohh, with that comes another question just to see if there is a pattern between one type people. *What kind of tragic stories move more the Fe and Fi users?* At the moment, I would imagine that Fe would be moved more by big tragedies, like the missing plane, 9/11 would move you more and individual tragedies would move an Fi user more. Not saying that I won't feel empathy towards a big scale tragedy, but if I see an article with the headline ''1000 people died from this or that'' I relate to it less than an article ''Here's a story of one of the victims of this and that''. We, of course, most likely will all feel for both situations, but what would we relate to more.....


This is an interesting idea, I will participate. 

I am not often moved by tragic stories. 9/11 or flight 370 or any events like that don't generate an emotional response from me. The only things that I have found that generate an emotional response from me are personal stories, because then I am able to empathize in some way with the speaker. Without a personal account from a connected person I am unable to connect and simply view the situation with indifference in regards to emotion. Sometimes it is difficult to respond even then, depends on the person.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

@littleredstreak

Everyone has feelings (or at least everyone whose relatively sane). It's all a matter of how we choose to express them (or not), and whether or not we're particularly sensitive to them in others. Thinking types don't value feelings as much as feelers, but we still have them (whether we care to admit it or not).


----------



## C3bBb (Oct 22, 2013)

FearAndTrembling said:


> The mistake is thinking that "authenticity", or to bring it down to everyday usage, "keeping it real", has any value in itself. It doesn't. A person fully expressing themselves has no value, by virtue of it being authentic. Authenticity is not some cover that justifies something. I mean, if killing 100 people is being true to yourself, and your worldview, nobody is going to accept it because you are being you.
> 
> Someone makes a point, it is wrong. "Well, that is just how I feel." Ok, fine. Your authenticity does not make it any more valuable, or somehow worthy of expression. It is much larger than that. Most people have no right to impose their values on the group. I am very happy to personally nullify the personal feelings of others. It is my obligation, and I get pleasure from it.


I hate this "be yourself" and "celebrate individuality" mantra everyone seems to collectively circle-jerk over. It's a pretentious-as-fuck notion that is almost rendered impossible when considering how people will undoubtedly always affect you to some degree mentally/emotionally/whatever. People will always play different roles to a degree depending on who they're talking to - parents, friends, business acquaintances. That's essentially the basis of communication - exchanging ideas while defining and re-defining our own in the name of adapting to the current situation. I challenge someone to find me a "truly" authentic person and I'll give you a modern hermit.

This guy pretty much sums up my opinion on it quite well (and hilariously)


----------



## Antipode (Jul 8, 2012)

Branden said:


> I do not believe Fe people lack feelings.
> 
> I do not think the cognitive functions account for feelings themselves, only what triggers them. Fe users in my experience look out for everyone in group situations. They seem to believe that unpleasantness is avoidable with certain diplomacy. Of course this can make them seem shallow due to their regard for broadness rather than specifics in order to maintain group harmony. Truthfully I doubt there is a great difference in the range of their ability to experience deep feelings though. I have an INFJ friend and he certainly seems to experience a great deal of stronger emotions than I. His judgement of my feelings is also amusing to me because he doesn't recognize Fi, which he views as selfish. This is of course the other side of the coin.
> 
> ...


Random side note: I absolutely love the way you write. 

I'm a writer of novels so... forgive me. Just had to say. :blushed:


----------



## Seeker (Aug 12, 2010)

Neverontime said:


> How is Fi more selfish than Fe then?


Okay, so I am basing my examples on my own experience with known Fi users. I do think it's possible that there are exceptions. 

But here is a case study regarding a few INFP's. So my ENFJ best friend and I had an INFP best friend housemate. She was in many ways a caring individual who helped children. She was capable of being caring towards us as well, which was unselfish.

But on the whole, she was more selfish than us, and we now no longer even speak to her because of the meltdown that occurred. So first, she had no place to go and I let her move in at what was 20% of the rent in the area plus her share of bills. I was happy to do so. At that point, the ENFJ was not living with us yet--instead it was a crazy borderline personality disorder woman living with us.

From there, every day I would spend long hours counseling her about her hurts--be they about her ex-husband, something her parents did, or something someone said at work. At the end of that we would get to my stuff, and it was enough. 

There were numerous instances where I went above and beyond what the average person might do when she had emotional melt downs. I soothed her through multiple panic attacks and took her to the hospital for what turned out to be a panic attack late at night when I was on a work deadline. I was also the person who cared for her when she had surgery. I soothed her when we were all grieving a mutual loss. 

The crazy BPD chick moved out with no notice--sticking me with $600 of her share a month in the most expensive city in the country. I was not making much money at all at the time and was concerned about being evicted and winding up homeless. Rather than step up to the plate, the INFP moved out and said that she needed her own space.

I was distressed that she had not been there for me for my housing need the way that I was there for her for her housing need. But I got past it and forgave her. The friendship and my counseling of her continued (some of the above happened during that time). 

So the ENFJ friend moved in, and eventually we got an additional housemate--although I did wind up in debt. Well, later the INFP was being bullied by housemates. So again, I told her that she could move in--this time at an even more cut rate rent. She moved in and was looking for housing in the $600 a month range. She never took out the trash and did not do much cleaning. 

The INFP started acting like our other ENFJ roommate was too much of a drama queen because the ENFJ would get really upset about some bad things happening at work and would need our help. But the thing is that the INFP had been just as much of a drama queen herself--and we had been gentle with her through it. Yet she felt too put upon by our ENFJ roommate. 

Well, the additional housemate moved out on short notice at the hardest time of year to find a roomie. And at the same time, one of my world's best friends died in a surgical accident. I was in the throes of grief. 

The INFP shut herself in her room and treated me like I had the plague. I could sense that whole drama queen message coming at me.

I offered her the room of the moving housemate--and I offered it in her price range--$600 a month. 

She refused and said that she just needed her own independence.

So twice I helped her when she was in a housing crisis--despite inconvenience to myself--I got past the inconvenience and just resolved to view the positives as opposed to the negatives because it was the right and giving thing to do. But twice she bailed on me during my housing crisis because she did not want to make the effort to get past the downside to her. SELFISH!

And I lost it and called her SELFISH too! And I have not forgiven her. And ultimately she did some stuff to the other ENFJ who has also not forgiven her. We don't speak to her. And I think she's made her bed and has to lie in it. I'm not going to ever be there again if she has a crisis. 

I've seen the same pattern play out with other INFP's.

On the other hand, with my many other long-term INFP friends--I just don't get that close to them. I get involved with them in spurts rather than having them be such a big part of my life or have so much power over me. In that scenario, I don't overwhelm them. And they can't betray me. The whole thing is quite beautiful and works out well.


----------



## Mutant Hive Queen (Oct 29, 2013)

Senshu_Ben_Gone said:


> I hate this "be yourself" and "celebrate individuality" mantra everyone seems to collectively circle-jerk over. It's a pretentious-as-fuck notion that is almost rendered impossible when considering how people will undoubtedly always affect you to some degree mentally/emotionally/whatever. People will always play different roles to a degree depending on who they're talking to - parents, friends, business acquaintances. That's essentially the basis of communication - exchanging ideas while defining and re-defining our own in the name of adapting to the current situation. I challenge someone to find me a "truly" authentic person and I'll give you a modern hermit.
> 
> This guy pretty much sums up my opinion on it quite well (and hilariously)



My response: 

1. No, he's not faking by wearing the joker mask-paint as his decision to wear that most likely came from his own internal desires. 
2. Acting different around certain people doesn't necessarily mean forsaking one's core values, _at all_, truly separate from other behaviors or no. If you treat your girlfriend better than someone else, that could just as easily be traced to the fact that _you_, at your core, value the relationship with her enough to refrain from acting out on your lesser desires as it could be to a legitimate change of identity, so a _much better_ example to use would be something like this:

You play roleplaying games a lot for fun, and they're a hobby that's stayed with you for years. Meanwhile, your girlfriend looks down on people who play those so you either hide or get rid of the books. Now, is _that_ wearing a mask, or no? I think people would answer _very_ differently than in the first case. 

3. You are doing yourself a _huge_ favor by sticking to a core set of drives that fuel your being. If people didn't make the choice to keep following their dreams even when it got difficult (and therefore, their "fluid self" no longer enjoyed that stuff) they'd be at least way less likely to achieve them.


----------



## Cellar Door (Jun 3, 2012)

SplitTheAtom said:


> Ohh, with that comes another question just to see if there is a pattern between one type people. *What kind of tragic stories move more the Fe and Fi users?* At the moment, I would imagine that Fe would be moved more by big tragedies, like the missing plane, 9/11 would move you more and individual tragedies would move an Fi user more. Not saying that I won't feel empathy towards a big scale tragedy, but if I see an article with the headline ''1000 people died from this or that'' I relate to it less than an article ''Here's a story of one of the victims of this and that''. We, of course, most likely will all feel for both situations, but what would we relate to more.....


I think that the Fi user will take any kind of big tragedy like that WAY worse. Keep in mind some aren't going to care at all I imagine, but I think there's more potential. I'm an inferior Fe user obviously, so understand this under the context. If 10,000 people die somewhere in the world, a plain crashes, 9/11 all over again, school shooting, outbreak of plague, etc. I really don't care about the people involved or their families. I'm much more interested in why they happen and learning about the cause if I'm curious. To me the idea of caring is so exhausting that I can barely think about what it's like to be a person who cares.

The only way I would possibly care is if it could in some way affect my friends and family, in which case I'll care to some degree. If something happens in real time and I am physically there then I can be empathetic, and I'm good at taking care of people's feelings too. 

For a strong Fe type they might care or they might not, at a minimum they'll think it's awful, but I think it's really the Fi types that probably have the potential to really get into it the most because Fi is focused on fixing things that are morally wrong. If someone somewhere is having something that they deem unacceptable happen to them then they are going to care a lot, I think Fe types are more focused on "applied ethics" and managing relationship dynamics that are situation-based.

Edit:

Here's something that nearly made me cry:

http://www.worthytoshare.net/mans-w...discovered-last-week-indescribable-get-tissue


----------



## C3bBb (Oct 22, 2013)

Chained Divinity said:


> My response:
> 
> 1. No, he's not faking by wearing the joker mask-paint as his decision to wear that most likely came from his own internal desires.
> 2. Acting different around certain people doesn't necessarily mean forsaking one's core values, _at all_, truly separate from other behaviors or no. If you treat your girlfriend better than someone else, that could just as easily be traced to the fact that _you_, at your core, value the relationship with her enough to refrain from acting out on your lesser desires as it could be to a legitimate change of identity, so a _much better_ example to use would be something like this:
> ...


I don't dispute that people's "core" values change in terms of basic principles and intrinsic motivations they live by, but the "be yourself" as people commonly say has more to do with superficial behaviors and not sacrificing individual expression and hobbies at the sake of "the herd" or others. The point people are trying to bring home has less has less of a philosophical slant but just another way of saying 'be who you want to be and fuck what other people say." 

What I and the video is generally trying to convey is the idea that we mold each other constantly just on the basis of communication and being human. Consciously separating yourself from "the herd" already implies that there's a "herd" to separate yourself from, implying that by trying so hard not to be affected by someone, they're in turn affecting you by trying so hard. And what's that to say for people who change their behaviors by others? They're all of a sudden "not themselves?" Who the hell are they then, some alien posing as themselves? Go with the flow, and forget what everyone else, even the people who claim that they're "being themselves," because it's just some overblown idea that seems dissociative and hypocritical by nature.


----------



## candiemerald (Jan 26, 2014)

SplitTheAtom said:


> Ohh, with that comes another question just to see if there is a pattern between one type people. *What kind of tragic stories move more the Fe and Fi users?* At the moment, I would imagine that Fe would be moved more by big tragedies, like the missing plane, 9/11 would move you more and individual tragedies would move an Fi user more. Not saying that I won't feel empathy towards a big scale tragedy, but if I see an article with the headline ''1000 people died from this or that'' I relate to it less than an article ''Here's a story of one of the victims of this and that''. We, of course, most likely will all feel for both situations, but what would we relate to more.....


I disagree. A catastrophe will shock and numb me, but I won't necessarily feel anything other than shock and horror. As a Fe user, I need to be able to see the people, the individuals that were injured before I can actually feel real pain, or have to imagine myself as a victim and put myself in their place before I can feel that pain. I need to see the human suffering. Otherwise, like someone else said, I'm most likely going to be more logical about the tragedy, and try to understand why it happened in the first place.


----------



## Seeker (Aug 12, 2010)

Senshu, I am so with you in this discussion. The term “interdependence” comes to mind. We have an inner core that impact the outside world and is impacted by it. Our feelings never exist in a mere vacuum. Others can challenge us and help us to grow. At the same time, there is something unique inside us that we can bring to others and that we need to nurture to be helpful to ourselves and others. 

When I talk about setting my own feelings aside, there are several different scenarios— some good and some bad. 

1.	I have good and bad feelings associated with helping someone else or looking upon them in a favorable light. I decide to work through the bad feelings and get past them for harmony. If they then meet me on that, it’s beautiful. That’s what happens with my _NFJ friends. 
2.	I have good and bad feelings associated with helping someone else or looking upon them in a favorable light. I decide to work through the bad feelings and get past them for harmony. If they play a small role in my life, that is still rewarding. 
3.	I have good and bad feelings associated with helping someone else or looking upon them in a favorable light. I decide to work through the bad feelings and get past them for harmony. However, the other person takes advantage of that and keeps on. 

Now, with respect to INFP’s, I don’t think that they do the last of these things on purpose. Rather, it’s that the constancy and intensity of a relationship with an ENFJ is too much for them. They are too overwhelmed by matching the ENFJ. 

So that’s why I think it’s healthy at least in my own personal case to keep INFP’s in the second circle. It’s better for everyone.

I still also think that INFP’s are probably a lot less selfish than many other types. It’s just that there is a dynamic by which in a CLOSE* relationship with an ENFJ the INFP winds up feeling overburdened—and the ENFJ, after a long period, winds up melting down and feeling betrayed or taken advantage of—while still also feeling guilty for feeling that way. 

CLOSE means romantic partners or best friends—which to an ENFJ is an extremely intimate relationship—that can be smothering to others who are not _NFJ’s. 

Second circle is still a closer relationship than most types probably have with one another. So when I say that I love INFP’s—I have rather deep feelings for my second circle INFP’s—enough so that I’d never want to ruin it by bringing in any more closeness.


----------



## candiemerald (Jan 26, 2014)

SplitTheAtom said:


> I find it so ironic how feelers are discussing which feeling function is better or worse.
> 
> *This gave me a question - what do Fe users think of zero tolerance policy?* I, as an Fi dom, cannot understand zero tolerance policy and the lack of human judgement in a situation where maybe the bigger ethical idea is that a certain action is wrong but someone commits it coming from a good place. Not talking about destructive actions, but ones that do not follow the rules and maybe erases group harmony for a moment. This is how I see Fi - looking at people as individuals, making judgements on individual cases. I also do not understand how some action can be taken because it serves the good of the majority and the well being of the minority is simply ignored. It is wrong in my eyes and this is where human judgement needs to take place.
> I see Fe as the doctor and Fi as the nurse.


I don't think, actually, that zero tolerance policy pertains more to either Fe or Fi. I know it's something that I can understand, but something I don't generally advocate, since I'll always be swayed by the individual needs. Fe isn't a monster that bulldozes over the needs of the few - quite the opposite, actually. I find myself often standing up for the minority, even if I don't agree with them, because I feel they need to be heard as well. I'm always siding with the underdog. If anything, I think Fe is often far too tolerant and easily swayed, not rigid or uncompromising. I think we have to stop thinking that either Fi or Fe is "better", and simply focus on how they function.


----------



## Seeker (Aug 12, 2010)

candiemerald said:


> .I find myself often standing up for the minority, even if I don't agree with them, because I feel they need to be heard as well.


 Yes!!!


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

You mean "Let's all be non-conformists together" doesn't really work for some reason?


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Seeker said:


> Yes!!!



Survival loves an underdog, and so do we. It's all over our mythology.


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

@Cellar Door 
I guess my question should have been addresses to dominant or auxiliary F users. The reason I was asking it is because I remember a situation where I noticed something - a tragedy happened in our small country in which around 50 people died. It was the biggest tragedy so far. I remember finding out about it, reading about it and understanding that it is terrible. Of course - 50 people losing lives, the families of 50 people losing their relative, unexpectedly and in many cases - too early. But it did not move me to the point where I would cry. I was even thinking - why am I not feeling for them? To me it was also more curiosity than anything. I guess the numbers and the concept of the tragedy did not touch my feeling functions. Te, maybe, as I was also trying to understand - how, why, what went wrong, all the details. Some of my friends were moved by the very fact that 50 people died by itself. But then media started telling individual stories from the tragedy - some victims, still alive but aware of their coming death contacting their family members, seeing the family members reacting to the news, all the stories of mothers losing their children or vise versa. Whereas some of the friends who were moved by the concept got rather skeptical when it came to the individual stories saying that they are there only to move people, only for the speculations and for the ''views''. They were more traumatized by the numbers. To them the tragedy was that - so many people. When to me the tragedy was that - this mother lost her child, this woman sent a dying message to her fiance. The numbers did nothing to me emotionally for some reason. I was watching the number grow every hour and felt nothing for that matter couldn't empathize with the fact, where my friends started crying with every added number. 
I wonder whether this has anything to do with Fe and Fi. As you say - applied ethics... maybe the very idea of the tragedy. The concept of it. In my stereotypical views I would imagine a Fe user getting mad that such a tragedy even happens, that it is immoral for such terrible things to occur. They will be the fighters for the truth and for the change. Whereas a Fi user will be the one giving compassion to the ones involved. Something like that. I don't completely understand Fe myself, so I would love to here from dom. or aux. Fe users, what are their reactions to tragedies.



> what it's like to be a person who cares.


It's pretty nice. It's what we actually enjoy  



Branden said:


> This is an interesting idea, I will participate.
> 
> I am not often moved by tragic stories. 9/11 or flight 370 or any events like that don't generate an emotional response from me. The only things that I have found that generate an emotional response from me are personal stories, because then I am able to empathize in some way with the speaker. Without a personal account from a connected person I am unable to connect and simply view the situation with indifference in regards to emotion. Sometimes it is difficult to respond even then, depends on the person.


I definitely relate with that, which is also why, as I mentioned in previous comments, things like zero tolerance policy, be it even for an ethical purpose, doesn't make full sense to me. And you having Fi as your tertiary function I guess makes it more visible than, for instance, Cellar Door's inferior Fe, where he says that tragedies in themselves rarely move him. 
I can see similarities also between how Ne and Ni work. Ne is all about ideas and Ni is digging deeper in them. Ne - quantity, Ni - quality. The same way I could see Fe and Fi. Fe being about the bigger picture of ethics, about their functionality, while Fi being about the details, digging deeper in the moral issue and figuring out the details of it and whether it is actually valid. And knowing that individual situations might hold exceptions even when it comes to our so beloved values.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Neverontime said:


> How is Fi more selfish than Fe then?
> Both types place the highest importance on their own values, both types have a hard time going against their values. It's equally as uncomfortable for a Fi type to ignore their own values and go along with the group, as it is for a Fe type to ignore their values and go against the group.
> My decisions are not made according to my personal feelings, they're made according to my personal values regarding what I believe is the right thing to do. With a dominant Feeling function, both Fe and Fi, judgements go over and above personal feelings about a situation. The same can't be said for the Feeling function if it's not in the dominant position.
> 
> ...


Fi isn't more selfish, it is less responsible. It is more ideological. I mean, if you were to compare Fe to Fi descriptions to an outsider. One looks what a teenager embraces, another the parent. It is teenagers who care about individuality, authenticity, and self expression. The further you get away from a high school environment, the less those things are important. I am beyond that. 

I actually think I was a heavy Fi user in my teens and early 20s. I was an INTJ or INFP. I switched, simply by maturing. Reminds me of Churchill quote, a conservative at age 20 has no heart, a liberal at age 40 has no brain. Priorities and worldview switch.

I was more political in my youth. Very libertarian, bordering on anarchist. That is Fi. Nowhere is Fi better represented than in Libertarianism. Which is also a young man's ideology. A libertarian is an island. I am much closer to a communist now. Which is Fe. 

I always bring up Max Weber, who predated Jung on Fe and Fi. What he calls the "ethic of ultimate ends" is Fi. The "ethic of responsibility" is Fe. 

"We must be clear about the fact that all ethically oriented conduct may be guided by one of two fundamentally differing and irreconcilably opposed maxims: conduct can be oriented to an 'ethic of ultimate ends' or to an 'ethic of responsibility.' This is not to say that an ethic of ultimate ends is identical with irresponsibility, or that an ethic of responsibility is identical with unprincipled opportunism. Naturally nobody says that. However, there is an abysmal contrast between conduct that follows the maxim of an ethic of ultimate ends--that is, in religious terms, 'The Christian does rightly and leaves the results with the Lord'--and conduct that follows the maxim of an ethic of responsibility, in which case one has to give an account of the foreseeable results of one's action.
You may demonstrate to a convinced syndicalist, believing in an ethic of ultimate ends, that his action will result in increasing the opportunities of reaction, in increasing the oppression of his class, and obstructing its ascent--and you will not make the slightest impression upon him. If an action of good intent leads to bad results, then, in the actor's eyes, not he but the world, or the stupidity of other men, or God's will who made them thus, is responsible for the evil. However a man who believes in an ethic of responsibility takes account of precisely the average deficiencies of people; as Fichte has correctly said, he does not even have the right to presuppose their goodness and perfection. He does not feel in a position to burden others with the results of his own actions so far as he was able to foresee them; he will say: these results are ascribed to my action. The believer in an ethic of ultimate ends feels 'responsible' only for seeing to it that the flame of pure intentions is not quenched: for example, the flame of protesting against the injustice of the social order. To rekindle the flame ever anew is the purpose of his quite irrational deeds, judged in view of their possible success. They are acts that can and shall have only exemplary value."

And that is how I view Fi. It has exemplary value only. Reminds me of Metallica touring early on with Guns and Roses. Said they learned what NOT TO DO, from GnR. Everything GnR does, do the opposite. 

So Fi is all about the "flame of pure intentions", hence the authenticity critique of Fe. 

Libertarians are ultimate end-ers. They approach the world as it ought to be, not as it is. But once the way the world "is" hits them, it's over. I used to be the same way. All drugs SHOULD be legal. I didn't care if it actually would cause problems, it SHOULDNT cause problems. And if it does, tough. People should be able to do drugs responsibly and if they can't, that's not my problem. I realized this was an immature way to look at things, because those people are going to be somebody's problem and I just can't ignore them or that part of the equation. Again, you have to work with the world the way it is. Pretending it is what it ought to be won't get it any closer to what it ought to be. 

I used the analogy from the movie Lincoln:

_I just watched Lincoln, and it gave some great quotes on Fe and pragmatism in general. Actually used a compass example. Lincoln was arguing with a guy who was hell bent on ending slavery. He had a moral compass, and he knew where it went. North was absolute._

_But that is blindness... Lincoln used the analogy of following a compass. The map is not the terrain. It points the right way, but it doesn't show the swamp, the cliffs, and every other obstacle in the way. If you end up taking it, you will actually fail. So, if you just go straight North, you're gonna fall on your face. You have to take into account every obstacle on the route. Take it as it comes. You will find North eventually, but you will deviate from the path many times._


----------



## tangosthenes (Oct 29, 2011)

I don't like being in crowds or around comfortable people(people who squeeze their minds tight enough to blot out the sun with platitudes and retarded shit) because I feel what they feel and it is sickening. It's a slimy filth that lines their insides and reeks of dishonesty.


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> I used to be the same way. All drugs SHOULD be legal. I didn't care if it actually would cause problems, it SHOULDNT cause problems. And if it does, tough. People should be able to do drugs responsibly and if they can't, that's not my problem. I realized this was an immature way to look at things, because those people are going to be somebody's problem and I just can't ignore them or that part of the equation. Again, you have to work with the world the way it is. Pretending it is what it ought to be won't get it any closer to what it ought to be.


To me it seems more like undeveloped T rather than a stubborn Fi. There's simple logic that comes with whether All drugs should be legal or not. I don't know, I'm a pretty strong Fi, but of course all drugs shouldn't be legal, it's never even crossed my mind, but neither should all drugs be illegal. Look at each case individually.


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

candiemerald said:


> I don't think, actually, that zero tolerance policy pertains more to either Fe or Fi. I know it's something that I can understand, but something I don't generally advocate, since I'll always be swayed by the individual needs. Fe isn't a monster that bulldozes over the needs of the few - quite the opposite, actually. I find myself often standing up for the minority, even if I don't agree with them, because I feel they need to be heard as well. I'm always siding with the underdog. If anything, I think Fe is often far too tolerant and easily swayed, not rigid or uncompromising. I think we have to stop thinking that either Fi or Fe is "better", and simply focus on how they function.


Agreed and thank you for answering. I do not understand Fe as much as Fi so of course I might be wrong about it. This was just an idea hat came to my mind as so far what I have been thinking of Fe is ''a fight for the cause''.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

SplitTheAtom said:


> To me it seems more like undeveloped T rather than a stubborn Fi. There's simple logic that comes with whether All drugs should be legal or not. I don't know, I'm a pretty strong Fi, but of course all drugs shouldn't be legal, it's never even crossed my mind, but neither should all drugs be illegal. Look at each case individually.


Well, many Libertarians would disagree. Private roads, private police forces, etc.. an entire swath of Libertarianism wouldn't work. It is totally impractical. But when you're driven by ideology, and the flame of true intentions, that stuff doesn't matter. Anarchy is impractical. Most ideologies are impractical, on both sides of the spectrum. I am not an ideologue anymore. That's the difference. I don't have my own values. I let everybody talk shit, then I look at what has been said, and just decide if I like it or not. I need the environment to awaken my values. I don't carry them everywhere. I said before I even need the environment to define my values, because I am totally disinterested in ideology at this point, which is why I detest religious and political discussion. It is the most vacuous debate, and everyone involved should be ashamed of themselves. It is only my irritability and lack of self control, that brings my presence into them occasionally.


----------



## Seeker (Aug 12, 2010)

SplitTheAtom said:


> @Cellar Door
> I guess my question should have been addresses to dominant or auxiliary F users. The reason I was asking it is because I remember a situation where I noticed something - a tragedy happened in our small country in which around 50 people died. It was the biggest tragedy so far. I remember finding out about it, reading about it and understanding that it is terrible. Of course - 50 people losing lives, the families of 50 people losing their relative, unexpectedly and in many cases - too early. But it did not move me to the point where I would cry. I was even thinking - why am I not feeling for them? To me it was also more curiosity than anything. I guess the numbers and the concept of the tragedy did not touch my feeling functions. Te, maybe, as I was also trying to understand - how, why, what went wrong, all the details. Some of my friends were moved by the very fact that 50 people died by itself. But then media started telling individual stories from the tragedy - some victims, still alive but aware of their coming death contacting their family members, seeing the family members reacting to the news, all the stories of mothers losing their children or vise versa. Whereas some of the friends who were moved by the concept got rather skeptical when it came to the individual stories saying that they are there only to move people, only for the speculations and for the ''views''. They were more traumatized by the numbers. To them the tragedy was that - so many people. When to me the tragedy was that - this mother lost her child, this woman sent a dying message to her fiance. The numbers did nothing to me emotionally for some reason. I was watching the number grow every hour and felt nothing for that matter couldn't empathize with the fact, where my friends started crying with every added number.
> I wonder whether this has anything to do with Fe and Fi. As you say - applied ethics... maybe the very idea of the tragedy. The concept of it. In my stereotypical views I would imagine a Fe user getting mad that such a tragedy even happens, that it is immoral for such terrible things to occur. They will be the fighters for the truth and for the change. Whereas a Fi user will be the one giving compassion to the ones involved. Something like that. I don't completely understand Fe myself, so I would love to here from dom. or aux. Fe users, what are their reactions to tragedies.


Actually, studies show that our brains do react more emotionally to stories--regardless of type. So I would be horrified by the numbers and troubled by that. But even as an Fe user, I would also be more likely to cry after hearing a well-told individual story.


----------



## candiemerald (Jan 26, 2014)

SplitTheAtom said:


> Agreed and thank you for answering. I do not understand Fe as much as Fi so of course I might be wrong about it. This was just an idea hat came to my mind as so far what I have been thinking of Fe is ''a fight for the cause''.


Well, I suppose it is true that Fe might have a greater tendency to look at the big picture of a problem first and suggest a universal action, then take into account individual problems with the action, while Fi would look at the individual problems first. So I can see what you're getting at. However, Fe is not blind to individual problems in the least. It is, actually, more like a barometer that takes in the entire social atmosphere. The social atmosphere for Fe is made up of individuals - each individual need affects our Fe perception, and alters our perception. Fe is all about looking at both sides of an issue, because to understand its own values it will seek opposing external values, and then choose which one seems closest too its own. For myself, I can't not entertain both sides of an issue, until I understand which side I agree with, while Fi is much less likely to do that. So Fe is all about trying to smooth the rift between universal values and personal values as much as possible, while causing as little conflict as possible.


----------



## candiemerald (Jan 26, 2014)

Seeker said:


> Actually, studies show that our brains do react more emotionally to stories--regardless of type. So I would be horrified by the numbers and troubled by that. But even as an Fe user, I would also be more likely to cry after hearing a well-told individual story.


Exactly, it's actually just how our brains work. It's harder for us to react to the deaths of thousands of people we don't know, than to the death of a person we have come to know by reading about their individual story.


"One death is a tragedy. One million deaths is a statistic."
-Kevin Federline

This article sort of illustrates that.


----------



## Mutant Hive Queen (Oct 29, 2013)

Senshu_Ben_Gone said:


> * *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But there's something--some_one_--of value that one sees through hobbies and expression and things like that, and I think that the individual nature of a person shouldn't just be viewed as this useless bit of sentimental claptrap that should get thrown by the wayside whenever others come into things. People have a right to those choices, and it should be very important to us that they get to make them. 

As for what you are when you aren't being yourself...depends, somewhat. If you're simply masking a preference then you're just being you and pretending you aren't. If you're actively changing those preferences you're a different person. That's a statement that gets thrown around a bit, yes?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile...as for what generates distaste in me, I'd have to say the things that do that used to be a lot more numerous. I kind of got burned out on raging at other people's problems some time ago. XD

The only things that really, viscerally anger me are things I relate to, now. In at least some fashion. This doesn't mean I've given up on moral values, mind--far from it, I'm actually a bit more stringent in my ethics now--but I sort of get less...worked up about it, I suppose.


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

candiemerald said:


> Well, I suppose it is true that Fe might have a greater tendency to look at the big picture of a problem first and suggest a universal action, then take into account individual problems with the action, while Fi would look at the individual problems first. So I can see what you're getting at. However, Fe is not blind to individual problems in the least. It is, actually, more like a barometer that takes in the entire social atmosphere. The social atmosphere for Fe is made up of individuals - each individual need affects our Fe perception, and alters our perception. Fe is all about looking at both sides of an issue, because to understand its own values it will seek opposing external values, and then choose which one seems closest too its own. For myself, I can't not entertain both sides of an issue, until I understand which side I agree with, while Fi is much less likely to do that. So Fe is all about trying to smooth the rift between universal values and personal values as much as possible, while causing as little conflict as possible.


Ok, I'm starting to understand it more. Just like Te will look for external ''facts'' to decide whether it is right or makes sense, Fe will also look for ''facts'' or listen to other opinions to decide whether something is morally acceptable or not. And Fi, just like Ti, will process the judgement internally looking for ''facts'' from personal experiences or knowledge (prob. backed up by Si). It's actually interesting, because I had made up an idea of what Fe is from my experiences with people reacting to situations differently than me or from what has been talked about it here, however in the end I do want to discuss it with others on possibly change my opinion (inferior Te). Thanks for clarifying. 



Seeker said:


> Actually, studies show that our brains do react more emotionally to stories--regardless of type. So I would be horrified by the numbers and troubled by that. But even as an Fe user, I would also be more likely to cry after hearing a well-told individual story.


Ok, I will look up the studies. Makes sense. Now I kinda see how my saying Fe - big picture, Fi - individuals makes it seem like Fe users cannot relate to people. It wasn't right.


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

Starting with the last thing you said, as I think it is important, and then going back to the top:


> Overall, this thread and this post are hard for me. I feel bad because I did not take care of other people's feelings in this thread--I said things that could likely be hurtful and don't feel good about that. I feel guilty for expressing my own feelings so strongly and feel embarrassed about that. That is Fe at work. I would feel comfortable expressing these feelings if I were on the phone with an ENFJ or INFJ right now because they would be actively empathizing.
> 
> My Ni experiences are also kicking in--because of Ni--I am frequently misunderstood. So right now, I worry a lot about being misunderstand in this thread.


<3 Well I think it's great that you expressed and explained this, and it's very interesting to see where you're coming from. It has helped to know how my Fi might be affecting people who see it in a different way. This is something I want to be aware of. I don't want to hurt people. I tend to assume that Fe-people (well, primarily Fe-doms) don't care if I'm being stringent in my Fi-stuff because they're in their own little Fe world and don't really understand what I'm feeling on a deep level, anyway, lmao. But that's not necessaarily true, and I can see how this would all be especially challenging for an Fe-aux.

I have a hard time speaking up for myself too, but I can do it because it's a core value and because I tend to assume everyone is gonna be okay and ultimately fend for themselves like I do (though that's speaking pretty generally. I also see these interactions as thought exercises and not something that people *should* get defensive about... but you could be coming at it from a totally different angle). So it's helpful to be reminded that that's an even harder struggle for other people, in a different and more personal way. So thank you.




Seeker said:


> Temporarily, yes--that's why ultimately I think that INFP's are basically good people. It's also why I love my second circle INFP friends and will always be friends with them--at arms length. They really bring something to the table.
> 
> But it's also why they are a bad match for me in a romantic relationship and don't belong in what I call "the inner circle," a place for INFJ's and ENFJ's. For me, my default is to set aside my needs for others. So my own feelings, which are still five on a ten function scale are left kicking around.


This may not be healthy, and may have nothing to do with Fe/Fi. I was just going to ask if you were into Enneagram at all, then saw you're a 2, which I was going to suggest. When I say "temporarily", what I mean is that I know my main focus needs to be on my own needs - ultimately - but sometimes that includes taking care of other people. As a 2, you take care of other people and put your feelings aside to fulfil a personal need, too. When I disintegrate to 2... uh... well, yes, I do the same thing.



> I need a fellow Fe--a strong Fe to help me with my own feelings. I don't have to fight so uncomfortably for my own feelings. With an Fi, I will try to get my needs taken care of. An inevitable conflict with their needs arises. They stand up so strongly for theirs, and I back down---or feel guilty for standing up for core needs.
> 
> In contrast, with a fellow strong Fe, we both negotiate so that each of our needs gets attention. And when the needs aren't directly in conflict, they allow hours of emotional sharing where they empathize with me. They may feel put upon, but they work through that and ultimately feel good for having given. I do the same for them.


I think it's the sign of an emotionally healthy and mature adult to be able to consider the perspective and experience of another person, and care about their emotions. It's true, a lot of Fi people will put their values before everything in a lot of situations, and I guess I can see why that would cause conflict if you already struggle with standing up for yourself. But I don't think Fe is a requirement to be able to do these healthy, mature things. I'm actually really bad at speaking up for my core needs - I may instead just altogether retreat, which isn't good. But in a good interaction, I will pay very close attention to the other person and encourage them to speak up for their thoughts and feelings, and I'm very careful not to invalidate that. Even if I have a different perspective initially. 

*scratches head* Whatever you need to do, I guess, but I just tend to think that totally closing yourself off to a certain type, in a certain way, is not the best way to grow as a person. It might be better to learn instead to challenge the traits you find difficult in a person, by becoming more confident and outspoken. Of course that's HARD to do and everyone starts from a different place, and you aren't always in a place to be able to do that. But if you want to be a healthier Two (regardless of cog functions), you might want to consider trying that at some point (such as by starting with posts like this perhaps). Either way, I understand.



> So, in any case, it's not that INFP's are selfish per se. It's that in an intimate or first circle relationship with me they can become so. It's not good for either of us.
> 
> But when I keep them at arms length in the second circle, it is truly a beautiful thing. The INFP will come through for me with selfless help at unexpected moments. They will give me bursts of complete understanding. I do the same back for the INFP. These are people with whom I've been friends for decades, and I've helped them through some real hard times. They have done the same for me. It's just that they are not on the hotline list or the call list when things are going wrong. That would be waaaayyyy too draining for them---it is too draining for them when it happens. It's why my other ENFJ friend and I are no longer speaking to our former INFP friend and housemate.
> 
> ...


Again, though, there are ridiculous and immature people of all types. I can understand some types being more likely to present personally challenging traits than other types, though. 

I've known plenty of frustrating and not-selfless Fe users. One of the most selfish (imo) people I know is an ENFJ. He uses Fe to get what he wants, to incite certain emotions and reactions, to transform the situation into what he wants, and into what feels best for him. Doesn't have the interests of others in mind, even if he seems on the surface to be trying to make people feel good. It's manipulative, and he's good at it. He has Fe. He's not a good person. But I'd be missing out on a lot of great people in life if I was like "nope, no ENFJs ever". 

That said, I do see myself having a hard time being in a serious relationship with an ENFJ, for a lot of reasons (though not because they have Fe - I usually prefer to date Fe-users)... it's not impossible but it's just easier not to go there in the first place, sometimes. Haha. So that's fair and I understand where you're coming from, in terms of romantic preferences.

I think that there is no single cog function that has an inherently... judgement-qualitative trait attached to it. I don't know. Learning about personality type, including my own blind spots and limitations, has helped me learn to better navigate and accept and challenge (as opposed to internalize or blame/shame) the blind spots and limitations associated with other types. Sometimes that's harder than other times.


----------



## Seeker (Aug 12, 2010)

The thing is spectralsparrow--my Fe friends help me get to that healthy place in more intimate relationships. They help me to stand up for myself when I go out into the world. 

Learning the balance with my INFP friends and keeping them in the second circle also helps me to stay in a healthy place. Wanting more from them is what makes it go wrong. It's getting too close to them that is unhealthy because they can't be what I need. Demanding that of them seems unfair to them actually. It is just a set up for everything going wrong. 

I am not CLOSING myself off to them. The second circle is a great place, and I get my needs met there if I keep things in a second circle place with INFP's. Allowing someone to get that close to me--closer than most people ever get to each other is not closing myself off. Having lifelong loving friendships is not closing myself. 

I feel unheard right now. I am not you. I have different needs. 

And you have not lived all of my experiences. They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over again and expecting different results. Well, I have seen the same pattern over again and have learned a way how not to repeat it so that I get different results.

This post makes me feel misunderstood and unfairly judged. Maybe I am misinterpreting you--but I thought I read that you were labeling me as unhealthy as opposed to understanding what I am saying. I do not appreciate that label. It hurts my feelings. I am someone who works really hard on my mental health all the time, and having that discounted by a stranger on the internet feels wounding.

At the same time, I feel really bratty right now for expressing my own feelings over it right now. And I also fear now that I am going to get labeled as manipulative for doing so. I don't want to manipulate. But I do want to be understood and don't want to be hurt. I'm trying to find a way to do that without having a manipulative effect.


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

Seeker said:


> The thing is spectral sparrow--my Fe friends help me get to that healthy place in more intimate relationships. Learning the balance with my INFP friends also helps me to stay in a healthy place. Wanting more from them is what makes it go wrong. It's getting too close ego them that is unhealthy because they can't be what I need. I feel unheard right now. I am not you. I have different needs. This post makes me feel misunderstood and unfairly judged.
> 
> You hurt my feelings.


Well, I'm really sorry for hurting your feelings, and if I jumped the gun on anything. I am not 100% sure what exactly I said that hurt your feelings, or if it's just the general "not feeling understood". You can feel free to PM me or reply here, if you wish to elaborate, but I don't want to further put you on the spot, either.

I am taking kind of a bigger picture perspective but I know that individual circumstances are different, especially individual relationship dynamics, and if certain people are less likely to give you what you need right now then that's fine. Knowing that is good, so you can avoid situations that might trigger some sort of anxiety (or whatever else) in a counter-productive way. I am also taking more of a detached and "thought experiment" approach to this, but it's clearly a personal and sensitive topic for you, and I respect that and won't push further on the issue. I do want to say that I didn't mean this in a personal way at all, so I'm sorry again.


edit: I replied to this before I saw your own edit... I'll reply to your updated content soon.


----------



## C3bBb (Oct 22, 2013)

Chained Divinity said:


> But there's something--some_one_--of value that one sees through hobbies and expression and things like that, and I think that the individual nature of a person shouldn't just be viewed as this useless bit of sentimental claptrap that should get thrown by the wayside whenever others come into things. People have a right to those choices, and it should be very important to us that they get to make them.


Sure? Yeah, there might be intrinsic "core" values that pushes people to certain hobbies and manners of expression. But that's besides the point of what I was mentioning as far as acting differently around certain people and maintaining your personality as far as "being yourself" goes.



Chained Divinity said:


> As for what you are when you aren't being yourself...depends, somewhat. If you're simply masking a preference then you're just being you and pretending you aren't. If you're actively changing those preferences you're a different person. That's a statement that gets thrown around a bit, yes?


Hmm..Let's use music preferences for an example. So you're saying if you actively change your music preferences from, say, rock to rap, that implies that you're a different person? I'm not really understanding this. Preferences are subject to change and molding and even if they do, I don't see how that affects who you are as an individual.


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

Seeker said:


> The thing is spectralsparrow--my Fe friends help me get to that healthy place in more intimate relationships. They help me to stand up for myself when I go out into the world.
> 
> Learning the balance with my INFP friends and keeping them in the second circle also helps me to stay in a healthy place. Wanting more from them is what makes it go wrong. It's getting too close to them that is unhealthy because they can't be what I need. Demanding that of them seems unfair to them actually. It is just a set up for everything going wrong.
> 
> ...


So, I definitely didn't mean to imply that you are necessarily unhealthy overall. I don't know you! Your description of that particular behaviour seemed, to me, possibly unhealthy, especially when you look at the models of health for Enneagram. I thought perhaps certain things were being incorrectly attributed to Fe or Fi when something else was going on.

So, when you said "_Temporarily, yes--" _etc etc

it *seemed* to me that you were saying, unless one completely and totally puts the needs of others first, at all times, they are not as good of a person as someone who does do that. And that's a worrisome thing to hear, both personally (since I happen to struggle with this in an unhealthy way) and conceptually. And you even said that your own feelings are left kicking around... so. I wouldn't want to do anything to cause someone to feel that way. *I want people to be able to express their feelings and needs*.

But what I want doesn't exactly matter here, since, as you say, everyone has different reasons for things. When I say this, I am just trying to express that it would probably be safe to express your feelings to me, as I'm going to try hard to validate them - of course that's ironic, considering you had the opposite reaction.

Uh, what else. No, I agree that you shouldn't keep doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results. And I think that you are very mature to realize that you can't expect things from people who won't be able to give you what you need. That's very important. I guess I'm just still not convinced that Fe is a requisite for things you describe requiring (GENERALLY SPEAKING, maybe not for you)- but I could be misunderstanding.

And I don't think you seem manipulative for expressing any of this. When I was talking about Mr. Manipulative ENFJ, I wasn't talking about him being honest or open with his feelings or needs. I was talking about him being very dishonest and misleading, actually. I do have an INFJ friend who expresses similar concerns about being manipulative, as does my ESFJ 2 friend, but yeah... it's really not, in my opinion. I'm sorry if you've had experiences that have made you feel otherwise. 

And once again - I'm discussing most of this stuff in concept, while understanding there are personal aspects that may not apply to everyone. 

It's interesting about the "stranger on the internet" thing, though. I am never one to be like "oh who cares, it's just the internet"... as the internet is a tool for disseminating information and attitude, and there are real people affected by it. That said, I didn't think that you would feel wounded or upset about what I had to say, partially because I didn't mean it personally, and also partially because I *am* just a stranger on the internet. Internet strangers sometimes hurt my feelings but I kinda have my own method of just processing that and moving on, so here's yet another example of a different person (with a different type) having a different experience with that.


----------

