# Let's Clear Up My Confusion about Cognitive Functions



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

Sorry, guys. I've been posting lots of threads here as well as looking up tons of info, PMing certain people, etc. Simply because after initially getting into personality types, I've only gained a sort-of-okay-loose-grasp on cognitive functions. So I've naturally got some questions. 

At first it started with me trying to differentiate between S and N in general (because info is so hard to find when it comes to that), and now it's me trying to come up with the difference between Fi and Fe. I've already looked at this thread: http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/85455-does-fe-ever-look-like-fi-10.html

My Fi and Fe are practically equal. Which naturally is causing me some confusion. x_X 

I've heard the stereotype of Fe = social norms, mostly going along with people, connecting, reading people, etc. And Fi is more personal value system. 

^ The above is not clear enough. What is the best way you can describe Fi and Fe? 

I think I can understand Si versus Se and Te versus Ti fairly well. Sometimes Ne versus Ni can confuse me, so feel free to talk to me about that too. XD

While I'm on this subject, I might as well bring up that I can get quite confused about the *inferior* functions of the personality type.  I keep trying to find information, and sometimes it is hard to understand the info posted on this site. Can somebody explain or point me to some helpful links? One site described them as:



> These will be the functions suppressed from the preferred position. We initially tend to disown them in ourselves, and feel vulnerable in some way or another through their senses of meaning. We then project this onto others. This is the basis of a full model of cognitive dynamics we are leading to.


Oh yes, and when and why do we start acting like our "shadows"? 

... Okay. I have officially barraged you with questions. O_O Probably some big questions. x3 I am curious, though.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

At the bottom of the article on http://personalitycafe.com/cognitiv...k-guide-understanding-jungian-psychology.html is a good description of the Inferior function.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

@LiquidLight - Thanks! ^^ I've been reading information on this for a while. x3 Trying to wrap my mind around it. I know that if I can't say it in my own words, I don't understand it all that well. From what I understand, the inferior function is going to be, I suppose you could say, the least developed? And the slowest to develop.


----------



## NeedsNewNameNow (Dec 1, 2009)

Well when you put an introverted next to any of the functions, it means it's personal, subjective. extroverted means shared or objective.

Introverted feelers tend to feel that feelings are personal. They often keep them to themselves and often seem surprised that their feelings have affected others. They also seem to care less how others feel about their personal choices (and do their own thing)

extroverted feelers know other peoples feelings affect theirs and they know they can affect others with their feelings. (and frequently do intentionally)

strong extroverted feelers have a sense of 'we' while introverted feelers have a sense of 'I'. It's not always so cut and dried though because they are influenced by other functions

In addition, Fe users establish social norms that feel imposing and fake to Fi
Fe users - you don't dress that way for church, it's just wrong. Fi user- Why shouldn't I dress how I want, am I dressing to please you or God? -- that's just an example off the top of my head


----------



## ljubavivino (Feb 2, 2012)

Fi and Fe confused me for a long time. Every time i think i'd get a good grasp on them, someone would present some new information and I'd begin doubting my understanding of it. The other day when I was talking to my roommate it really clicked for me. 

My roommate (Fi) and I (Fe) were talking about this student strike that is going on in our province in regards to a tuition hike. We both go to different Universities so for me, the strike has already been going on for a week while her Uni had voted against it the other day. Anyways, we were both talking about our problems with it and she brought up this comment a really political student from her school has posted on Facebook that was shaming/guilting those who had voted against the strike as being selfish and not looking out for the good of others/the future.
The way we judged this comment was totally different. She went on this long speech about why this made her upset, and how this person trivializing the possibility of an extended semester and financial issues that come with it (for the sake of the 'greater good') made her mad because she personally faced financial issues. No doubt about it, her argument towards this was completely valid, well thought out and clear. Yet it was definitely focused on her position in this issue. She was able to examine at how the situation fit into her beliefs and whether it remained valid after that examination. 
I agreed with her for almost every reason that she named, and i could definitely understand that it was unfair to make a comment like that. Yet i couldn't help but think, 'you're only _one_ of many opinions involved in this.' And despite the fact that I agreed with her, i also felt the need to take into equal account the reasoning behind why that person would make that kind of comment, as well as the hundreds of other opinions from students involved in this strike. My way of judging it was less about if I thought it was right or wrong _ personally_, and more about how it withheld many different perspectives.

It's interesting for me though, because while i'm able to collect and respect a lot of different viewpoints from people about the strike and kind of take them all into account when making a judgement on something, she has this definite and focused understanding of how the situation fits into her life/morals. 

But yeah, these are just my personal ramblings on how i made sense of the two functions. I'm trying to understand them in the least shallow way possible and avoid thinking stuff like 'Fe always complies with social norms' and 'Fi is unable to understand others perspectives'. Because that doesn't really tell you anything about how they work.


----------



## MuChApArAdOx (Jan 24, 2011)

ljubavivino said:


> Fi and Fe confused me for a long time. Every time i think i'd get a good grasp on them, someone would present some new information and I'd begin doubting my understanding of it. The other day when I was talking to my roommate it really clicked for me.
> 
> My roommate (Fi) and I (Fe) were talking about this student strike that is going on in our province in regards to a tuition hike. We both go to different Universities so for me, the strike has already been going on for a week while her Uni had voted against it the other day. Anyways, we were both talking about our problems with it and she brought up this comment a really political student from her school has posted on Facebook that was shaming/guilting those who had voted against the strike as being selfish and not looking out for the good of others/the future.
> The way we judged this comment was totally different. She went on this long speech about why this made her upset, and how this person trivializing the possibility of an extended semester and financial issues that come with it (for the sake of the 'greater good') made her mad because she personally faced financial issues. No doubt about it, her argument towards this was completely valid, well thought out and clear. Yet it was definitely focused on her position in this issue. She was able to examine at how the situation fit into her beliefs and whether it remained valid after that examination.
> ...


The part i highlighed is the best example of Fi i know. This would be true for me and other Fi users i know personally.


----------



## NeedsNewNameNow (Dec 1, 2009)

ljubavivino said:


> Anyways, we were both talking about our problems with it and she brought up this comment a really political student from her school has posted on Facebook that was shaming/guilting those who had voted against the strike as being selfish and not looking out for the good of others/the future.


This comment (do it for the good of others) sounds like an Fe perspective. 



> I agreed with her for almost every reason that she named, and i could definitely understand that it was unfair to make a comment like that. Yet i couldn't help but think, 'you're only _one_ of many opinions involved in this.' And despite the fact that I agreed with her, i also felt the need to take into equal account the reasoning behind why that person would make that kind of comment, as well as the hundreds of other opinions from students involved in this strike. My way of judging it was less about if I thought it was right or wrong _ personally_, and more about how it withheld many different perspectives.
> 
> It's interesting for me though, because while i'm able to collect and respect a lot of different viewpoints from people about the strike and kind of take them all into account when making a judgement on something, she has this definite and focused understanding of how the situation fits into her life/morals.


You are right that her perspective sounds like Fi, but your approach sounds more Ne-- you are perceiving many opinions, but you haven't judged it yet, which is what Fe would do.


----------



## ljubavivino (Feb 2, 2012)

NeedsNewNameNow said:


> In addition, Fe users establish social norms that feel imposing and fake to Fi
> Fe users - you don't dress that way for church, it's just wrong. Fi user- Why shouldn't I dress how I want, am I dressing to please you or God? -- that's just an example off the top of my head


I can't help but feel a little suspicious about these kind of generalizations of Fe/Fi. As an Fe user my POV would be more like 'why should how someone else dresses for church affect me? Sure, I can recognize that it's not the typical way the people dress for church, but i can also respect this persons individual decisions on the matter.' 

Fi's opinion towards something would probably vary though because it's introverted and personal (and forgive me if i'm wrong on this since I don't actually use Fi myself).
Could Fi not also, depending on the person, have an internalized set of morals equal to that common of society? And from that, their POV would be like 'Well, _I, _personally, would never wear that to church because of 'this and this reason' and therefore, I don't think that others should either' just as easily as they could be 'well, this way of dressing for church doesn't fit with my beliefs so I don't want to take part in it.'??


----------



## NeedsNewNameNow (Dec 1, 2009)

ljubavivino said:


> I can't help but feel a little suspicious about these kind of generalizations of Fe/Fi. As an Fe user my POV would be more like 'why should how someone else dresses for church affect me? Sure, I can recognize that it's not the typical way the people dress for church, but i can also respect this persons individual decisions on the matter.'


It matters where in the stack your Fe falls too. You don't list your type. What I listed above is more common with SFJs, they are using Si (how things have always been to know how to dress for church) and Fe to impose it among the group. If you are using Ni with your Fe, then your judgement could vary considerably, or if you are a thinker and your Fe is lower in your stack it makes a difference. I'm INTP and and use Fe, and while I'll recognize social norms, I don't really feel bound by them in the same way an SFJ would. If I see someone dressed inappropriately, it might make me uncomfortable.. not because it offends me personally, but because it will offend someone else who is likely to make a stink about it.



> Fi's opinion towards something would probably vary though because it's introverted and personal (and forgive me if i'm wrong on this since I don't actually use Fi myself).
> Could Fi not also, depending on the person, have an internalized set of morals equal to that common of society?


Yes



> And from that, their POV would be like 'Well, _I, _personally, would never wear that to church because of 'this and this reason' and therefore, I don't think that others should either' just as easily as they could be 'well, this way of dressing for church doesn't fit with my beliefs so I don't want to take part in it.'??


Probably not, because Fi tends to not impose its will on others. I mean they might feel that way, but they aren't likely to do anything about it, unless their Te is strong.

And that is something to keep in mind about extroverted judging (Te and Fe) they are acting in the outside world, and often expect others to conform to their judgment


----------



## TaylorS (Jan 24, 2010)

The most important thing to remember is that the functions are not things we "use" as if they were skills. The functions are filters or lenses our ego uses to help make sense of the world.

The Dominant and Auxiliary functions are those that filter our conscious perceptions of the world, while the Tertiary and Inferior functions are how the Unconscious compensates.

Because of the Persona 2 people with complete opposite types can look superficially similar and can hold identical beliefs and values (which is why most MBTI tests are BS), but the way their egos make sense of the world is totally different. Most often than not one's type can only be seen by others via projection of the Inferior and Tertiary functions.

So, for example, An Fe-Dom has a conscious filter involving keeping in mind the evaluations of others. It doesn't mean that the Fe-Dom blindly follows the likes and dislikes of others (though unintelligent Fe-Doms can be like that, less intelligent people always use their functions in a more concrete manner), but it does mean that they take other people's preferences into consideration.

An Fi-Dom, on the other hand, has a filter based on one's own personal standards of evaluation and does not necessarily care about the evaluations of others when doing things. many Fi Doms mistype as Ts for this reason, since many of the "F" questions have an Fe bias.

A good example of an intelligent Fe-Dom at work is linguist and anthropologist Daniel Everent, famous for his studies of the Pinaha people of the Amazon. He always emphasizes that language is not just something inside one's mind, it is a shared cultural tool and is meaningless outside the cultural context.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

What I am seeing is Fe - pays attention to people and other peoples' feelings. Fi - Pays attention to inward feelings. Is that really it? 

Is it normal to have a person who "uses" (sorry @TaylorS, for bad wording here) both Fe and Fi equally? I relate to both descriptions. And I've tested that way time and again on cognitive function tests (that I try and ensure are accurate, but I also self reflect and study).

What is interesting as most ENFP's use a lot of Fe, if that is the case, although Fi is the auxillary fuction.


----------



## ljubavivino (Feb 2, 2012)

NeedsNewNameNow said:


> You are right that her perspective sounds like Fi, but your approach sounds more Ne-- you are perceiving many opinions, but you haven't judged it yet, which is what Fe would do.


 haha, even typing this out i was thinking 'this sounds a little like the whole Ne 'juggling different perspectives' thing'. Let me see if i can explain this better.. 
I would say that I have judged the situation, In that i actually agreed with my roommate's frustration about that comment. My discontent with the comment was that it was really generalized and ignored the perspectives of many people (perspectives that, while i don't possess personally, i'm aware exist based on different vocalized voices and opinions that have been brought throughout the strike), and also kind of twisted the positive voices of the whole issue into a judgmental one. 
I kind of attribute this more to my Ni than Ne, in that I'm aware that this comment and my roommates response to it are not isolated incidents, and exist connected to all the other events that are taking place during the strike. Me thinking of her as 'only one of many opinions involved' in the strike, was kind of in response of her being stuck on that one detail and not looking at the larger morals at play in the situation, aka the rights to education. (gah, introverted functions are difficult to explain)


----------



## TaylorS (Jan 24, 2010)

JuliaBell said:


> What I am seeing is Fe - pays attention to people and other peoples' feelings. Fi - Pays attention to inward feelings. Is that really it?
> 
> Is it normal to have a person who "uses" (sorry @TaylorS, for bad wording here) both Fe and Fi equally? I relate to both descriptions. And I've tested that way time and again on cognitive function tests (that I try and ensure are accurate, but I also self reflect and study).
> 
> What is interesting as most ENFP's use a lot of Fe, if that is the case, although Fi is the auxillary fuction.


Fi and Fe is only "used equally" when F is an Auxiliary or Tertiary function. Aux and Tert functions are not as differentiated as the Dom and Inf functions and can either introvert or extrovert depending on the needs of the Dominant and Inferior.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

TaylorS said:


> Fi and Fe is only "used equally" when F is an Auxiliary or Tertiary function. Aux and Tert functions are not as differentiated as the Dom and Inf functions and can either introvert or extrovert depending on the needs of the Dominant and Inferior.


... Which happens to be the case for me. Interesting. ^^ So Fi, if you take Fe completely _out_ of the picture, really is a value system. "How much value does this have to me?" sort of a thing. It filters what is "worth it" according to the person. Although, like you said, that could come across as cold sometimes if someone used Fi without any Fe.

What is interesting is while I was reading one site, there was this blurb:



> It helps us know when people are being fake or insincere or if they are basically good. It is like having an internal sense of the "essence" of a person or a project and reading fine distinctions among feeling tones.


^ That's an Fi thing?  How so?


----------



## NeedsNewNameNow (Dec 1, 2009)

JuliaBell said:


> What I am seeing is Fe - pays attention to people and other peoples' feelings. Fi - Pays attention to inward feelings. Is that really it?


Not quite.. 'paying attention' implies using a perceiving function. Fe and Fi are judging. Fe is more about affecting and being affected by other persons feelings. 

If you care about a person, you are going to care about their feelings.. That's true whether you use Fe or Fi. But the approach is different..

Like let's say your best friend is upset-- Ne+Fi is going to look for a way to cheer them up, but while an Fe person might go with the tried and true approach, especially Si+Fe (everyone likes flowers, everyone likes sympathy cards) The Ne+Fi approach might be more individual-- maybe make something for your friend, but it's more likely to have your stamp of individuality on it rather than a typical hallmark card. 

It is hard to explain in words because the differences can be subtle, but once you recognize it, it's noticeable! 




> Is it normal to have a person who "uses" (sorry @_TaylorS_ , for bad wording here) both Fe and Fi equally? I relate to both descriptions. And I've tested that way time and again on cognitive function tests (that I try and ensure are accurate, but I also self reflect and study).
> 
> What is interesting as most ENFP's use a lot of Fe, if that is the case, although Fi is the auxillary fuction.


It is typical for ENFPs to be very people oriented. But it's Ne+Fi working together. It can be mistaken for Fe.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

@NeedsNewNameNow - I see... I am _very_easily effected by others' feelings, to the point where somebody recently asked me if I were sure I were really an ENFP and not an ENFJ. I think it's not exactly Ne+Fi for me all the time (though it could be for the majority, I suppose). 

The "typical hallmark card" you described did seem like somebody who used Si+Fe. I've got an ENFJ friend who I don't think always goes for the "tried and true" way when it comes to comforting or making a person happy, per se. I think you're on to something though.


----------



## NeedsNewNameNow (Dec 1, 2009)

JuliaBell said:


> @NeedsNewNameNow - I see... I am _very_easily effected by others' feelings, to the point where somebody recently asked me if I were sure I were really an ENFP and not an ENFJ. I think it's not exactly Ne+Fi for me all the time (though it could be for the majority, I suppose).
> 
> The "typical hallmark card" you described did seem like somebody who used Si+Fe. I've got an ENFJ friend who I don't think always goes for the "tried and true" way when it comes to comforting or making a person happy, per se. I think you're on to something though.


Thanks- yes the Si makes a difference. And because SFJs are so common and NFJs are so rare, I think it's easy to attribute things to Fe that are really the domain of Si. 

I thought about it a little more, and I think it isn't that Fe cares more about feelings, but it's more sensitive to the social harmony. If someone is upset, it affects the harmony, and even I as an inferior Fe user am made uncomfortable by the change in harmony. But because It's my inferior, most of the time I feel powerless to do anything about it. With Dominant or Auxiliary Fe, they instinctively know what to do to calm that person. And they are doing it for the benefit of the upset person. They may not actually care about that person any more than you or I do, so it looks like a fake outpouring of sympathy. This is something that Fi users abhor. Outpourings of feelings should be authentic. Also the Fi user seems to be affected for different reasons in my experience.. they often feel like they are at fault for not keeping the other person happy.


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Fi I think I use mainly :
Sensing feelings of other people as in atmospheres, body language, tones of voice. Knowing that a person isn't being sincere etc 

Recognising my own feelings and empathising with others 

Making decisions/ inner values aspects of it = I believe, I will put any inner values first if they are concerned in making a decision. I don't care what decision is more logical or what others want me to do IF it goes against my core values. 

Fe I think is about expressing feelings to other people. I find this awkward and think this is why Fi doms express feelings through creativity 

Looking for social cues in order to fit in and act like other people. 

Asking others how they are or keeping in touch, initiating contact /wanting to make connections with others


----------



## Kito (Jan 6, 2012)

Fi is very good at picking up the emotions of others. Fi-doms (INFP, ISFP) are particularly good at this, because we have a very well developed understanding of human needs and emotions, so we can figure out how someone is feeling from a mile away. How Se and Ne go with this differs - Se usually picks this up by observing body language and facial expressions, while Ne is able to connect it to other things going on in the person's life and jump to a conclusion.

It's the same with Fe, it can also be pretty focused on inward feelings, but when decision making, the feelings of others overrule this. With Fi it's the opposite. My ISFJ mother will always make an effort to please others, regardless of her feelings. I, on the other hand, will likely pass up an opportunity to make somebody else happy if it's going to have a negative effect on my mood. Basically, Fe and Fi can both be inward and outward, but the difference is mainly brought out when making decisions.


----------



## Mizmar (Aug 12, 2009)

NeedsNewNameNow said:


> I thought about it a little more, and I think it isn't that Fe cares more about feelings, but it's more sensitive to the social harmony. If someone is upset, it affects the harmony, and even I as an inferior Fe user am made uncomfortable by the change in harmony. But because It's my inferior, most of the time I feel powerless to do anything about it.


I'm the same way you are but I'm pretty sure (based on the comparisons between the two that I've read in this forum) that I'm a Fi-user not Fe-user. Even in fictional stories I'm sensitive to group harmony. In the show _The Walking Dead_, for example, I find the tension and animosity between the main characters every bit as jarring as the zombies themselves.



Kitzara said:


> Fi is very good at picking up the emotions of others. Fi-doms (INFP, ISFP) are particularly good at this, because we have a very well developed understanding of human needs and emotions, so we can figure out how someone is feeling from a mile away. How Se and Ne go with this differs - Se usually picks this up by observing body language and facial expressions, while Ne is able to connect it to other things going on in the person's life and jump to a conclusion.


Hmmm. I definitely go by facial expressions, tone of voice, and body language. I'm pretty sure I'm a Ne-, not a Se-, user though. I'll have to read through the "You know you're using __ when" threads a second time to compare.


----------



## Staffan (Nov 15, 2011)

You may also want to consider the fact that while the MBTI test has some empirical support, the type dynamics doesn't, at least as far as I can tell. There doesn't even seem to exist a documented test of cognitive functions. So there may be more than one reason why you use Fi and Fe.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

@Mizmar - Well, we all use body language quite a bit, and we pay attention to it quite a lot. However, some are better at paying attention to it than others. Be careful of the "You know you're using ___ when" threads. Often, they're just full of stereotypes or what other people think is one thing when it actually isn't, or has no relevance in the first place. They are fun, though. ^^


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

@Staffan - Definitely noted. ^^ I trust cognitive functions more, but I also know that MBTI has quite a lot of truth to it.


----------



## phantom_cat (Jan 1, 2011)

If an Fe user is an open book (nothing is private), then they expect the one who they're talking to be as well, otherwise, they "turn into" that other person to create harmony.

Fe would change the feeling based on the environment, Fi would not.


----------



## allisreal (Mar 23, 2010)

http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/87243-fe-vs-fi.html

I think there was a great discussion about the topic in this thread. It really cleared a lot up for me. Post #6 by @LiquidLight in particular. As a matter of fact, I always come back to this thread any time my Ne starts acting up and convinces me that my understanding of the difference between Fi and Fe isn't fully there.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

@allisreal - I feel like hugging you. That. Thread. Is. Awesome. O___O Clears up so much for me. Although what is meant by "surface value" exactly? It still kind of sounds like society.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

> I'm the same way you are but I'm pretty sure (based on the comparisons between the two that I've read in this forum) that I'm a Fi-user not Fe-user. Even in fictional stories I'm sensitive to group harmony. In the show The Walking Dead, for example, I find the tension and animosity between the main characters every bit as jarring as the zombies themselves.


Are you sensitive to the group harmony because you know how you would feel in that situation (Fi - being an abstract introverted function, it can pretty much observe it's own processes enough to be able recognize trends in its reactions and whatnot), or is it more of an automatic reaction not necessarily based on a preconceived understanding of your own feelings processes (where it just feels like the right time and place to be affected by the group harmony in the fictional story, but you couldn't predict that you would feel in the situation unless you were actually there, experiencing it in the moment (since the feeling is extroverted and is more energized by respective environmental impetuses than by it's own means of internal relation) - after all, Fe would account for the impact that the explicit nature of the feelings of others would have on the Fe type - so, it would be the direct impact of the situation on Fe by which Fe would respond to, while Fi would model it's own feeling dynamic so that it can predict how to feel about the situation, based on how it jives with the individual's feelings relative to the situation portrayed). Does this make some sense? (how Te of me to ask, lol).


----------



## allisreal (Mar 23, 2010)

JuliaBell said:


> @allisreal - I feel like hugging you. That. Thread. Is. Awesome. O___O Clears up so much for me. Although what is meant by "surface value" exactly? It still kind of sounds like society.


I'm not the best at explaining these things, but yeah societally held views are at play here when it comes to extraverted judgement. Fe believes that values should get its meaning from the environment, just as Te believes that logic should get its meaning from the environment. They don't seek to reinterpret what the environment deems significant the same way Fi and Ti would. This is not to say that Fe's value based and Te's logic based *reasoning* (I think this is the key) does not belong to the individual:



> You can still make personal choices on your objective information. For example, me as a ET dominant type, I don't blindly follow the universal collective on facts. I get to decide what universal "ideas" and "facts" I want to use, but I won't reinterpret them with my personal beliefs as a IT type would. I would keep them as is as that is what it means to be objective, but ultimately I get to decide what I want to do with them.


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

ljubavivino said:


> Could Fi not also, depending on the person, have an internalized set of morals equal to that common of society? And from that, their POV would be like 'Well, _I, _personally, would never wear that to church because of 'this and this reason' and therefore, I don't think that others should either' just as easily as they could be 'well, this way of dressing for church doesn't fit with my beliefs so I don't want to take part in it.'??


For me, I'd say Fi isn't what would be saying that, but my ability to see another's perspective might make me more flexible and considerate of others. It's not actually Fi doing that though, just Fe. I can share an experience where a fellow Buddhist's spouse passed away and I was getting dressed to go over and being into death/black metal and death themed shirts (which I oddly didn't realize until then!) I had to go through my dirty laundry to find one that was acceptable and that didn't stink  I do use some discretion now in things like that, it just doesn't naturally come first. The Fe-style thinking is much more deliberate and sometimes feels forced. It's probably because it's ideal to have some kind of balance like that if you want to get along in this world. It's just taken forever for me to figure that out! XD


----------



## Mizmar (Aug 12, 2009)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> Are you sensitive to the group harmony because you know how you would feel in that situation (Fi - being an abstract introverted function, it can pretty much observe it's own processes enough to be able recognize trends in its reactions and whatnot), or is it more of an automatic reaction not necessarily based on a preconceived understanding of your own feelings processes (where it just feels like the right time and place to be affected by the group harmony in the fictional story, but you couldn't predict that you would feel in the situation unless you were actually there, experiencing it in the moment (since the feeling is extroverted and is more energized by respective environmental impetuses than by it's own means of internal relation)


A bit of both I suppose. It's definitely an automatic, not a preconceived, response. But it has nothing to do with it being "the right time and place". It never occurs to me to question whether a feeling is appropriate or not. It's either there or it isn't. Also, I don't actually feel "energized" by emotional, environmental impetuses; if anything I feel drained by them. I need time afterward to process it all.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

> A bit of both I suppose. It's definitely an automatic, not a preconceived, response. But it has nothing to do with it being "the right time and place". It never occurs to me to question whether a feeling is appropriate or not. It's either there or it isn't. Also, I don't actually feel "energized" by emotional, environmental impetuses; if anything I feel drained by them. I need time afterward to process it all.


I think you're mixing up emotions with feelings here. The feeling functions, according to Jung, rationalize emotional content. I never said you feel energized - energized is a word used to deal with the orientation of the feeling function - is the feeling function stimulated more (and more easily rationalized) by the external world, or do you need to be alone to make sense of your feelings?


----------



## firedell (Aug 5, 2009)

When you see an emotional moral argument between dominant Fe's, and dominant Fi's. Then you'll know.

I know a few ESFJ's, and ENFJ's, and I usually one time or another end up in a debate or argument with them. Fe types love the greater good scenario when it comes to moral decisions. "How does the group feel?" "What is the best for society as a whole?" 

Where I ask, "What do I feel about _______? How would other individuals feel about ___?" 

So I usually get frustrated with Fe types because some of the time they don't think about individual cases, and they get angry at me because I don't think about the greater good.

I have forgotten some good examples of debates I have with my mother.


----------



## Mizmar (Aug 12, 2009)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> I think you're mixing up emotions with feelings here. The feeling functions, according to Jung, rationalize emotional content. I never said you feel energized - energized is a word used to deal with the orientation of the feeling function - is the feeling function stimulated more (and more easily rationalized) by the external world, or do you need to be alone to make sense of your feelings?


I admit I have a (very) difficult time conceptually separating 'emotions' from 'feelings' even though I've seen it emphasized often on this board that they are not the same thing. With that in mind, I'd have to say that I require alone time to make sense of my feelings.


----------



## TitaniaRose (Oct 27, 2011)

Kitzara said:


> Fi is very good at picking up the emotions of others. Fi-doms (INFP, ISFP) are particularly good at this, because we have a very well developed understanding of human needs and emotions, so we can figure out how someone is feeling from a mile away. How Se and Ne go with this differs - Se usually picks this up by observing body language and facial expressions, while Ne is able to connect it to other things going on in the person's life and jump to a conclusion.
> 
> It's the same with Fe, it can also be pretty focused on inward feelings, but when decision making, the feelings of others overrule this. With Fi it's the opposite. My ISFJ mother will always make an effort to please others, regardless of her feelings. I, on the other hand, will likely pass up an opportunity to make somebody else happy if it's going to have a negative effect on my mood. Basically, Fe and Fi can both be inward and outward, but the difference is mainly brought out when making decisions.


I do both of what you describe - looking at body language, expression - I often can just be in someone's precence and can just sense something. But I also look at persona's life situation and jump to conclusions - I do it all the time. I've yet to figure out if I'm S or N.

As for the rest of what you say, with my Fi, I use both Fe and Fi, sometimes I've gone against my Fi to go with my Fe(sometimes I regretted this later). But with my Fi, when I have a personal conviction/feelings and if this causes a conflict I generally want the other party to concede to my view, to me that would be the most ideal outcome. I want the group/situation around me to fit into what I feel is right. Is this Fi, or Fe or just being annoying? If it's just being annoying, I'm OK with that. 

I find it hard to tell Fi/Fe in others sometimes though. I mean the way the functions are described - for example a person putting someone else's feelings before theirs being apparently Fe - is that Fe, or could it also be low confidence? I know people who think their feelings aren't important. Is that really Fe, or a psychological issue?


----------



## paper lilies (Dec 6, 2011)

NeedsNewNameNow said:


> Probably not, because Fi tends to not impose its will on others. I mean they might feel that way, but they aren't likely to do anything about it, unless their Te is strong.


This bit actually interested me because I've had so-called "INFP's" online literally attack my posts. The one at large that stands out in my mind is a person blatantly telling me that I was treating an individual "wrong" and that I should have done "example" "example" "example" because this individual claimed to know how the individual in the situation I was describing would feel... Let's just say that it was ridiculously subjective on their end and completely irrational to begin with. Not only did they not know the situation that I was discussing in my life as a whole (let's not forget that we don't know each other personally) but how could you know how another individual feels? You're not them and your emotions are your _own_ responsibility, in my opinion. This so-called Fi-dom was certainly trying to impose it's will on me.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

@paper lilies, @firedell, @TitaniaRose, @Mizmar, @JungyesMBTIno - 

Thanks for the input you guys. I think I can understand Fi versus Fe much better now. Now, I think I can understand Te versus Ti pretty well since it is similar in concept to Fe versus Fi. However, Ne versus Ni can confuse me a bit... I have a general grasp, but the distinction isn't always clear to me. All I've got is Ni = slower, more direct. At least, that's what others seem to say. x3 Ne = fast, all over the place. 

The info @LiquidLight gave me about the inferior function was wonderful. ^^ 

But now... what is this about "shadow" functions? When exactly do we start falling back on our shadows?  

Also. Is there anything you might like to say regarding things people commonly misunderstand about the cognitive functions and personality types in general? Just curious, because I think those things might be good to know. XD


----------



## paper lilies (Dec 6, 2011)

JuliaBell said:


> But now... what is this about "shadow" functions? When exactly do we start falling back on our shadows?


Shadow functions seem to come out during times of stress, fatigue or illness. 
Falling into our shadow functions equate to a negative version of ourselves.



> The Shadow:
> 
> Just as the ego represents who we believe we are, the shadow represents who and what we believe we are not. Because shadow is just as important as ego in defining our personalities and boundaries, we adhere to the shadow aspects of ourselves with as much tenacity as that with which we hold to our egos. For most people it is very difficult to experience shadow characteristics as part of ourselves, so we tend to see the characteristics in others close to us, particularly our parent or sibling, relative, acquaintance or workmate, almost always of the same gender. A real giveaway about shadow material is that it nearly always causes irritation when experienced.
> 
> ...


Source: Jung's Model


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Interesting. I wouldn't really overreact too much about the shadow of personality, since, being constituted by unconscious functions, it's going to be really hard to identify (I honestly have no idea how people do this - I've thought about it, but there's so little way of having any confidence about what constitutes shadow experiences for the most part). It's not anywhere near as simple as "using" functions when we get into the unconscious functions, although it might be possible to determine as a source of evidence toward your conscious type, depending on whether certain types of people bug you or make you feel off for reasons that you can't consciously explain - then again, since the shadow functions don't really create a coherent "shadow type," I'm not sure how reliable the outside world could be in terms of typology in indicating one's shadow.


----------



## Kito (Jan 6, 2012)

The best explanation I've seen of Ne vs. Ni is how they connect patterns and find solutions. Say A is the first step towards finding the solution, and Z is the solution. It'd go somewhat like this:

Ne - A-C-L-S-U-Z
Ni - A-C-L-S... Z!

I'm not great with these two functions either, seeing as I lack both of them, so you're not the only one. xD


----------



## emerald sea (Jun 4, 2011)

good descriptions of how cognitive functions evidence themselves in thought/action are at this link - this helped me a lot and i hope it will help you too...

both Fi and Fe are concerned about values, but they are oriented differently since one is an introverted function and the other is an extroverted function; and they both have a different values standard against which they compare everything. 

Fi's concern about values is turned inward (in the form of being true both to personal values/beliefs and to self in terms of authenticity), and Fe's concern about values is turned outward (in the form of being true to social values, prioritizing relationships and interpersonal harmony and people's feelings and how everything affects people). Fi compares my own behavior and the behavior of others against my own personal values and modifies my own behavior to match up to my own personal values, and may get indignant over how the world doesn't align to my values and/or tries to persuade them to change their behavior so they do align with my values. Fe compares everything against socio-emotional values (such as protecting people's feelings, maintaining interpersonal harmony, making and keeping relationships) and modifies my behavior so it is - and will feel indignant if society is not, and try to encourage the behavior of others towards - matching up to those values. violation of their specific values is disturbing both to Fi and to Fe. both types may consider their values "their personal values" or "absolute values" and wish the whole world lived by them, both may be deeply concerned about other people; the major difference is the orientation of comparison - is everything measured in relation to self standards (Fi) or in relation to social standards (Fe)? 

so, to distinguish them, find out what is the question asked every time a decision is analyzed - "does this meet up to my own standards of what is right?" (Fi) or "does this meet up to standards of how people should be treated/affected and made to feel?" (Fe) in this way the values of Fi and Fe are oriented differently - trueness to personal ethics (is this authentic to me and does this behavior line up with my beliefs of the way someone should be/live?) or trueness to societal ethics (does this behavior contribute to interpersonal harmony or destroy it, does this behavior hurt anyone's feelings or protect them, does this behavior affect people in a negative or positive way, does this behavior keep my relationships strong and help me get along with others?). 

it is when personal ethics and societal ethics conflict that the difference between Fi and Fe becomes most clear. for instance, Fi can be authentic to self even if others are offended by it (unless one of the Fi user's values is not offending people), while Fe would feel a need to modify behavior to avoid (or stop) offending people. and Fe might compromise a personally-held ethical value in order to preserve harmony or protect someone's feelings, while Fi would have an internal struggle about doing so and might not be able to bring themself to do so. in determining whether it's Fi or Fe, you have to know the standard against which everything is compared, and you have to figure out what takes priority in decision-making (my own personal standard or a standard of how others are affected). again, there can be values shared by both Fi and Fe - it just depends on the individual Fi user, what their specific personal values are. i hope that makes the distinction between the two functions a little clearer.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

@seastallion - Thank you very, very much for that. That clears up even more. Thanks for the link, it was extremely helpful. ^^


----------

