# Since Fi has been deemed useless and selfish by much of the PerC Community



## Another Lost Cause (Oct 6, 2015)

Every week, or sometimes everyday, it seems there is a new thread denigrating Fi doms as selfish and useless, that they are annoyances to the selfless, useful, and altruistic Te, Ti, and Fe doms. So the question remains, what would the world be like if Fi didn't exist? Ti, for one, would have to fight a desperate battle alone against the forces of Fe and Te. It would have no allies in that battle. I can think of a few other things, but I want to know what others think.


----------



## RaisinKG (Jan 2, 2016)

Fi is probably the most misunderstood of the 8 functions, all because people perceive at as egotistic and self centered.

Fi, as an introverted judging function, makes decisions based on your own personal values and feelings; that's not exactly selfish in itself. A Fi-user considers their own values first when contemplating a decision. 



> it is focused on navigating and managing the FP’s personal feelings, tastes, and values. Rather than distributing its feelings and energies across a breadth of individuals (as Fe does), Fi concentrates its gaze on the self or the “subject.” This is why it is often described as “subjective.”





> experiences deep personal emotions. Fi acts independently of the emotions around them. Fi will cry at a funeral out of shared personal experience (knowing the pain of loss, having felt it personally) rather than universal, theoretical empathy. Fi don’t seek to adapt, which makes their emotion “purer” in the sense that it is entirely sincere. Fi is focused on sharing emotions through personal experience, so much so that they can at times be insensitive to others’ experiences that they can’t identify with. (Shared experiences are key.)



To answer your question, a world without Fi would in my opinion, be a pale, boring, gray place; without that Fi-user to bring up some diversity and colorfulness this time around. It would also upset the seesaw balance of Introverted Judging against Extraverted Judging, with a ratio of one weight of Ti to Two weights of Je.


----------



## Gossip Goat (Nov 19, 2013)

I don't think it's useless at all. In fact I wish I used more of Fi. I don't really like being a Fe user that much.


----------



## aphinion (Apr 30, 2013)

I don't understand Fi, so I can't say that I really have an opinion on it. Is Fi just hard to describe, or do Ti/Te/Fe users not make the effort to properly understand how it works?


----------



## ScientiaOmnisEst (Oct 2, 2013)

Another Lost Cause said:


> Ti, for one, would have to fight a desperate battle alone against the forces of Fe and Te. It would have no allies in that battle.


I just keep reading this sentence and thinking, "Ti and Fi are allies? In what universe?" :laughing:

But a little more seriously, seeing as I authored one of those anti-Fi threads I really shouldn't be talking, but I often thought of Fi as misunderstood more because of the hyperemotional stereotype, than anything about selfishness. Fi often comes across as cold and even unfeeling, in contrast to all the memes of weepy, emo IxFPS.


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

Anyone can be selfish. 

I think Fi can be more prone but this is not an absolute. I can think of a few Fi users I know who are extremely caring people. It does kind of depend on how the person executes their Fi. For one some Fi doms actually may have Fi values that line up well with the idea of what Fe/Te operate on. It also does depend on how a person was raised and their social experiences and life experiences and how they processed them. 

I am not going to all together extinguish that there is no merit in people have the stereotype in a generalization that Fi can be selfish, the stereotype is there because theres some general patterns. But seriously I think all types are not entirely their types description and have individual identity beyond mbti. Also again one can go back to that ennegram is a factor as well. 

Its really not exactly wise in my opinion to assume an Fi dom or aux is selfish just on that note. But theres something to be said for patterns and well I think Fi is more likely more so then that anyone should assume Fi is always selfish. It totally depends on so many many factors. 

As I said I know of a few extremely selfless kind kind Fi dom/auxs but with that said, I would say these people who stick out are an exception to the majority of the Fi dom/aux I know not a majority. I would in no way ever assume that all Fe users are kind and all Fi are assholes. 

Even going further tho people have many misconceptions across the board on what Ti/Te vs Fe/Fi are. So many many people assume for example thinkers in just that alone are assholes and all feelers are overly emotional nutcases or more caring. Eh no that is not how the functions work at all. I for example can be more dramatic or sensitive then My ENFP friend at times (depends what), still does not alter my functions or hers. (Again taking into account enneagram etc etc). 

I do think Fi gets an overly bad rep but its not all together out there from no where. People are associating it with patterns and Fi doms/auxs they obviously have come across. But no one should assume anything about anyone they do not know in my opinion as far as their core.


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

Gossip Goat said:


> I don't think it's useless at all. In fact I wish I used more of Fi. I don't really like being a Fe user that much.


Meditate more?

Excessively ruminate on all your flaws.


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

I think that often times, personal "subjective feelings" are seen as simply as an unnecessary waste of time, to be diverted into the all collective hegemony of preferred standard of behavior that individuals within a group are expected to adjust and hold themselves to accordingly.

But I don't think human nature is really static, or that simple. Natural urges can be suppressed too much, and will find a find to subvert into some other form of activity or expression, as all energy cannot be destroyed but diverted into some other direction. 

I think "Fi" is often just an existing manifestation for a individual sense of self. I almost think that everyone most have their own version of it, as well; made up of their own collages of responses and ways of interpreting.

But it can be selfish. I have come to realize that I often spend so much time and energy on my own self, I don't always have that much to give to other people. There is only so much time and energy you have in each day, and I probably lean to myself far too much then I should. 

But it's not really about that I think. I think Fi can be quite selfless but only for "selfish" (or personal) reasons.


----------



## Gossip Goat (Nov 19, 2013)

MeteorShadow said:


> Meditate more?
> 
> Excessively ruminate on all your flaws.


I do introspect (if dats what you mean). But in terms of decision making I definitely go more based on external factors. Which I dislike, not because it's bad in itself but the way its expressed in me limits and inhibits me. 

I sort of went on a little tangent there D: sorreh.


----------



## MuChApArAdOx (Jan 24, 2011)

Fi only gets a bad rap on Personality Cafe, go out into the real world and you will see that MOST people are very attracted and drawn to those who use Fi. Fe is sterotyped as the Goddess of emos, yet in reality people are more turned off Fe than Fi. I think its really cute when people start threads about Fi, because in my mind it means that I am very Unique, my Fi will never be exposed enough for people to pin me down, so therefore it actually makes me feel really special rather than offended.:kitteh:


----------



## nichya (Jul 12, 2014)

Fi doesn't care. Move on.


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

Another Lost Cause said:


> Every week, or sometimes everyday, it seems there is a new thread denigrating Fi doms as selfish and useless, that they are annoyances to the selfless, useful, and altruistic Te, Ti, and Fe doms. So the question remains, what would the world be like if Fi didn't exist? Ti, for one, would have to fight a desperate battle alone against the forces of Fe and Te. It would have no allies in that battle. I can think of a few other things, but I want to know what others think.


I keep Fi users close and run all of my moral decisions by them. They are the lodestar of moral rumination and depth. The guru on the hill. I would absolutely NOT run moral questions by an Fe. I would run questions of social etiquette by them, but never those deep moral questions. That is the realm of Fi, and there is no substitute. 

Sometimes, the only answer I get from them is a vibe... or even a slight change in their mood. I know that if they see me well, or feel good around me, that I can call myself good and moral. With an Fe, I can only say that I am ACTING moral, or appropriate or suitable. With an Fi, they may not say a judging word, but I can sense when something is amiss with them. They are, then, like canaries. You know that something is toxic if they won't touch it. You know you are in the wrong place if they have already left. 

It is laziness on my part, I know, but if every Fe in the world loved me and all the Fi types didn't, I would know I was nothing but a fraud. I would feel awful. It would be unbearable. I would know that on the surface it all looked right, but deep down something was rotten. Fi types are simply, without question, the better judges.


----------



## Another Lost Cause (Oct 6, 2015)

ScientiaOmnisEst said:


> I just keep reading this sentence and thinking, "Ti and Fi are allies? In what universe?" :laughing:
> 
> But a little more seriously, seeing as I authored one of those anti-Fi threads I really shouldn't be talking, but I often thought of Fi as misunderstood more because of the hyperemotional stereotype, than anything about selfishness. Fi often comes across as cold and even unfeeling, in contrast to all the memes of weepy, emo IxFPS.


I actually think there can be kinship between Fi and Ti types, even though they might clash since Ti might be vocal about disagreeing with the values of an Fi, and vice-versa. I think they respect each other's process of examining the world. I think the major error people have in judging Fi is that they assume Fi is all "me me me", I think Fi spreads out, it makes ethical observations and opinions about the environment. The INFP I knew, the flower-pot painter woman, seemed very wise regarding the treatment of the underclasses, for instance, you wouldn't see her berating people for their lot in life, or see her being cruel to animals. She seemed to have a sort of humble wisdom about her. I loved her artwork to, especially the pot with the stars and moon on the blue sky with the silouette of a woman and her child looking upwards. I think this is why these anti-Fi threads, where Fi-doms are erroneously skewered for being selfish, seem to get under my skin a bit.


----------



## bruh (Oct 27, 2015)

Instead of wasting time fighting Fe or Te, let's find beauty in our differences and learn to Co-! Ex! ist! ^___^


----------



## bruh (Oct 27, 2015)

Psychopomp said:


> I keep Fi users close and run all of my moral decisions by them. They are the lodestar of moral rumination and depth. The guru on the hill. I would absolutely NOT run moral questions by an Fe. I would run questions of social etiquette by them, but never those deep moral questions. That is the realm of Fi, and there is no substitute.
> 
> Sometimes, the only answer I get from them is a vibe... or even a slight change in their mood. I know that if they see me well, or feel good around me, that I can call myself good and moral. With an Fe, I can only say that I am ACTING moral, or appropriate or suitable. With an Fi, they may not say a judging word, but I can sense when something is amiss with them. They are, then, like canaries. You know that something is toxic if they won't touch it. You know you are in the wrong place if they have already left.
> 
> It is laziness on my part, I know, but if every Fe in the world loved me and all the Fi types didn't, I would know I was nothing but a fraud. I would feel awful. It would be unbearable. I would know that on the surface it all looked right, but deep down something was rotten. Fi types are simply, without question, the better judges.


Whoa^ what has happened to you to say this?
In all honesty I as well base logic on Ti persons. They see things I cannot see.


----------



## bruh (Oct 27, 2015)

flourine said:


> Fi is probably the most misunderstood of the 8 functions, all because people perceive at as egotistic and self centered.
> 
> Fi, as an introverted judging function, makes decisions based on your own personal values and feelings; that's not exactly selfish in itself. A Fi-user considers their own values first when contemplating a decision.
> 
> ...


Why is it either Fe is empathetic and Fi is selfish vs Fi is sincere and Fe is fake?


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

The majority of the PerC community are idiots. No need to defend the existence of a cognitive function. Anybody who is doing some form of function lynching is a fool not worth the effort.


----------



## Lunaena (Nov 16, 2013)

Fi is literally internal feelings. That is why it is perceived as selfish and putting themselves first. Fe is literally external feeling, which is why it is perceived as putting others first and being selfless.

Internal feeling is not necessarily selfishness, but is perceived that way because of descriptions and unhealthy individuals. But, unhealthy Fi and Fe acts differently. Unhealthy Fi may victimize themselves, unhealthy Fe may do bad things to people because they believe they are helping them. This is a very stereotypical example, though. 

In a way, taking it too literally, we can imagine that Fi, since it is internal, has no need for other people in order to feel. There is no need to bounce off their feelings to other humans and relating to them, while Fe do need other people when it comes to feelings because it is external. Once again, as I said, I write very stereotypically right now.

As an Fi-dom, I feel like I experience Fi very different from what descriptions say. "You have very strong personal values", etc. I feel more like my Fi works as in seeing how individuals are in a big mass of people, for example. I also put myself in other people's shoes to understand how they feel. Fi needs to feel in order to understand (this does not mean Fi-doms need to because we use other functions too), but the Fi function alone itself needs to feel to understand.

I can use an example of something that happened today. I was in a new class I have never been to before, and I knew no one. I was prepared to be all alone. In the break, a girl smiled bright to me and turned around to me instantly, introducing herself and asking me if I knew anyone here. She did not know anyone either. I kind of instantly reocognized that she was, or could possibly be, an ENFP. We both related to each other through our Fi, by imagining ourselves in each others shoes to understand each other.

Basically, saying Fi is selfish shows only great lack of understanding this function. Fi and Fe can both care equally about people, but in different ways.


----------



## karmachameleon (Nov 1, 2015)

*In socionics:
*Introverted ethics is an introverted, rational, and static information element. It is also called Fi, R, relational ethics, or white ethics. Fi is generally associated with the ability to gain an implicit sense of the subjective 'distance' between two people, and make judgments based off of said thing. Types with valued Fi strive to make and maintain close, personal relationships with their friends and family. They value sensitivity to others' feelings, and occasionally will make their innermost feelings and sentiments known in order to test the possibility of creating closeness with others.

Also, these types convey emotions in terms of how they were affected by something (such as "I did not like that"), rather than an extroverted ethics (Fe) approach that would describe the object itself without clear reference to the subject involved (such as "That sucked"). Much of their decisions are based on how they themselves, or others in relation to them personally, feel in contrast to considering how "the big picture" is affected (such as groups of people).


----------



## Prada (Sep 10, 2015)

No function is useless and Fi-doms can be very selfless. Seriously, if the whole word was just Fe users then no one would have opinions because there would be no one the Fe users could "adapt" to. In order to focus on the harmony of the group, there needs to be discord and someone using personal values.


----------



## Dasein (Jun 11, 2015)

Another Lost Cause said:


> Every week, or sometimes everyday, it seems there is a new thread denigrating Fi doms as selfish and useless, that they are annoyances to the selfless, useful, and altruistic Te, Ti, and Fe doms. So the question remains, what would the world be like if Fi didn't exist? Ti, for one, would have to fight a desperate battle alone against the forces of Fe and Te. It would have no allies in that battle. I can think of a few other things, but I want to know what others think.


Perhaps it is being perceived that Fi doms are this way. But I'm not sure this is the case.

I don't see Fi (or Fe) as undesirable. But I have a problem with those who base their decision irrationally relying too much on Fi (or Fe). The way that I have learned to try to make determinations in myself is an attempt to look at problems without Fi (or Fe). After I have made a determination using Ti, I will then look at the problem from Fi or Fe to make my final decision. I may override my rational decision making in the end because my Fi or Fe tells me to do so. But this is rare. It is usually only in personal relationships that I will do this, not in society as a collective whole. But developing ones values in life without rationally develop a framework of values, I think is detrimental to society and to the individual.


----------



## Plumedoux (Aug 16, 2015)

INTonyP said:


> Perhaps it is being perceived that Fi doms are this way. But I'm not sure this is the case.
> 
> I don't see Fi (or Fe) as undesirable. But I have a problem with those who base their decision* irrationally *relying too much on Fi (or Fe). The way that I have learned to try to make determinations in myself is an attempt to look at problems without Fi (or Fe). After I have made a determination using Ti, I will then look at the problem from Fi or Fe to make my final decision. I may override my rational decision making in the end because my Fi or Fe tells me to do so. But this is rare. It is usually only in personal relationships that I will do this, not in society as a collective whole. But developing ones values in life without rationally develop a framework of values, I think is detrimental to society and to the individual.


The problem is that you think that Fi and Fe are irrational. They are rational function as much as Te and Ti.


----------



## Glory (Sep 28, 2013)

selfishness is a good thing when it's balanced with accountability and clarity of thought. Fi simply isn't the tool to use when scrutinising values, that's what thinking is for, and Ti isn't any less 'selfish' on that end.


----------



## Rabid Seahorse (Mar 10, 2015)

FP's are no more selfish than any other type. Morals, values, spirituality, empathy...those are all _good_ things that Fi does. FP's are the type of people that can raise you up from the inside and will listen to you with sincerity when you're having problems. The truth is all types have the potential to be selfish- it just comes out in different ways for different types.


----------



## Dasein (Jun 11, 2015)

Plumedoux said:


> The problem is that you think that Fi and Fe are irrational. They are rational function as much as Te and Ti.


I rest my case.


----------



## ScientiaOmnisEst (Oct 2, 2013)

INTonyP said:


> Perhaps it is being perceived that Fi doms are this way. But I'm not sure this is the case.
> 
> I don't see Fi (or Fe) as undesirable. But I have a problem with those who base their decision irrationally relying too much on Fi (or Fe). The way that I have learned to try to make determinations in myself is an attempt to look at problems without Fi (or Fe). After I have made a determination using Ti, I will then look at the problem from Fi or Fe to make my final decision. I may override my rational decision making in the end because my Fi or Fe tells me to do so. But this is rare. It is usually only in personal relationships that I will do this, not in society as a collective whole. But developing ones values in life without rationally develop a framework of values, I think is detrimental to society and to the individual.


I get the impression you're missing the point of dom/aux Feeling...?

For one thing, the values _are_ the rational framework here, in an F-type.


----------



## Dasein (Jun 11, 2015)

ScientiaOmnisEst said:


> I get the impression you're missing the point of dom/aux Feeling...?
> 
> For one thing, the values _are_ the *rational* framework here, in an F-type.


Do you understand that the word *rational* is not mentioned in the OP, which I reference, but in my post by my definition? So the definition of rational is not related to what you may assume. Someone choosing their values based on feelings instead of logic, may or may not coincide with logic and reason (rational) thought. Therefore one cannot assume that Fi and Fe are rational in themselves. Decisions of values based on Fe or Fi might coincide with what is rational and logical, but they are not rational or logical in themselves.


----------



## mushr00m (May 23, 2011)

Would the world be any less selfish without Fi doms?


----------



## Dasein (Jun 11, 2015)

mushr00m said:


> Would the world be any less selfish without Fi doms?


I don't think selfishness necessarily has anything to do with being Fi. Selfishness can be a virtue depending on how you look at it.


----------



## SimplyRivers (Sep 5, 2015)

I don't see Fi as selfish. It's just making decisions off of personal decisions. Maybe it seems cold on the outside, but they do say you can only know people if you know yourself. 

I believe in the meanest person has a grain of humanity.


----------



## niss (Apr 25, 2010)

Rhonda Rousey said:


> the mroe i read the less i understand


It's because what you're reading is very erroneous. When I read some of the Fi descriptions in threads such as these, I just SMH and decide to move on. 

Thinking deeply about a topic is not the same as thinking clearly. A mad man can think deeply, but clarity of thought escapes him.


----------



## Dasein (Jun 11, 2015)

niss said:


> It's because what you're reading is very erroneous. When I read some of the Fi descriptions in threads such as these, I just SMH and decide to move on.
> 
> Thinking deeply about a topic is not the same as thinking clearly. A mad man can think deeply, but clarity of thought escapes him.


This is not a justification of an argument. It's called an "ad hominem."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem


----------



## niss (Apr 25, 2010)

INTonyP said:


> This is not a justification of an argument. It's called an "ad hominem."
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem


Actually, it's just an observation and explanation as to why the person I quoted would be confused.


----------



## mushr00m (May 23, 2011)

INTonyP said:


> I don't think selfishness necessarily has anything to do with being Fi. Selfishness can be a virtue depending on how you look at it.


You made my point already. Ta!

Not really a big Ayn Rand fan.


----------



## Dasein (Jun 11, 2015)

mushr00m said:


> You made my point already. Ta!
> 
> Not really a big Ayn Rand fan.


Being logical and rational doesn't depend on being a fan of anyone. I found some of her non-fiction writing very difficult to swallow, but they are very rational and reasonable.


----------



## Rabid Seahorse (Mar 10, 2015)

One more thing about Fi I'll add. Fi notices the "essence" of Fe systems much like Ti does with Te. Ti doms may have created entirely new frameworks and ways of thinking that have, as a result, lead to new Te developments.

Fi doms do this with Fe social systems.


----------



## mushr00m (May 23, 2011)

MuChApArAdOx said:


> Fi only gets a bad rap on Personality Cafe, go out into the real world and you will see that MOST people are very attracted and drawn to those who use Fi. Fe is sterotyped as the Goddess of emos, yet in reality people are more turned off Fe than Fi. I think its really cute when people start threads about Fi, because in my mind it means that I am very Unique, my Fi will never be exposed enough for people to pin me down, so therefore it actually makes me feel really special rather than offended.:kitteh:


Watching the numpties trying to explain Fi is like:


----------



## mushr00m (May 23, 2011)

INTonyP said:


> Being logical and rational doesn't depend on being a fan of anyone. I found some of her non-fiction writing very difficult to swallow, but they are very rational and reasonable.


Cool. Not my cup of tea though.


----------



## Psychopomp (Oct 3, 2012)

RubiksCubix said:


> Fi users like no one else are able to completely throw all rational premises for a discussion in the trash.
> 
> It is no wonder that such individuals are often trashed on a forum website.
> 
> ...


I've been meaning to reply to this. Sorry, I am slow.

Fi would neither denigrate or glorify a wrong choice. You are looking at them through your own lens. They are, you say, doing Fe wrong. 

In a sense, the implications of your point would be that Ti is impossible to convince of any logical point. That is true only in the sense that it has to make sense TO US in a void. We cannot budge from that, regardless of how hard we are pulled. The same is true of Fi, of course, but this is their strength... because this is not a logical reticence, but a moral one... and, like Ti with logic, they are often correct to do so.

The fact is that Fi desires clarity, not affirmation. Clarity of feeling-tone and moral rightness ... not logical clarity. Fi requires affirmation no more than Ti does. In order to gain clarity, both retreat from objective influences, and peer through their own psyche, to a very abstract and disconnected place, in order to judge. The result is the appearance of deep rumination, the emergence of nuance and even apparent contradiction. The result tends to be impressionistic, not obvious, but deep and very well-considered. 

Obviously, this is entirely unsuitable for the creation of public moral code. As unsuitable as it would be for a Ti to be responsible for building practical rulesets for a business. Their conclusions are too abstract to be effectively applied. Kant would suck at running a corporation or even building a constitution. Too abstract, too pushed to the infinite ideal. 

No Fi could establish a philosophical code of ethics, because such an effort is entirely beneath them. The Fe holds up a Code of Conduct and says to the Fi, "this is morality!" and the Fi unfocuses their eyes, sighs, and drops a coin into a well. The sound of it landing is never heard. "This is morality", they say. 

The same is true of a Te and Ti dom when considering facts and proofs and logical formulas. I constantly feel this way discussing points of logic with Te types. There are 1000 aspects that never entered their imaginations, that pull me down down down into them, perhaps never to conclude anything... because all must be considered. It becomes uselessly impressionistic and abstract, but always seems truer to me.


----------



## Dasein (Jun 11, 2015)

mushr00m said:


> Cool. Not my cup of tea though.


Completely understandable.

Ignoring reason because it doesn't satisfy your value based ideas pulled through by feelings is exactly what I was describing in my original post.

I would recommend to anyone who is interested to read an excellent book:

The Voice of Reason: Essays on Objectivist Thought, by Ayn Rand

I would also recommend:

The Undiscovered Self, by Carl Jung.


----------



## yet another intj (Feb 10, 2013)

Every single Fi user is carrying a heart shaped empty sheath under the left side of his/her chest. So, think twice before stabbing one of them in the heart.


----------



## mushr00m (May 23, 2011)

INTonyP said:


> Completely understandable.
> 
> Ignoring reason because it doesn't satisfy your value based ideas pulled through by feelings is exactly what I was describing in my original post.
> 
> ...


I didn't ignore it because it doesn't satisfy my values. How can you *know* what I expose myself to via different information. The fact that I said it's not my cup of tea should tell you I have looked at said information and didn't have great agreement with it. I don't support many of Ayn Rands claims, apologies in advance for critisizing her thought processes. 

INTP's can be inappropriatly self absorbed in their own thoughts sometimes so you may have to accept your own limitations aswell of your thinking and blindspots. 

I took an IQ test recently and scored highly and have never been told I ignore reason but thankyou. But if you insist... I would posit you took a peek at my type and made a conclusion based on confirmation bias.


----------



## sweetraglansweater (Jul 31, 2015)

My Fi brings all the boyz to the yard, damn right, it's better than Fe, damn right it's better than Ne... I could teach you, but I'd have to charge...


----------



## mirrorghost (Sep 18, 2012)

Grandalf said:


> Without Fi there would be no people  like this



thank you, i was looking for that photo but had trouble finding it. it is the first thing that comes to mind when i think of the noblest/most healthy expression of Fi.


----------



## Grandalf (Jun 7, 2014)

mirrorghost said:


> thank you, i was looking for that photo but had trouble finding it. it is the first thing that comes to mind when i think of the noblest/most healthy expression of Fi.


No prob. It's tough standing up to the totalitarianism of Te and (ESPECIALLY IMO) Fe.


----------



## ScientiaOmnisEst (Oct 2, 2013)

@Psychopomp makes all the lame, misunderstood functions sound cool. C=




INTonyP said:


> Completely understandable.
> 
> Ignoring reason because it doesn't satisfy your value based ideas pulled through by feelings is exactly what I was describing in my original post.
> 
> ...


Why this one? Last time I read it it seemed to at least imply the importance of individual thought/values, though I've been meaning to give it a reread.


----------



## Dasein (Jun 11, 2015)

ScientiaOmnisEst said:


> @Psychopomp makes all the lame, misunderstood functions sound cool. C=
> 
> Why this one? Last time I read it it seemed to at least imply the importance of individual thought/values, though I've been meaning to give it a reread.


It also discusses rational thought and the subconscious mind. How individuals create abstract mental images that they believe are reality, but in fact are just illusions of the mind. And some warnings on where this can lead. He discusses what some people might find controversial. That with the advent of modern science we have reduced the individual to a statistical average. He discusses how science is replacing religion as the new religion. While I'm not religious and I am from a science background (Physics and Computer Science), I recognized the limitations of science which is not popular to discuss in our politically correct world were science has become the new religion. Seeing that he wrote of this in 1957, he was way ahead of his time.


----------



## JacksonHeights (Nov 6, 2015)

Tbh it's true that Fi can be really unhealthy at times, most Tumblr posts are an example of Fi gone horribly wrong. Of course it can also be good, a lot of Latin American "dictators" were Fi and it was great since they stood up to the American corporations and kicked them out of their countries. Say what you want about Castro, but compared to Caribbean countries like Honduras, El Salvador, Haiti, Colombia, etc, Cuba was actually spared


----------



## KDoswald (Jan 5, 2016)

I have no idea why people bash on Fi so much. I'm not a Fi dom, but my girlfriend is. She's the most caring, selfless, and altruistic person I've ever met in my life. 

Seriously though, where did this stereotype come from anyway? According to the description of INFP (Fi dom) at 16personalities.com: _INFPS sometimes see themselves as selfish, but only because they want to give so much more than they are able to. This becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, as they try to push themselves to commit to a chosen cause or person, forgetting to take care of the needs of others in their lives, and especially themselves._

So no, Fi are anything but selfish and useless!


----------



## 318138 (Oct 1, 2015)

KDoswald said:


> I have no idea why people bash on Fi so much. I'm not a Fi dom, but my girlfriend is. She's the most caring, selfless, and altruistic person I've ever met in my life.
> 
> Seriously though, where did this stereotype come from anyway? According to the description of INFP (Fi dom) at 16personalities.com: _INFPS sometimes see themselves as selfish, but only because they want to give so much more than they are able to. This becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, as they try to push themselves to commit to a chosen cause or person, forgetting to take care of the needs of others in their lives, and especially themselves._
> 
> So no, Fi are anything but selfish and useless!


I want to give you multiple thanks!


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

@Psychopomp a gazillion thanks for your last comment. I think it touches upon the usefulness and positive sides as well as negative of all function directions. 
Back to my poetry....


----------



## salt (Jun 22, 2015)

becuz ppl dont fully grasp/misunderstand Fi
Fi provides powerful, utter passion to go for what you love in life
without Fi, this world would be more racist, sexist, just generally more ethically bullshit than it is now, because the Fe ppl would just go along with societal norms
Fi is what makes ppl rebel, comfortably, and ultimately CHANGE the world, more often for the better
ppl should get off the fucking internet and look at REAL ppl in the face and realize everyone has something worthy to provide to the world, IxFPs are just normal useful people i mean an INFP is perfectly capable of being a worker they can learn and function and be normally useful, theyre not useless sweep baby who does nothing but sit in one place and cry? get real yall
my infp friend has helped me a lot with my housework when im busy w my part-time job, she also watched the baby for her neighbor when they go to work and countless other things i love her


----------



## Elistra (Apr 6, 2013)

"Useless and selfish" is Fe, not Fi. 

Making people comfortable (supposedly an Fe thing) /= being an attention whore (the reality of Fe).

Being considerate of others (supposedly an Fe thing) /= only caring about your own feelings, and logic, morals, and other people's feelings be damned (the reality of Fe)

Being socially appropriate (supposedly an Fe thing) /= constantly butts into people's personal affairs uninvited (the reality of Fe)

Building relationships (supposedly an Fe thing) /= being overly familiar to the point of being obnoxious, which is INCREDIBLY off-putting (the reality of Fe)

Sensing other people's feelings and using that information appropriately (supposedly an Fe thing) /= sensing other people's feelings and using that information to exploit and/or abuse them as much as possible (the reality of Fe)

Enjoying helping people (supposedly an Fe thing) /= Frantically trying to make people indebted to you so you can set them up for emotional blackmail/control them later (the reality of Fe)

Works to build a happy, healthy community (supposedly an Fe thing) / = Constantly manipulates the perceptions of people/groups of people for their own selfish gain, and morality, the truth, and the good of anyone else be damned (the reality of Fe)

Sensitive to social roles (supposedly an Fe thing) /= EXTREMELY presumptuous and almost completely blind to what is their place and what is not (the reality of Fe)

Supportive (supposedly an Fe thing) /= supportive only when others are telling you what you want to hear and making you feel like a special little snowflake, so really, who is supporting who, here? (the reality of Fe)

And that's just the tip of the iceberg. :frustrating:


----------



## Grandalf (Jun 7, 2014)

salt said:


> without Fi, this world would be *more racist, sexist, just generally more ethically bullshit* than it is now, *because the Fe ppl would just go along with societal norms*


You hit the nail right there, especially with the bolded



> IxFPs are just normal useful people i mean an INFP is perfectly capable of being a worker they can learn and function and be normally useful, theyre not useless sweep baby who does nothing but sit in one place and cry? get real yall
> my infp friend has helped me a lot with my housework when im busy w my part-time job, she also watched the baby for her neighbor when they go to work and countless other things i love her


This goes further than simply Fi doms. With more 'manual' labor users assume N types are worthless yet love boasting on how intelligent and deep S types can be. 

The Fi is strong in this one :happy:


----------



## Grandalf (Jun 7, 2014)

@Elistra believing in crackpot conspiracy theories (supposedly an Ni thing)/ = understanding the flaws of the status quo via synthesizing inner world (reality of Ni)

acting weird just to be seen as 'special' (supposedly an Ni thing)/ = challenging the status quo to achieve truth and enlightenment (the reality of Ni)

And, man, do you have LOADS of it from that post.


----------



## OutOfThisWorld (Nov 4, 2013)

Elistra said:


> "Useless and selfish" is Fe, not Fi.
> 
> And that's just the tip of the iceberg. :frustrating:


Someone sounds bitter.


----------



## WorldzMine (Sep 9, 2014)

flourine said:


> Fi, as an introverted judging function, makes decisions based on your own personal values and feelings; that's not exactly selfish in itself. A Fi-user considers their own values first when contemplating a decision.


This is the definition of selfish though. Is the problem that you all put a negative spin on the word selfish? _To be selfish means to be moral._ "the exact meaning and dictionary definition of the word “selfishness” is: concern with one’s own interests."


----------



## OtterSocks (Sep 24, 2015)

This thread has pulled a 180 and become an Fi circlejerk. In response, I redact my previous comments; Fi is shit. While we're at it, Fe is shit, too. Everyone is shit.


----------



## General Lee Awesome (Sep 28, 2014)

Fi is self focused. this does not mean selfish.


----------



## RaisinKG (Jan 2, 2016)

selfish carries with it a negative connotation. 

One question I've always had is whether or not we can truly be selfless.


----------



## KDoswald (Jan 5, 2016)

@Lsjnzy13 sadly the australian educational system stays the same


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

Rabble rabble rabble


----------



## Elistra (Apr 6, 2013)

johnson.han.3 said:


> well you seem to think Fe make a person not objective which is false. Fe is a set of moral system in which the user remains relative objective. Fi people actually suffers from feeling based reasoning.
> 
> For me I see Fe can be selfish in a certain context. It really depends on what we define as "self". for example if you join a group, an Fe person for example will protect those in that group and provide for them. doing so this Fe person might be making less resource avalible for other people. Because this Fe person's identity of self is directly linked with this group, you can say he is being selfish because he is ensuring his group's survival. even if he appear to be selfless infront of his group members.


I'd like to know how Fe is objective, from your perspective. From my own, Fi is a set of rules which is applied evenhandedly across an entire system. It doesn't matter whether it's my best friend, an acquaintance, some random person standing in line at the DMV that I struck up a conversation with, myself, or a complete stranger, what is moral is what is moral, and what is not, isn't. By contrast, Fe makes exceptions right and left for self and for people that are particularly liked by said Fe person. 

Hell, in some cases, they even make exceptions for people they dislike. _"Look at that bastard, sitting at his desk eating crackers like he owns the place."_ kind of stuff. Just because the observer doesn't like the guy, it doesn't automatically make everything the guy does (no matter how innocuous) inappropriate or wrong.

How can such biased judgment be objective?


----------



## OtterSocks (Sep 24, 2015)

@Elistra

Your first paragraph applies equally, if not moreso, to Ti. The difference is that the 'rigid rules' are construed in one by feelings and in the other by thought. I also think you experience it that was because you're a T-dom with subservient F; high Fi is anything but rigid.

You're right that Fe is not objective in the colloquial sense; feeling in general is entirely subjective. When people say Fe is objective, they are referring to the Jungian definition, but unfortunately are still misusing it. Fe focuses on the 'objective factor', that is to say the world outside of oneself. So, Fe makes valuations based on what other people think, or how things will make them feel, or what's appropriate, or what will encourage people to have fun.

Which is why your example of an Fe valuation, while chuckle-worthy, makes no sense, in that it has nothing to do with the concept of Fe.


----------



## Amy (Jan 15, 2015)

Fi has haters, that's why it's so deemed. People like to judge what they don't understand and hate what they envy


----------



## Elistra (Apr 6, 2013)

OtterSocks said:


> @_Elistra_
> 
> Your first paragraph applies equally, if not moreso, to Ti. The difference is that the 'rigid rules' are construed in one by feelings and in the other by thought. I also think you experience it that was because you're a T-dom with subservient F; high Fi is anything but rigid.
> 
> ...


Look at the part I highlighted. The problem is, they're focusing not on what other people think really, but rather on what they BELIEVE other people think (and in many cases, are flat-out wrong), and how they IMAGINE people feel (likewise, they miss the mark a great deal of the time). 

Furthermore, what makes them feel special/happy/whatever seems to be by default what they consider "appropriate", whether it actually *is* appropriate or not.


----------



## autsdraws (Dec 6, 2015)

Okay, I just have to say that I've always really admired Fi users for one reason:
They're consistent. And their feelings are usually well-justified. And quite thought-out.
My feelings are sometimes incongruent and apt to change based on my environment. I think if the entire world was like that, it'd be utter chaos. No one would ever be entirely sure how they felt about anything. 
Fi users keep us all grounded; they keep us rooted in the reality of a situation. Even if they can be selfish sometimes.


----------



## OtterSocks (Sep 24, 2015)

Elistra said:


> Look at the part I highlighted. The problem is, they're focusing not on what other people think really, but rather on what they BELIEVE other people think (and in many cases, are flat-out wrong), and how they IMAGINE people feel (likewise, they miss the mark a great deal of the time).
> 
> Furthermore, what makes them feel special/happy/whatever seems to be by default what they consider "appropriate", whether it actually *is* appropriate or not.


That is true, although I think it's somewhat more of an Fe+Ni thing.


----------



## winterdreamwalker (Dec 28, 2014)

KDoswald said:


> I have no idea why people bash on Fi so much. I'm not a Fi dom, but my girlfriend is. She's the most caring, selfless, and altruistic person I've ever met in my life.
> 
> Seriously though, where did this stereotype come from anyway? According to the description of INFP (Fi dom) at 16personalities.com: _INFPS sometimes see themselves as selfish, but only because they want to give so much more than they are able to. This becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, as they try to push themselves to commit to a chosen cause or person, forgetting to take care of the needs of others in their lives, and especially themselves._
> 
> So no, Fi are anything but selfish and useless!


Thank you! You understand!!!


----------



## General Lee Awesome (Sep 28, 2014)

Elistra said:


> Look at the part I highlighted. The problem is, they're focusing not on what other people think really, but rather on what they BELIEVE other people think (and in many cases, are flat-out wrong), and how they IMAGINE people feel (likewise, they miss the mark a great deal of the time).
> 
> Furthermore, what makes them feel special/happy/whatever seems to be by default what they consider "appropriate", whether it actually *is* appropriate or not.


what they believe is irrelevant to how they obtain their sense of what is right and wrong.

Fi have a internal sense of morality that is internalized, and personalized (subjective)

Fe obtain morality from society standards (objective)

it is not to say anyone is better. there are weakness with both. 

for example, Fe can be led like a sheep, and made into believing the evil deeds they are doing is right.

Fi can use their own sense of morality to justify evil actions.


BTW.AS I HAVE SAID BEFORE no human being on this planet is objective in the colloquial term. even logic is subjective because you chose to use that set of logic. EVEN ROBOTS ARE SUBJECTIVE because they hold the biases of their programmer.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

@Another Lost Cause

I think this whole "Anti-Fi" thing is not true. It is just another function, no better, nor worse than any other. To start such threads is just to create the very monster you are attempting to defeat.


----------



## ninjahitsawall (Feb 1, 2013)

johnson.han.3 said:


> EVEN ROBOTS ARE SUBJECTIVE because they hold the biases of their programmer.


:whoa:


----------



## YellowDaffodil (Aug 4, 2013)

Well, I think Fe is great. 
I seem to be realising more and more that people don't like it because they think it's fake or whatever.
Well, I just won't bother going out of my way to show it then. I'll keep it to myself, shall I?


----------



## Angina Jolie (Feb 13, 2014)

YellowDaffodil said:


> Well, I think Fe is great.
> I seem to be realising more and more that people don't like it because they think it's fake or whatever.
> Well, I just won't bother going out of my way to show it then. I'll keep it to myself, shall I?


Thank you for your contribution to the subject


----------



## Elistra (Apr 6, 2013)

johnson.han.3 said:


> what they believe is irrelevant to how they obtain their sense of what is right and wrong.
> 
> Fi have a internal sense of morality that is internalized, and personalized (subjective)
> 
> ...


If someone is going by society's standards, then why is so much of the resulting behavior socially inappropriate?


----------



## General Lee Awesome (Sep 28, 2014)

Elistra said:


> If someone is going by society's standards, then why is so much of the resulting behavior socially inappropriate?


most people know right from wrong, it doesnt mean they are going to act up on it every minute of everyday. it take a lot of will power to do so. one thing is to "know" then other is to act. it take someone with very strong constituion to uphold a very strict personal standard.


----------



## Mair (Feb 17, 2014)

Fi is not useless, however damn a lot of Fi doms are such oversensitive crybabies. 

A lot of Fi users have very strong morals that guide them. Sometimes it's a good thing, sometimes it's bad, depending on the person and the circumstances.


----------



## ParetoCaretheStare (Jan 18, 2012)

KDoswald said:


> I have no idea why people bash on Fi so much. I'm not a Fi dom, but my girlfriend is. She's the most caring, selfless, and altruistic person I've ever met in my life.
> 
> Seriously though, where did this stereotype come from anyway? According to the description of INFP (Fi dom) at 16personalities.com: _INFPS sometimes see themselves as selfish, but only because they want to give so much more than they are able to. This becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, as they try to push themselves to commit to a chosen cause or person, forgetting to take care of the needs of others in their lives, and especially themselves._
> 
> So no, Fi are anything but selfish and useless!




People of the PerC-interested community: THIS is what a real boyfriend should act like. HUGE kudos and positive energy to men who are capable of being ideal role models for upcoming generations.


----------



## Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar (Apr 9, 2015)

Elistra said:


> If someone is going by society's standards, then why is so much of the resulting behavior socially inappropriate?


Because for most of time society is evil. The concept of a vaguely humane society is a relatively new thing.


----------



## Elistra (Apr 6, 2013)

johnson.han.3 said:


> most people know right from wrong, it doesnt mean they are going to act up on it every minute of everyday. it take a lot of will power to do so. one thing is to "know" then other is to act. it take someone with very strong constituion to uphold a very strict personal standard.


That's like a fish feeling burdened by water. Who would want to live any other way? You'd think the self-loathing alone would lead them to...

<thinks of all the self-destructive and self-defeating behavior humanity is heir to>

... heh. Never mind. 

But if they have no internal standard, why would they even care, let alone care to the point of engaging in some sort of unconscious self-punishment about it? Hell, a lot of people seem functionally incapable of behaving as if they have even a token awareness of right and wrong unless they think something terrible is going to happen to them if they don't, whether they think said negative consequence will be administered by circumstances, laws of physics, god (if they're religious) or other human beings.


----------



## ninjahitsawall (Feb 1, 2013)

Elistra said:


> That's like a fish feeling burdened by water. Who would want to live any other way? You'd think the self-loathing alone would lead them to...
> 
> <thinks of all the self-destructive and self-defeating behavior humanity is heir to>
> 
> ...


I think Fe users do in fact have an internal standard, but it is connected to outside factors. The E/I distinction is more of a directional one than a "what's inside and what's outside?" one. It doesn't make sense for an extroverted function to be some kind of shell that isn't internalized at all. That would be like saying Te has no internal standards because it's not Ti. Te does have standards, but these are based on the physical realities presented to it (which can change, hence why Ti is more interested than Te in having some framework of "universal truth" that stays consistent).


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

ninjahitsawall said:


> The E/I distinction is more of a directional one than a "what's inside and what's outside?" one. It doesn't make sense for an extroverted function to be some kind of shell that isn't internalized at all.


Yes!

Fe: 

Self >>>>>>>>>>> Outer World >>>>>>>>>>> Self

Fi: 

Self <<<<<<<<<<< Outer World <<<<<<<<<<< Self


Ultimately they're the same; they're just looking in different directions. Unfortunately we Fs generally seem to be a little short-sighted about understanding F usage in the opposite direction. Fe users tend to see Fi users as selfish because they perceive the Fi user looking internally but don't always seem to follow that path all the way to how the internal is being used to extrapolate to the external. And Fi users tend to see Fe users as selfish because they perceive the Fe user adapting externally but they don't make it all the way to understand how the external is being used to care for the internal.


----------



## johnnyyukon (Nov 8, 2013)

That would be the day the music died


----------



## ninjahitsawall (Feb 1, 2013)

angelfish said:


> Fe users tend to see Fi users as selfish because they perceive the Fi user looking internally but don't always seem to follow that path all the way to how the internal is being used to extrapolate to the external.


That's sooo true for me and my puny Fi function, it pretty much only shows up directly as "I haven't been criminally convicted of anything." :laughing: 

A few people can see my actions being ethical if they care enough to look, but often it's Fe (undeveloped?) users who just moralize every action. :dry:


----------



## narawithherthought (Jun 10, 2014)

I just want to clarify briefly that if someone said that only Fe users who are naturally empathetic, this is totally wrong. I myself and other INFPs and ISFPs that I know, and my ESTJ, ENTJ, INTJs friends are totally empathetic person. 

If there is no Fi function:
- you won't have your own opinion about something and this means you lose one of your identity.
- you don't have your own morality and this means you just do something because the law or the rule is already written.

Is Fi selfish?
I don't know. But every human in this world is selfish. The scale of selfishness maybe is different. I admit that I often say let me do something that I want or this is my life so I can do anything with my own life. I also think about myself too much too. But I also think about other people too. I often read that INFP is caring and I agree with that because when I say I care you it means I really care you. I tend to sacrifice myself (in some of points) to love others. So, there is no way someone who is selfish is also caring right?


----------



## Ninjaws (Jul 10, 2014)

Usefulness is a judgement made by Te. Fi is not concerned with this. It is based on attraction/repulsion.


----------



## moonling (Feb 6, 2016)

It's easy for Fi doms to exert their feelings in other ways rather than emotionally dumping our feelings on anyone. We create music, art, and poetry. We are good at empathizing; we can't always understand people, but when we do, oh man. As romantic partners, you should appreciate our deeply intense feelings for you. Being an Fi means we get Te, which is its own neat little function.

Yes, we make decisions based on our feelings. Is that such a bad thing? It's not like we don't care about how these decisions will affect others. We do. We just assume that others will take responsibility for their own feelings. And most of these Fi decisions are so personal that it would be amusing if someone was offended by them. 

Fe users aren't the embodiment of kindness. They don't always adapt for others. They can be selfish, too. It's a matter of being human more than it is MBTI.


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

ninjahitsawall said:


> That's sooo true for me and my puny Fi function, it pretty much only shows up directly as "I haven't been criminally convicted of anything." :laughing:
> 
> A few people can see my actions being ethical if they care enough to look, but often it's Fe (undeveloped?) users who just moralize every action. :dry:


Yeah, I think you're right about underdeveloped. Of course there are some skillful Fe users who are just jerks, but generally a healthy strong Fe user is typically warm and accommodating, trying to find a fulfilling place for everyone and figuring out how everyone can harmonize, weak Fi users included.

My INTP dad and I used to battle it out when I was a teen. I think that was also a matter of our enneatypes and instinct variants clashing, but I think his fairly weak Fe constantly perceived my Fi as overwhelming, pushy, and inflexible - whereas my ESFJ mom and I were much more intuitively understanding of how to accommodate one another and rarely had any issues. She rarely seems to have issues with weak Fi users either. She and my INTJ aunt get along swimmingly.

Online it's usually ENTPs that hate me, lol.


----------

