# Ti/Fi vs. Fe/Te Subjective vs Objective



## scorpion (Dec 8, 2012)

The reason I say this is because introversion is sort of internal while extroversion is focused on the external. The more I think about this way of describing the functions the more it makes sense to me. What do you think?


----------



## erasinglines (Sep 1, 2010)

Hi~ I was very excited when I saw this, because I think I've been thinking the same thing. Some time ago, I made a post here:

Thinking and Feeling and Introversion and Extroversion

Which I think basically sums up to the same sort of thing... just different terms I think. How'd you come to this thought? :3

Personally for me, it's difficult to think of introversion as internal and extroversion as external. Even if that's really what it is. Because it's difficult for me to define what's going on internally as opposed to externally. So I had a lot of help from very wonderful PerC members that helped me understand introverted and extroverted processes much more clearly. :3


----------



## scorpion (Dec 8, 2012)

I was just imagining do a video where I explained the different functions and this is what came out. I could elaborate but I'm a little short on time atm. Ill get around to it later.


----------



## Erbse (Oct 15, 2010)

scorpion said:


> The reason I say this is because introversion is sort of internal while extroversion is focused on the external. The more I think about this way of describing the functions the more it makes sense to me. What do you think?


I think you are correct.


----------



## erasinglines (Sep 1, 2010)

scorpion said:


> I was just imagining do a video where I explained the different functions and this is what came out. I could elaborate but I'm a little short on time atm. Ill get around to it later.


Okay~


----------



## Aelthwyn (Oct 27, 2010)

Yes I think all the introverted functions are supposed to be 'subjective' and the exroverted functions are supposed to be 'objective'


----------



## Abraxas (May 28, 2011)

Yup.

Subjectivity is anything that exists within the mind, and objectivity is essentially whatever exists independently of your own experience. This is basically the essential nature of introversion and extroversion. Having knowledge of this basic metaphysical distinction makes understanding these functions pretty easy.


----------



## scorpion (Dec 8, 2012)

Thanks for all the agreement guys. ^^ Makes me feel special. I really like to simplify things for people (including myself) and I'm glad I was able to do that some what with the MBTI Functions. 

Oh and sorry for not elaborating sooner, I just kind of wasn't sure how to (very easily)but, for me Fi is subjective in that I experience it inside me and to really feel for another person, it has to affect me inside. Sometimes, this means I literally have to imagine myself in their shoes or situation whatever you want to call it. Umm, on the other hand my Se is very outward focused. It just is. I'm constantly taking up information via the senses. And so is my Te, the way I think about it. This I'm finding harder to explain but, I think about my environment? and how it affects me, less how I affect my environment. Well no both . .. ok scratch that. lol.

But yeah I'm sorry for not getting back to you sooner @_erasinglines_. Hope that sorta made up for it. :S


----------



## All in Twilight (Oct 12, 2012)

The objective IS subjective because it had to be made up by Ti and Fi. So what we perceive as Fe, was initially the thought of a Fi user: Fi objectified

Just a thought...


----------



## scorpion (Dec 8, 2012)

All in Twilight said:


> The objective IS subjective because it had to be made up by Ti and Fi. So what we perceive as Fe, was initially the thought of a Fi user: Fi objectified
> 
> Just a thought...


Edited version: Oh I see what you're saying.

I think the difference between Fi and Fe is the focus. And with Fe users the focus is on others feel, then on how they feel, while with Fi users the focus is on, how they feel, then on how others feel.


----------



## All in Twilight (Oct 12, 2012)

scorpion said:


> Oh I see what you're saying. Well I think that you could probably say the same for Te then but also I think you're just mixing up the way these functions work. Like Yes both are experienced internally AND yes both interact with their environment. . . .
> Like because my Fi is somewhat like Fe and Fe is somewhat like Fi but I think the diffenerce between the i and e is better shown through thinking so I'll use that as an example.
> 
> Now when we think it's in our heads, our bodies literally (same with the way we feel) but does that mean it's subjective? I don't think so. I think you're taking this a little too literally. (says the one who heard the name moon dogs and thought of dogs on the moon ) It's not about where we experience the emotion or thought, it's about the focus. And with Fe users the focus is on others feel then on how they feel while with Fi users the focus is on how we feel then on how others feel.
> ...


The same can be said of Te...but Te has to be man made. Everything you see was once nothing more than a thought that has found his way into the physical world. There was Fi before Fe and there was Ti before Te.

I was not talking about the workings of the functions, it's just something to think about and is not directly related to MBTI.


----------



## scorpion (Dec 8, 2012)

All in Twilight said:


> The same can be said of Te...but it Te has to be man made. Everything you see was once nothing more than a thought that has found his way into the physical world. There was Fi before Fe and there was Te before Ti.
> 
> I was not talking about the workings of the functions, it's just something to think about and is not directly related to MBTI.


Oh you're talking about the evolution of, wait how is this not about the functions? Well anyway, I don't feel like I can agree with you for one reason: I use Fi and Te not Fe and Ti so I wouldn't know first hand what the other functions are like. If any Fe Ti users want to step up to the plate and comment on this matter please do so.


----------



## All in Twilight (Oct 12, 2012)

scorpion said:


> Oh you're talking about the evolution of, wait how is this not about the functions? Well anyway, I don't feel like I can agree with you for one reason: I use Fi and Te not Fe and Ti so I wouldn't know first hand what the other functions are like. If any Fe Ti users want to step up to the plate and comment on this matter please do so.


I corrected my my post. I meant Ti before Te. Again, for the third time, it's philosophy and not related to MBTI DIRECTLY. Everything started with subjectivity because man is subjective. So the objective was once subjective. So ask yourself how objective Fe and Te really is. That's the question and has nothing to do with the workings of the functions.


----------



## Helios (May 30, 2012)

@All in Twilight couldn't you argue for the opposite? Not everything is manmade, and much of what is manmade is in response to the objective, is it not? So couldn't you say that for the subjective to come into it's own fully, it had to draw from the objective?


----------



## All in Twilight (Oct 12, 2012)

FacelessBeauty said:


> @_All in Twilight_ couldn't you argue for the opposite? Not everything is manmade, and much of what is manmade is in response to the objective, is it not? So couldn't you say that for the subjective to come into it's own fully, it had to draw from the objective?


Exactly my point, but it's the object that becomes subject. Just look at the order of the functions of the INTJ or ENTJ for example. I am just questioning here what objectivity really is. There is no right or wrong, I am merely trying to trigger something. It just popped up in my head and I felt compelled to reply.


----------



## scorpion (Dec 8, 2012)

All in Twilight said:


> I corrected my my post. I meant Ti before Te. Again, for the third time, it's philosophy and not related to MBTI DIRECTLY. Everything started with subjectivity because man is subjective. So the objective was once subjective. So ask yourself how objective Fe and Te really is. That's the question and has nothing to do with the workings of the functions.


:S

edit .. .


----------



## Helios (May 30, 2012)

All in Twilight said:


> Exactly my point, but it's the object that becomes subject. Just look at the order of the functions of the INTJ or ENTJ for example. I am just questioning here what objectivity really is. There is no right or wrong, I am merely trying to trigger something. It just popped up in my head and I felt compelled to reply.


Hmmmmm. Well I think it's hard to really separate the two. They intertwine too much. And I think the definition of objectivity or subjectivity largely depends on the context.


----------



## All in Twilight (Oct 12, 2012)

FacelessBeauty said:


> Hmmmmm. Well I think it's hard to really separate the two. They intertwine too much. And I think the definition of objectivity or subjectivity largely depends on the context.


I honestly don't know but let me tell you a story of a Chinese monk.

Fa-yen, a Chinese Zen teacher, overheard four monks arguing about subjectivity and objectivity. He joined them and said: "There is a big stone. Do you consider it to be inside or outside your mind?"
One of the monks replied: "From the Buddhist viewpoint everything is an objectification of mind, so I would say that the stone is inside my mind."
"Your head must feel very heavy," observed Fa-yen, "if you are carrying around a stone like that in your mind."


----------



## scorpion (Dec 8, 2012)

@_All in Twilight_ This is what I was trying to say before. Yes everything is literally "subjective" if we are talking about the fact that we all we perceive is literally with in our bodies/brains, but we all know that's not what the word subjective really means. Subjective, if I were to define it means the process of experiencing things, where the focus primarily lies. Subjective is primarily internal and objective primarily external.


----------

