# Fi vs Fe. Seriously, what?



## kitsu (Feb 13, 2013)

I was trying to explain the difference between Fi and Fe to a friend who is new to MBTI who I'm positive is an ENFJ, and she got stuck when I said Fe derives from social norms whereas Fi comes from an inner sense of value, because that just makes it sound like she's a conformist who can't think for herself, which she sure as hell is not. I also have an INFJ mother and good friend who have fully developed inner senses of value that have little to do with what society expects of them.

Anways, I have a pretty good understanding of Fi, but does anybody have a better explanation of Fe than those squirming all over the internet? Preferably by contrasting it to Fi.


----------



## Number Six (Mar 4, 2013)

Fi could feel bad lying to someone for the sake of the social cohesion

Fe could feel bad telling the truth at the cost of social cohesion

This doesn't mean an Fi user won't tell white lies or an Fe user is needlessly deceptive, it's simply the way they prioritize their values.


----------



## I Kant (Jan 19, 2013)

Hurricane said:


> I was trying to explain the difference between Fi and Fe to a friend who is new to MBTI who I'm positive is an ENFJ, and she got stuck when I said Fe derives from *social norms* whereas Fi comes from an inner *sense of value*, because that just makes it sound like she's a conformist who can't *think for herself*, which she sure as hell is not. I also have an INFJ mother and good friend who have fully developed inner senses of value that have little to do with what society expects of them.
> 
> Anways, I have a pretty good understanding of Fi, but does anybody have a better explanation of Fe than those squirming all over the internet? Preferably by contrasting it to Fi.


Value reasoning and rational reasoning are different.

Your friend got too emotional and jumped the gun on her conclusion. Her loss.


----------



## RoSoDude (Apr 3, 2012)

It's more about what information with which they tend to occupy themselves. Fe users are very attuned to social cues, embarrassment, or how they positively influence the general emotional atmosphere, while Fi users focus more on interpersonal distance between people (often themselves and others). When it comes to the social and emotional information they perceive, both have very different orientations. This doesn't mean one type is better at "thinking for themselves". Due to the kind of information they are naturally strong at grasping, an Fe user may have very well developed opinions on social customs, law, or politics, for example, and these opinions certainly need not be derived from those of others, but rather may come from how they interact with others and what value they place on cohesion in the collective. An Fi user, by contrast, will likely have opinions more derived from their personal relationship with others and everything in their world. Fi tends towards individual focus just as Ti does, in that both focus on scrutinizing distinct entities and piecing together connections from there, the opposite process as Fe or Te.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

@RoSoDude is right on.  Most people make out those who have Fe as a dominant or auxiliary function to be sheep to a certain degree. As the people who just get their views from what everybody else think. It's totally up to the individual as to whether or not they will think for themselves or choose what to value. Fe has nothing to do with _what _you value. Fe isn't the function that tells you to take up the popular way of valuing some random thing. It doesn't go along with the social norms. 

It is up to the individual of any type whether or not they go along with social norms or jump on bandwagons or just think/value what everybody else does. Any type can become this sort of person. Being this sort of person requires a choice on your part. You have to consciously rationalize thinking in that sort of manner. That is you making a decision, deciding what you are going to think. Therefore it has nothing to do with what type you are. 

Remember that Fe is a function. It is the process, not the values themselves. 

Feeling is essentially the process by which you pay attention to your emotional responses to something in order to determine something's worth. The only difference between Fe and Fi is within the attitude, which RoSoDude pointed out very well. ^^


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

For what it's worth, Jung thought that it was _extraverts generally_ — rather than the people who internet forumites tend to describe as "Fe types" — whose values tended to reflect the majority social/cultural values of their time, while introverts tended to shun majority values simply _because_ they were majority values.

For more, see this post.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

Hurricane said:


> I said Fe derives from social norms whereas Fi comes from an inner sense of value




It's this simple: what's the difference between Te and Ti? Among many, many other things, Te might aim to reason regarding the objective, reaching a conclusion oriented towards objective validity and as @_reckful_ writes roughly, this is much more oriented to the reasoning being held to some "common standard". While Ti may follow some sort of "logic," even if the logic itself may certainly be formally expressible externally, the reasoning itself is not oriented this way at all.

Fe attempts to strip the subjectivity out of evaluation. That could involve either being a "sheep" or a much more complicated approach, but either way, it is an orientation. Whether or not they are "truly" objective or subjective is another story. 

If one accepts the MBTI model for example, Fe and Ti are paired together. This means inherently that both perspectives are accessed, so there's almost no way to call them sheep. It's a subtle case of really understanding where the F and where the T reasoning are coming from in them - how they are oriented.


----------



## chaoticbrain (May 5, 2012)

Julia Bell said:


> Feeling is essentially the process by which you pay attention to your emotional responses to something in order to determine something's worth. The only difference between Fe and Fi is within the attitude, which RoSoDude pointed out very well. ^^


Hmm really is that according to jung ? I thought feeling didn't necessarily have to do with emotions but referred to value statements in general.


----------



## Teybo (Sep 25, 2012)

Differences between FP's and FJ's is one of my favorite topics. My INFP sister and I spend an absurd amount of time discussing how we see the world, how our interpersonal conflicts play out, and what aspects or cues we see as "invested" with meaning. I want to write about some FP/FJ interpersonal conflicts she and I analyzed together to see if we can't illuminate some of the differences in worldview.

The first conflict is between an INFP, "Patty" and an INFJ, "Jenny", who are dating. Jenny called Patty up and invited her for dinner. Patty drove to Jenny's house, picked her, up, and drove through rush hour traffic to the restaurant. At the restaurant, Jenny told Patty that she was hurt that Patty didn't say anything about her appearance, something like "Oh you look beautiful!" when Patty picked her up. Patty was flabbergasted, and felt hurt because it seemed like Jenny didn't trust Patty's love, and didn't appreciate Patty's effort in picking her up and driving through stressful rush hour traffic.

The second conflict is between INFJ "James" and ISFP "Paul", who are friends. James and Paul live in different cities, but James visits Paul when he can. One time, James came to visit Paul, but Paul seemed distracted and inattentive while James was visiting, such as browsing the web or facebook while they were having a conversation. After the visit, James told Paul that he felt hurt by his inattentiveness because it seemed like Paul didn't care that he had come to visit. Paul felt confused and hurt. Paul didn't feel like he was being inattentive, and if James felt that way, Paul thinks he should have spoke up right away. It wasn't Paul's intent to hurt James, after all.

So in these two stories, we have an FJ who observes the behavior of an FP and reaches conclusions about the FP's feeling towards themselves based on the FP's observable behavior. In turn, we have FP's who are hurt and confused because they feel like their inner motives and intentions are being misconstrued or ignored by the FJ's, and the FP's feel like FJ's make assumptions based on "the surface".

To be clear, neither the FJ's nor the FP's are "wrong" in these stories. They are just viewing the world differently, particularly in what they consider to be "evidence" of what a person values. The FJ's see external, observable behavior as evidence, while FP's see internal, unobservable motivation or intent as evidence. These differences in the perception of evidence lead to differences in expectations of behavior.

For FJ's, it's not a person's internal state that shows you what they value, like, or dislike. It is their actions. How do I know my girlfriend likes me? Because she tells me. Because she compliments my clothes. Because she has a big bright smile when I see her. In short, because she does or says something that I can observe.

For FP's, a person's actions are just a "rough translation" of their inner motivations, and what they value, like, or dislike isn't shown by the rough surface appearance but by a person's internal state. How do I know my girlfriend likes me? Because we share a special bond. Because she reveals her inner self to me. Because of a deep sense of empathy between us. In short, because of what I feel are her inner motivations and intentions.

To be clear, both FJ's and FP's are concerned with motive, behavior, empathy, and intent. Where they differ is in their beliefs on how these ideas are related and expressed in the world. FJ's expect a person to behave a certain way if they have a certain motivation or belief. What that expected behavior is depends on each FJ, but there is certainly a belief that the way a person behaves is a direct reflection of what they value. In the stories above, both the FJ's had expectations for the other person ("If my girlfriend likes me, I expect her to compliment my appearance." and "If my friend values my company, I expect him to pay attention to me when we have a conversation") and were hurt when their expectations were not met.

FP's, on the other hand, see motivation and behavior as connected, but ultimately distinct, things, and thus they tend to be less concerned with meeting social expectations. In the stories above, both of the FP's felt unfairly judged. "Why is it so important that I act the way you expect me to act? Don't you trust my judgment? If you doubt my intentions, you need to ask me, not assume."


----------



## MrShatter (Sep 28, 2010)

Hurricane said:


> I was trying to explain the difference between Fi and Fe to a friend who is new to MBTI who I'm positive is an ENFJ, and she got stuck when I said Fe derives from social norms whereas Fi comes from an inner sense of value, because that just makes it sound like she's a conformist who can't think for herself, which she sure as hell is not. I also have an INFJ mother and good friend who have fully developed inner senses of value that have little to do with what society expects of them.
> 
> Anways, I have a pretty good understanding of Fi, but does anybody have a better explanation of Fe than those squirming all over the internet? Preferably by contrasting it to Fi.


Fe users tend to express there judgements in an action-oriented extraverted way. this being hugs, lovey dovey Fe stuff with emphasis on everyone involved in the situation having a positive experience. 

Fi users will think about their values and judgements in a reflective, introverted manner. For them, the emphasis is on doing what is right, finding this truth and using it to guide themselves through life.

They both have values, one uses the values to navigate the internal world, the other, the external.


----------



## BlueSeven (Nov 19, 2012)

Hurricane said:


> I was trying to explain the difference between Fi and Fe to a friend who is new to MBTI who I'm positive is an ENFJ, and she got stuck when I said Fe derives from social norms whereas Fi comes from an inner sense of value, because that just makes it sound like she's a conformist who can't think for herself, which she sure as hell is not. I also have an INFJ mother and good friend who have fully developed inner senses of value that have little to do with what society expects of them.


Fe is the ability to collect different emotions, and work with them. Fi does not simply take in your own emotions but the emotions of all involved, in order to create your own emotions. This can make ENFJ very protective of certain groups in society and certain people they feel are vulnerable simply due to the fact that they take in their feelings as well, and are not okay with feeling fine when these groups do not. ENFJ while taking in this knowledge, are able often to remain impartial, making them great advice givers even if they disagree with something. It gives you the ability to differentiate from 'I would to this' to 'I wouldn't do this but it seems pretty cool' in terms of many things. Which is a valuable asset in a world where conformity is also personal it's 'You don't do this? Well hate everyone who does' rather than the more Fe 'If it makes you happy and you're not hurting anyone go for it '


----------



## Aelthwyn (Oct 27, 2010)

Teybo said:


> So in these two stories, we have an FJ who observes the behavior of an FP and reaches conclusions about the FP's feeling towards themselves based on the FP's observable behavior. In turn, we have FP's who are hurt and confused because they feel like their inner motives and intentions are being misconstrued or ignored by the FJ's, and the FP's feel like FJ's make assumptions based on "the surface".
> 
> To be clear, neither the FJ's nor the FP's are "wrong" in these stories. They are just viewing the world differently, particularly in what they consider to be "evidence" of what a person values. The FJ's see external, observable behavior as evidence, while FP's see internal, unobservable motivation or intent as evidence. These differences in the perception of evidence lead to differences in expectations of behavior.
> 
> ...


thank you, that is so true, so perfect. yes.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

Hurricane said:


> I was trying to explain the difference between Fi and Fe to a friend who is new to MBTI who I'm positive is an ENFJ, and she got stuck when I said Fe derives from social norms whereas Fi comes from an inner sense of value, because that just makes it sound like she's a conformist who can't think for herself, which she sure as hell is not. I also have an INFJ mother and good friend who have fully developed inner senses of value that have little to do with what society expects of them.
> 
> Anways, I have a pretty good understanding of Fi, but does anybody have a better explanation of Fe than those squirming all over the internet? Preferably by contrasting it to Fi.


Tell her Fe wishes for unity and harmony in people's relations.

Following social norms, conformist, is not type related -- everyone does that to a certain extent.


----------



## chimeric (Oct 15, 2011)

IME, affection is expressed in a different way too. This is anecdotal, not Established Theory, so take it with a grain of salt:

An FJ is more likely to host a dinner party, treat you to lunch, run errands for you when you're sick, bake you cookies, call you pet-names.

An FP is more likely to perceive that you're unhappy, think about what is uniquely meaningful to you, and get you a very personalized gift or make a handmade card that lists all the things they value about you.


----------



## Schweeeeks (Feb 12, 2013)

I liked this thread:
http://personalitycafe.com/articles/63173-fi-vs-fe-101-a.html
It's from the ancient times but the info is still good.

Fe description by an ENFJ named Sean O: 


> I've noticed that a lot people without an Fe preference tend to see Fe as having a lot to do with appearances, getting along/fitting in at the expense of yourself, people-pleasing, inability to say things as they are, etc... Certainly it can manifest like that but that's not at all what Fe is based on. And I think a lot of the confusion about Fe - which seems like it should be easy to understand because it's so visible, but believe me it can be just as complex as any other function - comes from making too many comparisons between Fe and Fi. I tend to believe that Fe and Te have more in common with each other than Fe and Fi. What Fe and Te have in common is that they're based on organization of the environment. But while Te focuses on organizing tasks and objectives, Fe is about organizing relationships and social/emotional dynamics. The fact is, sometimes what is best for the group is also best for the individuals in that group. Fe tends to ask the question, "What is the purpose of us coming together like this, and how is what everyone is saying/doing affecting that purpose?" Kind of like how Te considers the goal of a project and how elements of that project fit together to achieve that goal.
> 
> Apart from that, Fe is also about helping people grow beyond their problems, kind of like how Te is about breaking through obstacles to improve your situation. Fi is about growth as well, but in a different way... Fe leads to growth by taking what someone thinks or feels in context with their environment, seeing how the two affect each other, and then either changing the environment or changing how the person interacts with their environment, hopefully in a way that's empowering. Fe growth happens in the context of the environment, whereas Fi growth seems to happen more in spite of the environment. This gives you guys a very strong and consistent inner "anchor", but it can also put you at odds with people and things unnecessarily, without much benefit coming from it. In that sense, Fi is very cause-oriented whereas Fe is much more effect-oriented. And this isn't a bad thing - sometimes I am amazed at how much of an advantage being Fe-dominant gives me compared to people who don't focus on that kind of thing as much. On the other hand, balancing the benefits of this advantage with staying true to my core is more of a challenge for me (being pulled to the needs of others can be a storm sometimes).
> 
> That doesn't mean conformity though - fitting in and conforming are two very different things, and it has a lot more to do with the individual than with what their function preference is. One of the best things about being Fe-dominant is that I never really have to "conform" in order to fit in pretty much anywhere I go. I feel at home with everyone because Fe always lets me find common ground. It's genuine common ground because it comes from something that's true about me, and also true about the other person. Sometimes this common ground is minor, and basically just leads to small talk... other times it's more significant and leads to a friendship. It feels just as natural for me to fit in with a group of artists as it does to fit in with a group of scientists, because in both cases the fitting in is based on something real. The artists and the scientists each see different aspects of me (because that's what I show them more of in order to relate), but they're still both seeing the real me. I hate not being true to myself as much as any other type, I just approach it in a different way.


----------



## Khiro (Nov 28, 2012)

As with all functions, the difference between Fe and Fi is one of objectivity vs subjectivity. 

Fi is willing to uphold personal values at the expense of social goals.

Fe is willing to effect social goals at the expense of personal values.

That doesn't necessarily mean that someone with a preference for Fe is going to abandon their own values for society's, it means that someone with a preference for Fe is likely to overlook their personal beliefs if a more pragmatic approach serves a greater purpose. 

I'll use an example from my own life to attempt to explain. 

Recently, a friend of mine went to see a clairvoyant. Her father died about a year ago and she's been having a difficult time dealing with that. The clairvoyant told her that she'd spoken to her father and that there were certain things he wanted her to know. I don't know the exact details of what my friend was told, but I do know that nothing she was told seemed to be harmful. With that said, in my opinion, this clairvoyant lied to my friend about her dead father in order to milk her for money. I honestly can't think of many things that strike me as more abhorrent. 

Now, I was utterly appalled by what my friend had told me, but I didn't let her know that. Why? Well, that, in my opinion, is the way in which Fe attempts to affect the world. I care a great deal about my friend and it infuriates me that someone would take advantage of her under those circumstances, but I recognize the objective value of allowing her to believe what she's chosen to believe. As much as a part of me wants to tell her she's being cheated, another part of me recognizes how important it is to her that she be able to believe her father still exists in some capacity. If I were to push her based on my own beliefs all I would be doing is robbing her of the peace of mind she's found. In short, I see it as more important that she be happy than she acknowledge the truth.

Essentially - and seemingly ironically for an F function - Fe is largely about _dismissing_ one's own emotional considerations in favor of a more practical approach to people. An Fe preference doesn't demand values be changed, it demands they come secondary to obligations.


----------



## Sixty Nein (Feb 13, 2011)

Fi and Fe is mostly just a difference between self referencing your evaluations (Fi), and referring to forces outside of you for that (Fe).

So essentially it's like this.

Fi: I like object because I like it for some reason.
Fe: I like this object, because it's popular/classy/indy or whatever.

They both like the object equally, they just refer to different sources of evaluation. As a Fe type, it's awkward for me to like something just based on my own personal feelings on it, or rather to use myself as a justification of liking something.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

Yes, as @St Vual suggests, the source of value assignment will tend to be objective for relatively differentiated Fe preference.

There may be Fi going on, but that perspective will neither be conscious necessarily nor will the user be anything short of uncomfortable with bringing it to consciousness.


----------



## Chris Knight (Jan 9, 2013)

Julia Bell said:


> It is up to the individual of any type whether or not they go along with social norms or jump on bandwagons or just think/value what everybody else does. Any type can become this sort of person. Being this sort of person requires a choice on your part. You have to consciously rationalize thinking in that sort of manner. That is you making a decision, deciding what you are going to think. Therefore it has nothing to do with what type you are.


The difference being that when Fe user do it they seem normal, when Fi users do it they seem like crazy relativists. Seriously, I've been trying really hard to do this lately, and most people think I'm going crazy.


----------



## Loupgaroux (Mar 9, 2013)

Fi & Fe is like night & day to me. I wonder how many other Fi-doms have thought they where T-dominant like I did (whether it be Te or Ti), because we can be emotionally inexpressive.

My mother is an obvious Fe-dom (not 100% on her type as of yet though, ENFJ perhaps?), when feeling hits her she tells you, she emotes it, every bit of it. When it hits me, I get lost in thought, I evaluate it, I turn it over in my head & see how it affects my values. 

She's more inclined to feel as it affects everyone, as to how she can exert herself into the situation & change it, control it. 
I just observe & let my feelings decide how I feel about those actions. My emotions can be just a strong & consuming, but I often tune them out, my mom can't tune them out, they consume her.


----------



## Sporadic Aura (Sep 13, 2009)

Number Six said:


> Fi could feel bad lying to someone for the sake of the social cohesion
> 
> Fe could feel bad telling the truth at the cost of social cohesion
> 
> This doesn't mean an Fi user won't tell white lies or an Fe user is needlessly deceptive, it's simply the way they prioritize their values.


This would make me an Fi user. I wonder if it varies because an F function isn't in my dom or aux spot.


----------



## mr. rozay (Nov 2, 2011)

Fe vs Fi is really the same as differences between ethics vs morals

its best to understand the clear definitions of both in order to make sense of things.


With Fe your morals are based on social ethics. With Fi your ethics are based on your personal morals. 

I have a strong sense of what I consider to be right and wrong. The way I treat other people is based on what I consider good. If I had Fe in me, the way I would treat people would be by feeling them out and getting a sense of what they consider good and bad and shaping my morals to theirs, so I don't offend them. Whereas in Fi I can't help offending people so I treat them the way i'd want to be treated, according to my rules.

heres a good link:http://www.diffen.com/difference/Ethics_vs_Morals


the 2 also show different styles of compassion: Empathy vs Sympathy

good link: http://www.diffen.com/difference/Empathy_vs_Sympathy


----------



## Teybo (Sep 25, 2012)

Sporadic Aura said:


> This would make me an Fi user. I wonder if it varies because an F function isn't in my dom or aux spot.


I think your intuition here is leading you in the right direction. The more I interact with people, the more I see that the four letters matter. A TP might identify more with introverted Judgment in general over extraverted Feeling. This makes sense, because they prefer "P" (i.e. introverted judgment) but not "F".

I should also say, though, the statements you were responding to aren't very good indicators of Fi vs Fe, in my opinion.


----------



## LostFavor (Aug 18, 2011)

Consider the other cognitive functions involved: It's less Fi vs Fe than it is Fi vs Ti. 

Fi is all about saying "these are my values" and then checking constantly to see if *my* values are being followed by me. This is highly independent of others at its core. Think Eddard Stark in Game of Thrones or Thomas More in A Man For All Seasons - both stubbornly holding to their personal values regardless of reason saying that they should stay quiet about it. It's the overriding priority.

Ti, on the other hand (which goes with Fe), is more about saying "this is what's correct" and then checking constantly to see if the correctness is being adhered to. That said, Fe users may find themselves in situations similar to Fi users - the values under attack scenario - but their overriding priority is more about the cohesion of people or the correctness of the value. If you can show to a Ti user, for example, why a belief is incorrect and that person's sole basis for believing is the correctness of the belief, then the belief goes bye bye. 

Fi can be more stubborn because it's rooted less in "correct" information and more in a personal interpretation of information.


----------

