# Fe and Fi



## BooksandButterflies (Jul 26, 2012)

Fe is the lava that boils out.
Fi is the fire inside that started it all.

Fe sings.
Fi composes.

Fe asserts itself.
Fi just IS.

Fe is the bird.
Fi is the song.

Fe is contagious.
Fi is seductive.

Fe feels for others.
Fi feels for self.

Fe resounds.
Fi resonates.

Fe is the smile that leads to the kiss.
Fi is the butterfly in your chest that led to the smile.

Fe makes decisions based on values.
Fi makes decisions based on PERSONAL values.

Fe reaches out.
Fi pulls in.

So...what do you think? No, this is NOT mine!:kitteh:


----------



## All in Twilight (Oct 12, 2012)

BooksandButterflies said:


> Fe is the lava that boils out.
> Fi is the fire inside that started it all.
> 
> Fe sings.
> ...


Nice...where did you find this? Did you make it up yourself?


----------



## BooksandButterflies (Jul 26, 2012)

All in Twilight said:


> Nice...where did you find this? Did you make it up yourself?


*I wish I could take credit for this but I got it from www.INTJforums.com
Gah! It won't post the link! I double checked to make sure I had it right and it still won't allow it!:frustrating:

:happy:
*


----------



## Hal Jordan Prime (Dec 13, 2012)

I was just gonna ask if it's possible for a type to both possess Fe and Fi

I'm assuming an INFP or ENFP??


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

puer_aeternus said:


> I was just gonna ask if it's possible for a type to both possess Fe and Fi
> 
> I'm assuming an INFP or ENFP??


nope, they push each other away.
It's kind of like you got an F function and it either develops introvertly or extrovertly. Not both.

Tho it could be argued that you might have some of the other function, but it is a lot weaker than its stronger sibling.


----------



## Zen (Nov 10, 2012)

Everyone has all the functions , you just like to use some more than others.


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Mitri said:


> Everyone has all the functions , you just like to use some more than others.


What fact do you have to support that claim?


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

Hmmmm. I'm confused here - how is @_Mitri_'s claim that different from @_Acerbusvenator_'s



> Tho it could be argued that you might have some of the other function, but it is a lot weaker than its stronger sibling.




I think you're both generally right and in agreement! Aka, the general idea is you use some of S, F, N and T, and it seems reasonable that your processing will tend to favor one, either the introverted version or the extroverted. That is, one will often be much weaker. 

E.g. my Fi is mostly weak enough to effectively be nonexistent.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

@_puer_aeternus_: Overall, the answer to your question is yes, you do use Fe and Fi, at least by the MBTI theory. One is considered "shadow" in the sense that it operates as a much less natural, comfortable one as compared to the other one.

People fit the model to different degrees, it seems.

But either way, the way MBTI explains how someone who does something rather like a function that's supposed to be their shadow well is that they might synthesize it through other functions. E.g. some combo of Ti and Ne might somewhat resemble Ni, even if it's not quite Ni, as Ni is not a judging function. Intense self-observation is necessary to understand what you are really using. For instance, Ni produces hunches, which might semi resemble the conclusions of Ti, but in reality they're nothing alike, as one is completely nonlinear, an the other follows much more precise steps in processing.

Suffice it to say that, while the model describes many well, the reasons behind the model working seem to have exceptions, and hence in that sense, I don't think the model claims to explain everyone's cognitive behavior. In reality, weird things can and will happen.


----------



## Kris312 (Dec 7, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> What fact do you have to support that claim?


The same one you used to support yours?

:happy:


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Kris312 said:


> The same one you used to support yours?:happy:


With the difference that my claim is supported by the official MBTI system. The other was supported by Jung.The only person I know that support the 8 function thing in MBTI is beebe and his theory is highly inaccurate.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> With the difference that my claim is supported by the official MBTI system. The other was supported by Jung.The only person I know that support the 8 function thing in MBTI is beebe and his theory is highly inaccurate.


Alas, Jung didn't develop MBTI. Katherine Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers did derived it from his work. The cognitive functions are rather well developed as a sub-tool of MBTI. They are designed to explain how the types differ due to extraversion and introversion. 

Understanding the MBTI Test


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

tanstaafl28 said:


> Alas, Jung didn't develop MBTI. Katherine Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers did derived it from his work. The cognitive functions are rather well developed as a sub-tool of MBTI. They are designed to explain how the types differ due to extraversion and introversion.
> 
> Understanding the MBTI Test


Didn't say that he developed MBTI. Which was why I separated them. Jung's system is a lot different from MBTI.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Acerbusvenator said:


> Didn't say that he developed MBTI. Which was why I separated them. Jung's system is a lot different from MBTI.


Yes you did. My bad. Sorry about that.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

Well, to clarify, we were discussing this in another thread, and @_Acerbusvenator_ doesn't, as I understand it, suggest we only use 4 out of the 8 functions, rather he seems to view there to be 4 total in general, not 8: Feeling, Thinking, Sensing, and Intuition. Which I would be totally fine with. There is always, in my experience, an interplay between extroverted and introverted sides of a function, and one needn't view these as separate functions, but rather 2 sides of the same of each of the 4. 

I think someone could refer to the 4 that Acerbusvenator speaks of as 8, depending on language choice, and still get at the same meaning, so that's why I don't really think there was necessarily a conflict of ideas above.

But regardless, what I find accurate is that we tend to require all 4 of the different processing schemes, and very likely will favor an introverted or extroverted approach to some extent in each.

Something which Jung seems to have allowed for, which is less clear from the MBTI, is that one may be more comfortable with the introverted or extroverted expression of the 4, and that they needn't follow the pattern of alternating introversion and extroversion in actual preference, even though it is almost certainly best to have some extroverted function well-developed to support each introverted one.

Alas, I can't say in people, I've found they all actually have this basic development, which it seems could help greatly alleviate many misunderstandings.

One other thing: there are various ways to categorize the functions. One is of course by the types of perceiving and types of judging. It may be, however, that someone in general prefers judging functions in an introverted sense over judging functions in an extroverted sense, or perceiving functions in general over judging! I could imagine this possibility. So they may exhibit some sort of processing preference that looks more like N-S-T-F, or some such thing, which is of general form P > J. That said, their P functions and J functions still _support_ each other, but support doesn't necessarily correlate exactly to order of preference, or at least I can't see a reason why it would.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

I'm not convinced Fe is really an expression of the deeper aspects of a person's personality (that would be more just introversion in general). I think Fe would just be kind of a mechanism of the mind that draws someone toward the outer world via evaluative concerns - the receptacle for an objective proof of a subjective conviction in terms of it's objective importance (always backed by Ti, no matter what the position). Tends to come out through readable, direct acts of self-expression - very much a direct source of agreement/disagreement between people - there's almost no arguing with it, it sets the motives of the person up clearly (from Ti though, the person's motives are more vague).


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Fi, on the other hand, is almost invisible until it gets negative (Jung). They might at times look Fe as well just as a compensation for the invisibility of Fi to the outside world.


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

@JungyesMBTIno

I guess 



> I'm not convinced Fe is really an expression of the deeper aspects of a person's personality (that would be more just introversion in general). I think Fe would just be kind of a mechanism of the mind that draws someone toward the outer world via evaluative concerns - the receptacle for an objective proof of a subjective conviction in terms of it's objective importance (always backed by Ti, no matter what the position).




sort of contains both the question and the answer -- whilst it may not be such an expression directly, its use is coupled inextricably with an aspect that can be tied deeply to the actual personality, whence the manner of expression of any given individual's Fe may be rather revealing, I suppose.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Yea. Frankly, you can argue that Fe is more "objective" than the thinking of these types (Ti), which might seem strange to Te types and all who think thinking is more objective than feeling based on stereotypes and the popular view that Te is the only legitimate "thinking" to begin with (Jung talked about this - I'm sure it's about as true today as it was with him then). The unfortunate thing about feeling though is that it's hard to intelligibly convey it's rationality, no matter how objective it may be, but that's largely due to it's overall repression in society as a rational approach anyhow (since society strongly clings to thinking).


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

@_JungyesMBTIno_, I guess the issue winds up being that in the end, only Te is both objective and produces reasoning that follows logical structure. The Ti's truths are subjective, and hence not necessarily understandable or sensible to anyone but the user, even if the process of arriving at those may have involved extroverted functions. 

The mysterious thing about extroverted feeling is that, whilst reasoning _using _the objective, and _about_ the objective, the reasoning process itself is somehow inextricably linked with Ti and Pi. Even Si, which is perhaps a bit more straightforward than Ni, is potentially tough to unravel when one considers exactly how it was linked with Fe-use. 

A phenomenon I experience as a Ti-dominant is that my Fe is so severely tied to T that I almost can provide an approximation of F as a systematized process that can be intelligibly conveyed. While the F itself can't be conveyed in a rational way to someone who refuses to accept F reasoning, my Ti approximation can.

The reason being that the issue behind conveying F lies in the actual reasoning itself involving subjective choice that the outside world is blind to. While Pi+Te involves the subjective, the other world, while blind to how one arrived at the Te reasoning, can appreciate the Te reasoning itself. This seems to essentially be what you were writing. 

And where I think the subjectivity of Ti can be used as a weapon here is that it can produce so-called static abstract truths that are evident to the F, and submit a reasoning style that is more mechanical and thus can undergo scrutiny, unlike in the case of F.

Now this can be trouble again with a Te user who refuses to accept Ti truths. But then I'm forced to use Pe to convey the objectivity evident in my decision-making. This is what results in a tl;dr effect. Nobody really wants to read pages of Ti-Ne.


----------

