# A Fi-dom's feeling on Fe.



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Stelliferous said:


> My values are created from Ti. Fe pays attention to the values of others.
> 
> Having weak Ti is a sign of the person having weak values.


Thinking deals with logic, not values.


----------



## Aspen (Feb 25, 2016)

I think this is an interesting discussion. I do think the original examples of Fe behaviour could be attributed to many types. My ESFP friends love singing and dancing and group hugs and it is not something I would do so maybe it is more of an introvert vs extrovert function thing. 

I always find the comments about Fe being fake to be intriguing. In my mind it is far from fake. I am so connected with people that I can feel and understand where they are coming from so I respond in a way that enables further connection. It is not me pretending to feel/be something I am not but it is that I am so flexible and have such an understanding of people that my responses are not set in stone and are more fluid. Because Fe is focused outwards my heart and motivations are affected by what is going on around me. I am not being fake or putting on an act. I am just genuinely connecting with people and responding to them where they are at. Maybe it is the combination of Ni and Fe but I can see and feel where people are coming from and that perspective makes me more open-minded and understanding.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

Neverontime said:


> Thinking deals with logic, not values.


Thinking deals with objectivity. Values are determined by the cause and effect of actions from a logical standpoint. Knowing that angry people cause separation, I value creating an environment that minimizes anger so cooperation can work things out objectively better. Both Ti and Fi find values based on their own way of thinking. 

Without seeing the cause and effect from a Ti perspective, it is just a game of cause and effect with no end goal.


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Stelliferous said:


> Thinking deals with objectivity. Values are determined by the cause and effect of actions from a logical standpoint. Knowing that angry people cause separation, I value creating an environment that minimizes anger so cooperation can work things out objectively better. Both Ti and Fi find values based on their own way of thinking.
> 
> Without seeing the cause and effect from a Ti perspective, it is just a game of cause and effect with no end goal.


You're incorrect. Thinking tells us what something is, Feeling tells us what it's worth. You're confusing rational Feeling evaluation for logic. Logic doesn't take feelings into account. For example, Thinking decided that slavery would be a good idea, it's convenient, efficient and productive. Feeling questioned its worth and decided it was immoral, cruel, inhumane and overall unacceptable.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

Neverontime said:


> You're incorrect. Thinking tells us what something is, Feeling tells us what it's worth. You're confusing rational Feeling evaluation for logic. Logic doesn't take feelings into account. For example, Thinking decided that slavery would be a good idea, it's convenient, efficient and productive. Feeling questioned its worth and decided it was immoral, cruel, inhumane and overall unacceptable.


Actually I never said anger was immoral, inhumane, unacceptable, cruel, or worth anything. I said that it leads to disharmony, which is unvalued because it's not functional. 

The same way you see people say, "you're emotional and not thinking straight, back away from this and let me handle it," or "you're too close to this." The value comes from accomplishing the goal determined by Ti and uses Fe to fulfill the goal.

If I didn't value a logical approach, why would I be using so much logic all the time? I would be worthless.


----------



## DOGSOUP (Jan 29, 2016)

Stelliferous said:


> Thinking deals with objectivity. Values are determined by the cause and effect of actions from a logical standpoint. Knowing that angry people cause separation, I value creating an environment that minimizes anger so cooperation can work things out objectively better.





Neverontime said:


> You're incorrect. Thinking tells us what something is, Feeling tells us what it's worth.


I don't see these statements as mutually exclusive.



> Thinking decided that slavery would be a good idea, it's convenient, efficient and productive. Feeling questioned its worth and decided it was immoral, cruel, inhumane and overall unacceptable.


Perhaps, but things aren't as simple. For example, from point of view that tries to ensure maximum productivity and efficiency, it makes little sense to torture and humiliate people (it is obvious how it weakens their ability to work, it _certainly_ creates no respect or loyalty between slaves and owners, or might result in the slaves escaping from captivity -- which is a direct "loss of resources"). 

There was something else going on as well. The ethical atmosphere and general consensus stated that inequality between people was status quo, and to further enhance this idea slave owners would use cruel methods to maintain their superiority.

Also, abolishing slavery required not only shared values or people who truly believed in their cause, it required also moral principles, rules and methods of action to put it into practise. So I'd say both thinking and feeling played a part in slavery as they played a part in its abolition.


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Stelliferous said:


> Actually I never said anger was immoral, inhumane, unacceptable, cruel, or worth anything. I said that it leads to disharmony, which is unvalued because it's not functional.
> 
> The same way you see people say, "you're emotional and not thinking straight, back away from this and let me handle it," or "you're too close to this." The value comes from accomplishing the goal determined by Ti and uses Fe to fulfill the goal.
> 
> If I didn't value a logical approach, why would I be using so much logic all the time? I would be worthless.


I never said that you said any of those things. 
Disharmony isn't functional, making people happy to cooperate gets the task done, holding a gun or a whip to people gets the task done (probably faster). So both approaches get the task done, what's the difference?


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

Neverontime said:


> You're incorrect. Thinking tells us what something is, Feeling tells us what it's worth. You're confusing rational Feeling evaluation for logic. Logic doesn't take feelings into account. For example, Thinking decided that slavery would be a good idea, it's convenient, efficient and productive. Feeling questioned its worth and decided it was immoral, cruel, inhumane and overall unacceptable.


I disagree with this. Fi is subjective but Fe isn't. Fe is an observing function just like Te. Both see things as what they are. They are similar in how they operate. There are objective standards for morality as there is for logic. Yes, feelings cannot be rationalized but Fi and Fe aren't about feelings. Fe is more concerned with the rules related to objective ethics. Feelings are simply chemical reactios in the brain and both thinkers and feelers can behave irrationally under the influence of feelings. But Fi and Fe aren't about feelings. They follow certain rules too - the rules of ethics and relationships. Te and Ti don't deal with that.

Also I don't associate values with feelings. I don't think either Fe or Fi deals with ethics and values directly - more like through certain rules. I don't know if that makes sense.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

Neverontime said:


> I never said that you said any of those things.
> Disharmony isn't functional, making people happy to cooperate gets the task done, holding a gun or a whip to people gets the task done (probably faster). So both approaches get the task done, what's the difference?


The difference is that a whip doesn't get the task done because people are unhappy. It's like a rough draft that is flawed. More advanced logic shows that the ideal way to get things done is through respect, compassion, freedom, support, harmony, and comfort internally and externally. We are far from meeting those conditions on a wide scale however so there's a lot of discomfort and unhappiness leading to not getting anything done right.


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

DOGSOUP said:


> I don't see these statements as mutually exclusive.
> 
> 
> Perhaps, but things aren't as simple. For example, from point of view that tries to ensure maximum productivity and efficiency, it makes little sense to torture and humiliate people (it is obvious how it weakens their ability to work, it _certainly_ creates no respect or loyalty between slaves and owners, or might result in the slaves escaping from captivity -- which is a direct "loss of resources").
> ...


I agree, it's not that simple. No cognitive functions exist in isolation, but in order to understand cognitive functions we need to isolate each from the others, theoretically anyway. Then when the functions are understood, we can see interplay between them in a personality type. One function influences the others, either within an individual or within a group of individuals. That doesn't mean that each function doesn't have it's own particular direction and aim.


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Blue Ribbon said:


> I disagree with this. Fi is subjective but Fe isn't. Fe is an observing function just like Te. Both see things as what they are. They are similar in how they operate. There are objective standards for morality as there is for logic. Yes, feelings cannot be rationalized but Fi and Fe aren't about feelings. Fe is more concerned with the rules related to objective ethics. Feelings are simply chemical reactios in the brain and both thinkers and feelers can behave irrationally under the influence of feelings. But Fi and Fe aren't about feelings. They follow certain rules too - the rules of ethics and relationships. Te and Ti don't deal with that.
> 
> Also I don't associate values with feelings. I don't think either Fe or Fi deals with ethics and values directly - more like through certain rules. I don't know if that makes sense.


Fe and Te take their standard from the external world. They take on external values and ideas, using those to determine judgement. Fi and Ti take their standard from the internal world, aka collective unconscious. 
Feeling judgement is about feelings, but not in the way most people believe. It's largely directed by empathy/sympathy, which are feelings. It determines worth and what is acceptable, by considering the feeling reactions of others and how others will be affected. For instance, why do we say please and thank you? It serves no purpose in communication, if I say "Pass me the pen", you know exactly what I require. The word 'please' on the end isn't necessary to communicate with you. So what purpose does it serve?


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Stelliferous said:


> The difference is that a whip doesn't get the task done because people are unhappy. It's like a rough draft that is flawed. More advanced logic shows that the ideal way to get things done is through respect, compassion, freedom, support, harmony, and comfort internally and externally. We are far from meeting those conditions on a wide scale however so there's a lot of discomfort and unhappiness leading to not getting anything done right.


A whip does get the task done.
Do you think slaves were volunteers?


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

Neverontime said:


> A whip does get the task done.
> Do you think slaves were volunteers?


Actually what got the task done was the black peoples communion and hope and love for each other that was stronger than the oppression. They didn't give up. The slaves get all the credit for getting the job done. The whippers didn't do a fucking thing to help get the job done. They just made it harder for no reason.

Its like disciplining a child in an oppressive way. Either it ruins the child because you deny them of needs or they find the needs somewhere else, particularly with a familial bond with other victims, and fight through the oppression. The parent thinks they helped the child but the child and the other victims or ideas he or she attached to is what guided the child forward.


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Stelliferous said:


> Actually what got the task done was the black peoples communion and hope and love for each other that was stronger than the oppression. They didn't give up. The slaves get all the credit for getting the job done. The whippers didn't do a fucking thing to help get the job done. They just made it harder for no reason.


No, slaves worked because they were being forced to work. If they weren't forced, they wouldn't have been slaves, FACT. I'm not trying to defend slavery, it was an example to try and explain T vs F. Don't start debating the morals of an example, it's very frustrating and simply derails.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

Neverontime said:


> No, slaves worked because they were being forced to work. If they weren't forced, they wouldn't have been slaves, FACT. I'm not trying to defend slavery, it was an example to try and explain T vs F. Don't start debating the morals of an example, it's very frustrating and simply derails.


You're right if they weren't forced then they wouldn't have been slaves. They would have been ordinary workers getting paid. Getting the job done because the job always gets done when it's for positive purposes. If you don't give anything positive for them then they have to create their own positivity. 

This is the logical path of getting shit done. Humans need what they need and it is the needs and who supplies the needs that get all the credit. Not the people who deny the needs and tell them to figure out how to survive.


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Stelliferous said:


> You're right if they weren't forced then they wouldn't have been slaves. They would have been ordinary workers getting paid. Getting the job done because the job always gets done when it's for positive purposes. If you don't give anything positive for them then they have to create their own positivity.
> 
> This is the logical path of getting shit done. Humans need what they need and it is the needs and who supplies the needs that get all the credit. Not the people who deny the needs and tell them to figure out how to survive.


That's not the logical path. Again, you're confusing logic with values. 
It's not logical just because people feel nice.


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

Neverontime said:


> Fe and Te take their standard from the external world. They take on external values and ideas, using those to determine judgement. Fi and Ti take their standard from the internal world, aka collective unconscious.
> Feeling judgement is about feelings, but not in the way most people believe. It's largely directed by empathy/sympathy, which are feelings. It determines worth and what is acceptable, by considering the feeling reactions of others and how others will be affected. For instance, why do we say please and thank you? It serves no purpose in communication, if I say "Pass me the pen", you know exactly what I require. The word 'please' on the end isn't necessary to communicate with you. So what purpose does it serve?


It's a lot more than feeling good or bad. Imo the feeling functions are a whole different way of relating to the world. It's more than just feeling reactions of others... Fe is about harmonizing. Imagine we're on a team. You're free to hate someone in the team as long as you don't express it and cause discord. 

If the goal of Te is effectiveness, the goal of Fe is harmony. Both Te and Fe are looking at things and people respectively and seeing how they fit into their plan for acheving their goal. Is this thing harmonizing? If not how can I make it so? And from my observation, Fi has parallels to Ti too. If Ti is building vast logical systems, Fi is building a similar system but with subjective interpretations of the world around them. I suppose this is where 'values' comes into play. It isn't values in the traditional sense of the word. 

Empathy and sympathy are just one aspect imo.


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Blue Ribbon said:


> It's a lot more than feeling good or bad. Imo the feeling functions are a whole different way of relating to the world. It's more than just feeling reactions of others... Fe is about harmonizing. Imagine we're on a team. You're free to hate someone in the team as long as you don't express it and cause discord.
> 
> If the goal of Te is effectiveness, the goal of Fe is harmony. Both Te and Fe are looking at things and people respectively and seeing how they fit into their plan for acheving their goal. Is this thing harmonizing? If not how can I make it so? And from my observation, Fi has parallels to Ti too. If Ti is building vast logical systems, Fi is building a similar system but with subjective interpretations of the world around them. I suppose this is where 'values' comes into play. It isn't values in the traditional sense of the word.
> 
> Empathy and sympathy are just one aspect imo.


Fe isn't about harmony, it's about values, harmony is a value. If we're in a team and I hate someone, you don't want me to express it because you place a higher value on a pleasant feeling atmosphere than you do on my feelings. If you're in a group and that group starts torturing a puppy, then (I assume) you will disrupt the pleasant feeling atmosphere in order to protect the puppy. In that situation you will place higher value on the wellbeing of the puppy than you place on the pleasant atmosphere. Am I right?


----------



## Glenda Gnome Starr (May 12, 2011)

I love this, and I love all of my friends who do this, not because someone told them that they had to, but because it is almost second nature for them. I've always wanted to be more like this because I think that it is a kind way to live. But, somehow, I can't manage it. I feel that I have to take care of my feelings and needs and, then, I am better equipped to take care of others. If I neglect me, I don't have the heart to be the person that I want to be, to support more harmonious living. 



Blue Ribbon said:


> Fe isn't being fake. Fe users want everyone to want the same things, a common goal. It isn't about being fake to please others - it's about compromising on my wants, my desires, my feelings and believing that others would too - for the sake of being in harmony.
> 
> To an Fe user who doesn't understand the nature of Fi, Fi can appear to be self absorbed and uncooperative.


----------



## Glenda Gnome Starr (May 12, 2011)

It depends on the tone. When you say "pass me the pen," does it come across as a request or as a command? For sure, I don't like being commanded. I don't like the feeling of someone controlling me. When people say "please" and "thank you," it is more obvious that it is a request, not a command. So I appreciate that.



Neverontime said:


> Fe and Te take their standard from the external world. They take on external values and ideas, using those to determine judgement. Fi and Ti take their standard from the internal world, aka collective unconscious.
> Feeling judgement is about feelings, but not in the way most people believe. It's largely directed by empathy/sympathy, which are feelings. It determines worth and what is acceptable, by considering the feeling reactions of others and how others will be affected. For instance, why do we say please and thank you? It serves no purpose in communication, if I say "Pass me the pen", you know exactly what I require. The word 'please' on the end isn't necessary to communicate with you. So what purpose does it serve?


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

Neverontime said:


> That's not the logical path. Again, you're confusing logic with values.
> It's not logical just because people feel nice.


..........

I am not sure how I can further explain the logic. If you don't understand by now then it's not my failure. 

One last attempt though:

logic:

goal = complete task
positivity = willing to work 
goal = positivity 

Look up Fun Theory. There is a whole fuck ton of data concerning how people work better when work doesn't feel like... work.


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Garden Gnome said:


> It depends on the tone. When you say "pass me the pen," does it come across as a request or as a command? For sure, I don't like being commanded. I don't like the feeling of someone controlling me. When people say "please" and "thank you," it is more obvious that it is a request, not a command. So I appreciate that.


Yes exactly. A request is respectful and the command is not. While it's not a hard and fast rule, context and tone is important. You still seem to have understood what I meant.


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Stelliferous said:


> ..........
> 
> I am not sure how I can further explain the logic. If you don't understand by now then it's not my failure.
> 
> ...


You can't further explain it, so we'll leave it at that.


----------



## perpetuallyreticent (Sep 24, 2014)

Neverontime said:


> Thinking deals with logic, not values.


So with that logic, do people where their Feeling function's placement is tertiary or inferior, have no values? I feel as though you're trying to paint thinking and feeling as black and white, when it's very much the opposite. I admit it's easier for someone with Fe or Fi to understand and find a base of where their values derive from, but it's not impossible for, say, an INTP to have their own values based on a different understanding from which they're derived. 

Correct me if I'm wrong, because I'm an ISFP and can only explain my own functions. But from what I've gathered by research and listening to Ti users, their values are often co-existent with their principles, and Ti is a basis of internal consistency in which something makes sense to the individual. Our Values, as feelers, primarily coincide with how it makes us feel. Theirs with what makes the most sense to them. 

Obviously an xNTP is not going to inherently feel very strongly for something based on subjective worth to their feelings on a specific matter at hand. It's going to connect through subjective understanding and the worth of it's importance to their principles and subjective knowledge, paired with understanding of the matter. 

To me, values in thinkers and feelers are primarily the same. It's in how we describe them where those differences begin to emerge. A thinker isn't going to explain it in the same way a feeler is. Especially concerning Fi and Ti. 

Ti - This is important to me because it harmonizes with my internal sense of logic. It makes sense to me.

Fi - This is important to me because it harmonizes with how I feel, and who I am as a person. 

Values are not determined by judgement processes.


----------



## iblameyou (Oct 1, 2016)

Existentialismz said:


> A can understand the gist of what you mean. As far as people singing and dancing around me, that would make me uncomfortable only because I don't like being pressured into doing something I don't want to do or something that doesn't feel right. The more others try to get me to do what they're doing, the more I want to rebel and do the opposite. If I hear a song I like and I'm overcome with the urge to sing and dance, I'll enthusiastically do so, but if some one asks me to I'm more likely not to. That's certainly not the nature of Fe.
> 
> Fe can be painfully fake, but it isn't always bad. Fe is especially good for Fi users to experience because Fi users usually have this narrow view of good and bad - that if something is disingenuous, it must be bad and if something is genuine, it must be good. I've come to realize this is a pretty shitty line of thinking.
> 
> ...


As an Fe-aux, if Fi tries tells me that I need to be "myself" how do you know I'm not being myself? When an Fi tells me I'm being emotional dishonest, how do you know I'm being dishonest? The funny thing is both Fe and Fi judge each other. IME I feel judged and misunderstood when Fi make the claim (based on assumption) that Fe are disingenuous because of a, b, c...I personally hate the accusation without the facts being checked. By that, it is simply asking for clarity. I have a lot of Fi-friends and most of my family members are Fi. I like them a lot. I'm learning but I will not hesitate to put my foot down, to rock the boat if necessary. I think proximity determines if you see my rawness or not, and if you are on the outside, it is easier to make that judgment.



Stelliferous said:


> I get uncomfortable with verbal complimentary expressions in general. I feel they are often merely ways to take attention away from something else. Like "hey I baked cookies for everybody" and I would be thinking, "who are you underneath the mask?"
> 
> Though I have inferior Fe, I do feel rather deeply from others' feelings. I just have a hard time trusting them is the thing.
> 
> ...


I can only speak for myself, but I'd agree with that statement. I think healthy Fe are able to distinguish the level of closeness with people even though Fe is always finding some way to express itself. For me, I'd also say my friends get special treatment (not sure about Fe-dom). 



Neverontime said:


> Inconsistencies in their values.


It depends. I have a societal value and core value. Societal value are fluid and is something you can simply observed externally. I have my own core value that _sometimes_ do translate to the external world, but it's always consistent.



Garden Gnome said:


> It depends on the tone. When you say "pass me the pen," does it come across as a request or as a command? For sure, I don't like being commanded. I don't like the feeling of someone controlling me. When people say "please" and "thank you," it is more obvious that it is a request, not a command. So I appreciate that.


The other day my ISFP friend stated a question that could be easily interpreted into anything. I ask in a direct manner (with politeness, of course) if she needs help because her question is implying "I need help but I don't want to force you to help me". I'm all for helping if you are direct otherwise I will unintentionally ignore your need because you were not direct with me.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

@thisgirl

Is it special treatment? Or is it fair treatment for them being good to you? Like Karma. 

If a stranger is good to you, don't you treat them better too?


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

Neverontime said:


> Fe isn't about harmony, it's about values, harmony is a value. If we're in a team and I hate someone, you don't want me to express it because you place a higher value on a pleasant feeling atmosphere than you do on my feelings. If you're in a group and that group starts torturing a puppy, then (I assume) you will disrupt the pleasant feeling atmosphere in order to protect the puppy. In that situation you will place higher value on the wellbeing of the puppy than you place on the pleasant atmosphere. Am I right?


Yes because in that situation, I know that ttorturing the puppy is wrong. But in another situation where it might not be so obvious... 

It's interesting you say harmony is a value. I've never thought of it that way.


----------



## iblameyou (Oct 1, 2016)

Blue Ribbon said:


> Yes because in that situation, I know that ttorturing the puppy is wrong. But in another situation where it might not be so obvious...
> 
> It's interesting you say harmony is a value. I've never thought of it that way.


I've always thought that harmony is a value. Fi and Fe both value harmony but for different reason?


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

Aspen said:


> I think this is an interesting discussion. I do think the original examples of Fe behaviour could be attributed to many types. My ESFP friends love singing and dancing and group hugs and it is not something I would do so maybe it is more of an introvert vs extrovert function thing.
> 
> I always find the comments about Fe being fake to be intriguing. In my mind it is far from fake. I am so connected with people that I can feel and understand where they are coming from so I respond in a way that enables further connection. It is not me pretending to feel/be something I am not but it is that I am so flexible and have such an understanding of people that my responses are not set in stone and are more fluid. Because Fe is focused outwards my heart and motivations are affected by what is going on around me. I am not being fake or putting on an act. I am just genuinely connecting with people and responding to them where they are at. Maybe it is the combination of Ni and Fe but I can see and feel where people are coming from and that perspective makes me more open-minded and understanding.


I think that's where the idea that Fe is "fake" comes from: Fi sees Fe as a social chameleon, and assumes that they simply go along with what everyone else is thinking/doing, and has no inner substance. You start to wonder, do they really agree with me, or are they simply being polite? It's how people are in the American south, with their "Bless your heart." 

Perhaps some Fi types are irked by someone assuming they understand them (perhaps better than they understand themselves), because, really, can you really know with 100% accuracy what someone has been through, is experiencing, etc. unless you are them?


----------



## perpetuallyreticent (Sep 24, 2014)

WamphyriThrall said:


> Perhaps some Fi types are irked by someone assuming they understand them (perhaps better than they understand themselves), because, really, can you really know with 100% accuracy what someone has been through, is experiencing, etc. unless you are them?


If you're a mind reader, maybe. But otherwise, no. :tongue:


----------



## perpetuallyreticent (Sep 24, 2014)

thisgirl said:


> *I've always thought that harmony is a value. Fi and Fe both value harmony* but for different reason?


That in itself seems kind of redundant to me.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

thisgirl said:


> As an Fe-aux, if Fi tries tells me that I need to be "myself" how do you know I'm not being myself? When an Fi tells me I'm being emotional dishonest, how do you know I'm being dishonest? The funny thing is both Fe and Fi judge each other. IME I feel judged and misunderstood when Fi make the claim (based on assumption) that Fe are disingenuous because of a, b, c...I personally hate the accusation without the facts being checked. By that, it is simply asking for clarity. I have a lot of Fi-friends and most of my family members are Fi. I like them a lot. I'm learning but I will not hesitate to put my foot down, to rock the boat if necessary. I think proximity determines if you see my rawness or not, and if you are on the outside, it is easier to make that judgment.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's the thing: Fi doesn't presume to "know" anything. It's an assumption. Judging functions do just that, and in this case, it's how Fe comes across to a Fi user's value system. 

Fe does seem to have the "edge" when it comes to socializing. You see it in the ENFJ "cult leader" and ESTP "con man" stereotypes. Even ISTP benefit from an inferior Fe, with their "bad boy" aura. 

One of my friends, the leader of a non-profit organization, I suspect of being an ExFJ, and I'm always impressed at how patient, diplomatic, and neutral he can be. I wouldn't be able to do it, but at times, I think he expects me to??? 

A bit like expecting Stephen Hawking to outmuscle Hercules!


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

perpetuallyreticent said:


> So with that logic, do people where their Feeling function's placement is tertiary or inferior, have no values? I feel as though you're trying to paint thinking and feeling as black and white, when it's very much the opposite. I admit it's easier for someone with Fe or Fi to understand and find a base of where their values derive from, but it's not impossible for, say, an INTP to have their own values based on a different understanding from which they're derived.
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong, because I'm an ISFP and can only explain my own functions. But from what I've gathered by research and listening to Ti users, their values are often co-existent with their principles, and Ti is a basis of internal consistency in which something makes sense to the individual. Our Values, as feelers, primarily coincide with how it makes us feel. Theirs with what makes the most sense to them.
> 
> ...


What are values determined by, if not judgement processes? 

Thinking and Feeling, *as functions*, are black and white. The Thinking function deals with logic, not values. I didn't say IXTPs deal with logic, not values. When functions are combined together in one individual or within society, then we get shades of grey. The balance is achieved by opposing functions existing together and therefore compensating for each other. Thinking types have values which don't oppose their Thinking function, whenever values do oppose their Thinking, they will be disregarded because Thinking types place highest importance on logic. 
This is why they accuse others of taking things personally, it doesn't fit into their logical worldview, therefore they assume it must be a flaw in the other person's logic, due to their emotions getting in the way. 




Jung said:


> Extraverted Thinking
> 
> In accordance with his definition, we must picture a, man whose constant aim -- *in so far, of course, as he is a pure type -- is to bring his total life-activities into relation with intellectual conclusions*, which in the last resort are always orientated by objective data, whether objective facts or generally valid ideas. This type of man gives the deciding voice-not merely for himself alone but also on behalf of his entourage-either to the actual objective reality or to its objectively orientated, intellectual formula. *By this formula are good and evil measured, and beauty and ugliness determined. All is right that corresponds with this formula; all is wrong that contradicts it;* and everything that is neutral to it is purely accidental. Because this formula seems to correspond with the meaning of the world, it also becomes a world-law whose realization must be achieved at all times and seasons, both individually and collectively. Just as the extraverted thinking type subordinates himself to his formula, so, for its own good, must his entourage also obey it, since the man who refuses to obey is wrong -- he is resisting the world-law, and is, therefore, unreasonable, immoral, and without a conscience. His moral code forbids him to tolerate exceptions; his ideal must, under all circumstances, be realized; for in his eyes it is the purest conceivable formulation of objective reality, and, therefore, must also be generally valid truth, quite indispensable for the salvation of man. *This is not from any great love for his neighbour, but from a higher standpoint of justice and truth.* Everything in his own nature that appears to invalidate this formula is mere imperfection, an accidental miss-fire, something to be eliminated on the next occasion, or, in the event of further failure, then clearly a sickness.
> 
> ...


The post you quoted was in response to 


> My values are created from Ti.


Ti does not create values. It tolerates them, as long as they fit into it's aims.



Jung said:


> Thinking, if it is to be real thinking and true to its own principle, must scrupulously exclude feeling.


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

thisgirl said:


> As an Fe-aux, if Fi tries tells me that I need to be "myself" how do you know I'm not being myself? When an Fi tells me I'm being emotional dishonest, how do you know I'm being dishonest? The funny thing is both Fe and Fi judge each other. IME I feel judged and misunderstood when Fi make the claim (based on assumption) that Fe are disingenuous because of a, b, c...I personally hate the accusation without the facts being checked. By that, it is simply asking for clarity. I have a lot of Fi-friends and most of my family members are Fi. I like them a lot. I'm learning but I will not hesitate to put my foot down, to rock the boat if necessary. I think proximity determines if you see my rawness or not, and if you are on the outside, it is easier to make that judgment.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Your Feeling function is subordinate to your dominant function. It's not differentiated, so it doesn't manifest in it's own right. 
Everybody adopts at least some objective values as core values, Fe doesn't go beyond those boundaries, Fi sometimes does.



Jung said:


> Feeling in the extraverted attitude is orientated by objective data, i.e. the object is the indispensable determinant of the kind of feeling. It agrees with objective values. If one has always known feeling as a subjective fact, the nature of extraverted feeling will not immediately be understood, since it has freed itself as fully as possible from the subjective factor, and has, instead, become wholly subordinated to the influence of the object. *Even where it seems to show a certain independence of the quality of the concrete object, it is none the less under the spell of. traditional or generally valid standards of some sort.*


----------



## Sour Roses (Dec 30, 2015)

I'm Fe'eling (lol) for @Neverontime in this thread, who has made a valiant effort to keep explaining the basics over and over again.




perpetuallyreticent said:


> Values are not determined by judgement processes.



If you truly believe this to be the case, how can you frame these questions within the context of MBTI, which VERY clearly states that:

Feeling and Thinking are both judgement functions.

Feeling judges based on moral, ethical, emotional standards.

Thinking judges based on logical, factual, evidential standards.





> So with that logic, do people where their Feeling function's placement is tertiary or inferior, have no values?



How did you make this leap? It's a very far leap indeed.

ALL of the types use an F function, and all of the types use an T function.

The position of each function dictates the attitude towards the intrinsic aspects of it, as well as the frequency of use.

IFP's get logical, INJ's get sensory action oriented, ETJ's get touchy-feely ethical, ESP's get insight into situations, ect ect.





> an INTP to have their own values based on a different understanding from which they're derived.



And, an ITP had a Fe values outburst right here in this thread... about slavery**... but as is usual for every type when dealing with their inferior function, it can be very hard for them to recognize it in action.
As an aux-Fe user though, from a Ti-Fe family, I'm pretty familiar with Fe in action.

**I'd like to take a brief moment to point out that in every culture throughout history, there have been slavery epidemics... and not all of the cultures responded the same way - however, all of them did spend time subject to these injustices due to punishment and fear of punishment - it's human nature.



Feelers tend to try to pass their logical deductions off as moral-emotional reasoning, and thinkers tend to want to pass their moral-emotional reasoning off as logical deduction.

WHY? 

Well, it's very simply based on the aforementioned attitude towards each functional position.

It becomes confusing for the user when their inferior function offers mental input and their dominant function wouldn't usually think that way. It's still from the same mind. It's still seen as a valid thought by the user because the function that generated it is still working in the background. 

So the easiest thing for the dominant function to do is to see it as it's own intellectual property.


MBTI highlights our majority thinking, our preferred avenues.

If we didn't all use all the functions we have at our disposal, we would walk around like brainless nits without a thing going on up top.

The same would be true if the functions were as basic as many folks try to over-simplify them into being.

The functions control category of thought. Not the conclusions arrived at.

Fe can say "to hell with harmony" just the same as it can put all out effort into cultivating it.
Either way, it's painfully aware of the interpersonal dynamic as it goes down.


We can use my reply here as a loose example. As I write my firmer statements, I'm deeply aware of how non-tender they come off... and that they might cause offense to some.
When people don't listen, don't really let it in, I tend to purposely disrupt the harmony to make an impact... like most Fe users.... it's just raising the volume. Yet I wouldn't cross boundaries that might actually be hurtful without justification.

So, again as Neverontime has said, harmony is a value. 


It's really interesting actually. Before MBTI, I never had the faintest inkling that ethics and emotions were interconnected. It never occurred to me. I thought morals were something people learned, and feelings just happened based on internal states / others actions or lack thereof.
MBTI cleared that up for me though, and it finally makes sense to see how they work together.

* I know the above sounds a bit dumb... it's just because Fe has low internal vision in regards to personal feelings.
Someone wrote earlier how they aren't sure what a Fe user is really feeling beneath the mask... well, for most of us, we have no idea either.
Our personal emotions are pushed out into the world to become whatever is needed... and the motivation behind all the nicey-goody behaviour is that we don't feel right if others don't feel right.
Fe is a leash, that tethers our feelings to others feelings.
Unless we deliberately choose to ignore it.
Being able to ignore it, for dom/aux 's , is a sign of healthy well-roundedness as we can access our logic function.
Just as learning to accept Fe is for tert/inferior 's, a sign of healthy maturity within type.


----------



## DOGSOUP (Jan 29, 2016)

WamphyriThrall said:


> That's the thing: Fi doesn't presume to "know" anything. It's an assumption. Judging functions do just that, and in this case, it's how Fe comes across to a Fi user's value system.


Wouldn't it be better to say judging functions deal with inferences (which means a good amount of reasoning is being used) over assumptions, which just kind of tend to happen and cannot be proven.



> Fe does seem to have the "edge" when it comes to socializing. You see it in the ENFJ "cult leader" and ESTP "con man" stereotypes. Even ISTP benefit from an inferior Fe, with their "bad boy" aura.


Except that these people aren't real... or at least, they seem less and less real to me every time I see them. To be honest I'd love to meet the makers of these stereotypes, to see where they originate from. Or the people who were seen as incarnations of these stereotypes. Might be interesting.


----------



## iblameyou (Oct 1, 2016)

Stelliferous said:


> @thisgirl
> 
> Is it special treatment? Or is it fair treatment for them being good to you? Like Karma.
> 
> If a stranger is good to you, don't you treat them better too?


Um, no? If a stranger is good to me, I return the same treatment. If a friend is good to me, I treat them better. Fe may be objective when it comes to the interaction, but I'd think the whole treatment thing comes from core values and deep relationships. Not necessary Fe itself. 



perpetuallyreticent said:


> That in itself seems kind of redundant to me.


Hahaha, how so? Do explain because I would like to know. Fe = harmony but most people do not bother to further their explaining. 



WamphyriThrall said:


> That's the thing: Fi doesn't presume to "know" anything. It's an assumption. Judging functions do just that, and in this case, it's how Fe comes across to a Fi user's value system.
> 
> Fe does seem to have the "edge" when it comes to socializing. You see it in the ENFJ "cult leader" and ESTP "con man" stereotypes. Even ISTP benefit from an inferior Fe, with their "bad boy" aura.
> 
> ...


Then it would be safe to assume that Fi are morally self-righteous because it is comparing others to itself. *hint I am not serious about my answer* I would have thought Fi is really about authenticity and acceptance, but it is oxymoron in the way it presents itself.

I do want to clarify myself that I'm not in anyway mocking Fi-users.


----------



## perpetuallyreticent (Sep 24, 2014)

@Neverontime and @Rebecca.M 

I think I phrased that sentence weird because either you guys interpreted it completely wrong or I phrased it in a way for it to only be interpreted wrong.

But what I meant by values not being determined by judgement processes is that values aren't going to only be primarily found in feelers and not thinkers. 

In that, I was simply trying to state that our values are not determined whether we've got high Fi or Fe, or low. Because it seems there are people that think if you're a thinking type with tertiary or inferior feeling that therefore you lack values.

And that's what I don't believe to be true.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

DOGSOUP said:


> Wouldn't it be better to say judging functions deal with inferences (which means a good amount of reasoning is being used) over assumptions, which just kind of tend to happen and cannot be proven.
> 
> 
> Except that these people aren't real... or at least, they seem less and less real to me every time I see them. To be honest I'd love to meet the makers of these stereotypes, to see where they originate from. Or the people who were seen as incarnations of these stereotypes. Might be interesting.


Perhaps, but my point is that Fe is more concerned with relationships, and therefore seen as being more "sociable". I would say they express themselves better. Fi? Not so much. That's up to Ne or Se. 

On some level, Fi might be less socially graceful, because they're less in touch with others and aren't compelled to placate or understand others the same way. They have to consult inwards, first (speaking mainly for introverted, Fi-doms). 



thisgirl said:


> Then it would be safe to assume that Fi are morally self-righteous because it is comparing others to itself. *hint I am not serious about my answer* I would have thought Fi is really about authenticity and acceptance, but it is oxymoron in the way it presents itself.
> 
> I do want to clarify myself that I'm not in anyway mocking Fi-users.


Fi does not compare itself to others... it's more like taking information, and weighing how it jives with their values, beliefs, wants... There are individuals I disagree with, but at the end of the day, respect the differences and assume every person is their own world. I won't pressure someone to act or think a certain way, and you'd have to really make a scene to annoy me.


----------



## Aspen (Feb 25, 2016)

WamphyriThrall said:


> I think that's where the idea that Fe is "fake" comes from: Fi sees Fe as a social chameleon, and assumes that they simply go along with what everyone else is thinking/doing, and has no inner substance. You start to wonder, do they really agree with me, or are they simply being polite? It's how people are in the American south, with their "Bless your heart."
> 
> Perhaps some Fi types are irked by someone assuming they understand them (perhaps better than they understand themselves), because, really, can you really know with 100% accuracy what someone has been through, is experiencing, etc. unless you are them?


Can anyone ever truly understand someone else even if they explain where they are coming from? Most people don't even understand themselves or have the means to communicate that. Humanity is so complex that if we are only allowed to connect with people we completely understand then life is going to be very lonely. Having understanding for people and connecting with them doesn't mean I think I know everything about them or know them better than themselves.


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

perpetuallyreticent said:


> @Neverontime and @Rebecca.M
> 
> I think I phrased that sentence weird because either you guys interpreted it completely wrong or I phrased it in a way for it to only be interpreted wrong.
> 
> ...


Like I said, I wasn't talking about people, I was talking about functions.


----------



## perpetuallyreticent (Sep 24, 2014)

Neverontime said:


> Like I said, I wasn't talking about people, I was talking about functions.


Okay. I was covering my end since there was confusion about what I meant.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk


----------



## Sour Roses (Dec 30, 2015)

perpetuallyreticent said:


> In that, I was simply trying to state that our values are not determined whether we've got high Fi or Fe, or low. Because it seems there are people that think if you're a thinking type with tertiary or inferior feeling that therefore you lack values.
> 
> And that's what I don't believe to be true.



Any person of any type has sufficient time over the course of growing up, to develop a values system. 

What happens with inferior/tert feeling is just that it is used less often, consulted less, during daily life.

The person still has an F function, still uses it, and I don't think that anyone knowing much about MBTI would say otherwise.

What perhaps happens is that it _sounds_ like people may be saying that, when they refer to how infrequently, or perhaps simply less cognizantly, those types use feeling / reference moral values.


Really, MBTI comes down to "How often do you think that way". 
Because every thought process described in all the types is part of human nature on a whole, and one is likely to think that way at least once in their lifetime, LOL.


** I didn't mean to overstress my point... I just wanted to add more for further clarity.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

@perpetuallyreticent

Your OP doesn't sound like a Feeling function concept more of a emotional one.


----------



## perpetuallyreticent (Sep 24, 2014)

myjazz said:


> @perpetuallyreticent
> 
> Your OP doesn't sound like a Feeling function concept more of a emotional one.


Er... elaborate?? 

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

@perpetuallyreticent

It does seem that your Fi has attached itself to some form of emotional detachment or anxiety. Feeling functions does not equal emotions which is the main factor as to what I originally mentioned, no matter how well written someone tries to say otherwise or how many people feel the same way.

As far as the discussion on Fi vs Fe. To me it seems that Fi users find Fe to be fake because of its value on the other person instead of the Fe user. As a Fe auxiliary user I find Fi at times to be fake for vise versa reasons.

But I dont believe Fi nor Fe to be fake .

I can elaborate more if you want me to if I havn't done so


----------



## perpetuallyreticent (Sep 24, 2014)

myjazz said:


> @perpetuallyreticent
> 
> *It does seem that your Fi has attached itself to some form of emotional detachment or anxiety.* Feeling functions does not equal emotions which is the main factor as to what I originally mentioned, no matter how well written someone tries to say otherwise or how many people feel the same way.


The bold, but also the rest of this paragraph is compiled of really broad statements which is why I'm gonna ask for elaboration again. Give me some examples of what you mean by my Fi being some form of emotional detachment or anxiety? Where do you see that? In my OP where I describe how what I perceive as Fe, makes me uncomfortable? 

And I don't think I ever stated, or meant to give the impression that I consider Feeling functions = emotions. But if I did, I didn't mean to because I definitely don't agree with that.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

@perpetuallyreticent

My apologies I didn't mean to make it more confusing while trying to elaborate.

Might help if we back up some because no matter how many times I reread your OP the INFJ in me trips up on seeing anxiety to form a response that will better portray a comment to your question. 

If you would give me another example or something else please


----------



## iblameyou (Oct 1, 2016)

WamphyriThrall said:


> Perhaps, but my point is that Fe is more concerned with relationships, and therefore seen as being more "sociable". I would say they express themselves better. Fi? Not so much. That's up to Ne or Se.
> 
> On some level, Fi might be less socially graceful, because they're less in touch with others and aren't compelled to placate or understand others the same way. They have to consult inwards, first (speaking mainly for introverted, Fi-doms).
> 
> ...


I think if you are weighing the information you're receiving and consulting inwardly first (as you said), I would still consider that as comparing external values (or Fe's value in that sense) to yours. I'm not saying it's bad because we all do it to and that's how we form opinions and whatnot. Maybe comparing isn't the word but you are making judgments (positive or negative, up to the individual person). Again, I do notice it more with Fi making that huge assumption (of Fe stating a judgmental opinion) even if it's simply stating an observation. All in all, I do appreciate Fi even when they are one of the most under appreciated functions. Any of my healthy Fi friends (dom or aux) have that vibe where you can be yourself, but honestly, sometimes I wonder if they are judging me (because of Fe) even though they are very accepting at the same time. Again, this is my experience and understanding of Fi, not necessary an end of itself.


----------



## maihxo (Dec 19, 2015)

Neverontime said:


> As a Fi dom, you will most likely recognise it in negative ways. It might irritate, annoy, confuse, cause discomfort, seem fake/forced/sheep like. Other times you could be oblivious to it. Sometimes you will go along with Fe group behaviour due to Fi, like joining in the group hug because you don't want to be rude.


Fi is my auxiliary function ( I'm ESFP) but according to the cognitive functions tests I've done I use it very highly. I relate with this completely! I am always saying to my ENFP sister when we discuss our friends and their types that those who lead with Fe I really struggle with because I do exactly that - "recognise it in negative ways. It might irritate, annoy, confuse, cause discomfort, seem fake/forced/sheep like." And it annoys me, because sometimes I feel like their feeling comes across fake and disingenuous.


----------



## Librarian (Jun 14, 2016)

Fe users have often made me respect the function, but if given the choice I would always choose to be Te-Fi. I would not wear Fe very well but it would sure come in handy.


----------



## perpetuallyreticent (Sep 24, 2014)

Wanted to touch on this portion of @reckful 's post here. 

This part,



> Speaking of von Franz, she also said (citing Jung) that people have the most difficulty understanding not the opposite of their dominant function (i.e., Se for an Ni-dom), but rather their dominant function turned in the opposite direction (i.e., Ne for an Ni-dom). As she put it:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I've always felt more alienated from Fe than I ever did Ti. At least Ti is the same in orientation, being Ji. There is a similar process in which the data is processed. Not identical, obviously, but similar. Fe, on the other hand, may deal with feeling matters, but in a completely different manner than Fi does.


----------

