Confused about Fe vs Fi | Page 2 | INFJ Forum

Confused about Fe vs Fi

Some Fe people make Fi sound selfish. Like it's only about what the individual feels and is not concerned about other people.

Some Fi people, as well as thinkers who have Fe as an inferior function, make Fe sound superficial. I've read comments from many that seem convinced that it is never sincer, and some have said that they think it is all about pettiness and political correctnesss. They also accuse Fe as "groupthink". What they think of when they think "Fe" goes against *their values*.

So those of us with Fe need to understand the way that Fi often percieves us. I don't think anyone really has a problem with true alturism, if there is such a thing. But we look fake to some people.

And people with Fi need to understand that Fe does not just conform to whatever group it is in. The values of the group have to match the individual's values. It is not a superfical way of being. It is just a different way of being.

*Edit- Agreed with the poster above me. I used to think that Fe was simply externalizing feelings, because I do that sometimes.

I also used to think that Fi was simply internalizing them and that it only dealt with the individual's emotions.

But it's better to think of them as internal and external values and not as feelings.
 
Last edited:
aeon said:
In MBTI, feeling ≠ emotion.
Click to expand...

I wish more people understood this very simple concept. Apparently the heavy negative bias towards feelers is this idea that their decisions are based primarily in primitive instincts(a.k.a emotions) and that is why they can't be taken seriously.

Can't emphasize this enough.
 
Ji taps into a personal understanding.
Je taps into a universal understanding.

F is more often than not about; "what is appropriate behavior".
 
MikeA said:
F is more often than not about; "what is appropriate behavior".
Click to expand...

The only difference is that Fi establishes this criteria of "appropriate behavior" by personal reasoning, while Fe establishes it by normative reasoning.
 
AUM said:
The only difference is that Fi establishes this criteria of "appropriate behavior" by personal reasoning, while Fe establishes it by normative reasoning.
Click to expand...
Yes, exactly. Normative is the word.

However, from a Fi individual's perspective they can often think that whatever they believe IS the norm, even though it is merely a personal point of view. They project (Just like Ti) that "Yeah, this is how it SHOULD be," and are often inclined to try and change the external environment whether bulldozing into other people's lives or not just to make it work the way they want it to. This last part does not always happen because that would go against what they believe in, but they tend to forget it (Just like Ti) and go "Hmpf, you're wrong, you're evil," and do it anyway.

An example, without turning this topic into a political debate, just to explain the above paragraph: The U.S. Government "Go to war and seize a country to change their system into our kind of Democracy" is extreme Introverted Judging (Ti and Fi), and project when to defend itself, that it is for the better good for everyone else that they siege that country and do it THEIR way.
 
Last edited:
AUM said:
Apparently the heavy negative bias towards feelers is this idea that their decisions are based primarily in primitive instincts(a.k.a emotions) and that is why they can't be taken seriously.
Click to expand...

Very true.

I think that people of different temperaments will simply have different emotional responses over different things- that goes for both thinkers and feelers.

My theory on thinker/feeler issues based on observations:

I think a lot of the time feelers will appear to "confirm" the common assumption of being ruled by emotions, because they get upset about things that an observing thinker believes that he or she would not get upset over.

So the thinker will then dismiss the "drama queen" as:

"You're being oversensitve. You need to try to be more objective so you can think straight."

But I have noticed some thinkers saying that they get hurt by feelers, and I believe that the reason for this most of the time is that the feeler is being defensive, because the feeler thinks that he or she is being attacked by the thinker when they are not.

So basically, I don't think it's as simple as many people think. It's more of a matter of communication problems.

Feelers are not simply emotional basket cases. Thinkers are not simply robots.

The word needs to get out more about thinking v. feeling..
 
Last edited:
Is vegetarianism/veganism largely a product of Fi?
 
bickelz said:
Fi would go vegetarian because "it's wrong to eat animals" and Fe would go vegetarian because "everybody else around me" is going vegetarian.
Click to expand...
I have never done a single thing in my life for the sake of "everybody else around me is doing it". Should I turn in my INFJ card? LOL.

Seriously though, everyone around me has told me that I march to the beat of my own drum. I concur. But I thought this was a trait of INFJs (highly individualistic, committed to a cause, etc.). Do I have this wrong?

FWIW, I am vegetarian because: 1.) It is wrong to eat animals, 2.) I've gotten food poisoning from bad meat more times I can count (food hygiene reasons), 3.) I hate that icky, oily feeling I get after eating meat.

I also don't drink alcohol. I used to, but it really never did anything for me (i.e., improved my mood, made me happy, etc.--it just made me sleepy at best and depressed at worst). I look at people who drink alcohol and go out of control (e.g., do things they would stop short of doing when they are sober, become violent/start fights, become all-around losers--alcohol becomes a central focus of their lives), and think no way in hell I want to become part of that club--even if everyone is doing it. It's tough because whenever I go to a place where people are drinking, they're always urging me to drink or giving me a hard time or making fun of me for not drinking. Even so, I stick to my guns. If I lose a few friendships or fail to get laid because of it, so be it. At the end of the day I have to live with myself, not with these "pseudofriends". But by the same token, alcohol is a poison. The feel-good effect that you experience is due to alcohol's toxicity. Why the fuck would I want to put something in my body that is harmful to it. I get enough of that eating food ladened in pesticides, breathing polluted air around me, drinking nasty water from the tap, etc.

Would you read this bit as Fi-intense, Fe-intense, or something else?
 
Last edited:
bickelz said:
Fe would go vegetarian because "everybody else around me" is going vegetarian.
Click to expand...

I would say that's what a very immature Fe would do. Though to be honest, I don't think going vegetarian has nothing to do with functions.
 
Is it really wrong to eat animals--? That's more of a personal view, and much more of a personal value. Some people will need to eat animal protein, while others won't need to. It's more about what's most healthy for your body. You'll find books that say yes, you need animal protein and you'll find books that say no, you don't need it. For the record, I've been vegetarian, vegan, and omnivore. I feel at my best when I eat meat, fruit and vegetables with very few grains, and very little dairy.

That aside, [MENTION=4254]Broken705[/MENTION] is absolutely right. Behavior can be an expression of MBTI, but if we're separating cognitive functions that's more Jungian theory which works with pairs of functions.
 
AUM said:
I would say that's what a very immature Fe would do. Though to be honest, I don't think going vegetarian has nothing to do with functions.
Click to expand...
Au contraire. I think if you were to examine the reasons or rationale behind an individual's decision to go vegetarian (decision-making processes), you might be able to clue into the fact that they use primary X and auxilliary Y processes in doing so.

You might be able to do the same for a lot of lifestyle choices that a person has made...
 
arbygil said:
Is it really wrong to eat animals--? That's more of a personal view, and much more of a personal value. Some people will need to eat animal protein, while others won't need to. It's more about what's most healthy for your body. You'll find books that say yes, you need animal protein and you'll find books that say no, you don't need it. For the record, I've been vegetarian, vegan, and omnivore. I feel at my best when I eat meat, fruit and vegetables with very few grains, and very little dairy.
Click to expand...
I respect others' diet and lifestyle choices, so I am not on some nutty crusade to convert everyone on the planet to vegetarianism--far from it.

But engage your empathy, and experience it from the animal's point of view. How would you like it if you were brought into the world and had your cute little life cut short for the express purpose of being killed so you can feed "a growing population"? Hell, why don't we bring humans into the world so we can harvest their organs for transplants? I see humans and animals in the same view. Everyone is worthy of dignity, respect, and to live a full life.

And please don't give me the "plants are alive, too" argument...

Edit: These are my views. I'm not here to impose them on others or win converts or to derail the thread. I'm just asking you to read them and tell me what cognitive processes could possibly be at play here. Thanks...
 
Mogura said:
Au contraire. I think if you were to examine the reasons or rationale behind an individual's decision to go vegetarian (decision-making processes), you might be able to clue into the fact that they use primary X and auxilliary Y processes in doing so.

You might be able to do the same for a lot of lifestyle choices that a person has made...
Click to expand...

No offense, but the way you're looking at human behavior is very simplistic. Do you actually believe that MBTI is able to predict a specific behavior? This system is merely a model, people use a variety of other mechanisms to make decisions, not only the X and Y variables. You have to take in into the equation several other factors such as personal experiences, culture, and personal philosophies. It's not merely about inserting an input and getting an exact output.

People of the same type go vegetarian for a lot of different reasons. Don't confuse the model with reality, it's all I'm saying.
 
Mogura said:
I respect others' diet and lifestyle choices, so I am not on some nutty crusade to convert everyone on the planet to vegetarianism--far from it.

But engage your empathy, and experience it from the animal's point of view. How would you like it if you were brought into the world and had your cute little life cut short for the express purpose of being killed so you can feed "a growing population"? Hell, why don't we bring humans into the world so we can harvest their organs for transplants? I see humans and animals in the same view. Everyone is worthy of dignity, respect, and to live a full life.

And please don't give me the "plants are alive, too" argument...
Click to expand...

Animals eat each other.
Humans are animals.

Lions eat antelopes.
Humans eat cows.

What's the problem?
 
Majesty said:
Animals eat each other.
Humans are animals.

Lions eat antelopes.
Humans eat cows.

What's the problem?
Click to expand...
I'm cool with hunting. I'm not cool with industrialized douchebag agricultural practices...
 
AUM said:
No offense, but the way you're looking at human behavior is very simplistic. Do you actually believe that MBTI is able to predict a specific behavior? This system is merely a model, people use a variety of other mechanisms to make decisions, not only the X and Y variables. You have to take in into the equation several other factors such as personal experiences, culture, and personal philosophies. It's not merely about inserting an input and getting an exact output.

People of the same type go vegetarian for a lot of different reasons. Don't confuse the model with reality, it's all I'm saying.
Click to expand...
Of course I don't believe MBTI predicts a specific behavior. But it does describe decision making processes (not the decisions themselves, but the processes)...
 
Mogura said:
I respect others' diet and lifestyle choices, so I am not on some nutty crusade to convert everyone on the planet to vegetarianism--far from it.

But engage your empathy, and experience it from the animal's point of view. How would you like it if you were brought into the world and had your cute little life cut short for the express purpose of being killed so you can feed "a growing population"? Hell, why don't we bring humans into the world so we can harvest their organs for transplants? I see humans and animals in the same view. Everyone is worthy of dignity, respect, and to live a full life.

And please don't give me the "plants are alive, too" argument...

Edit: These are my views. I'm not here to impose them on others or win converts or to derail the thread. I'm just asking you to read them and tell me what cognitive processes could possibly be at play here. Thanks...
Click to expand...

1. It's me or the animal, health-wise, so I eat them. But I eat organic whenever possible, and I believe in a healthy, humane death for them. But I'm one of those who need the meat.

2. I agree with dignity. I used to be a huge PETA advocate, and I still am. There are humane ways to eat meat, and there are kind ways to treat your food. In the same way that I don't want to destroy myself with pesticides in my fruits and veg, I also want to eat meat from free range animals and organic farm sources - and places that actually help the ecosystem thrive, rather than destroy it (self-sustaining agriculture, and all that). A clean, humane death is best. And respecting its source is equally important.

Heck, this is a totally different topic and it could probably be split to a new topic. But as for the cognitive function, well it's the same as before: The reason why we do something and the reason we prefer something can be different reasons. Fe is an extroverted function. It relates to to the outside world, and how we relate to others. Fi is an introverted function and it relates to the internal world, and how we relate to ourselves. If you're strictly going by Fi, then the whole vegetarian thing of "It's wrong to eat animals" is Fi. That's your personal opinion, but it's your personal value. It's something that you may judge others about, if they don't share that value. Me, I come from vegetarianism more from an Fe angle: Is it healthy for you? Do you like it? Is it good for your body? How do you feel? Right/wrong of my values don't come into it at all.
 
AUM said:
I would say that's what a very immature Fe would do. Though to be honest, I don't think going vegetarian has nothing to do with functions.
Click to expand...

Mogura said:
I have never done a single thing in my life for the sake of "everybody else around me is doing it". Should I turn in my INFJ card? LOL.
Click to expand...

Oh no. Lol, I was more talking in context if Fe moves in with vegetarians/ has a vegetarian roommate, then it would be inclined to go vegetarian out of accommodation. It's a bad example but it was brought up so I'd thought I would show the difference between Fe/Fi in that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back