Signs you have lousy Fi
- Thread starter Billy
- Start date
That's true, I don't get most of it because it's about romanticizing the past, or love. If it's more abstract or sophisticated, or about emotions other than nostalgia and love, I tend to get it.
That's the story of my life.
For the most part, yes, as far as visual art. I also like some photographs. I do like music and a good voice, though I tend to like synthesizers even there.
I really do. I like a couple of his comedies and histories, like Julius Caesar, but most of his tragedies seem to be wallowing in self-pity. Unfortunately, most people seem to like Romeo and Juliet the best.
Agreed. It's better to follow the customs of the people you're surrounded by, than to just arrogantly act according to your own values, as if they're superior, and thus make everyone uncomfortable.
I could have written this one myself. I feel that way all the time, and it seems like completely arbitrary nonsense when they say that.
Quite often, but generally only with people who aren't very expressive in typical ways. If they're very reserved and their emotions mostly come out in idiosyncratic manners, then I am pretty insensitive to their visceral reactions.
That's a bit harsh, but I often think so. Mostly it's when their feelings make everyone else uncomfortable because they don't share them, and are impractical, keeping things from moving forward. If people attempt to halt largely positive social progress based on nothing more than an idiosyncratic personal notion, that really bothers me.
Especially if you're in an environment where people are looking for a scapegoat. If you take on accountability in many circumstances, you're just making yourself look bad.
If we're talking about taking responsibility privately in the sense of realizing that you have to change your habits in order to avoid negative outcomes, then no. Otherwise... it probably is.
True. It may not be healthy to be that way, but I am.
Yes. It's because of the above, choosing actions in order to gain approval.
Honestly, I think it's more neutral. I think a personal/emotional investment makes it harder to let go of something, but it doesn't increase the intrinsic value of something (nor does the lack of it). It's important to make sure you don't overrate something just because you've invested too much into it.
Yes, it's my worst function. Ni > Ti > Fe > Si=Ne > Se=Te > Fi
I do not get along with INFPs that well, and sometimes it even makes it difficult to deal with INTJs when they're expressing their feelings in a way that makes no sense to me.
Last edited:
i love poetry. derek walcott, elizabeth barrett browning, keats, shakespeare, whatever. i haven't read much but i have loved everything i have read. (but i refuse to read coleridge because i believe he murdered his baby with opium.)
(this list is not me in the slightest.)
(this list is not me in the slightest.)
1. You don't "get" most poetry.
Ha, no. I adore poetry and consider it easy to "get"
2. You can easily make other kinds of evaluations and choices, but you never seem to know what you really want, and find it frustrating that people ask you this all the time.
True, and untrue. I don't find it frustrating when people ask me this, I simply change my mind too often.
3. The only kind of art you can really appreciate is surrealism, M.C. Escher, and a few classical or Renaissance pieces... for the sense of proportion.
No, I love art of all kinds
4. You think most of Shakespeare's stuff is schmaltzy.
Actually I think it's usually fun and funny. Although I hate Romeo and Juliet. I want to strangle all the characters.
5. You have no moral problem (though at times might have an intellectual problem) with following the saying, "When in Rome, do as the Romans do."
Not in theory, however something in me rebels in the moment.
6. You don't understand what people are talking about when they want things to be "authentic and real." What, do they think I'm lying about something, or I'm an impostor?
I think most people like things to be authentic and real, even if they don't think about it as much.
7. People tell you (much to your confusion) that you're completely insensitive to "visceral reactions," and thus extremely offensive to many people, despite your best efforts to be polite/considerate.
I've never been told this.
8. You think people with strong personal convictions about right/wrong which have no basis in anything other than their own feelings are stupid, childish, backwards, uncooperative, and irrational.
I think people without strong personal convictions about right/wrong are stupid, childish, and backwards.
9. You think "personal accountability" is for suckers and scapegoats.
Just - No. I don't.
10. Your sense of ethics is based almost entirely on how your actions make other people feel about you.
no.
11. You've been compared to a politician more times than you care to remember.
no.
12. You don't appreciate when people claim a "lack of personal/emotional investment" as an argument against the value of something. To you, this makes it better.
Depends on the thing.
Ha, no. I adore poetry and consider it easy to "get"
2. You can easily make other kinds of evaluations and choices, but you never seem to know what you really want, and find it frustrating that people ask you this all the time.
True, and untrue. I don't find it frustrating when people ask me this, I simply change my mind too often.
3. The only kind of art you can really appreciate is surrealism, M.C. Escher, and a few classical or Renaissance pieces... for the sense of proportion.
No, I love art of all kinds
4. You think most of Shakespeare's stuff is schmaltzy.
Actually I think it's usually fun and funny. Although I hate Romeo and Juliet. I want to strangle all the characters.
5. You have no moral problem (though at times might have an intellectual problem) with following the saying, "When in Rome, do as the Romans do."
Not in theory, however something in me rebels in the moment.
6. You don't understand what people are talking about when they want things to be "authentic and real." What, do they think I'm lying about something, or I'm an impostor?
I think most people like things to be authentic and real, even if they don't think about it as much.
7. People tell you (much to your confusion) that you're completely insensitive to "visceral reactions," and thus extremely offensive to many people, despite your best efforts to be polite/considerate.
I've never been told this.
8. You think people with strong personal convictions about right/wrong which have no basis in anything other than their own feelings are stupid, childish, backwards, uncooperative, and irrational.
I think people without strong personal convictions about right/wrong are stupid, childish, and backwards.
9. You think "personal accountability" is for suckers and scapegoats.
Just - No. I don't.
10. Your sense of ethics is based almost entirely on how your actions make other people feel about you.
no.
11. You've been compared to a politician more times than you care to remember.
no.
12. You don't appreciate when people claim a "lack of personal/emotional investment" as an argument against the value of something. To you, this makes it better.
Depends on the thing.
Looking back..and I have noticed how much my perspective has changed..I have really gotten back and forth on this theories..
When it comes to art, nature, music and other things, I am very much NOT a Fi. I like classical Baroque period music for its structure. I do love surrealism and similar art.
Stuff like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Las_Meninas_01.jpg
Diego Vel
Stuff like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Las_Meninas_01.jpg
Diego Vel
- You can't form an opinion or make a decision without finding out what popular opinion is, and then agreeing with the consensus.
- You have almost no personal boundaries and cannot say "no" even though you wish you could: You wear yourself utterly thin for others and secretly resent them for it. (Martyr complex)
Last edited:
- Aug 9, 2009
- 1,339
- 180
- 0
- MBTI
- IEI
- Enneagram
- 6w5 sp/sx
+1 on liking Baroque
1. Err, poetry is a hit or miss for me. I do like hearing people's interpretations though.
2. I know what I want, I just don't know how to go about getting it. Now when people ask me for an opinion on something, that's a problem.
3. Heh, art. Only recently did I figure out what to look for, but surrealism isn't my thing.
4. "Oh Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo?..." that's about all I know from Shakespeare. Guess I never cared to read more about it.
5. I don't think that statement was intended to be applied to moral issues, but if it does, I don't care what the Romans are doing.
6. Oh, I know what they're talking about, and I think they are really asking for something else, like more expressiveness and openness.
7. Nope, never heard this one.
8. Strong personal convictions are good, but without a strong foundation in meaning, it couldn't be anything but childish and irrational. I suppose this gets at the question of whether 'feelings' are meant to refer purely to emotions rather than content of personal experience.
9. Uh no. Accountability for someone else's faults is for suckers and scapegoats. I think, however, that interest in poetry/art is working with something completely different from having morals and principles. This test sounds completely invalid now.
10. Nope.
11. Nope.
12. Err, I'm not sure what this distinction is getting at, but it would depend on the thing in question.
What's a passing score? 8 of 12? Looks like my "Fi" is pretty good (though I don't think I consulted that function to get these).
1. Err, poetry is a hit or miss for me. I do like hearing people's interpretations though.
2. I know what I want, I just don't know how to go about getting it. Now when people ask me for an opinion on something, that's a problem.
3. Heh, art. Only recently did I figure out what to look for, but surrealism isn't my thing.
4. "Oh Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo?..." that's about all I know from Shakespeare. Guess I never cared to read more about it.
5. I don't think that statement was intended to be applied to moral issues, but if it does, I don't care what the Romans are doing.
6. Oh, I know what they're talking about, and I think they are really asking for something else, like more expressiveness and openness.
7. Nope, never heard this one.
8. Strong personal convictions are good, but without a strong foundation in meaning, it couldn't be anything but childish and irrational. I suppose this gets at the question of whether 'feelings' are meant to refer purely to emotions rather than content of personal experience.
9. Uh no. Accountability for someone else's faults is for suckers and scapegoats. I think, however, that interest in poetry/art is working with something completely different from having morals and principles. This test sounds completely invalid now.
10. Nope.
11. Nope.
12. Err, I'm not sure what this distinction is getting at, but it would depend on the thing in question.
What's a passing score? 8 of 12? Looks like my "Fi" is pretty good (though I don't think I consulted that function to get these).
Last edited:
I usually understand what it is trying to convey better than most, but find it quite difficult to value much of modern poetry.
I can make choices based on enough inputs. When there is little evidence to go on and neither likely outcome is objectively better things become much harder. I know what I want when I want something, but the idea that I should have feelings about so many minor issues is strange.
I can appreciate more than just that, but much artwork is overrated.
Much of Shakespeare is very good, but some parts are terrible.
Yes I do.
I care a great deal about authenticity, but many people has some strange ideas about what is real.
No one has ever put it like that, but I could imagine why some might.
Convictions need some backing.
Absolutely not.
Not at all.
Now that's just crazy talk.
Eh, maybe.
