Post by mikesilb on Sept 18, 2017 12:56:58 GMT -5
Hi again,
I have noticed two seemingly distinct qualities in Fi that I'm not sure how well they interconnect and how distinct they generally are. (And this post is not necessarily relating to the Seelie/Unseelie aspect).
I have seen two different ways of describing Fi:
The first way has to do with their sense of personal causes and ethics in general. I find that this aspect of Fi leads a person to have a strong sense of making sure (possibly on a political level) that people's individual rights are not being harmed in any way. Fairness as an ethical virtue is fundamental here and there will often be a need to speak up or protest in order to make sure that their voice has been heard. Anything that they believe to help the downtrodden or to increase the personal rights of individuals or groups is something that will be paid attention to.
The second way is more about responding emotionally to what impacts them in any given moment. If there is something positive that affects them, they will smile (in the Fi asymmetrical snarl-y way). If there is a sad story that they hear, they can deeply resonate with the other person and can empathize on an emotional level with that individual. If there is something that will make them laugh, they can make such a deep laugh that genuinely affects that person to the core. There is also an emotional sensitivity in this form of Fi, where they are DEEPLY affected by how words and deeds ping at them. Criticism (that lacks constructiveness....or even sometimes constructive criticism since Fi can overpower/overtake Te in a given moment) can momentarily paralyze them in a way that requires them to spend time alone to shake off the emotional pain. So this sense of emotional pinging or resonating with what is happening around them is how their Fi shows up.
I tend to think that form #1 is one outgrowth of form #2, but it is not at all a necessary outgrowth. In my own case, I feel that while I can deeply resonate with the emotions/moods of other individuals (despite having Te > Fi in my CT), I may not necessarily then join a group or a cause to defend or protect another from that harm. What I am wondering though is whether or not I have any less of a conscious (or even ego) Fi since I will definitely apply form #2 (and do it a lot....especially as many of you on Discord know) but not necessarily #1. There is a chance that I might join a larger cause....but I'm not sure if that is necessarily a fait accompli based on the fact that I exhibit #2.
So this gets to the question of what signifies conscious Fi and what signifies ego Fi? Would both forms be needed? Would one form suffice?
In my own case (as a read TeNi....which I find to fit me very nicely overall ), it isn't like I am barely doing #2. I tend to think (especially in thinking that I was one of the two NFP types using the MBTI) that I was applying #2 quite a lot, and my own emotional resonance and sensitivity is very much present (especially as I feel it on the inside). I would have thought that this definitely puts me for sure in the conscious level of Fi, and quite possibly (although I am less sure of this) in the ego level as well.
So I am very interested in how either of these two components (and/or both of these) fit the general characteristics of Fi, and whether or not #2 looms large for determining either conscious and/or ego-level Fi.
I would love your feedback about this!
I have noticed two seemingly distinct qualities in Fi that I'm not sure how well they interconnect and how distinct they generally are. (And this post is not necessarily relating to the Seelie/Unseelie aspect).
I have seen two different ways of describing Fi:
The first way has to do with their sense of personal causes and ethics in general. I find that this aspect of Fi leads a person to have a strong sense of making sure (possibly on a political level) that people's individual rights are not being harmed in any way. Fairness as an ethical virtue is fundamental here and there will often be a need to speak up or protest in order to make sure that their voice has been heard. Anything that they believe to help the downtrodden or to increase the personal rights of individuals or groups is something that will be paid attention to.
The second way is more about responding emotionally to what impacts them in any given moment. If there is something positive that affects them, they will smile (in the Fi asymmetrical snarl-y way). If there is a sad story that they hear, they can deeply resonate with the other person and can empathize on an emotional level with that individual. If there is something that will make them laugh, they can make such a deep laugh that genuinely affects that person to the core. There is also an emotional sensitivity in this form of Fi, where they are DEEPLY affected by how words and deeds ping at them. Criticism (that lacks constructiveness....or even sometimes constructive criticism since Fi can overpower/overtake Te in a given moment) can momentarily paralyze them in a way that requires them to spend time alone to shake off the emotional pain. So this sense of emotional pinging or resonating with what is happening around them is how their Fi shows up.
I tend to think that form #1 is one outgrowth of form #2, but it is not at all a necessary outgrowth. In my own case, I feel that while I can deeply resonate with the emotions/moods of other individuals (despite having Te > Fi in my CT), I may not necessarily then join a group or a cause to defend or protect another from that harm. What I am wondering though is whether or not I have any less of a conscious (or even ego) Fi since I will definitely apply form #2 (and do it a lot....especially as many of you on Discord know) but not necessarily #1. There is a chance that I might join a larger cause....but I'm not sure if that is necessarily a fait accompli based on the fact that I exhibit #2.
So this gets to the question of what signifies conscious Fi and what signifies ego Fi? Would both forms be needed? Would one form suffice?
In my own case (as a read TeNi....which I find to fit me very nicely overall ), it isn't like I am barely doing #2. I tend to think (especially in thinking that I was one of the two NFP types using the MBTI) that I was applying #2 quite a lot, and my own emotional resonance and sensitivity is very much present (especially as I feel it on the inside). I would have thought that this definitely puts me for sure in the conscious level of Fi, and quite possibly (although I am less sure of this) in the ego level as well.
So I am very interested in how either of these two components (and/or both of these) fit the general characteristics of Fi, and whether or not #2 looms large for determining either conscious and/or ego-level Fi.
I would love your feedback about this!