Two sides to Fi

I tend to find that Fi users don't really focus on the differences between people except in reaction to the idea of overwhelming sameyness. Like Ti, it asks "what is it, and what is it not?" in contrast to Je's approach, which focuses on the relationships between objects and causalities between them.

TiFe looks at commonalities and differences in people as a way of understanding what is "essentially human". Person A likes cats and hates dogs, Person B likes birds but hates peanut butter and is indifferent to dogs or cats. Therefore, preference in animals is not part of humanity as a whole, not coded into us, and therefore not "real", in a sense. It's more of an accumulated quirk than an essential aspect of personhood. However, both Persons A and B become defensive when you speak poorly of cat- and bird-lovers, or imply that people that don't love dogs have some kind of personality disorder-- aha! Now we've struck a chord of the human. It's the action/reaction of the unseen that gives away what a human is like, to an Fe-user. Everything else is mere detail.

FiTe, on the other hand, tends to ignore that. It takes as given that a human does is human. It makes no sense to weigh, judge, or criticize people for their details because it's all "them". There's little to nothing to unravel, but everything to learn: it doesn't matter why I or anyone else likes things unless you're working in therapy, what matters is whether or not you accept as given whether or not the other person is, well, a full person. There's an association between the Fi palette and the Fi-user's identity. "I'm a person who loves a good steak", "I suppose you could call me a Star Wars fan", "Look, I'm just a guy who loves a nice suit, is that so wrong?".

This often causes a language barrier between the two, owing to the two different goals in speaking and word selection. Fe speaks as a way of relating to and affecting the other's disposition, choosing words that have a commonly understood meaning, and unusual words as a way of getting at a specific meaning or avoiding cliche. There can be impatience with others when the "rules" of communication aren't being followed. "The words and grammar you used imply that you actually hate me and not just the thing I like. I'm going to trust you meant well but what you said was hurtful, please be more considerate next time."

Fi cares less about how language affects others, and more with how language reflects the speaker, using words to relate the speaker's disposition to the listener. It doesn't matter how the words hit others if they accurately convey (from the speaker's perspective) what is being felt and meant. Unusual words are used more as they like the way they sound or precisely convey complex ideas and feelings. Strong Te-users have that notorious stereotype of saying very rude things and defending it with "look up what I literally said in a dictionary and get over it" for this reason-- they value the factual accuracy of the language over its impact.

My FiNe wife used to drive me crazy by using really disgusting mental pictures to describe things she hates (often using terms that evoke images of parasites, rotten food, or skin conditions) because she's trying to convey the impact the thing had on her. I always tell her that while I care very much for how she feels about things, my emotional airport is too short to handle those kinds of jumbo-jet descriptions and they're more distracting than communicative. Fi users don't usually avoid cliche unless they specifically decide to, so long as it conveys their feelings properly, leading to umpteen Si+Te users with their stock quotes and SeFi reality stars who "hate fake bitches" and "aren't here to make friends". Somewhat paradoxically, Fi-users are also the ones who speak in unusual, often dated patterns and vocabulary despite the confusion it causes people. "M'lady" is the most notorious, but I also know Fi-users who act almost in-character based on whatever book they've read recently.

As a result, Fi listeners tend to give speakers a lot of leeway. There's no expectation for how someone "should" express themselves, because speech is just another detail of a person that makes up the snapshot of their identity. The listener is likewise free to react as they please, and is under no obligation to find common ground with any given person. Differences are just a part of life and you shouldn't have to be friends with everyone. People are made of millions of details that will never completely match another, so why fuss about my exact wording when how I speak is up to me and only me?

Fi users really and truly, down to their very essence, mean it when they say they can only speak for themselves.

Understandable. Fe very much values *not* saying the truth of how we feel if context would suggest it appropriate to do so. Fi and Te tend to arrive there together, as experience shows the relative effectiveness of that kind of communication in different situations. We just... don't really care as much about representing our core essence as our ideas and intentions. I think this is why TiFe ebbs and flows in its articulation; we are extremely intentional communicators. We would rather say nothing, or say something very slowly, than risk being misrepresented by our own words. There's an element of reputation in there as well, because we often can't bear, even for the duration of a short chat, the notion that someone may think of us in a way we didn't intend. For some that means being extra kind to avoid being seen as mean, for others it may mean being very commanding to avoid being seen as weak.

Ti pauses usually translate to "Hm... how do I say this exactly... the word X keeps popping up but I don't like the connotation... maybe if I dig into what I believe about this again I can recreate the meaning I want to express... hm..."

And even when Fe takes over, it has all that warm emphasis and on-beat gestures because it's trying to make sure the words are being received with the understanding of the intention with which they were spoken. Counting down on fingers before pausing on the thumb, then slowly pounding the fist in the air, emphasizes that of all the numbers, this one is the one you should remember.

Zweilous, those are some good observations. In some of those senses I feel more Ti. I can also be particular about choosing language (like a Ti-Fe user) for an audience when I think it's helpful, especially when defining things and clarifying distinctions. 

I've also noticed (and sort of dislike) when Fi-users define themselves by their preferences. Actually, I high Fe types so a similar thing (decorating their truck in all 49ers paraphernalia). It seems like a shallow identity. One difference is that high Fi users do not like defining themselves by their social affiliations. But they do define themselves in terms of their interests. In the past few years, I've watched how different people define themselves and learned to be okay with it because... I could never find any good criteria by which we should define ourselves. 

As you said, I do focus on similarities between people rather than distinctions between them. I categorize people automatically by similar people, and not in a judgmental way - that has its own separate system. What I do make are finely grained ethical distinctions the way Ti does about inanimate qualities. I like to reconcile seemingly ethical paradoxes. I can put my finger precisely on what others like and don't like in an ethical sense. Things that bother them but they can't put their fingers on. However, I couldn't tell you someone's favorite color or ice-cream flavor.

I also have a feeling of being fully human. Like there is no feeling I haven't experienced. The difference is a matter of degree, not kind. <- That may not be true, actually, but it's sort of a deeply rooted presupposition. It lends an incredible sense of empathy where judgment may otherwise be. 

lol Yes of course. Even the sentiment irks me though at times.....SaveSave

I've seen Fi users identify with their sports team, race, gender, club, etc. As long as they feel that it's something they are actually personally interested in. But the various affiliations they have make up the totality of who they are as an individual. I hate sports personally, but most people seem to like them and go crazy identifying with their team especially during some kind of playoff season. And they aren't all Fe. I am definitely more likely to define myself based on my interests, but I'm also see myself as being "that person's friend" or a "member of that staff" or I even create my own groupings or posses to feel like I'm part of social circles.

I'm not sure if anyone here is into the enneagram, but the affiliation with social things is not a cognitive function issue, but rather a social instinct issue. People with a strongly identified social instinct will identify with the connections they keep, the groups they join, the friends they have, and their identity in relation to all these people. Social-blind Fe-users will not do this.

True, but I do know one SO 6 TeSi who is obsessed with racial politics, and identifies himself and everyone by their racial group, gender, occupation, etc. He’s very quick to judge people based on their conglomerate social representation.

Oh yes that makes sense. Yeah I find that Fi with low Te can be on one end of that spectrum and Te with low Fi on the other. My Fi and Te are in a fierce battle. Swords and everything.