[INFP] Introverted Feeling Function

Tendency to tantrums can e.g. relate to FFM limbic/calm in that calmer individuals generally are less reactive in this sort of sense. Personally I think this is often just as much a factor as is how mature someone's feeling function is. It's true that, all things being equal, someone with a very strong feeling function is more likely to have a sense of reasonableness about their feeling judgments, and this can help offset outburst tendencies some.

Tendency to attention-whore is well-documented to relate to FFM extraversion/neuroticism. Note FFM Extraversion is not quite = Jungian extraversion.

I think introverted feeling is harder to move, somehow, than extraverted feeling, precisely because it isn't oriented outward. This can certainly give it a certain sort of stubbornness but I'd call it more inaccessibility than stubbornness really (what abd might be getting at by "private"). However, stubbornness by itself (independent of the particular variety) is a trait I think can't easily be mapped onto a specific type.
Instead, I'd say introverted feeling has a variety of stubbornness hard to deal with for types not acquainted with it.
 
Yeah I think thinking about this more reaffirms for me that the ultimate collective consensus machine is Te, not Fe, because the latter is still reliant on subjective criteria for value judgment. I guess in the one case where it's just going with what the group wants, sure. But I do not think that's really what good quality/differentiated extraverted feeling does. Now seeking harmony is a separate story -- that, one could imagine extraverted feeling (or feeling in general) to do -- in fact, over seeking true consensus.

The confusion tends to be that the extraverted orientation to collective values is more a concern with the existing attitudes of the time (the extravert is more concerned with these than is the introvert in Jungian terms).
It's not necessarily a desire to conform to them, it could equally to involve one's cognition in them.
A differentiated function should be usable in individual terms, rather than just sticking to conservative trends. Although it's true that for many of the less outlandish, these kind of amount to the same thing -- their individual ambition tends to be to fit in. Still, the normal man isn't particularly differentiated anyway.

What's very confusing is that in Big 5/FFM terms, there are a LOT of Jungian concepts smashed together: e.g. what he called intuition-sensation as well as what he called differentiation/collective. Ultimately people low in Open to Experience have lower thirst for really developing a mode of experience/cognition to its finer aspects. Of course to some extent this is related to Jungian intuition, but it's pretty different too (the only main similarity is greater orientation to possibilities and imagination).

It's worth noting just as extraversion can get caught in parroting the views existing in a time, introversion can get caught in expressing an archetype of the collective unconscious in a raw, primitive fashion. And this is especially the case in 2 cases: 1) an undifferentiated person 2) a differentiated type with an inferior extraversion or introversion respectively
 
Last edited:
I think in some ways, Fi/Te axis has a greater focus on pragmatic judgment. That is, Te demands collective consensus based on the facts (vs Ti deploys logic more for structural definition), more or less in an appeal that without such appeals, knowledge stagnates, as no results are possible. This is one reason why Te types are sometimes associated to "scientist" mentalities -- given science demands more in the way of pragmatics leading to collective consensus. I see the complementary nature as being that Fi represents the most fundamental a priori criterion for relating the subject to any given content -- this demands that the subject adopt certain values/attitudes. In a way, the "more subjective of the subjective judgment functions." I do NOT agree with the idea that this implies Fi types don't appeal to the rest of the group and view their value judgments as universally applicable. Indeed, part of their feeling function not descending to emotionality is ultimately the claim it has to normative judgment.

I don't tend to agree that Ti doms are "Ps" in MBTI necessarily. I think they can be extremely rigid, for instance. I think Fi/Te's focus on pragmatic judgment criteria is somehow often construed as more "bullheaded" than the apparently more refined, structural considerations of Ti, but quite honestly, I find this forgets that Ti acts with an auxiliary in mind (usually). This means that, while pure Ti may devolve into pure structural considerations, typically these considerations are built with some irrational factor in mind. So for example, impactfulness to some presently existing situation via Se. This results in extremely rigid structural considerations quite frequently which the Ti type demands rather than merely speculating.
 
acd said:
Well then the difference is that Fi can disagree without thinking it's causing drama while Fe Dom's see drama and explosions when people disagree and question. I haven't said anything explosive or dramatic. I don't even think it's negative.
Click to expand...

And if I thought you had, I would tell you point blank. I don't dance around. Again though, you're just proving my previous statement. Fi tends to turn everything inward, personalize, make it about them. That's the 'selfish' thing I said. I made no statement about you personally, and yet you took it personally and reacted to it. I apologize for not being more clear. Obviously we have different opinions on Fi, and that's fine. Let's agree to disagree.
 
Another thing that occurs to me as problematic about the idea some have that Fi is "individual" Fe appeals to "everyone" is that universality is to some extent crucial for any function and a sign of maturity. That is, some degree of it separates cognition from hallucination -- if you're simply seeing things, that's a problem. Generally, it's true in my experience that to Fi, the idea that there may be certain limits to what a certain individual's nature can help them relate to is very real. But, this is also extremely important to Fe types -- when Fe seeks involvement with the object, there must be a subjective appeal to that involvement.

If a feeling type sees that a certain judgment is unnatural to a certain individual's subjective nature, that generally should be worked into their worldview, accommodated as part of the nuance of how different perspectives lead to different ways of assigning value.
 
Probably an upshot of my approach to note is that I refuse approaches that more or less treat the differentiation of Fi vs Fe as being more important than the differentiation of F from T (as some proponents of the Beebe model are often prone to doing). I see these as subtler issues. The least subtle issues are F vs T and N vs S (in their Jungian, not MBTI dichotomies, senses).
 
I also think Fi compels the user to do the unpopular thing in the belief of what the user thinks/feels is right even if it puts the user at a disadvantage. Because I'm obsessed with US politics these days, I'll say I think Speaker Ryan publically stating he does not support Trump is an example of this. I don't know his mbti, but in doing so, he's drawn a lot of backlash on himself from Republicans. He's not supporting Trump because he is not a populist. It will be very inconvenient for him if Trump actually is elected, but he was acting more on his beliefs. Call that a temper tantrum if you must. I'm definitely not a fan of Paul Ryan, but i do give him credit for this. When I was a kid in school, I remember in one of my classes there was a poster on the wall that read, “What is right is not always popular and what is popular is not always right.” it's an Einstein quote. That quote has always resonated with me. I think that is a good example of Fi.
 
Ti - thought police
Fi - feeling police
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top