Thursday, June 15, 2006

Fe Organizing Principles

Do you have a comment about this page?

8 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

People I know who prefer Fi don't care about such "nonsense." They seem to sorta wish it didn't exist. They connect to people for who they are, not for what their standing is in the scheme of things.

I am someone who prefers Fi, and I do connect to people for who they are, but I also struggle to anchor folks into their relational positions. Its information that you just need if you want to converse with them. I'm accustomed to only getting maybe one or two connective threads at the introduction, and then I have to either observe or request the remaining threads. It's so much easier to understand a person when you are aware of all of their connectivity.

August 14, 2006  
Blogger Vicky Jo said...

Y'know, I just did a session on Interaction Styles, and I noticed how important it is to that style to get to know "who everybody is." Because this style has a need to make "consultative decisions," they want as much information as possible in order to "integrate" it. So, for example, if they know so-and-so is a "scientist," then that is a good person to "consult with" about a scientific question. Makes sense, right? So I noticed that the important piece is not the title per se, but what the title implies: it says what this person might be able to offer in the way of background, or life experience. This seems different from locating somebody's position on an "org chart," which I think may better resemble how INFJs "sort" according to people's titles.

What do you think? Does this land?

(It's also important to remember that Fe is in 5th place for INFPs, so they're not completely out of touch with this process. That's the problem with *all* these distinctions. I actually think the Se/Si dimension shows the most dramatic contrast, and Te/Ti would be a close second.)

-Vicky Jo

August 14, 2006  
Blogger Vicky Jo said...

First of all, remembering things like that sound like some kind of access to introverted Sensing. Furthermore, it sounds like you have a value around "wanting to be of value." It sounds like that is IMPORTANT to you, and sounds like it comes from the realm of Fi.

Fe is about how we *connect* with others. It addresses a different aspect of valuing others I think...

I'll be saying more about this later as I share some more of what I've learned from Dr. Beebe.

September 24, 2006  
Blogger Dan said...

As an INFJ, I can relate to this. I've actually been accused of being a bit formal at times because I'll often refer to people as "Ma'am" or "Sir" if I don't know the person. I'll also often try to leave out using names in the first place if I'm completely unsure of what to call the person and find that it would be rude to ask.

October 18, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It depends... I'm usually really bad with names and titles, but when it comes to my family, my mom, an ESFJ had always introduced people to me as "Your aunt/uncle so-and-so" so to this day that's still what I call them. Instead of Cory, it's "Uncle Cory." Some of them laugh about it, saying that I don't need to do that, but it's a leftover habit from when I was little and couldn't remember anyone's names.

In more general relationships, I'm prone to forgetting names and titles. Whereas my mom will say, "Mary was so happy to see you the other day... blah blah blah." I'm more likely to say something like, "Remember that holiday party last year? Well, the sweet girl, she works for Dad, and she loves snowboarding, anyway, I ran into her at the grocery store this morning...." Of things then become a frustrating guessing game as mom tries to hook a name to this description that I've given and I often may not even remember the name once she stumbles across it.

Mom: "You mean Mary?"
Me: "Maybe, I don't know. She's really pretty, brown hair, always has cute earrings... She had to leave the party early because she needed to pick her grandma up from the airport..."
Mom: "Are you sure it isn't Mary?"
Me: "I told you, I don't remember. It might be Mary..."

Etc.

My boyfriend says he's finally figured out why I don't remember names. He says its because I'm remembering so many other things about the person and how I got to know them, that the name is worthless to me because it doesn't tell me anything about the individual. The name is just a label for them that I tend to dismiss as I learn more about them and find better things to remember about them.

November 26, 2007  
Blogger Vicky Jo said...

I absolutely agree with you about names! They are a detail that I can rarely remember myself. I figure it's a "label" on the wonderful (or awful) container of soul/personality/essence/spirit/body that I am thinking of. It's weird to be able to feel soooo connected to somebody at their essence level, and be weak on remembering their name. The name is the least important element.

But oh those relationship webs! I took a workshop recently, and I couldn't remember if the two developers were involved in a romantic relationship (gay) together or not, and it drove me crazy until I knew for certain. It made a big difference to me to know that -- it provided me with some level of understanding that goes beyond being nosy or gossipy, and I can't explain it. It's like there is a relationship "geography." I'm weak on their names, but I can sure tell you their relationship (and I know who I know that they know too).

November 26, 2007  
Blogger Gabe said...

"I absolutely agree with you about names! They are a detail that I can rarely remember myself. I figure it's a "label" on the wonderful (or awful) container of soul/personality/essence/spirit/body that I am thinking of. It's weird to be able to feel soooo connected to somebody at their essence level, and be weak on remembering their name. The name is the least important element."

Well, I agree with that too. I guess the difference is that I don't care if I can't remember people's names (even If I'm thier friend).

November 29, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

First off, sorry about triple-posting in the "Don't worry be happy" thread! I thought it wasn't getting submitted until I noticed the line at the top. :/

Anyway, I'm an INFP and I definitely identify with the titles thing, except for the "S.O." part. I thought it was pretty good! For me, "S.O." is somewhat of a synonym for "My better half," etc.

As for titles, I just think it can often become a status game, like John's a salesman at blah blah, Karl here is a VP. Where do you live? O I live here...o wow you live in Beverly Hills?

I just think people should treat their fellow man/woman as human beings first, and not as higher or lower status "tribe members" if you will.

I noticed someone else in another thread had a naming problem. I rarely get this problem, and if I get constantly referred to as so-and-so's son or son-in-law, strange as it sounds, I begin to feel dehumanised. Is there not a me beyond the role?

July 03, 2008  

Post a Comment

<< Home