Honestly, I think MBTI is pseudoscientific at best, but one concept I’ve always found particularly interesting to criticise is Fe (Extraverted Feeling).

The way Fe is described often seems to blur the distinction between being considerate of other people and enforcing social conformity. In its less flattering form, what gets framed as maintaining social harmony can become a way of controlling how other people behave.

My issue is with people who treat their understanding of social etiquette as an objective moral standard. They decide what counts as respectful, appropriate or considerate, then use shame, guilt, exclusion or social disapproval to punish anyone who doesn’t comply. Disagreement becomes evidence that you’re selfish, insensitive or morally deficient.

The fundamental problem is mistaking social norms for morality.

Something being socially accepted doesn’t automatically make it morally right, just as something being socially unacceptable doesn’t automatically make it morally wrong. Etiquette is often culturally relative, and conformity isn’t the same thing as compassion.

There’s a difference between caring about how your behaviour affects others and demanding that others conform to your expectations to preserve social harmony. The former involves empathy; the latter can become social control dressed up as morality.

I think this behaviour can have a narcissistic element, particularly when someone believes their own social standards are unquestionably correct and feels entitled to punish others for violating them. It places their interpretation of what is appropriate above other people’s autonomy.

This also makes me think of communal narcissism: the idea that someone can build their sense of superiority around being particularly caring, moral, helpful or socially responsible. Rather than seeking admiration through conventional displays of success or dominance, they may derive it from being perceived as the most compassionate, considerate or virtuous person in the room.

To be clear, I’m not arguing that everyone who values social harmony is controlling or narcissistic. Nor am I claiming that everyone labelled an Fe user behaves this way. I’m criticising the behaviour itself and questioning whether MBTI’s framing of cognitive functions encourages people to rationalise it as a neutral personality trait.

Why is enforcing social expectations sometimes framed as empathy or emotional intelligence, when the same behaviour can amount to conformity policing?

I’m interested in how people here distinguish genuine empathy from the enforcement of social norms, and whether you think the way Fe is conceptualised adequately accounts for that distinction.

Something I’ve noticed as an INFJ, and also the intuitives around me with inferior Se (I only have one sensor friend) is that aestheticism does not come as naturally. It takes a lot more effort for me to put together something nice than compared to my sensor friend, who I often go to for fashion advice and the like. When it comes to things like clothes, sure I know how to dress and make myself look good. But coming up with something outside of the box or curating something takes a lot more effort. I love it, I love taking the nice photos and always making sure I look put together or whatever, but by no means does it come naturally to me. I feel like I’m having to teach myself a lot of basics, like doing hair makeup nails etc that growing up I was just never concerned with?

I have such a deep admiration for my ESTP friend, I feel like literally everything she does is amazing and brilliant. I feel like to develop an eye like hers I have to have others directing me a bit. idk how to explain it

Below are signs and motivations that are displayed by each function to aid in typing other people. Assume that these symptoms are seen by each function in the upper positions of a person's conscious stack, and are more so symptoms of that function by itself, than it is of that function's entire axis. Feel free to let me know your thoughts.

Si

Speaking/explaining with lots of details and specifics. Organizes through details and specifics. 

Referencing/telling many past experiences and backstories. 

Goes off topic by losing the forest for the trees, then the trunks, then the dirt, and then the roots…etc.

Orients towards things being done in a specific, “right” way.

Generally, volunteering information that was not directly prompted for.

Having personal rituals, wearing, eating, doing the same things every single day, and not only being content with that, but also having a distaste for anything else. 

Ni 

Speaking/explaining through generalizations and concepts. Organizes through generalization and concepts. 

Speaking in a concise, straight to the point manner.

Orients towards things having relevancy and fitting together for one unified whole.

Always wondering what is going on “behind-the-scenes” of something. 

As reductive as this sounds, staring deeply and longingly at people/things. 

Having a good sense of visual aesthetic. One may think this would be more of a sensory thing, but this is actually more of a Ni thing. Ni-types enjoy organizational congruency within both their lives and their physical environment. 

Always judging a book by its cover, jumping to conclusions without apparent evidence. 

Se 

Speaking in a direct, blunt fashion. 

Always wanting to go do new things, see new things, explore new things in the physical world. 

Very in tune with the present, always exploiting present opportunity. 

Having this air of care-free adventurousness. 

Lacks follow through and procrastinates because they always want to do something else, and retain their ability to do something else. 

Ne

Talking about something and then splitting off into 10 different tangents, hopping from one topic to the next. 

Where Si goes off topic by diving deeper into the details of something, Ne goes off topic by bringing in unrelated things. 

Can be pretty talkative, and inquisitive. 

Uninhibited-style of thinking. Willing to entertain almost anything and everything ideationally speaking. 

Lacks follow through and procrastinate because they always want to engage with something else, and retain their ability to engage something else. 

Fi 

Not bound and not in tune with the emotional tones/reactions other people give off. 

Resilient toward ostracism. Will not experience the same internal “hurt” that an Fe type will have from negative tribal reactions. 

Will often say and do things without any care of the atmosphere around them. 

Beliefs tend to be fickle, idiosyncratic, and independently formed. These opinions tend to change and be developed the same way Ni-ephiphianies tend to be formed. Does not care for them to make sense or be justifiable on a “Ti-level”. Does not care for them to be accepted on an “Fe-level”. HOWEVER, if Fi deems a select individual or individuals worthy to influence their beliefs, Fi will allow them to. This is different from Fe because with Fe, almost everyone can influence their beliefs, with Fi its very selective, if at all.

Ti 

Plenty of usage with conditional logic and if…then statements.

Beliefs are built line by line, and at least attempted to be logically sound. The more bulletproof the belief is, the more willing the Ti person is to voice it, even if it goes against the tribe. Unlike an Fi type however, they can only do this with select beliefs they feel are completely logically covered, 

Still vulnerable to ostracism and bound by Fe, but engaging with it less emotionally, and more through their internal scope of conditional reasoning. 

Te

Always wanting to do things towards a goal, and always having goals.

Socializing in a more mechanical, operational manner. For example wearing a suit to a business meeting not to necessarily make people like you, but to appeal to the professional environment. 

Appeals to things such as uniforms, dress codes, ranking systems, management hierarchies. 

Where Fi will violate a social atmosphere for the sake of honoring their Fi, Te will violate a social atmosphere for the sake of a goal or to get something done. 

Speaks less in terms of logic, and more in terms of instruction. 

Fe 

Very vulnerable to ostracism. Will feel a deep need to emotionally appeal to everyone in order to guard against this vulnerability.  

Always shifting personalities depending on who is in the room. 

Making conscious, deliberate efforts to manage the perceptions and alter the feeling tones of those around them. Almost taking the controls of the “Fe controller” instead of just being bound by it. 

Rarely voice individual subjectivities. Will almost always go with the flow of the social environment. 

I know it's a difficult question but it's interesting to speculate. Like say Te. Who is the "stronger" user between ESTJ and ENTJ generally speaking? Please don't "it depends" me. It's all light hearted fun.

Te, Ti, Se, Si, Ne, Ni, Fe, Fi.

Like is it one of the more liked personality types or smth like infj or no?

Fi being misunderstood is an understatement of a lifetime. Almost everything online about Fi is at least partially incorrect. Even google overview's explanation of Fi leaves a lot to be desired; It says that having morals in everyone else comes from other people, which is just...not how this works.

As an INTP who went through a phase of questioning whether I was INFP or not, I came to the conclusion that no, I am not, but I'd be forgiven for thinking so because I have significant moral OCD and if you took what everyone online says about Fi seriously, you'd think they're the same thing. (Pro tip: They're not.)

So what is Fi if not constantly scanning your environment for Bad Things and rejecting all that doesn't make you feel good on the inside?

Well, simply put, moral OCD provides anxiety, Fi provides clarity. Fi is a guide that INFPs (and others) use to figure out what feels right to them in every facet of life. Whether this is used immaturely or maturely entirely depends on the INFP; both terrible and great things can come from this. However, it doesn't primarily come from an overwhelming sense of fear or a desperate need to prevent something bad from happening (unless in dire circumstances, of course), it comes from a sense of catering to one's true self. It's not inherently about catering to one's own morals, though it often utilizes that quite a bit. Rather, it's about one's identity.

Let's run that back again: Fi is about catering to one's identity, not one's morals. There is strong overlap, but identity comes first. They move about the world in a way that caters to their individual identity so as to provide clarity to themselves.

Wanting to be authentic and having morals are not monopolized by Fi users. In real life, virtually everyone will have a point (or many) where they cater to their ideas of themself, become more of an individual, stand up for their morals, and even cry or gasp in horror at someone crossing a moral line. The difference is, this is a 24/7 process for INFPs, and while they can absolutely feel stressed out and anxious about the state of the world (same girl, same), it's a process that works to provide them clarity. That's the important word here. Clarity about themselves and their identity.

While nothing is ever black and white, in general, Fi would look more like:

Examining whether things are right for you automatically, rejecting social norms one doesn't understand simply because they don't feel right, wanting a life that feels like you to an extreme or significant level (note: this is not the same as wanting to be an individual), doing things because they feel right to you, not because they're for the greater good (though you may take that into account as well), life is about building your identity.

Whereas moral OCD looks like:

Constant, anxious preoccupation with doing the right thing, intense fear about being a horrible evil person if you so much as breathe wrong, feeling like the world's problems are on your shoulders, constantly fretting about how much active harm you're causing by simply existing, extreme and intense constant rumination on past and present mistakes, feeling sick to your stomach when you make an error, life is about constantly trying to resolve the extreme anxiety and stress you get from the reality that you might not always be right or say the right thing or be a good person.

Building and catering to one's identity is at the forefront of Fi users's minds. At the forefront of someone with moral OCD is nothing but intense fear and anxiety about the what ifs of everything.

Now, again, everyone will want to build their identity at some point. It might even be at the forefront of your mind for some time. The difference is, it never really leaves Fi users forever. I'm INTP, and I definitely care about my identity nowadays, but that's partially because I didn't really have one at all until I was in my late 20s, and even then it was still blossoming. I had my own morals and convictions and sense of right and wrong, but I didn't really know who I was outside of that, I only knew what I believed, my likes and dislikes, and some traits. "But isn't that your identity?" Well...no, not quite. Look, I'm struggling to put into words the difference, but the best way I can explain it is that an INFP can easily and readily see who they are beyond and beneath that; I can see patterns, I know why I like and dislike certain things, and I know who I want to be, but I'm still unsure to this day of who I am beneath all of that. I don't know. Maybe a broken and scared child, maybe an alien, maybe a chunk of animated meat. I don't know. Generally by my age, INFPs know. There is little uncertainty.

I am defined by my uncertainty; they are defined by their clarity.

I’m curious how an ESxJ’s Ne differs from an INxP’s Ne!

I read emotions really well and absolutely understand where the guy/gal is coming from which is really useful to me to steer conversations, but I just don't care sometimes when its irrelevant and counter-productive. I am just blunt and just intuitively know exactly how everyone feels about me when im blunt, but in most cases I think the ends justifies people not liking how it sounds (and most cases they actually appreciate it after a while).

I meet a dozen of INFJs or so irl, and sometimes I can't stand how emotional they were. I'm very people driven but also systematic and solution oriented because of my engineering background and strong INTJ influence from my dad. I feel quite alienated amongst irl INFJs.

And yes, I am very positive I'm not mistyped based on the functions I identify with.

Because people are saying that hyperphantasia means high Si and low Ni, and aphantasia means high Ni and low Si. I think Ni is my highest function and Si is my lowest. However, I definitely do not have aphantasia. I do not have hyperphantasia either, but I have the auditory version of hyperphantasia. If you are a Ni dom without aphantasia, or a Si dom with aphantasia, could you please explain how you realised that you had one introverted perceiving functions and not the other?

I’ll constantly find myself apologizing even if I don’t think I’m at fault. Mostly because I want to avoid future conflict by any means necessary and because I don’t want them thinking I’m a jerk in the small chance I did offend or hurt someone.

Is this typical? Because ENFJ is listed as “protagonist”, and I feel like most protagonists I see in media are very rarely prone to apologizing…

Thoughts?

I want to know the reaction and strategy of every type during emergency situations

In my opinion, Ai Hoshino is an unhealthy ESFJ, not an ENFJ, because firstly, being energetic, extroverted, charismatic, and influencing others do not easily prove that you are an ENFJ! Secondly, NI is not clearly visible in Ai Hoshino, and like Akane Kurakawa, who is an INFJ, Ai Hoshino does not have active NI. While ENFJs, like INFJs, are often very strong analysts, Ai Hoshino instead of being analytical and searching for hidden patterns, values ​​concrete tasks and information, reactions from fans, and searching for love that she has never experienced, rather than thinking too much about possibilities and abstract patterns. And all these sites that have typed MBTI characters are not official, they are just fan-made and have not been announced by the creator himself.

I would be pleased to have the community collectively deduce the singlemost 1) intrapersonally unaligned and 2) interpersonally unaligned types. Earlier I thought about having AI deduce it for me. However, I turned it to an opportunity to socialise online by inviting too many minds to my post. I also might rather ask questions than deduce significantly.

Would like to know who is more common between a lone wolf and a party animal. MBTI does/can not have to be isolated from such archetypes.