Reply To: Seelie & Adaptive vs. Unseelie & Directive: Is it Related to Conflict Avoidance?

[LadyNerdsky]

Jumping in as an unseelie Fi-lead. I don’t think it’s conflict avoidance at all, and I think the descriptions and depictions of unseelie Fi as dismissive, haughty, vengeful, somewhat evil or grinch-like are exaggerated.
I was very surprised to be typed Fi-lead, having seen myself as NT temperament. In my online lurking here, I don’t feel like I belong in the same group as Seelie Fi users, or that we’re two sides of the same coin but one is light and good and the other is just a darker more bitter and sarcastic version of Seelie. It’s almost like Unseelie Fi is an entirely different “function” that is not just the darker dichotomy of Seelie Fi.
I conceive of Unseelie as doing a heart bypass and attempting to understand self, and by extension others, with the head instead. I’ll still be pursuing an Fi-agenda, but not by focusing on emotions, empathy, emotional absorption of others’ emotional states via permeable heart boundaries etc. My heart channel is somewhat shut to these methods. Instead, I take a clinical detached approach and try to intellectualise and empirically evaluate myself and others.
I thought I was strong in Te. Instead, I’m using Te approaches like if-then reasoning and causality-focus to pseudo-scientifically dissect myself and others, treating myself and others as self-contained “systems”, to understand and solve the problems of who am I —> who are You (External other) —> who are You (External collective).
Unseelie Fi to me just means I’m not as clinical, scientific, or objective as I first thought. No matter what, my decisions and perspectives are coloured by Fi attraction/repulsion, like/dislike, vibe/don’t vibe, resonate/reject.