I believe I have found a misconception in how Fe attitude is viewed in CT. Adaptive Fe is seen as doormats who are martyrs and who give only to others. While directive Fe is seen as shame throwing corrective truth-tellers. Adaptive Fe believes in the idealistic oneness of everybody; while Directive Fe believes in the enforcement of the rules of current society. Adaptive Fe is submissive; while Directive Fe is aggressive.
I believe there is a mix-up here. I believe Directie Fe is caused by high Ti in a person cognition. High Ti blocks the heart from its analysis function. I used to have high Ti and used to ignore or suppress my pain and suffering to life (because the F functions do signify "life"), to be above it. When Ti got dislodged from my ego, a change in my psyche that Auburn had also perceived, I did feel more, painfully so and I also became more feminine and even discovered that I found guys attractive.
Anyway, I was still very aggressive though and after some times has passed I am still aggressive, but the ideas that Adaptive Fe represent is what I am aggressive about. And btw those ideas are an accumulation of feelings. The belief in the oneness of everybody comes from feeling the suffering and pain of others, feeling an impulse and fulfillment from helping someone and feeling their changed stated, this is less felt specifically, but more at a grand scale of a group of people. Like I do right now for the homeless, it feels like an accumulation of pain, including my own and also the feeling that things should be corrected.
As a Ti user, I still go back to being able to be above it, to grow from it "this is life" I conclude and move on after attempting to change things (I went on social media to aggressively complain at people at the cruelty and darkness).
So my observation is that aggression comes from trauma and not caused by directive Fe, because I feel directive Fe is caused more by high Ti usage, which I feel when it's too high it just block a person's heart and feelings. But in a more healthy level, it can conclude the truth about life to move one and not endlessly fight from one's heart and its feelings.
From this I can say high Ti users are usually martyrs because they can self-sacrifice in an unhealthy way, ignoring the pain in their hearts and bodies for some higher principle. I say this because I feel adaptive Fe would be vulnerable to their own pain and in fact would seek correction if somebody hurt them. Bascially, directive is high Ti (cold higher principles (even if those higher principles are helpful) above anything), adaptive is high Fe (meaning high sensitive feelings and Je correction).
Aggression is separate from this and is more due to traumatic experiences, though someone avoiding to process their traumatic experiences and rise above it would be high Ti (which I was before).
What do you guys think?
I didn't vote. I'll have to look at the data on ego development and emotionality and compare them to be sure, which I'm too lazy to do. But by the way...
Both "directive pusing" and "adaptive emulation" were included in the list of Fe signals in the vultology code 2.0, although in version 3.0 that I just read in CT's wiki, all signals are now categorized according to their respective cognitive functions in tandem instead of in isolation. So, maybe both "directive" and "adaptive" signals are not exclusive to Fe anymore (although I haven't read that anywhere) and your presupposition could apply. But if we go by types alone, it's been noted somewhere in CT's old website that Fe types are abundant in bodybuilding and coaching profession, which is kind of masculine and negates the view that high Fe is associated with femininity. Unless... if all those samples also turn out to somehow have integrated Ti into their development, then you might be on to something.
Since a function axis always works in tandem, it sure means that Ti is indeed affecting Fe also. I'm not sure in what way. But cognitive type and emotional attitude don't necessarily have to affect each other. The latter could be caused by any other aspects of nature or nurture.
You can also look up onto this page about the level of usage (function development). It illustrates the spread of "libido" which is shown to be always equal in quantity. It's said there that the l--- level development has the greatest libidinal concentration compared to others. And I wonder if someone with llll development could have gained easier access to control the spread of that libido so that its concentration could be just as great as l---, and could be used depending on their situation or goal. This other page about the aspects of each of those development levels might also be of interest to you.
Interesting topic, by the way.
Thank you grockl.
Let's see if my logic makes any sense to you. You mentioned that high Fe users have been mentioned to be in bodybuilding and coaching wich sounds very masculine. Let's assume masculine is signified by the general psychological temperament as ST (Sensing and Thinking). There is an article by auburn which categorizes the types on a scale of masculine and feminine, noting the focus on Thinking as particularly masculine. That means if you see bodybuilding as masculine than somehow there's a factor in it that makes it high T or S. I think it's both. That mean Fe bodybuilders perhaps don't have their Ti concious, but their cognition is such that they are T (and S?) heavy. And bodybuilding mindset kinda fits with Ji's need for personal refinement, molding ones image and muscles. So it would be consistent with my proposition that directive Fe is rather high Ti (T+Ji). And that directives would sacrifice more of themselves (self-pain) for some higher Ji principle (image, identity, manhood, strength, body artistry)? A person more vulnerable to their own pain (high F) would avoid bodybuilding (painful work) and rather stick to walking and eating healthy, for example. Idk, I'm just guessing from what I would do lol.
Coaching is rather neutral, it depends on the coach and their attitude, I would think. Compare Jordan Peterson to Alain De Botton. I feel Jordan Peterson is cold and high Ti, directing me to clean my room (be tough, more fatherly) despite any pain or feelings I would have (depression). Alain would be more affectionate and considerate of my suffering, perhaps helping me to clean my room and all the while giving me advice (more motherly). Both are coaching me, but one is more cold and one is more sensitive.
I have to admit that I haven't looked into the new model closely and so I will when I have time, but this is just my natural proposition of the F attitudes and the f functions.
F functions are derived from life . CT makes it seem like it's a logical affair( "it's sentient and has a brain/nervous system so I compute "life") like it's an ethical-logical-definitonal propositional computational process. I disagree with this. Empathy for life first comes from the "heart" or "soul" and it's experienced (meaning it's innate), meaning I "feel" first for a dog or a person dying and make my ethics based on that with Ji or Je, but it needs that initial experience input. Therefore, a blocked heart and alternatively a feeling heart (on a spectrum) is what I feel determines the attitudes. high T (Ji/Je) can have this effect; or trauma too which leads to coldness ( Ji or Je cognition may not be developd in truamatic cases, but it "mimics" high T). But that's from personal experience, if we had more data on perhaps high T leads and the integration experience of their F function, perhaps we would have a more clearer picture. Because when I try to use high Ti now as used to do, it feels impossible, to ignore myself and what I feel, it's crazy and lifeless. I have found that F is life, yours and others, and it includes bodily/heart phenomenological, raw sensitivity to life. it's polar opposite is coldness (lack of any sensitivity) or high T (low sensitivity) for accurate/ factual analysis/judgement.
What do you think? I think it needs more evidence and research, but it's a start and more "natural" in my opinion?🤷
Ps. Wrote this on my phone, so my writing is wonky, sorry.