Come see my discussion with CourtJester NiFe I-I-

[Anonymous]

This is the first video of many in which I hope to display confirmed types and get the experience of their type in life in their current development (I have to learn how to talk less about myself, so sorry I took up a lot of time to contrast myself with @courtjester, but I think it was needed to give better understanding of our cognitive function hierarchy and how it differs though we both have same functions conscious).
Thanks again to CourtJester for making this first video possible (even while I work out the kinks, like the fact that Skype unfortunately crops the recorder video in the center and he is off to the side).
Enjoy! ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrzsQuoJMEk

[LadyNerdsky]

This is such a great idea. I’ve only seen the first 8 minutes so far and need to set aside time to take it all in, but even those few minutes have been valuable in seeing your signals unfold over an organic conversation, and even how Ni-Ti vs Ti-Ni manifests differently in the larger embedded function context of NiFe vs TiSe.
It’s also great to “meet” you both.

[Anonymous]

Thank you @ladynerdsky, if you or anyone else have questions or feedback that will much appreciated and helpful.
Right now I don't know if perhaps the format should be more structured and have key questions that I should ask, though I would like to keep it organic since it is more fun this way.

[Nymph]

@scientiam I think you did a great job with the interview. I guess we didn't follow and particular structure but it worked well for two double introverts ?. I also think the exchanging back and fourth as we went through might show the audience the difference in the way we process. It might be a good idea to add time stamps. I can even comment on the YouTube video with time stamps to help out.
Anyway, it was a great talk and I learned a lot from you in what was shared. I think these interviews can only help us all to understand eachother and cognitive functions on a deeper level.
We should do another when we bring our unconscious functions to light.
 
 

[Rua]

Just finished the whole thing; that was a fascinating conversation and I'm very glad the two of you had it and shared it. What's interesting is that I wanted to make a suggestion to set a one hour target-time for these convos d/t the lessened strain on the audience (and on the participants), and yet I found that the last 35 minutes (in which courtjester pushed through his stated fatigue) contained some of the most interesting bits of discussion. So now I dunno; there are always pros and cons to any structural changes.
Speaking from the perspective of myself as an individual who decided to commit to watching the whole video, I'm very glad I stuck around for the whole thing, but if I attempt to take the generalized audience perspective then I find myself siding with the one-hour target. Although, the metrics I can recall for engagement with any given video don't even bear out anything close to 50% audience retention through a 30-minute mark, let alone an hour, so perhaps it simply makes the most sense to just do whatever is most organic for the actual conversation taking place. Regardless, tyvm for the effort you both put in here 🙂

[Faeruss]

Thanks for sharing this, guys. It was good to see your vultologies side-by-side. I can see the conductor vs revisor differences, and how Scientiam though not having Pe conscious has a base-line of toggling and swaying way beyond what CourtJester's is.
 
Regarding the content of the video, I have a few notes:
(1) Since you are both directive the distinction between keeping stuff to yourself vs pushing out your beliefs unto others strikes me as a conductor vs revisor thing.
(2) The view of Se put forward in this video was too simplistic. Se is not the 5 senses + extreme sports. Whatever it is, it's much more than that. Ne users can see the world perfectly fine and clear.
(3) I don't think Fe is covert or manipulative. At least not directive Fe.
(4) Inferior Ti does not equal poor Ti. The hierarchy seems to determine more the overall role of a function in one's mental life, plus a certain baseline of energetic toll.
(5) I disagree that double introverts are deficient/disadvantaged. At least not in general. Perhaps you have come up against things in your life where this double introversion has proven to not be optimal. I was a double introvert for most of my late teens and early twenties, and that development seemed to work very well for what my goals were at the time.
(6) Introverted functions don't give more insight, but they give different kinds of insight. We must remember that they are all cognitive functions and they all relate to our cognition, and as such they are all bound to tell us interesting stuff about our thinking and how it relates to other's thinking, the patterns in reality, etc. Introverted functions do seems to go for depth over breadth, in a sense, however, so that's maybe what was being pointed to. But there are types of knowing and types of insight that the introverted functions can't know.
(7) CourJester's experience with his Fe might be due to hierarchy, where we would expect this Fe to be much more readily available as it is in an auxiliary position. From the video, I would not say Fe is conscious.
 
Finally regarding Rondo's comment about length, I say: do what you want, and have the conversation that you need to have. People don't have to watch the whole thing if they don't want to. Indeed Joe Rogan's podcast is a perfect example here.

[Rua]

(3) I don’t think Fe is covert or manipulative. At least not directive Fe.

In response to this line from Faeruss, and as a decent chunk of the video's discussion was concerned with Directive Fe, I thought I would provide a real-world example of my own use of Adaptive Fe, which I would argue does often operate covertly and is "manipulative" (though that word has heavily negative connotations, and I would argue even a throwaway compliment towards someone can be seen as a simple manipulation designed to increase the other's self-esteem). Both Directive Fe and Adaptive Fe seek to manipulate the social environment to what they both inevitably see as "the right way" for things to be, but I find that their methods do indeed differ quite markedly in practice.
--------Real-world example--------
One of my part-time jobs is as an MHT (the new, hip abbreviation for "orderly") in an inpatient mental health facility. Probably about a month ago I found myself working with a newer male, full-time MHT on one of the adult units. As I had already gathered some information on the interpersonal conflicts he had had (it seems he specifically did not like being told that he was ever wrong, especially by female MHTs), as well as through my own brief observations of his personality, I concluded that his ego needed a "softer touch" lest he become defensive and through this defensiveness compromise the integrity of treatment and of the unity that I perceive to be essential to a safe milieu.
So, when the MHT-led goal group for the patients was about fifteen minutes away I asked him his preference: whether he would rather watch the unit or run the group. As I am already quite comfortable running groups, and as he will be dealing with patients directly much more than myself over the course of time, it made little sense for me to simply step in and go, "Well I know how to do this already, so I'll just do it." I've seen that attitude before, but cannot understand it from a treatment perspective: how can new MHTs ever get better at running groups, thereby improving overall treatment outcomes and becoming individually competent, without practice? He decided he would run the group; no problems there.
The time came and went for the goal group to start, and this MHT was "holding court" in the unit's therapy room, telling stories of drug-lords and prison escapes into shark-infested waters sourced from the news (not exactly therapeutic material). However, I knew that if I called him out directly (Directively... hehe), it would not end with my desired outcome of actually running a safe, cohesive, treatment-focused unit, and would instead drive a wedge between two people that are supposed to operate as a team. So, I calculated my options and decided to simply take a marker and write on the giant whiteboard in the room, "Goal: Avoiding Sharks". The message had its desired effect, achieving a good bit of laughter and a lightening of the mood, as well as drawing attention to what was actually supposed to be taking place: the goal group.
Once I'd seen that tactic had elicited laughter from the MHT himself, I knew the mood had been sufficiently softened to broach the fact that it was five minutes past the time group was supposed to start. He responded with what was to me a weak excuse of, "Oh, two patients aren't here so we'll just wait." Not content with that, I went to the patients' rooms and asked them to attend group; neither responded affirmatively so I returned and informed the MHT that, "Those two patients aren't coming to this goal group, but since everyone else is here why don't we go ahead and start, no sense holding everyone else back just for them." That argument was amenable to his ego, and placed the social locus on the group rather than on the individual holding the group, thereby allowing him to not feel threatened by someone essentially telling him what to do. So, he ran the group (not too well imo), but at least he got the experience and was given the opportunity to learn that you don't have to have all patients present to run a goal group.
--------Conclusions--------
All of that sounds rather tedious when written out, but in practice and in real-time it flows for me with little effort. It is my personal feeling that Adaptive Fe generally has more creative solutions to social/emotional problems available to it (provided it has a proper understanding of all the key social elements involved), but it can't work everywhere or all the time. Sometimes one just has to "lay down the law" directly, as Adaptives/Seelies can be seen, especially by those with sociopathic traits, as doormats to be used whenever someone feels like it. That behavior I will not abide, and I would say that in my own life, Directive Fe feels like it is needed probably 20-30% of the time.
Lastly, I spoke briefly with sekundaer recently about Directive Fe and how it relates to a bandleader. I think that Directive Fe could be extremely useful in that role, because although it can come across as harsh, and indeed often feels that way to those that are under its "wrath", getting a bunch of different people to come together to achieve a high standard of excellence in a long series of performances seems to me to be a daunting task with endless room for error. So it is understandable to me from the personal perspective of a bandleader who is already dealing with creative musical solutions to not want to channel even more energy towards creative social solutions, instead simply saying, "This is how it is, this is how we're playing it, this is how you're playing it wrong".
At the very least, being able to channel Directive Fe when Adaptive Fe is unsuited to the task (and vice-versa!) seems like a very useful skill to have.

[Nymph]

@faeruss Looking back, I wish we had spent more time trying to define or clarify what we think Ne and Se are.
As far as Fe, you remind me of my ENFJ cousin remarking how bad my Fe is ?. This is why I've always questioned my type.
Sciebtiam's did toggle more than mine in the video. More than half the time I couldn't see my eyes because of the glare and graininess of the video on my end. Nevertheless, since I've been doing dream work and other things I shouldn't be doing in my current mental state, I've noticed in other videos I've made I'm toggling less and locking back on more. The amount of clarity I've had in the past two months must mean some shift is about to happen; whatever it may be.
 

[Anonymous]

There's a lot of good feedback here, thank you so much for watching it and writing your thoughts.
@courtjester, I will put time stamps and I am definitely looking forward to when you and I bring light to our extroverted functions and showcase them.

@rondo, I think one hour is not enough time to understand a person and get their viewpoint (unless it is structured to get it out of them), though I can understand the reluctance on the viewer to watch a long video and stay focused.  I'm thinking of building structure into the conversation as I explore and understand what I am trying to look for, the simple directive of measuring our experience together wasn't enough I think (though it is central to what I want, which is not based on pinpointing exactly which cognitive functions we use and defining them,  but on the phenomenological experience of our type in specific individual lives and how each person views the "cognitive functions" in their behavior, their thoughts, their dreams, their view of other people, etc.). I think this humanizes what is otherwise abstract material (for example, saying Fe is unconscious and saying that it feels like a spirit that takes over you are very different things, and it says a lot about the worldview/mental state/humanity of the person).

@faeruss, I will respond to some of your points. Also, thank you for stating the importance of  having talks and their being posted here for psychological and vultological reasons a while ago. I was thinking about it in my mind about it before, but it was your encouragement for it that made me do it:
1) You are right, the pushing beliefs thing is about the conductor and reviser dichotomy (but that doesn't satisfy me as to it's origin and raison d'être in my mind, which is that I respect a person's viewpoint if they are willing to articulate for me and I am willing to accept it in my mind to assess it's reasoning. Pushing a belief would contradict that in the outset). Does that not mean, from the point of view of a high Ti user, a projection of one's Ti on other people and therefore the resulting respect?
2)Yes, I wasn't to concentrated on making sure that definitions of functions were correct or giving each function its due, but more on the personalized views and experience of "Se" in our lives. Perhaps it's too simplistic due to the fact that both court jester and I devalue Se (Pe) in general, at least that is what I got from the conversation (like the chaos/desires it pesters me with).
3)I think both adaptive and directive Fe are manipulative, since in slowly bringing it to consciousness I am aware of the power of the Word/Logos. With articulation comes the power to modify/change people's mind/s and therefore their behaviour based on your chosen words/actions. I agree with rondo, manipulations have bad connotations, but I meant it in it's denotative sense where you can manipulate (that is alter) for both good and bad ends (and how much more important it is to know that, that manipulation is inherent in articulation, and that the morality of your words are much more important because of that, because of their power to do good and evil). I think this is an interesting conversation we could have at some point in a youtube video, if you are up for it. Ti wants the other person to come to their own conclusions because it respects independent reasoning; Fe, on the other hand, adapts or directs the other person to agree with them, and manipulates the word for that end. In any case, directive Fe under stress, according to CT literature, can lead to psychological and emotional manipulation, but that happens, I think, due to what I already said about its inherent power.

[Faeruss]

1) You are right, the pushing beliefs thing is about the conductor and reviser dichotomy (but that doesn’t satisfy me as to it’s origin and raison d’être in my mind, which is that I respect a person’s viewpoint if they are willing to articulate for me and I am willing to accept it in my mind to assess it’s reasoning. Pushing a belief would contradict that in the outset). Does that not mean, from the point of view of a high Ti user, a projection of one’s Ti on other people and therefore the resulting respect?

Yeah, exactly. You are always playing the game, there is no such thing, shy of disappearing completely, of not sending signals to those around you. Not responding is a kind of response, albeit not a very information-rich one. I see high Ti users with no Fe development sometimes speak as if they were nowhere to be found, as if they were speaking from a perspective-less point, as if they had a view from nowhere, as if their action or lack of action did not affect others.
 
And yes, I would be up for a discussion on the issue of Fe and manipulation, among other things.
 
@scientiam

[GreenCoyote]

Cool video, @CourtJester 's voice is so soothing.
It's cool to see an actual Ni user after thinking I was one for 8 years and now being SeTi or TiSe. Reminds me of a friend I had once. Although not entirely the same, I recognize the same feeling in myself of wanting to provide support to the Ni ego and feeling an awakening in sympathetic feelings which I don't feel too often. cool stuff.

[GreenCoyote]

https://youtu.be/bbvKAHdcdDM

[Anonymous]

@greencoyote, Good video. I kind of needed this, been trying to let go of control/outcome and you mention that J lead betas are like having "battle plans"  while their Ni/Se is more personal. The story of how you go to a bar and can see negative energy from someone and try to give them joy made me happy, makes me think I can do that too with Se/Fe or that I can accomplish other things in my environment in a relaxed manner (not always having a battle plan) lol Iss so hard though! ?

[Nymph]

I think it is so cool how the Beta's are forming this alliance and allegiance. It is beginning to feel like the beginning of a crusade and the crusade is an internal/spiritual one 🙂

[Author]

Posts