FeSi Profiles
FeNi Profiles
TeNi Profiles
TeSi Profiles
NeTi Profiles
SeTi Profiles
SeFi Profiles
NeFi Profiles
TiNe Profiles
TiSe Profiles
FiSe Profiles
FiNe Profiles
SiFe Profiles
NiFe Profiles
NiTe Profiles
SiTe Profiles
The Fe Myth & Meta Narratives

Home 2023 Forums Model 1 Discussions The Fe Myth & Meta Narratives

  • This topic has 40 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 5 years ago by Tea.
Viewing 16 posts - 26 through 41 (of 41 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #9336
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    I strongly agree with @Auburn 's assertion that 'naming it isn't his choice.' And that further evaluation is needed to clarify this. Just to make my position clear.
    As a writer myself, I also feel that the characters tell me who they are; I don't get to decide.  I don't want to kill off certain characters but I have to, because that is part of their arc and what is needed to bring the mythology to fruition.
    I couldn't agree more that this has to develop organically. I'm just clarifying my own reaction to some of the ideas that have been presented, but on the whole, the Fe myth will have to name itself. Its truth will have to reveal itself.
    It may be true that the Hero is the best name, for the reason that it forces us to consider alternative ways of viewing heroism.  But in that case, I feel it is absolutely imperative that stories like Harry Potter are acknowledged as "Se Hero" myths in which a trickster destroys the leader's plans, and frees the world from the tyranny of corrupt Fe (or Je).  If stories like that are lumped into Fe, then we defeat the beauty that may come of exploring different angles on heroism.
    In my opinion, if we are going to explore Fe 'heroism' in an intellectually honest light, then we will also explore myths that are similar to Voldemort, and which portray the darker side of 'getting rid of your own feelings to become something more.' Corrupt leaders, false messiahs - these people are everywhere. Why aren't they covered in the article, like they are for the other types?
    This is, in fact, what I am doing with my Fe lead antagonist. He is not a black-and-white villain like Voldemort, he is a very human and relatable Fe lead - who demonstrates the darker potentials of the archetype. I am sure other stories like this already exist, and these also should be mentioned in the Fe discussion.  Otherwise, people will see "Se - the Joker" with no balance from characters like Harry Potter;  and Fe "Jesus, the Messiah, Peterson" etc - and think.... Ok, so Fe is good and Se is evil?
    Auburn mentioned that if Se people show up with a higher crime rate, we should not skirt around that fact. I agree. But we should also not skirt around "Se Trickster Hero is Harry Potter." Because it has shown up. It exists.
    Kali, Harry Potter, Loki - these type of archetypes that are Se, exist. We don't need to limit ourselves to the Joker, and then throw Harry Potter into the Fe camp. If we're gonna keep it real, then let's be real. 😀
    We can say "Oh, but Fe is about being a better person and self improving, and Se isn't. So even if these characters are Se leads, their stories don't belong in the Se description." However, is that really true? Shouldn't we acknowledge the reason that tricksters have shown up as heroes,  freeing people from tyranny and exposing the darkness behind the throne - time and time again, throughout history?  Shouldn't this be part of the timeless Se myth?
    We don't get to decide which myths are embodied by the functions. The truths come to us. Specifically Auburn, who is channeling their essence.
    And the truth has shown itself, that Se has a heroic role to play, mythologically. So, what is it? Why do we only see delinquents and addicts in the description? Why isn't Voldemort, or another corrupt leader, in the Fe description - as Trump is portrayed so negatively in the Te description?
    When Se heroes are showing up all around us, portrayed in series whose themes are anti-authoritarian and focused on freeing people from Je tyranny, and we start viewing them as "Fe hero stories" - we can assume that culture has, in fact, influenced us to see "Fe hero narrative" as the only heroic narrative. However, that is not how I see it. I see both heroic and demonic narratives in different functions, and I would hope those stories show up in the descriptions.

    #9346
    Ivory
    Participant
    • Type: TiSe
    • Development: ll--
    • Attitude: Adaptive

    The Classic Hero is indeed Fe. Think Superman, think Captain America. These are the prototypal 'good guys' who feel the weight of the world on their shoulders. Other modern heroes, such as Spider-man, are not Fe but are known to try and emulate the 'greats.'
    Harry Potter is not Fe, yet his story is often used as an example of the Heroes Journey. Yet, there are tons of instances where HP subverted expectations and acted true to his nature; that of the wild card, the Trickster.
    So we have the archetypal Hero, and we have the Hero's Journey. When these two come together, you get powerhouses such as Jesus Christ. But these stories are mostly unrelatable, so authors often use non-archetypal-Hero protagonists and throw them in the Hero's Journey. Boom, now we have someone relatable, like H Potter. Everybody wants to be like Captain America, but it is Spider-man, the geek thrown in the Hero's Journey, who is most relatable and thus most popular.
    Hero =/= Hero's Journey
    I know this has been established already, but I'm merely putting emphasis on the importance of this distinction here.

    #9347
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    Yes.
    The role of the Trickster - aka Delinquent, Sex addict, Drug addict, Vulgar, Self-indulgent Maniac - is to expose the tyranny of a corrupt King, who believes himself a Hero.
    May we never lump that in with Fe hero's journey.
    The Trickster does not view himself as a Hero. He doesn't give a flying load about his role in society. Yet he fulfills it nonetheless. He has the volition to chase what he wants; he is ruled by the thrill of the chase; and he is relentless. If he has any morals at all, they come from his own Ji, rather than from society.  Thus he may stumble into a hero role and leave it behind as soon as he's free to return to indulging himself. Or, better yet, when a more exciting challenge presents itself.
    Meanwhile, many a powerful Je leader is lacking in Ji. The lack of Ji leads to high instances of hypocrisy, just as the lack of Pi leads to reckless abandon in Pe types.  That lack of integrity is what leaves the Self-proclaimed "Hero" vulnerable to the Trickster.
    May we never fail to acknowledge that roles exist, whether we choose to embody them or not. Therefore, the conscience-driven Je type, may want to embody the hero- but may instead, embody the Persuader, the False Messiah, or the Tyrant.  Likewise, the self-indulgent delinquent Se Trickster, may embody the Hero in a wide-spread social way; at times when disruption, chaos and "stick it to the man" is most needed.

     

    #9400
    Aletheia
    Participant
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: ll-l
    • Attitude: Adaptive

    Truth be told, I haven't had the time to read all the way through this thread! So these thoughts may have already been addressed by others. But this is my take on the Hero Journey and how the myths of Fe and Fi seem to differ..
    Fi: "I face adversity and take my place in the world despite the hardship" (Snow White, Frozen, Mulan, Harry Potter (he's 'marked', special, descended from important ppl), etc.) Self symbolism prevalent.
    'I will find my place in the world and rise to be respected as I deserve, this will enact ethical justice on those who suppressed me, and you will learn from my example what is right and how to do this for yourself!'
    Many fairy tale stories are about the protagonist being suppressed from being their true self or having the life they deserve for who they are (royalty, etc.) They go through a journey where they escape the restrictions, and end up 'riding away into the sunset' to their perfectly fulfilled and comfortable life - paradise, essentially. This goes along with Te's myth of the King/Queen, it's about having one's own identity, being respected for who they are, having a 'domain' and complete satisfaction in material comforts.
    Fe: "I face death and overcome it for the good of the collective" (Examples: Jesus Christ, Leouch from Code Geass, Hercules, Odysseus etc.) Hero/Messiah symbolism prevalent.
    'I'll stay behind and be the martyr, I'll take the brunt, so that the rest of you can be ok! I'll enact justice for your sake, and then you will honor me and I'll earn your respect.'
    The Fe hero story tends to be grittier than the Fi myth and often contains an element of self-sacrifice/death. It also tends to end in ascension to Godhood or a place of tribal leadership, the character ends up with a heavy hand in the dealings of society/humanity. This contrasts to the Fi myth, which focuses on the individual's achievement for its own sake - the protagonist ends up earning their rightful place, but is more isolated in their paradise.
    This is anecdotal, but I relate a lot with this kind of take on the Fe hero myth. I've always felt an underlying drive to overcome the suffering I experience because of the notion that I have a purpose to aide humanity, and so that I would be a source of inspiration to encourage others to rise above their struggles and pursue excellence. It's very much about self-mastery too, and image for my own sake, but without the second component of potential contribution to society, I likely wouldn't have the motivation to do what I've done.
    It's a subtle nuance, and the two journeys can have a lot of parallels, but I think it's about the impetus being essentially the self or collective. Does this make any sense?

    #9402
    Faex
    Participant
    • Type: NeFi
    • Development: ll--
    • Attitude: Seelie

    It’s a subtle nuance, and the two journeys can have a lot of parallels, but I think it’s about the impetus being essentially the self or collective. Does this make any sense?

    I agree, @alerith. I think this "collective" element inherent in Fe is what makes it difficult to find a name for it that doesn't sound inherently saintly or positive: hero, saviour, champion, protector, even mentor. The difficulty we're experiencing is how to describe a kind of 'service' quality embedded in Fe because of the relationship with "other" or "collective". The opposite of individualism. But just as long as we don't confuse this with the ego's journey to wholeness itself (universal myth) I think we can find something.
    I agree that the "opressed hero" myth (Cinderella stories) is very Fi. I actually think they are "Fi against Fe oppression" myths. Typically, the oppressed here is seen as socially lowly.
    Another kind of story that follows along the same general lines, Alerith, are the ones that demand a "pure of heart" test. Where people are rewarded or punished based on whether they are really good or not, which is discovered by what they do when they think no one is watching.
    -Usually, a magical being (like an enchantress or fairy) transforms themselves into a weak/poor/old/ugly person in need and rewards or punishes those who are kind or unkind to them in that state. I can think of several stories like this.
    -Another is where the magical being makes it easy to get away with vice and then sees whether the person takes that route or not. For example, the story of the poor woodcutter who accidentally threw his axe into a lake. The lake faery came out and offered to help him find it. She went in and brought out a much better axe, I think of finer wood or bronze or something and asked, "Is it this one?" The woodcutter admired it but said "No." Then she brought out a silver one, then lastly, a gold one. Each time, the woodcutter thought how much it would enrich him but said ultimately, "No." Then the faery brought out his old ugly, tired axe and he said, "Yes, that's my axe." Then she rewarded him with all four axes she had tested him with.
    Both of them are about "true goodness" versus the appearance of goodness. I find them very Fi in sentiment; like a story that might've been crafted by an Fi author.

    #9406
    Faex
    Participant
    • Type: NeFi
    • Development: ll--
    • Attitude: Seelie

    Oh, and yes! To add to that about the Fi myths,^^ this is another reason we can consider Harry Porter and Frodo Baggins Fi characters. Though Harry has tons more Pe than Frodo. Frodo is probably Fi dom.
    Anyway, what I mean is, these 'integrity tests' or 'pure of heart' myths are all over both Rowling's and Tolkien's stories.
    The reason the hobbits are able to bear the ring of power with the least corruptibility of all the peoples of Middle Earth is that they are the most detached and least power-hungry. Simple, humble folk whose simplicity is symbolised by their small size and the idyllic life of the shire.
    All the big Je characters are vulnerable to the ring's temptation; including Gandalf and Galadriel--the best Je people of Middle Earth together with Elrond. We don't see Elrond tempted, but its probably safe to say that if Galadriel and Gandalf are vulnerable, he probably is too. Eventually, though, after bearing it for so long, it takes its toll on the hobbits too: Biblo, Frodo, and even Sam.
    Harry also gets tested in this way. He's able to acquire the philosopher's stone in 'The Philosopher's Stone' because he's not greedy for it. "Only those who wanted it but not to use it", says Dumbledore. That was the 'integrity test'. Gandalf says it hasn't entered Sauron's wildest thought that someone might want to destroy the ring of power. So Sauron and even Saruman calculate strategies for people seeking the ring but they have no contingency plan for people who want to destroy it: which is the 'integrity test' of LOTR.
    In Deathly Hallows, after all is said and done, and Harry has not only defeated Voldermort but won the elder wand, he simply breaks it and throws it into the river; removing the temptation for other dark wizards or even himself to seek to misuse it.
    I think destroying the elder wand shows Harry as Fi rather than Fe, the most. Fe would seek to use the power of the wand to do good instead, I think, like Dumbledore had done. Just like Dany wants the Iron throne in order to rule the people well (as well as her belief that it's her destiny and birth right.) Gandalf even explains his own temptation in LOTR this way. He says he'd seek to use it to do good, but through him the ring would unleash a power too terrible to imagine. Same as Galadriel (She'd be a queen more beautiful and terrible than the dawn.) Frodo failed this test in the end despite his great moral integrity, but until then, he had passed it every day since he acquired the ring.
    Even the story of the three brothers and death told in Harry porter when explaining the origin of the elder wand is an integrity test. Only the detached brother escapes death.
    Funnily, Frodo too is often compared to a Christ figure, like Harry, because he willingly bears the ring into Mordor, so I think it's interesting because he and Harry are both not Fe personalities. I love what @ivory said about non-Fe personalities thrust into the Hero's journey and how it makes their stories more relatable than Fe-based hero's journeys whose heroes seem larger than life even if we admire them. All Harry and Frodo want is to live their simple lives (Sam too). Even Bilbo is more Pe with his thirst for adventure than Fe. He's not out for an individuation journey or "destiny" at all; just good old adventure! Lol.
    Voldermort and Sauron (both Je tyrants, as @animal calls their myth) are defeated by people who have passed the integrity tests of their worlds. Frodo, even if he failed in the end, still got the ring into the belly of Mount Doom with Sam's help.

    #9415
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    Fi: “I face adversity and take my place in the world despite the hardship” (Snow White, Frozen, Mulan, Harry Potter (he’s ‘marked’, special, descended from important ppl), etc.) Self symbolism prevalent.
    ‘I will find my place in the world and rise to be respected as I deserve, this will enact ethical justice on those who suppressed me, and you will learn from my example what is right and how to do this for yourself!’
    Many fairy tale stories are about the protagonist being suppressed from being their true self or having the life they deserve for who they are (royalty, etc.) They go through a journey where they escape the restrictions, and end up ‘riding away into the sunset’ to their perfectly fulfilled and comfortable life – paradise, essentially. This goes along with Te’s myth of the King/Queen, it’s about having one’s own identity, being respected for who they are, having a ‘domain’ and complete satisfaction in material comforts.


    @alerith

    I could definitely get behind this.  I wanted to add a nuance from a Te angle. 🙂  I do agree that many Te users are about material comforts - but this is a symbolic manifestation of something deeper that I wanted to elaborate on. For me personally, I'm Te-heavy, and it's not about material but rather, 'knighthood.'
    I grew up in a very liberal area where "oppression olympics" is a popular mindset and everyone has a belief that someone else is stopping you from being yourself. Personally, I always found this mindset to be weak and unattractive. I call it 'voluntary weakness.'
    As a kid I was already Te heavy, and I felt that I could build my own destiny, regardless of where I started. I had a lot of setbacks because I was born with illness and didn't know it, and I also went into theater and the music industry where girls are treated like shit, but I felt that perseverance and 'keeping my eye on the prize' was  up to me, and no one else. I  always felt that the hero & enemy were both within, and any time I felt 'oppressed' in some way, I knew that the only person really oppressing me was myself. I had to be my own hero, rescue myself from any hardship etc.
    Before I got sick, people might not have known the nuances of my fight, and might have said "privileged white girl fighting for her destiny, whoopee." But after losing my voice and suffering ongoing illness, yet continuing to have the same attitude, these SJWs have a really hard time coming up with a reasonable argument that my attitude is about privilege. It isn't - for me, it's about Se-Te, and having those functions so deeply intertwined my whole life, giving me strong volition & autonomy.. and also my enneagram, since I'm heavily 8 fixed.
    The kicker is that Te-heavies who take this attitude still have the idea of "being true to yourself and protecting yourself from the world,"  and it comes out in the "fight" mentality, but also, in how I always protected others. I have endless, bottomless patience for other people's genuine vulnerability and suffering, and all my life, even as a little kid, I have always jumped in to protect people from bullies.
    I feel that any sense of my own innocent frailty was lost very young - through my own doing. I had to crush it so I could survive the music industry and live my dreams. And whatever was left, was lost with the illness.  But in the meantime, others are still innocent and I can take a lot of heat, so I want to be the one to take heat that others can't. I'll be the one to bring bad news in order to help someone improve... because I know they'll hate ME and not someone else; and I'd rather take the heat. I'll be the one to jump in to defend bullies even if other people are 'bigger' because... I can.  And in this way, I also serve to protect the individualism and freedom of others.
    Yet I decide who to protect and who not to. I don't want to make others weaker by jumping in and solving their small problems. There's a difference between vulnerability and voluntary weakness, and I feel I have a keen eye for it. Voluntary weakness is something I will try to help someone overcome by themselves, if I am their friend; whereas vulnerability is something I'll protect at any cost, even the cost of losing more of my own.
    Te users who haven't integrated Fi, might believe that buying someone a fancy house will protect them. The material 'castle full of lavish items' is a manifestation of protective walls beyond which princesses and princes can be safe.  For me, instead of 'material,' these walls might have been my tough personality and "do it myself" attitude - I do the labor that others don't want to do.
    However, I also have Fi conscious, so there's a bit more nuance, in that I realized as I got older - taking on too much labor (be it emotional, physical or mental) on behalf of others, actually weakens them and prevents them from individuating. So I've been increasingly cautious about how to play my hand.  On top of that, I'm also more self-absorbed and concerned with my own projects and fantasies, than Conductors with Te, or those without Fi.  The most important princess that I need to protect is my own creative spirit, and she always comes first, in a very concrete way. My projects, my visions, bringing Erosia to Earth - is number one priority, always.

    #9500
    Ash Rose
    Moderator
    • Type: TiSe
    • Development: ll--
    • Attitude: Adaptive

    This description still resonates with me far more than any other description. Definitely far more than the Fi description. It’s also how I would describe my more conscious side while the Fi description sounds more like my unhealthy/shadow side. What @animal keeps saying about Ni/Se having more of an “as above, so below” mentality while Ne is more divergent... yeah, I’m definitely more of the former.
    I was up all night last night having Hero’s Journey/“as above, so below” discussions with someone outside of the typology community last night. I’ve also been asking a bunch of people in the typology community (whose opinions I value highly) if they can see me as INFP in relation to these descriptions and seriously no one else can. Everyone knows me as someone who is continuously battling evil and talking about transformation/metamorphosis/and referring to myself as a Phoenix. I even talked about it in my typing video a bit.
    So the confusion continues...

    #9501
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @elisa day
    This was my exact point. The phoenix, and battling good & evil, and rising from the ashes to become your own hero &  hero for others; is inherently human. That's why having it listed as "Fe" doesn't make sense, and will only cause confusion for people regarding their types.

    #9556
    Juan E. Sandoval
    Keymaster
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: l--l
    • Attitude: Adaptive

    Ok, I do want to fix the profile if it is off. But I think I need more specific information.
    @elisaday - Do you mean you relate to all of the Fe profile descriptions, or specifically to this Fe mythology? How do you relate to the other sections, or even other phrases within the Fe myth section?

    @animal
    - Can you tell me what sentences in the mythology section are specifically too general?
    That would really help me start to hone in on how to proceed. Thanks guys!

    #9597
    Faex
    Participant
    • Type: NeFi
    • Development: ll--
    • Attitude: Seelie

    Hi, @auburn.
    I think it's more about the paradigm we're using than specific sentences. That's why I thought it might be good to separate the universal from the function-specific myths.
    For example, what in stories refers to individuation? I think this was the point, @faeruss was trying to make.
    Individuation is about transformation, journey, death, coming-of-age. Many NF temperaments are drawn to these themes quite naturally. That's the problem with a paradigm that assumes they are inherently Fe and unnatural to those who don't have Fe. It's kinda like saying, people without Fe are not drawn to individuate, which is what feels odd.
    For example, the sense of "taking my father's place" is not universal, but the sense of a journey, struggle, death and resurrection, and the search for the sense of "home" or completion are. Because this is the human life rather than any specific function.
    If the myths are about the essence of a function, I don't see what in these are the essence of Fe per se (or exclusively). They seem to me the essence of the sense of incompleteness inside all humans and the difficulties of life that are part of our experience (essentially, the human experience, inside and out, is what stories are about).
    A person will generally feel ok until some kind of crisis throws them into a hero's journey in some aspect of their life, so that they must now search for "home". At the end of it (when things are "better" or resolved as far as that crisis goes), the person typically will have experienced:
    1) A "call",
    2) A mission,
    3) A journey,
    4) Struggle,
    5) Several defeats (most likely)
    6) Lessons,
    7) Victory,
    8) Death and resurrection.
    Each time. Different aspects, different struggles, different crises, but if you "come out the other end", you usually have experienced the whole cycle.
    So we shouldn't assume this to be Fe. Or rather, if it's Fe in a special way, we should express in what way we mean. Because anybody reading that this kind of cycle is Fe might assume they are Fe rather than just human!
    In fact, most hero's journeys in stories begin with the hero refusing the call. This is because individuation is painful and scary and most of us don't willingly go after it when push comes to shove, unless we have to. It is thrust upon us by crises, most of the time. Jung himself said without "necessity" the human personality isn't born because we don't just willingly suffer unless we are forced to by circumstances, crises, and catastrophes, most of the time.
    I suggest that for Fe, the hero's journey has a collective element to it. Their call, journey, process etc, might involve their place in society. But even this is not the essence of Fe but how Fe experiences the hero's journey IMO.
    I think the myth of Fe should be a role, like King, Prince, Senex. Rather than a process. Including the process/journey confuses it IMO. What's the hero's role? I think to be saviour (rescuing their people), champion (winning on behalf of their people, possibly against an enemy or in a contest with a rival group), and mentoring (leading their people on some collective/group journey) like @animal suggested; are all Fe roles. We can find a name that means them all.
    I think the essence of Fe is, in contrast to the Te King, a communally "chosen" or "popular" leader; the person who has identified his own journey with that of the community. The one who embodies the needs and aspirations of "the people", rather than ruling by tradition or practical need (The Te King). When rescuing, he's the 'saviour'; when bringing glory to his people, he's a champion; when leading others on a "collective journey", he's the mentor. Fe is the popular leader who is carried on shoulders and hailed because he does something his people deeply cherish or need in some way, rather than because he's an effective, fair, or efficient administrator (Te).
     

    #9602
    Faex
    Participant
    • Type: NeFi
    • Development: ll--
    • Attitude: Seelie

    By the way, I believe Moanna represents all three VERY well! In fact, I think she's the most Fe of our noted fictional Fe heroes yet!
    She is mentor per excellence; She is champion per excellence; and she is saviour per excellence.
    She does it three different times throughout the movie for five sets of characters: the baby turtle, Maui, Teka/Tefiti, her dad, and finally, her people.
    As saviour (the one who faces death so other people may live), she faces the ocean and Teka. As champion, she faces the sea monsters and the ocean; and as mentor, she helps the baby turtle, Maui, Teka, her dad, and her people, all overcome their fear and accompanies them till they "make it", helping and showing them the way.

    #9603
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @auburn
    I really appreciate your willingness to listen to feedback and consider it genuinely 🙂
    I will go through the profile either later today or tomorrow, very carefully, perhaps with Ivory if he has time, and offer what I can. 🙂

    #9615
    Tea
    Participant
    • Type: NeFi
    • Development: l--l
    • Attitude: Seelie

    The Fi heros such as Harry Potter and the Baggins hobbits have a elements of the "underdog" that seems absent in the Fe myths. The Fe hero's journey are a bit more about realizing one's place in the world, while the Fi myths seem to be about succeeding despite one's place in the world. That personally resonates with me, too. I ain't no fortunate son. Whereas Fe heroes have to prove they're more than just fortunate sons or frauds.
    In "The Greatest Showman, Barnum was also an underdog, but his greatest challenge was proving he wasn't a fraud.
    (And of course, these are fundamentally human struggles at the end of the day, so anyone can experience both)
    I've wondered what our core presuppositions about character are in the J axes. Perhaps the differences can be summed up:

    • If you've got what it takes, you'll do it.

    vs.

    • Once you've done it, you've got what it takes.

    I'm kind of echoing Jelle's observation of a static/plastic mindset divide.

    #9675
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    Ahh I wish I  had more time, so much to do, so lil time

    @Teatime
    - Socionics talks about Delta being the Quadra of "Clipped Wings," whereas the Gamma is "Tied Hands."
    I'm gonna return to this to elaborate more, but I just wanted to throw a wrench. While I did rise out of tragedy. I don't relate that much personally to 'underdog' stuff, and I don't see this as a big theme among Se users either. I did "beat the odds senseless" but for me it's more about the thrill of challenge, as @auburn so astutely added to the Se article.
    Saying I 'beat the odds senseless' is more of a thrill feeling. I don't feel like an underdog even when I probably should. 😀  Oh, I'm realistic about my lot in life being especially difficult, but it's a very extreme situation and I still feel like I'm luckier and have more at my disposal! It's more like I want that thrill of rising against something and meeting the energy of a challenge though.
    "Underdog" stuff seems more Delta. But i know someone is going to shoot me for saying this 🙁
    I think Deltas have a lot of compassion for the little guy in general. I mean look at LOTR. I would never ascribe power to those tiny creatures. It's a beautiful theme but not my theme. Nor do I see it per se in other Gammas like Prince, Trump, Bjork, Tori Amos, and on and on. Yes, rising to challenges - but no to little guys and underdogs.
    So I'd say this is more NeFi than just Fi.

    #9679
    Tea
    Participant
    • Type: NeFi
    • Development: l--l
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @animal, that's a good distinction. Both have elements of "against all odds," but delta is more specifically the underdog one. My view is probably colored by the gammas I know who strongly root for the underdog, but that doesn't mean it's necessarily a theme. Also, they do conceive of the problem in different terms.
    @fae, does this resonate with you? It's been discussed on Discord that Fi is about "truth" (I think all Ji is after truth), and a lot of times what makes me really want to rise to the occasion, what brings our the hero in me, is when I see misinformation or a harmful way of doing things. I want to champion truth. I want to champion a better way. It's an indirect service to the people.

Viewing 16 posts - 26 through 41 (of 41 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
bookmarkglobeenvelopeshopping-bag