[Jennifer]

Originally Posted by athenian200

Now obviously thinking types have emotion to some degree (if only on the level of instinct), because they value efficiency and correctness, and want to achieve their goals/understanding and survive. If they they were completely objective and detached, no particular outcome or action would be preferred over any other, and they would probably allow themselves to stagnate and die.

I don't think that's true. Objectively, some choices are always better than others, and especially survival instinct. Thinkers (and Feelers too) don't need to use much "Thinking" to decide, "Hmmm, if I do this, I won't die; and if I don't do this, I probably will die. Logically, I'd rather not die (!)"

I don't think the level of detachment you are describing is possible for any organism. The Thinking detachment is simply the ability to evaluate things without letting arbitrary/personal (dis)likes and/or values interfere. If the value is a universal one (like the survival instinct), well, that one is "true" objectively and thus is acceptable.

But from my perspective, it doesn't look that way. It seems when I look at them that they actually experience emotion on a deeper level, not just a primitive, instinctive one. Perhaps it's simply an elaborate ruse for the reasons mentioned above, but if it is, it's a very accurate and well-conceived one.

Of course T's do experience emotion, just as much as F's do think rationally. We are all human beings, and human beings do all these things. It's more merely a matter of priority and (generally) "which one is in charge" when both are operating simultaneously. And still, people are all inconsistent, so T's will sometimes just emote and F's will sometimes detach unconsciously, in the right situation.

Doing the inverse of your earlier example, would it make sense to say that, "it's possible that feeling types try to understand humor in general so that they can respond to it and enjoy it for its own sake. And perhaps they explore people as a system simply because they value interpersonal relationships and study the intricacies of communication simply to master them and connect better, showing false interest in the data so that they can experience compassion and interest in others...?"

(Or something similar, I know the analogy has not been worked enough yet to be totally equivalent but it should still give you an idea of what I am saying...)

Some of my analogy actually is accurate... but not 100%.

That is the thing:

T's DO generally use emotions as tools to achieve a goal rather than as ends in themselves, and otherwise suppress them -- especially the negative and unpleasurable ones, depending on the type. The Feeling is usually subordinated to the Thinking.

(Some T's actually don't mind anger, because it makes them even harder and more resolute and powerful. But sad depressing emotions or explosive insane emotions, ones that prevent the T from being out of control and thus unable to organize events in their preferred detached Thinking way, are the emotions that T's want to avoid.)

And F's DO generally use facts and details and structured logic in order to benefit the relational Feeling aspects of their lives. The Thinking is subordinated to the Feeling a majority of the time.

So Thinkers can often exude "real" emotions... but ultimately the emotions are still harnessed as they come out in service of a detached logic, if there is such a need. And Feelers can express "real" detached logic... but the logic is still harnessed in order to support the Feeler's values.

So, which is it? Wouldn't it be difficult to tell the difference?

Yes, for some people who are more nuanced and practiced, it can be hard to tell the difference unless you actually know the person, have seen them respond in various environments, and have also seen what they were like in the past (i.e., you have seen them "grow" as people and thus can interpolate back and imagine where they started from).

I think it is an interesting question and am curious to see what other people have to say.