What's it like to be a Thinker?

[Mort Belfry]

... One thing that sucks is when someone is hurting but I can't give them the sympathy they want. I can try to fake it but it really sounds fake, like there's no heart in it even if all the words are modeled correctly.

Sympathy is hard, but one thing I tend to do is get angry on behalf of them. I don't know if this T, I've read somewhere the anger can be the easiest emotion for an INTP, or if this shows a slight F in my system, but when somebody puts down a friend or family member I typically react by saying something like:

"What the *expletive* do they know? It's their fault in the first for *analysis of situation* you should have said, *clever reversal of what the person said to them* Don't worry about them, who cares what they think anyway?"

But any sympathy that can't involve anger I'm completely inept at displaying.

1) What goes on in your mind when you're thinking? How would you describe it?

If I'm thinking about people, then I generally thinking mean things about them. If I'm sitting on a bus or something, I tend to play "fun ways of killing everyone" in my head. I tend to think about myself a lot, usually in quite flattering terms. Otherwise my mind is running through whatever fad I'm in at the time. At the moment it's MBTI, and I think about how to apply it to everything. It can get really tedious.

2) How much does logics weight in on your decisions and how much does feelings come into play?

To be honest I can't think about many decisions I make on regular basis. It's usually something as mundane as what day should I go grocery shopping this week. It's usually with logic, but I can't see how you could do it with anything else. Of course that could be the imposing force of a dominant function.

How do you determine whether you've over-thinked?

When I bored with the logic and rants that run continously through my head. It usually means it's time to go out and talk to someone. Of course this could just be a case of determining when I'm over-introverting.

3) How easily can you go through the steps you've taken to arrive at a conclusion? Is it automatic? Or does it involve some translation to get it into a form understandable by others?

Pretty fast. I enjoy doing logic puzzles because you make strong decisions almost straight away.

4) Anything else you feel like sharing.

I have an ice cream.

 

[bluebell]

1) What goes on in your mind when you're thinking? How would you describe it?

The only time I'm not thinking is when I'm asleep. I can't (and don't want to) switch it off.

Grayscale probably described it best in his reply to this question. The motivation for me is wanting to understand everything. The model of the world/universe/people inside my head is continually being added to from data from the outside world. Processing the data and slotting it into my mental model and making new connections to gain new insight is pretty much all of my thinking. Everything is viewed through this model and everything becomes data for the model.

Most of my thinking is visual. A lot of things are mapped onto a mental model of the planet which I can zoom in and out of. The underlying connections/interactions are part of this mental world. Everything is multi-layered and I'm always spinning through what's already there to find new connections between concepts. The 'eureka' moments are quite addictive - there's often a euphoric rush when a new insight becomes apparent.

I analyse everything. There is a part of me that is always observing and analysing what's happening. If the real world is intruding too far and taking up too much processing power because I'm being forced to act in real time, I can't observe and analyse. Then clarity of thought suffers, and I need a lot of downtime later to process and analyse what went on.

2) How much does logics weight in on your decisions and how much does feelings come into play? How do you determine whether you've over-thinked?

It depends what you mean by logic. If you mean rigid step by step logic - that seems so cumbersome and misses a lot of the subtleties and shades of grey. My logic is a bit more like fuzzy logic - not an exact analogy, but somewhat similar (in a fuzzy kinda way ).

Decisions need to make sense and be self-consistent. I like to run through all the implications of a particular decision before deciding. I guess there's a lot of instantaneous if/then processing happening.

I value objectivity over anything else. That said, I do usually pay attention to feelings because sometimes they can be a useful extra piece of data that needs to be analysed (this only works if I've actually noticed I'm feeling something). If it's a decision that affects me personally, I try to analyse how I feel about it. This is because (from experience) my emotional reactions to things can be an indicator that there's something that I need to make concious and add to that to the input to make the decision.

A feeling of unease about a more impersonal decision, like a project at work, is usually a sign that my brain has spotted a potential problem that could arise later. I need time to dig it out and analyse it conciously. I think this is one of the reasons why I really dislike being forced to make rapid decisions.

I don't often over think things. Occasionally I get stuck and go round and round in circles without coming to any new conclusion or new insight. Then I have to make myself switch to something else to think about, or go hunting for new data.

3) How easily can you go through the steps you've taken to arrive at a conclusion? Is it automatic? Or does it involve some translation to get it into a form understandable by others?

It usually takes a huge amount of translation and effort to be able to explain it to others. It's easier to communicate the thinking to others who think in similar ways - but I prefer to do it in writing because that gives me thinking time. Sometims conclusions are just so obvious that it can almost be painful to have to explain each step. Partly this is because there is a lot of stuff I already know and understand, and partly because it's often hard to translate visual thinking into words.

4) Anything else you feel like sharing.

Uh, not at the moment.

 

[substitute]

The worst thing for me about being a Thinker is that very strong Feelers (like my sisters and mother) just point blank REFUSE to believe that this is the way I am. They INSIST on trying to change me, to get me to be "more caring", refusing to acknowledge that I care just as much but show it in different ways that are just as valid. Nope. Sorry. If you're not crying and hugging then you don't care, period.

I'll get to the questions...

edit - I remember trying to describe the differences between an INFJ friend and myself years ago, before I knew about MBTI. People are like a tray of marbles. The tray is your mind, your intellect, and the marbles are you feelings. They roll around roughshod all over and obscure the truth, the reality and cause you to think irrationally. Some people have learned to push all the marbles up to one end where they can't do too much damage and dam them in with a divider, so the rest of the tray is free and clean and can see things more clearly.

Yes, I have feelings, yes there are emotions, but I ignore them and consider them of little import. When I'm making a decision, if I'm deliberating, then I'm examining what of my thoughts are biased by my own feelings and those that are get weeded out as self-indulgent, and ignored. My feelings in this case are like children in a hardware store that also just happens to sell candy. My mind is the parent, my feelings are the children. Spoilt children will run around the store picking things up and not putting them back where they belong; they break things, and they throw tatrums in the hopes it'll get them what they want by power of pestering and embarrassment - if they embarrass the parents enough and make everyone look at them then they'll get attention, get whatever it is they're pestering for.

Well behaved children on the other hand, have been trained to stay where you can see them, not to touch anything without permission, to ask once and only once and to accept the parent's decision as to whether or not they can have any candy.

If I ask myself whether I'd rather the 'parent' part of me was in control, making my decisions, or the 'spoilt child', then the decision seems pretty clear to me. The only way forward is to train and discipline the child so it can still come along for the trip and have a bit of a say, but it doesn't ruin things and the final word is the parents'.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

1) What goes on in your mind when you're thinking? How would you describe it?
Oh, there's first of all, the subject area. Thinking of a subject area, I recognize what kind of general "problem solving template" has the best match with the subject.

Like if it's a human resources issue, I recall what I know about human resources.

I recall what kind of solution methods or thinking methods I know, and what kind of information sources and tools are available. I select a particular combination with a hunch, and see if the issue seems to unfold.

I made it sound rather rigid, but it's extremely open-ended, free-form process for me.

Basically, it's a cycle of recognizing the information sources, problems, tools, my thinking skills, time, rewards and other data that affect the process. I juggle the pieces of information around.. most of it is just symbolic for me. I juggle them around like I was copying and moving pieces of information. I check the outcome of some logical operations with feeling to see it's in line with my values. But then again, I have strong Fi, and often I don't even start to consider some unacceptable options, even if they occur to me.

2) How much does logics weight in on your decisions and how much does feelings come into play? How do you determine whether you've over-thinked?

When I do one small step in a thinking process, my brains rather automatically evaluate it for it's feeling content. Still, often I dismiss the emotional information, or note that the emotion department says "ok" and agrees with my logic department

I notice overthinking by comparing to some expected standard of thinking & emotion, how others do it. Also, by noticing how I've done it previously and what has given best results.

3) How easily can you go through the steps you've taken to arrive at a conclusion? Is it automatic? Or does it involve some translation to get it into a form understandable by others?
It requires almost no translation, and it's semi-auto I can prevent myself from thinking, it's a controllable element for me. What I can't prevent is to get the first step of thinking from something. But I have absolute control of whether I go on. Feelings and Thinking each draw me to different thought processes, depending on mood, circumstances and subject matter.

4) Anything else you feel like sharing.

-

 

[SillySapienne]

So what's it like to be a Thinker?

What goes on in your mind when you're thinking? How would you describe it?

Well, thoughts of course. I would describe thinking as that thing that makes us capable of being conscious beings. Dare I quote Descartes, oh well, why not... cogito ergo sum

I think therefore I am

For me, however, it would hold more credence if he/it were to state, "I think therefore I know I am"

My ability to think critically, and my passion for independently thinking things through and thoroughly have led me to essentially teach myself.


How much does logics weight in on your decisions and how much does feelings come into play? How do you determine whether you've over-thinked?

When I over analyze something, I am in trouble. I have a strange tendency to over think things to pieces. To dissect thoughts to shreds, bleh, yucky, yucky!!

I have had a love and deep respect for logic for as long as I can remember. Everything makes sense. Logic is the language of common sense. And logic exists as both an effective and accurate tool one can employ in order to aid in their ability at discerning the most accurate truths while disregarding the most fallacious untruths.

Alas, there are those who are deeply lacking in their capacity for logical reasoning, and I quite often feel utterly frustrated by them. (unless of course they happen to be of the feminine persuasion, which of course I've been known to make allowances for )

How easily can you go through the steps you've taken to arrive at a conclusion? Is it automatic? Or does it involve some translation to get it into a form understandable by others?

That depends on the difficulty of the problem at hand. Some conclusions are easily drawn, whereas other conclusions take more time to reach and are therefore a lot more deliberate in the process.

Anything else you feel like sharing.

Sometimes I want to give my brain a hug, she rarely lets me down!!

 

[Totenkindly]

1) What goes on in your mind when you're thinking? How would you describe it?

What an odd question to consider. It's like asking what goes on in my mind when I speak English... it just happens.

I guess I am always scanning around me and putting things together like blocks. That is my instinct. As soon as I see something, I am trying to fit it into a larger picture, context and otherwise... and not based inordinately on my personal feelings (although I can just to limit it to that angle if I want).

I just call it "coherence." I am always looking for coherence... when I go through my day, when someone talks to me, when I read something, when an event occurs. My brain immediately tries to make it coherent and give clarity, to understand what it is.

2) How much does logics weight in on your decisions and how much does feelings come into play? How do you determine whether you've over-thinked?

I used to (as a child and even young adult) completely ignore feelings as irrelevant, because they fluctuated and in the end all the mattered was what WAS (impersonally). My feelings did not count or have any power, and no one else's feelings were stable either. They were not dependable enough to build anything enduring upon.

This was reinforced by my religion at the time: you were never allowed to trust your feelings, feelings would lead you astray, you always were taught to set those "evil feelings" aside and focus only on "God's truth" and adhere to it. Feelings could only damn you, if they ran against what you "knew" to be true intellectually.

Now my feelings are considered as a valid data stream I need to consider when making decisions. (and I also weigh other people's feelings in my decisions.) Even if i don't want to. Because they determine how well I can adhere to a commitment or even just "quality of life." They heavily influence my relationships AND my inner thought life. They teach me another aspect of what being human means. And if my feelings are consistently bad, I need to change something... they are a "warning system" of sorts that I only ignore at my peril.

3) How easily can you go through the steps you've taken to arrive at a conclusion? Is it automatic? Or does it involve some translation to get it into a form understandable by others?

It depends on the conclusion, but I "think" in logical steps, treatise-like. I can track it all, I'm aware of it all. And even when I make an intuitive leap, I can tell you the 'evidence' I used to justify the leap even if some of the steps cannot be explained.

I realized long ago that this is how I talk, too -- when I discuss anything, unless I am purposefully just being whimsical or letting myself float, I go through a pretty logical series of steps. It took me a LONG time to realize that people naturally do not speak that way. And it was why I was so critical of them for parts of my early life. It's been hard to relax myself sometimes.

When I am interacting with others, I do sometimes purposefully ease up. Or I shift from a "logic progression" and talk differently. Or I throw out the critical thing, deciding what needs to be mentioned and what doesn't (based on my knowledge of their feelings)... and I go from there. I am more versatile now than i was 20 years ago.

4. Add'l comments. Well, I hate that "critical" thing -- the FIRST thing I am aware of when people talk is incoherence... where one of their ideas/comments 'does not fit.' i can smile and nod and keep it to myself, but as soon as an incongruent or weak statement is made (even if someone is just describing a trip to the supermarket and makes some offhand judgment), the flashers come up.

It's just something I contain to my own mind, to not make others feel uncomfortable.

 

[MX5]

1) What goes on in your mind when you're thinking? How would you describe it?
Thinking (for me) is like what I imagine the formation of the planets was like, the accretion of matter from a gas cloud. A thought forms out of nothing, then grows, collecting bits of information and insight from a nebulous cloud. As it grow, it gains "density" and intellectual "weight" to the point that it becomes the most prominent feature of my mind-scape.

2) How much does logics weight in on your decisions and how much does feelings come into play? How do you determine whether you've over-thinked?
Logic and rationality are preeminent. A decision that does not have a locigal or rational basis is not a decision - it's a knee-jerk reaction. That doesn't preclude that I don't have those reactions, I just recognize them as such and file them under "foolishness". For the most part (90%+) I analyze and evaluate the decisions that I make - even the bad ones.

When/if I find myself flipping back-and-forth between two different answers to a question, then I know that I am in the midst of over-thinking. Generally, it is a battle between what I want, and what I need (logic vs emotion). That's when I have to stop myself and say, "choose one".

3) How easily can you go through the steps you've taken to arrive at a conclusion? Is it automatic? Or does it involve some translation to get it into a form understandable by others?
If you're asking if I can explain my thought process to someone else, then I cannot. There was a cartoon that I saw once that had a scientist at a humungous blackboard. To his left was a mass of equations, to his right was "the answer". In between, where the scientist stood pondering, was the phrase "then a miracle occurred".

It's the "miracle" that I can't explain.

I dislike it intensely when others press me for that explanation. I don't know, and others shouldn't care, HOW I came up with the answer - just be glad that I DID come up with the answer!
4) Anything else you feel like sharing.
Nope...thanks for the question

 

[Usehername]

So what's it like to be a Thinker? What goes on while you're making a decision? I refuse to believe there's nothing there.

Modifying Tallulah's set of questions:

1) What goes on in your mind when you're thinking? How would you describe it?
2) How much does logics weight in on your decisions and how much does feelings come into play? How do you determine whether you've over-thinked?
3) How easily can you go through the steps you've taken to arrive at a conclusion? Is it automatic? Or does it involve some translation to get it into a form understandable by others?
4) Anything else you feel like sharing.

Who pointed it out weeks ago that although thinkers have a set of emotions, they just aren't (necessarily) attached to their thoughts?
I do have feelings. I have a lot of feelings. I do value these feelings. But, they do not necessarily interact with my thoughts.

I have learned when I am too overwhelmed with feelings (mostly when someone has died, but for other reasons, too) to just let them happen to me. To close myself off in a room and experience. I value their power to take control of me.
But for most things in life, I intellectually allot a certain proportion to my "feelings" to contribute to the decision-making... it does hold some weight. I use logic to determine the rest.

I can never, ever turn off my thoughts, though. They always run. Always. I have spent some nights lying down in bed, physically exhausted, and literally went until the sun started to come up without getting a second of sleep because my brain was racing and I can't stop it from happening.

 

[nightning]

She's way older than me although I'm not young and, attempting to start putting her at ease, I start my sentence with "You're older than me but...." Stopped right there by her very loud disapproval... "That was rude and uncalled for. How do you know how old I am."and she went on chastizing me for another two minutes... no kidding! Geez... kick myself... I should have known as she was wearing a blond wig, too much makeup and hitching a ride in her 80's. LOL... so I really goof and hurt people sometimes... bet I don't do that one again... just the latest example of social ineptness.

I wouldn't consider it social ineptness as just plain not knowing what the lady would say. You have to admit you don't see hitchhiking old ladies with wigs and too much makeup that often. However it is bad manners on her part to raise a rackus when she should be grateful for getting a ride.

I think the biggest feeling that I watch out for the is feeling I get when it seems like things are progressing illogically and I can't fix it. If something doesn't make sense, it pisses me off, but in a way that motivates me to fix it. If I can't fix it through the use of logic, it pisses me off even more. (Which is an illogical feeling itself, because you should never be upset over something you can't control, so the cycle starts over again until everything is calm again.) It's not that hard to feel and understand my other feelings, but I will only keep them if I can align them with what I think is logically correct. Otherwise, I use my logic to fix them.

That might sound bad, so I'll have to provide an example. I think love is a good feeling. I think pain is a good feeling, sometimes. I'm not afraid of feelings, I just don't want them to take away my power to be in control. When it comes to my own personal hapiness and watching out for what I think makes the most sense, I believe that taking many emotional risks is worth it, regardless of whatever the outcome may be. Love is important. Feeling betrayed when I know I have not been betrayed is illogical and it's a negative feeling that serves me no purpose, other than to let me know I need to work on my perception of things so that it doesn't happen as much anymore. Once I've done this long enough, it's really hard for me to become emotional in a negative way about most things. I am not always controlled by reason, but I usually try my best. If using reason can make things better, I'll do it. If my reasoning tells me to use my feelings more, I will do that.

Feelings as an unconscious indicator of your overall state of being as a person. I think at the end of the day that's all they are. It's something Fs pay more attention to and trust as potentially useful data.

The star [logic] is impersonal and objective. It is my friend. I can always count on it. It won't lie to me. It won't change its mind.

I find that statement amusing. To the thinker, logic is a friend... it won't lie, it won't change its mind. While feelings for a thinker can be deceiving. Where as to a feeler you get the opposite. The moon (moon and star seems to work for an analogy) is a trustworthy friend. The F can always count on the emotions as being true, as they originate deep inside and cannot lie. The same cannot be said for logic. The math and statistics might be sound, but the interpretations can be all wrong. It's a use and disuse thing. The more practice you have on one method, the more you trust it and distrust the other.

I do apologize if I'm rambling stuff that are blatantly obvious. It helps me understand.

The worst thing for me about being a Thinker is that very strong Feelers (like my sisters and mother) just point blank REFUSE to believe that this is the way I am. They INSIST on trying to change me, to get me to be "more caring", refusing to acknowledge that I care just as much but show it in different ways that are just as valid. Nope. Sorry. If you're not crying and hugging then you don't care, period.

Yes... but if the very strong Fs suddenly change I think you'll miss their nagging a little bit. The difference between Ts and Fs acts as a foil. Makes you appreciate something so much more.

edit - I remember trying to describe the differences between an INFJ friend and myself years ago, before I knew about MBTI. People are like a tray of marbles. The tray is your mind, your intellect, and the marbles are you feelings. They roll around roughshod all over and obscure the truth, the reality and cause you to think irrationally. Some people have learned to push all the marbles up to one end where they can't do too much damage and dam them in with a divider, so the rest of the tray is free and clean and can see things more clearly.

You can equally say marbles are all the data you're given... with feelings being but a subset. Ts choose to dam up the feeling marbles... Fs choose to dam up other ones. Why can't people get a bigger tray? Annoying.

Yes, I have feelings, yes there are emotions, but I ignore them and consider them of little import. When I'm making a decision, if I'm deliberating, then I'm examining what of my thoughts are biased by my own feelings and those that are get weeded out as self-indulgent, and ignored. My feelings in this case are like children in a hardware store that also just happens to sell candy. My mind is the parent, my feelings are the children.

I like that analogy.

 

[Seanan]

By Jennifer:

I realized long ago that this is how I talk, too -- when I discuss anything, unless I am purposefully just being whimsical or letting myself float, I go through a pretty logical series of steps. It took me a LONG time to realize that people naturally do not speak that way. And it was why I was so critical of them for parts of my early life. It's been hard to relax myself sometimes.

When I am interacting with others, I do sometimes purposefully ease up. Or I shift from a "logic progression" and talk differently. Or I throw out the critical thing, deciding what needs to be mentioned and what doesn't (based on my knowledge of their feelings)... and I go from there. I am more versatile now than i was 20 years ago.

Kudos to you for learning this and adjusting. I haven't been able to and, most likely, won't be. That is the one place where I seem to greatly offend people. When they're talking and skip a logical step, I have to know what they left out so I ask. This seems to come off as questioning their intelligence, integrity or making me look snooty.
Of course I'm not but I cannot follow the conversation unless I have that piece. If I'm in a situation where I catch myself before asking knowing this is one who will take offense, then I'm just bored and quit listening. If it happens to be a feeler teenager who is experiencing emotion at the time, then I'm told they feel like I'm "grilling" and mistrusting them.

 

[substitute]

Yes... but if the very strong Fs suddenly change I think you'll miss their nagging a little bit. The difference between Ts and Fs acts as a foil. Makes you appreciate something so much more.

Actually no... When I spend a lot of time around Thinkers I don't miss the Feelers or their input at all, I just find the peace, lack of drama, the clarity and directness refreshing and peaceful. When I have to deal with some of the Feelers I know, I feel like I have to sorta 'gird myself' or roll up my sleeves, sorta thing But when I have to deal with Feelers a lot, I do miss the clarity and directness and pine to be back among Thinkers again! I guess it's only natural, a variant of homesickness maybe?

It all feels like a rather uneven playing field to me, you know? I'm not saying I'm right but just describing how it comes across to me. It's like intuitives and Thinkers are expected to always come over to the Feelers' and Sensors' plains of operation, like we have to be ambi-planal haha, or something, because they claim not to be able to come over to us. So like, when dealing with Feelers I have to be gentle and couch things carefully and tread on eggshells, and with Sensors I have to struggle to speak in concrete terms and to go through stages of thought clearly rather than jumping about, but if I ever ask that a Feeler dam up their emotions for a moment and just be direct and objective, or a Sensor to just use their bloody imagination for a minute, I'm somehow being mean, I'm invalidating them, I'm being unreasonable, I'm not accepting them as they are etc etc...

Now this isn't a generalization because I'm talking here about some of my experiences with certain individual people, and I'm not blaming all of the issues I have with people on mine or their MBTI types. It's just this is the title, you know, like you wanna know what it's like being a Thinker so that's what I'm telling you, that for me, that's how it sometimes feels, whether or not there's any truth to it.

 

[Delilah]

It all feels like a rather uneven playing field to me, you know? I'm not saying I'm right but just describing how it comes across to me. It's like intuitives and Thinkers are expected to always come over to the Feelers' and Sensors' plains of operation, like we have to be ambi-planal haha, or something, because they claim not to be able to come over to us. So like, when dealing with Feelers I have to be gentle and couch things carefully and tread on eggshells, and with Sensors I have to struggle to speak in concrete terms and to go through stages of thought clearly rather than jumping about, but if I ever ask that a Feeler dam up their emotions for a moment and just be direct and objective, or a Sensor to just use their bloody imagination for a minute, I'm somehow being mean, I'm invalidating them, I'm being unreasonable, I'm not accepting them as they are etc etc...

It's not just you, I find dealing with too many Sensors and Feelers for an extended period intensely draining, it feels like work because it is work for me, but I still put forth the effort to do it when I must, it would be nice to have it go both ways.

 

[Totenkindly]

I don't know if it helps to remember that Thinkers tend to evaluate their feelings as objects (if they recognize they are having feelings); Values-oriented people tend to subject their thoughts to their values.

So at the end of an argument, someone could try to make me "feel better" by saying lots of nice things and apologizing for the conflict... but if the conclusion doesn't make sense, then it still doesn't make me feel better. It continues to eat at me until I can point out what doesn't make sense and have it addressed somehow (even if it's just the other person acknowledging my point and then refusing to agree. At that point, they've acknowledged the inconsistency, so whether or not they want to agree is inconsequential).

I still tend to do better with NFs than SFs, overall. Even when T/F conflicts, the N connection creates a bridge.

 

[Delilah]

I don't know if it helps to remember that Thinkers tend to evaluate their feelings as objects (if they recognize they are having feelings); .

True, I view mine as dirty, lying, distracting objects that I want to lock into a dark box and bury in the backyard, after I do that then I feel happy, until I bury that.........

 

[The Unknown Essence]

1) What goes on in your mind when you're thinking? How would you describe it?

My thinking is not sequential. Thoughts develop in a very random manner in my mind and I tend to make connections between unrelated ideas very easily.

2) How much does logics weight in on your decisions and how much does feelings come into play? How do you determine whether you've over-thinked?

Logic definitely overrides emotion for me. I always thought of feelings as very fickle and I've never understood how people can make major decisions based on a changeable thing. Logic, however, is a constant. As for "overthinking" something, there's no such thing for me.

3) How easily can you go through the steps you've taken to arrive at a conclusion? Is it automatic? Or does it involve some translation to get it into a form understandable by others?

It's hard for me to explain my thought process to others. Because of the fact that my thoughts are very abstract, it's difficult to "convert" them for those with a linear mindset.

 

[Seanan]

I posted this on a blog and it was a response to a post. I thought it pertinent here too.

Here's what I think I'm learning. (Edit: from the Feeler/Thinker/Blog) Neither the "F" nor the "T" is of more value than the other. Neither approach is a choice in its demanded dominance. Its no different than being male or female... they're different, surely, but equal values(parity.) One cannot place value judgements on them nor force one's self into being the other.

Of course, everyone thinks. Of course, everyone feels. The difference lies in which approach is necessary/required in the individual to be most effective as a human being. To ask an "F" to function as a "T" would disable them into paralysis.... likewise for the "T" trying to be "F." For instance, strong negative emotion does, quite literally, incapacitate me. Perhaps to explain to an "F" I would have to define it as rage which they've surely experienced... rage hinders the ability to think and, consequently, make wise choices. The enraged person is somewhat senseless. For me, as a "T," what an "F" might experience as simple anger interferes with me just as rage would to an "F." So, yes, if I do ever experience anger, I will immediately push it down in order to think. It has, now, become so automatic that I perceive it as not ever experiencing anger.

This one is pretty easily understood but becomes "murkier" or harder to grasp for an "F" I'm sure when the whole gamut of emotional possibilities are considered... those they might see as more positive emotions... but the same thing occur generally speaking. All I can say is this "pushing down" in order to stay effectively present is an automatic, normal, process. The responses in the face of inhibiting emotion are learned from others. That doesn't mean we're cold, uncaring, people... we just need to stay focused in thought to be effective if we're going to stay connected to/with them. Which is, surely, what we find required by our caring. Caring, for us, lies more in our thoughts about the person and their needs rather than emotional identification or connection with them.

 

[bluebell]

It's not just you, I find dealing with too many Sensors and Feelers for an extended period intensely draining, it feels like work because it is work for me, but I still put forth the effort to do it when I must, it would be nice to have it go both ways.

Yep, same here. It would be nice to meet in the middle. A few do that, but most don't.

 

[disregard]

Of course, everyone thinks. Of course, everyone feels. The difference lies in which approach is necessary/required in the individual to be most effective as a human being. To ask an "F" to function as a "T" would disable them into paralysis.... likewise for the "T" trying to be "F." For instance, strong negative emotion does, quite literally, incapacitate me. Perhaps to explain to an "F" I would have to define it as rage which they've surely experienced... rage hinders the ability to think and, consequently, make wise choices. The enraged person is somewhat senseless. For me, as a "T," what an "F" might experience as simple anger interferes with me just as rage would to an "F." So, yes, if I do ever experience anger, I will immediately push it down in order to think. It has, now, become so automatic that I perceive it as not ever experiencing anger.

How true this is, at least for me. Thanks for putting this into words!

 

[Tallulah]

I posted this on a blog and it was a response to a post. I thought it pertinent here too.

Here's what I think I'm learning. (Edit: from the Feeler/Thinker/Blog) Neither the "F" nor the "T" is of more value than the other. Neither approach is a choice in its demanded dominance. Its no different than being male or female... they're different, surely, but equal values(parity.) One cannot place value judgements on them nor force one's self into being the other.

Of course, everyone thinks. Of course, everyone feels. The difference lies in which approach is necessary/required in the individual to be most effective as a human being. To ask an "F" to function as a "T" would disable them into paralysis.... likewise for the "T" trying to be "F." For instance, strong negative emotion does, quite literally, incapacitate me. Perhaps to explain to an "F" I would have to define it as rage which they've surely experienced... rage hinders the ability to think and, consequently, make wise choices. The enraged person is somewhat senseless. For me, as a "T," what an "F" might experience as simple anger interferes with me just as rage would to an "F." So, yes, if I do ever experience anger, I will immediately push it down in order to think. It has, now, become so automatic that I perceive it as not ever experiencing anger.

This one is pretty easily understood but becomes "murkier" or harder to grasp for an "F" I'm sure when the whole gamut of emotional possibilities are considered... those they might see as more positive emotions... but the same thing occur generally speaking. All I can say is this "pushing down" in order to stay effectively present is an automatic, normal, process. The responses in the face of inhibiting emotion are learned from others. That doesn't mean we're cold, uncaring, people... we just need to stay focused in thought to be effective if we're going to stay connected to/with them. Which is, surely, what we find required by our caring. Caring, for us, lies more in our thoughts about the person and their needs rather than emotional identification or connection with them.

Beautiful assessment! I might frame that.

 

[Usehername]

So at the end of an argument, someone could try to make me "feel better" by saying lots of nice things and apologizing for the conflict... but if the conclusion doesn't make sense, then it still doesn't make me feel better. It continues to eat at me until I can point out what doesn't make sense and have it addressed somehow (even if it's just the other person acknowledging my point and then refusing to agree. At that point, they've acknowledged the inconsistency, so whether or not they want to agree is inconsequential).

Does this actually help a feeler? I always assumed this was universal.