• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Subjective/Objective Input Differences Across Types <split>

erm

Permabanned
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
1,652
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
5
Split from Mistyped MBTIc Members.

Nocapszy, why do you think F functions are linked to emotions?

I double checked many function descriptions and F is in no way linked to emotions (except by a few descriptions dealing with the symptoms, not the disease). It is linked to being able to decipher emotions, but that's because it deals with tones, images, feelings etc. Which help in noticing emotions in yourself and others. However, T functions can do the same thing, they just need more skill and experience to pull it off with objective reasoning. Whereas subjective reasoning (feeling) is much better at dealing with subjective things like emotions without much prior experience.

I know non-J functions can affect what trigger certain emotions and J functions can do the same indirectly (by affecting your emotional development), but that seems to be the only link that can be made. An F or a T can both value emotions, as they are both J functions, and any value judgement made on emotion has nothing to do with F functions. F functions are just better at reasoning with that kind of stuff.

The same can be said with T and logic. T functions only seem more logical because it is easy to express objective reasoning objectively. F functions have a hard time expressing themselves objectively, so it's more difficult to see the logic in them.

I always thought of it as:-

Te-objectively processing objective input.
Ti-subjectively processing objective input.
Fe-objectively processing subjective input.
Fi-subjectively processing subjective input.
 

Thursday

Earth Exalted
Joined
Mar 14, 2008
Messages
3,960
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
8w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I always thought of it as:-

Te-objectively processing objective input.
Ti-subjectively processing objective input.
Fe-objectively processing subjective input.
Fi-subjectively processing subjective input.

Thank you
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,145
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Now that we have that figured out, let's work more nuance into this... because I think the topic deserves it.

True, F is not "feelings or emotions."

However, emotions are often tied into our values. We have an emotional or visceral reaction to something -- and that "something," we realize, embodies a value. The emotional response in part helps us determine what values we hold; it's how we recognize them.

T responses don't really use emotions to validate them. The validation is inherent in the thinking process, which operates with or without emotion. (In fact, emotion often derails the thinking process.)

I think this is why emotions often get attached to F values, in the conventional wisdom. It's because emotions are one of the triggers used to detect and denote a value, while emotions aren't a necessary trigger for the existence and validity of detached logic.

So I don't think it is realistic to say emotions and F values are not in any way related. I do agree with emotions are not EQUAL to F values at all.
 

Maverick

New member
Joined
Apr 29, 2007
Messages
880
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Te-objectively processing objective input.
Ti-subjectively processing objective input.
Fe-objectively processing subjective input.
Fi-subjectively processing subjective input.

Exactly :nice:

So I don't think it is realistic to say emotions and F values are not in any way related. I do agree with emotions are not EQUAL to F values at all.

Good point.
 

erm

Permabanned
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
1,652
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
5
Now that we have that figured out, let's work more nuance into this... because I think the topic deserves it.

True, F is not "feelings or emotions."

However, emotions are often tied into our values. We have an emotional or visceral reaction to something -- and that "something," we realize, embodies a value. The emotional response in part helps us determine what values we hold; it's how we recognize them.

T responses don't really use emotions to validate them. The validation is inherent in the thinking process, which operates with or without emotion. (In fact, emotion often derails the thinking process.)

I think this is why emotions often get attached to F values, in the conventional wisdom. It's because emotions are one of the triggers used to detect and denote a value, while emotions aren't a necessary trigger for the existence and validity of detached logic.

So I don't think it is realistic to say emotions and F values are not in any way related. I do agree with emotions are not EQUAL to F values at all.

The validation process of thinking is often inherent in logic, which it works around the most. The logic isn't part of the T functions, the emotions not part the F functions, logic and emotions are both involuntary and outside of the psyche (essentially).

F functions focus on emotions more because they specialize in dealing with subjective input, however, this does not change the emotional input you receive. If someone is expressing emotion, it means that they are experiencing emotions at a certain strength in a certain enviroment, how they deal with it is when F and T functions step in. F's analyze it one way, T's another.

I also think that emotions disrupt the feeling process as well. If I'm sitting down analyzing my own feelings (different from emotions) when a wave of anger passes by, I get distracted. Emotions end up triggering irrational responses, regardless of T or F functions. When you are in an irrational state you can't use the four rational functions as effectively. The stronger the emotion, the less you can "think" with T or F functions.

So yea, there is definatly a correlation between F functions and emotions, but it has nothing to do with the actual emotions themselves, just how you react to them. Even how you react to them is split just as much between the other functions as the J ones. Those non-J functions actually affect what emotions you feel as well (an E becoming irritated at a long period of being alone), whereas being an F or T does not, in anyway, affect how you feel about a baby seal being beaten! (okay it will, as anything does, have an indirect effect)
 

SillySapienne

`~~Philosoflying~~`
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
9,801
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
Te-objectively processing objective input.
Ti-subjectively processing objective input.
Fe-objectively processing subjective input.
Fi-subjectively processing subjective input.
WTF?!?!?!?

Everyone is subjectively processing objective input, EVERYONE!!!

:thelook:

*throughly confused*
 

ThatsWhatHeSaid

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
7,263
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
WTF?!?!?!?

Everyone is subjectively processing objective input, EVERYONE!!!

:thelook:

*throughly confused*

I know what you mean, but there's still a difference between being subjective about evaluations and being objective. When you're objective, you're less interested in how you relate to the object of analysis, compared to when you're subjectively analyzing. A judge, for instance, would be more impartial and objective, while a defendant would be subjective. It's true that even the judge or scientist is looking to see how his ideas relate to the object of analysis, but it's a different quality than someone who reacts subjectively.
 

SillySapienne

`~~Philosoflying~~`
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
9,801
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
I know what you mean, but there's still a difference between being subjective about evaluations and being objective. When you're objective, you're less interested in how you relate to the object of analysis, compared to when you're subjectively analyzing. A judge, for instance, would be more impartial and objective, while a defendant would be subjective. It's true that even the judge or scientist is looking to see how his ideas relate to the object of analysis, but it's a different quality than someone who reacts subjectively.

Sure, sure, understand that, will let that slide.

But, um, isn't all *input* necessarily objective?
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I always thought of it as:-

Te-objectively processing objective input.
Ti-subjectively processing objective input.
Fe-objectively processing subjective input.
Fi-subjectively processing subjective input.
Great way of putting it!

So I could extend that to the perceiving functions as:

Se objectively perceiving objective input
Si subjectively perceiving objective input
Ne objectively perceiving subjective input
Ni subjectively perceiving subjective input

We may not think of everyone as being "objective" or "subjective", but as descriptors of the functions, every does use them, and remember, they all fall into an order, so for that reason, some people will be more or less subjective or objective.
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
The validation process of thinking is often inherent in logic, which it works around the most. The logic isn't part of the T functions, the emotions not part the F functions, logic and emotions are both involuntary and outside of the psyche (essentially).

F functions focus on emotions more because they specialize in dealing with subjective input, however, this does not change the emotional input you receive. If someone is expressing emotion, it means that they are experiencing emotions at a certain strength in a certain enviroment, how they deal with it is when F and T functions step in. F's analyze it one way, T's another.

I also think that emotions disrupt the feeling process as well. If I'm sitting down analyzing my own feelings (different from emotions) when a wave of anger passes by, I get distracted. Emotions end up triggering irrational responses, regardless of T or F functions. When you are in an irrational state you can't use the four rational functions as effectively. The stronger the emotion, the less you can "think" with T or F functions.

So yea, there is definatly a correlation between F functions and emotions, but it has nothing to do with the actual emotions themselves, just how you react to them. Even how you react to them is split just as much between the other functions as the J ones. Those non-J functions actually affect what emotions you feel as well (an E becoming irritated at a long period of being alone), whereas being an F or T does not, in anyway, affect how you feel about a baby seal being beaten! (okay it will, as anything does, have an indirect effect)

I think Jennifer was saying (and correct me if I'm wrong) that the feeling functions are related to emotion because of values. The feeling function evaluates its input in terms of values. Values *are* values precisely because of the emotion that they produce. Therefore the feeling function is permanently related to emotion even though it is not responsible for raw emotion.
 

ThatsWhatHeSaid

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
7,263
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Sure, sure, understand that, will let that slide.

But, um, isn't all *input* necessarily objective?

I don't know what the hell erm is talking about, to be honest. I also have trouble answering that question because it's hard to say where the division between input and "my mind" is.

On the one hand, yeah, input is colorless and featureless. Like computer bits, it's just information or events. On the other hand, all that information has to pass into my mind in order to be recognized, and in that process, gets "tagged" and colored with all sorts of crazy shit -- interpretations, identifications, valuations, stories, memories, etc. MBTI is the classic example. Someone starts talking and you label their words and behavior as give them all sorts of crazy meaning. Shit, I'd even argue that words themselves are featureless, but we assign them meaning automatically and subconsciously. Zen koans try to draw people's attention to that fact.

Monk: Does a dog have Buddha nature?
Joshu: MU! (no)
 

SillySapienne

`~~Philosoflying~~`
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
9,801
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
Someone please help me understand what the hell "subjective input" is/means?!?!?
 

SillySapienne

`~~Philosoflying~~`
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
9,801
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
I don't know what the hell erm is talking about, to be honest. I also have trouble answering that question because it's hard to say where the division between input and "my mind" is.

On the one hand, yeah, input is colorless and featureless. Like computer bits, it's just information or events. On the other hand, all that information has to pass into my mind in order to be recognized, and in that process, gets "tagged" and colored with all sorts of crazy shit -- interpretations, identifications, valuations, stories, memories, etc. MBTI is the classic example. Someone starts talking and you label their words and behavior as give them all sorts of crazy meaning. Shit, I'd even argue that words themselves are featureless, but we assign them meaning automatically and subconsciously. Zen koans try to draw people's attention to that fact.

Monk: Does a dog have Buddha nature?
Joshu: MU! (no)
Precisely!!!

Through thinking, feeling and being, we "subjectify" objective "stuff".
 

ThatsWhatHeSaid

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
7,263
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Precisely!!!

Through thinking, feeling and being, we "subjectify" objective "stuff".

Being...hm. Not so sure. Just perceiving things (being) doesn't involve build ideas about those things or relying on past ideas and labels. But thinking and feeling for sure. I call it all Thinking with a capital T. Others would call it producing mental formations.
 

SillySapienne

`~~Philosoflying~~`
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
9,801
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
Being...hm. Not so sure. Just perceiving things (being) doesn't involve build ideas about those things or relying on past ideas and labels. But thinking and feeling for sure. I call it all Thinking with a capital T. Others would call it producing mental formations.
You are a smarty pants, ;) I was unsure about the being aspect as well, I should of said, "human existing" as it is impossible for us to *not* subjectively process information.
 

SillySapienne

`~~Philosoflying~~`
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
9,801
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
Being...hm. Not so sure. Just perceiving things (being) doesn't involve build ideas about those things or relying on past ideas and labels. But thinking and feeling for sure. I call it all Thinking with a capital T. Others would call it producing mental formations.
Have you done any recent research on perception?!?!?

It is pretty trippy dude, our perception is constantly changing, playing tricks on us, even "fixing" stuff for us.

Our moods and our physiological states alter/affect our perceptions as well.

Perception itself, too, is subjective.
 

ThatsWhatHeSaid

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
7,263
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Have you done any recent research on perception?!?!?

It is pretty trippy dude, our perception is constantly changing, playing tricks on us, even "fixing" stuff for us.

Our moods and our physiological states alter/affect our perceptions as well.

Perception itself, too, is subjective.

Maybe sensation would have been a more accurate word to use. I haven't researched it enough to say I really know about it, but I studied it a bit in college. I'd agree that perception influences data and makes it subjective.

Also, I'm going to split this conversation into a new thread on objective/subjective input.
 

SillySapienne

`~~Philosoflying~~`
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
9,801
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
I still want someone to try to explain what "subjective" input would be.

:shock:
 

erm

Permabanned
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
1,652
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
5
I think Jennifer was saying (and correct me if I'm wrong) that the feeling functions are related to emotion because of values. The feeling function evaluates its input in terms of values. Values *are* values precisely because of the emotion that they produce. Therefore the feeling function is permanently related to emotion even though it is not responsible for raw emotion.

So if an F functions cause emotions, what do T functions cause? Where does a T get their motivation to act if an F gets it from emotions? Assuming F's act on their values because of these emotions produced.

If an F has a value to help people find the truth and corrects people because of this, what does a T have when they correct someone?

I still want someone to try to explain what "subjective" input would be.

:shock:

I'll try.

If I shot you in the kneecap, the objective input is that you were shot in the kneecap. The subjective input is everything you feel because you were shot in the kneecap. The objective input is what everyone knows, the subjective input only you know.
 

SillySapienne

`~~Philosoflying~~`
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
9,801
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
If I shot you in the kneecap, the objective input is that you were shot in the kneecap. The subjective input is everything you feel because you were shot in the kneecap. The objective input is what everyone knows, the subjective input only you know.
"The objective input is what everyone knows"?!?!?!?!

That's, like, the most subjective seemingly "objective" statement I've ever heard/read.

:huh:
 
Top