What Is Feeling?

[SquirrelTao]

Okay, I know that Feeling and feeling are not the same, and I know that Jung believes that Feeling to be a form of thinking that is focused on other people, especially ethical thinking. But is that all that Feeling is?

I have sometimes wondered if the following kinds of thinking are the kinds engaged in by people who score high in the F category:

1. Non-linear thinking - thinking that is more holistic, that takes into account multiple factors, that pays more attention to interrelationships.

2. Lateral thinking, meaning thinking that is more about changing concepts and perceptions, not obvious step by step thinking (or maybe lateral thinking is more N)

3. Thinking that resembles emergent, self-organizing processes in nature. This type of thinking is iterative and interactive in nature. It is intimate and responsive. It works by just getting a start by getting into contact with something and then from there by responding to each feedback, without being wholly conscious.

4. Thinking that resembles evolution, in that the mind "hunts" for a solution to a problem that involves optimizing multiple factors. And with too many possible solutions for the logical part of the human mind to process. Maybe this is more N as well.

[entropie]

I like 3, but I havent understand most of the english words.

What I dont get is 4: "And with too many possible solutions for the logical part of the human mind to process"

there is nothing, which can not processed via logic, except not logic .

Cant say more though, cause I am on the way to find out more about Feeling, myself.

[Magic Poriferan]

Feeling is one of two ways to analyze the value of of a subject and form rationale. It is specifically a way that assesses things in terms of good or bad.

I mean good or bad in the most general way possible. Everything from "killing children is bad" to "Hamburger Helper is bad".

[SquirrelTao]

Originally Posted by entropie

What I dont get is 4: "And with too many possible solutions for the logical part of the human mind to process"

there is nothing, which can not processed via logic, except not logic .

Well, yes, what I am talking about can be processed with computer logic in genetic algorithms. And I'm not even sure that there is really a similar thought process in the human mind. But I suspect there is, and I think it is not wholly conscious. I'm thinking of when people have Eureka moments and a solution comes to them.

[entropie]

I do not really see te connections there. Why can a human brain not function like a computer and eureka moments are related to intuition aint they ?

Well ,nevermind the thread is intresting. I think I am getting ill, my tempreature has risen and I got pain in my mouth.

Not relly fit at the moment

[Magic Poriferan]

Originally Posted by SquirrelTao

1. Non-linear thinking - thinking that is more holistic, that takes into account multiple factors, that pays more attention to interrelationships.

That has everything to do with Intuition and nothing to do with Feeling.

Originally Posted by SquirrelTao

2. Lateral thinking, meaning thinking that is more about changing concepts and perceptions, not obvious step by step thinking (or maybe lateral thinking is more N)

This isn't so much more Intuitive as it is more Perceptive in general. Receiving and refreshing information that is. Still, changing an opinion is obviously going to require Judgement, since that's the source of opinion. Neither F nor T have more of a claim on process of changing opinions, though.

A great example of T changing opinion would be the effects scientific method.

Originally Posted by SquirrelTao

3. Thinking that resembles emergent, self-organizing processes in nature. This type of thinking is iterative and interactive in nature. It is intimate and responsive. It works by just getting a start by getting into contact with something and then from there by responding to each feedback, without being wholly conscious.

That's a very odd description. It has pieces of several processes in there. It sounded the most like some form of Extraverted Perception though, what with responding to information obtained by interaction. Still, no one process really captures that whole paragraph.

Originally Posted by SquirrelTao

4. Thinking that resembles evolution, in that the mind "hunts" for a solution to a problem that involves optimizing multiple factors. And with too many possible solutions for the logical part of the human mind to process. Maybe this is more N as well.

This also sounds like a glut of processes, though oddly, almost nothing to do with Feeling. This covers aspects of both Ni and Ne, and it also covers a little bit of Ti and Te, actually.

The more elaborate your description gets, the more prone it is to actually require several processes, rather than being attributable to one.

[SquirrelTao]

Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan

Feeling is one of two ways to analyze the value of of a subject and form rationale. It is specifically a way that assesses things in terms of good or bad.

I mean good or bad in the most general way possible. Everything from "killing children is bad" to "Hamburger Helper is bad".

But what is involved in arriving at the assessment of good or bad? For me, it involves thinking of multiple factors and interrelationships. It also involves responsiveness to feedback. And I can use these same thought processes for other purposes besides just deciding something is good or bad.

Anyway, from what I recall of what Jung wrote, there are more permutations of F than that. For instance, if your F makes you more people focused but are introverted, you might be a writer. Surely more is involved in writing and psychology than just making judgements about what is good and bad.

[SquirrelTao]

Originally Posted by entropie

I do not really see te connections there. Why can a human brain not function like a computer and eureka moments are related to intuition aint they ?

Take a simple genetic algorithm. Say that there is a hole in a football field, and you don't know where it is. You have ten marbles. You drop them at random. Every time they land, somebody watches from above in a helicopter and tells you which of the ten marbles is the closest. You then pick them up and drop them by where the closest marble fell the last time. You keep repeating this until finally a marble falls into the hole. What if you needed to do this one million times? It would take you forever. A computer can do it a lot faster.

But maybe the human mind can do it somehow on a subconscious basis.

[SquirrelTao]

Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan

That's a very odd description. It has pieces of several processes in there. It sounded the most like some form of Extraverted Perception though, what with responding to information obtained by interaction. Still, no one process really captures that whole paragraph.

Say that you are walking around carrying groceries, and your cat is underfoot. You can't see where you are stepping because the grocery bag is in your way. As you put your feet down, you feel your foot start to come down on the cat. You do not put your full weight down, and the cat gets his paw or tail out from under your foot before getting hurt. This is simple enough. You have just easily altered your behavior in response to feedback, mid-goal, the goal being to put your feet down and walk. The effect of your behavior was that you did not hurt the cat. You care about the cat. You used your responsiveness to feedback to avoid hurting the cat. Because you think causing unnecessary pain to cats is bad. So the only part of this that is F is the part where you care about the cat? It's starting to seem to me to be a very inaccurate picture of functions to see them in an isolated way. I doubt if they can really function in isolation at all. EDIT: Which you just got done saying, of course! But do you just think my descriptions happen to be a mixture of processes, or do you think that everybody's mental processes are always a mixture of processes?

[entropie]

Originally Posted by SquirrelTao

Take a simple genetic algorithm. Say that there is a hole in a football field, and you don't know where it is. You have ten marbles. You drop them at random. Every time they land, somebody watches from above in a helicopter and tells you which of the ten marbles is the closest. You then pick them up and drop them by where the closest marble fell the last time. You keep repeating this until finally a marble falls into the hole. What if you needed to do this one million times? It would take you forever. A computer can do it a lot faster.

But maybe the human mind can do it somehow on a subconscious basis.

Ahhh, no I get your point. Wow that surely is innovative