Musings on NT/NF disagreements

[BlackCat]

I honestly can't relate to the OP.

Yeah, I get along just fine with most NTs I meet. I never understood the issue, we're both N... and I enjoy their T attitude as well.

 

[simulatedworld]

Well, one thing NTs do to me, is that they exaggerate their emotions if they express them at all, which causes me to become more worried than I really should. They freak me out and make me think, "Wow, they had a really strong reaction to that," and then later I realize they didn't have a strong reaction and just expressed their feelings in an exaggerated manner.

They either do this, or they downplay their emotions all the time and unconsciously expect me to pick up on what they're feeling despite their failure to express it (and the ones that do this will either vehemently deny it or get really freaked out and start avoiding me if I point it out). If I just avoid the issue, their frustration/tension builds until they find a reason to project their emotions onto me.

NTs are okay at expressing the type of emotion they feel, but they really suck at expressing their emotion at the level they actually feel it.

Interesting perspective. We don't actually downplay our emotions as much as you think we do...which is not to say that we never do it, just that it doesn't extend far as you imagine it might.

And um, we rarely expect you to pick up on what we're feeling without expressing it. That's a trademark NF issue. (The opposite mistake that NTs make commonly is assuming everyone can follow their abstract thought patterns with ease, and becoming impatient or even rude with those who can't.)

As Thinkers we're often not even concerned with the realm of emotion at all--it just doesn't come into consideration. We often don't actively recognize that what we're saying will be perceived as emotionally hurtful. We use language in ways that run contrary to your basic feeling-based sense of the meaning of language, and you need to release the idea that so-called "heavily emotional language" is actually emotional even if no strong emotion was intended. (This is tough for Fi, I've found.)

Anyway, what you perceive as "expressing feelings in an exaggerated manner" is actually not an exaggerated expression of emotion as often as an exaggeration expression of Te/Ti. Note that this isn't fundamentally emotional; Thinkers simply don't read the same level of emotional implications into ANYTHING the way you do because we aren't

So, we run into an issue when you assume that we use words and phrasings in the same ways as you--you need to release the idea your perception of the emotional implications of a given phrase or wording is objectively "more correct" than someone else's. This is a function of Ni--which explains why NFJs don't exhibit the behaviors I'm dissecting nearly as often as NFPs.

"I don't care whether he meant offense, it was hurtful and that's why I responded negatively!" is a fundamentally flawed position because it opens everyone up to negative character judgments for all kinds of completely unintentional things of which we may even be entirely unaware.

Fi sometimes has a difficult time releasing the idea that it's always morally in the right.

 

[durentu]

Hehe, yeah I did already come to the same conclusion as well, but I'm wondering if there's some way we can learn from each other as bridge that gap with those that don't naturally have the same functions. Is there anyway to simulate this and how do you go about it concretely?

This is a tough one. And I'm not sure that the complete answer can be found in MBTI alone. But for the sake of argument, let's say MBTI is the only thing we have.

Every one of the 16 types has all 8 of the cognitive functions. It's just that some are more hidden than others. Here's an example

ENFJ - Fe Ni Se Ti Fi Ne Si Te
ESTJ - Te Si Ne Fi Ti Se Ne Fe

As you can see, each other's dominant function is the other's 8th function. And within the first 4, we have the Fi/Fe and Te/Ti mismatch. I can imagine that you already see relationship problems galore.

The Socionics site gives us a clue what happens.

If Super-Ego partners cannot find common interests, their interaction can become very formal. Partners normally think more about expressing their own point of view than listening to their partner. This expression comes from the confident side of one of the partners reaching the unconfident side of the other partner. The latter tries to defend themselves by projecting their confident points in return. Partners normally show interest and respect to each other if they do not know each other well enough. When partners start more close interaction, they start experiencing many problems.

Super-Ego partners may think that they understand each other well. However, when it comes to day to day matters or co-operative activity, partners start thinking that their partner is deliberately trying to do everything wrong. Super-Ego partners are not interested and do not make each other aware of their intentions. Therefore their actions may look exactly opposite to what was expected. Although the hope and the feeling between partners may remain as before, it does not prevent the conflicts penetrating their relationship.

So now that I've set the stage for the worse match in history, how can these two get along using only the tolls of MBTI? I really don't have a clue.

Let's say that this particular relationship has to work. And we are allowed to use non-MBTI methods, the only way that I know how to bridge the gap is to drop your ego and to not call the ego of the other. The best way to do this is to use a third party. Either to a project, or speak to each other in fables, stories or analogies. The moment the ego goes up, the defenses go up, and the mind locks into the most dominant function, which are each other's weakest function. When this happens they basically obliterate each other in argument. Nobody wins and everyone's dead.

Even if the communication hit's a solid wall, the heart felt truth always leaves a mark. When the other person comes out from their defenses, they can analyze the mark at some later time.

You cannot make someone understand as you do. The only thing you can hope for is to prepare your communication well and send it over with compassion. It's really up to them to open the package and hope that the message received was correct. Have your say and leave it at that. They aren't going to accept unless they are willing.

Basically, when communicating, and things aren't working out, MBTI will give you a great insight, but it won't produce a solution. Not everyone will have similar order of functions as you. But every human understands what feelings are. This is the best bridge I know of.


So from this 'worse case' scenario, it can only get better from here. There is no real simulation except perhaps in chat rooms and a willing partner to share the leg work in this endeavor.


I remember a story where a young man asked his mentor about becoming a politician. He asked what he could do to help his fellow people, to which the mentor replied "work on yourself and make yourself better, so that there be one less rascal walking around" (I forget who).

NF's natural ability is diplomacy. Bringing people together, just like all the greatest civil justice champions. First, be self aware and note your strength and weaknesses. After that, speak to their heart, not to their MBTI type

 

[simulatedworld]

Yeah, I get along just fine with most NTs I meet. I never understood the issue, we're both N... and I enjoy their T attitude as well.

Usually it's fine; it's just the occasional really nasty disagreement that's the problem.

 

[epp]

Well, one thing NTs do to me, is that they exaggerate their emotions if they express them at all, which causes me to become more worried than I really should.

other people (say, NT-s) CAUSE you to feel a certain way... or CAUSE you to have a feeling in certain 'amounts'?

... WOW!!! i mean... talking about responsibility!!!

my most valuable lesson of all times was when i realized - every single human being is responsible for their own feelings, illusions, and conclusions about other people's motives.

you can be deadly mad at me, insult me whichever way you want... my reaction is my doing, my responsibility. i can be upset, i can feel sorry for you... or basically... whatever... however way you treat me, you can never CAUSE me to react a certain way.

the same way you choose YOUR reactions and no NT (or whoever) can ever cause you to feel terrible. are you a proactive or a reactive person? who is responsible for your feelings and actions?

you can think whatever you think, react however you want to react, have a feeling or intuition about someone else's motives, feelings etc, just keep in mind that it might not be true (and probably isn't) even if all the evidence seems to point that way.

disclaimer: i'm not trying to say it's OK to tell someone off or 'let all the anger out' or say nasty things. it's not OK, because i, too, am responsible for my own actions... sensible manners are there for a reason.

 

[Orangey]

I've heard many NTs claim (on this forum) that they have trouble identifying their feelings. If you don't even know what you're feeling, how can you say that the intuitions of others on the matter are wrong (enough to call this sort of thing a pattern of communication breakdown between NTs and NFs)?

You have to give up something. Either you are regularly able to identify your feelings, or you're not. In the latter case, you're more likely to be caught behaving emotionally without recognizing the influence of emotion on your behavior. If that's the case, it may be easier and more likely for others to pick up on your emotional states than it would be for you to recognize them on your own.

And I say this in a general sense, not in reference to any silly squabble that may have taken place between SW and Amargith (which may or may not exemplify the communication difficulties that can arise between NTs and NFs.)

For an exaggerated case to prove my point, see the NFP-heavy far social left that honestly believes that 100% of people who oppose gay marriage are horrible, cruel bigots who hate them personally.

Eh, I'd say they're just 100% idiot.

 

[Virtual ghost]

It is interesting that NTs are more present in this thread then NFs.

 

[simulatedworld]

I've heard many NTs claim (on this forum) that they have trouble identifying their feelings. If you don't even know what you're feeling, how can you say that the intuitions of others on the matter are wrong (enough to call this sort of thing a pattern of communication breakdown between NTs and NFs)?

Umm, well I don't know who you're referring to specifically, but you underestimate the significance of the whole "you're not me" barrier.

How can I see this pattern of communication breakdown? Ne.

You have to give up something. Either you are regularly able to identify your feelings, or you're not. In the latter case, you're more likely to be caught behaving emotionally without recognizing the influence of emotion on your behavior. If that's the case, it may be easier and more likely for others to pick up on your emotional states than it would be for you to recognize them on your own.

I suppose that would be true for someone who's totally unaware of his own feelings, but I think this is pretty rare even for NTs.

I don't see that I have to concede anything. I'd say I'm pretty aware of my own feelings most of the time; they're just not as strong a force in my decision-making as impersonal reasoning.

In any event, hearing one NT say that he can't identify his own feelings is in no way an indication that this holds true for all or even most of them.

And I say this in a general sense, not in reference to any silly squabble that may have taken place between SW and Amargith (which may or may not exemplify the communication difficulties that can arise between NTs and NFs.)

And absolutely does.

Eh, I'd say they're just 100% idiot.

Well, no, they're just binging on F and have relatively poor T development.

 

[Athenian200]

Interesting perspective. We don't actually downplay our emotions as much as you think we do...which is not to say that we never do it, just that it doesn't extend far as you imagine it might.

And um, we rarely expect you to pick up on what we're feeling without expressing it. That's a trademark NF issue. (The opposite mistake that NTs make commonly is assuming everyone can follow their abstract thought patterns with ease, and becoming impatient or even rude with those who can't.)

Well, I'd agree that most NTs don't do this. They usually exaggerate them. I've only met about 3 out of... say, 20? NTs that do that. And I have to say, it's much more annoying than the ones that exaggerate. It's easier to mentally compensate for exaggeration than downplaying/unspoken expectations.

As Thinkers we're often not even concerned with the realm of emotion at all--it just doesn't come into consideration. We often don't actively recognize that what we're saying will be perceived as emotionally hurtful. We use language in ways that run contrary to your basic feeling-based sense of the meaning of language, and you need to release the idea that so-called "heavily emotional language" is actually emotional even if no strong emotion was intended. (This is tough for Fi, I've found.)

Anyway, what you perceive as "expressing feelings in an exaggerated manner" is actually not an exaggerated expression of emotion as often as an exaggeration expression of Te/Ti. Note that this isn't fundamentally emotional; Thinkers simply don't read the same level of emotional implications into ANYTHING the way you do because we aren't

So, we run into an issue when you assume that we use words and phrasings in the same ways as you--you need to release the idea your perception of the emotional implications of a given phrase or wording is objectively "more correct" than someone else's. This is a function of Ni--which explains why NFJs don't exhibit the behaviors I'm dissecting nearly as often as NFPs.

I'm not really talking about hurtful things. I rarely see anything an NT says as hurtful, so much as I see exaggerated expressions of joy or disappointment over a situation. My impression is that they've unconsciously learned to just throw additional emotional emphasis in a misguided attempt to express themselves in a more human manner, and it just makes their emotions seem exaggerated. This ends up making more people (especially SFs) comfortable with them, but NFs will be confused and note how the reaction doesn't make emotional sense (due to it's out-of-phase degree) in context of the way the NT normally processes and responds to reality, and just won't know quite what to make of it at first.

"I don't care whether he meant offense, it was hurtful and that's why I responded negatively!" is a fundamentally flawed position because it opens everyone up to negative character judgments for all kinds of completely unintentional things of which we may even be entirely unaware.

Fi sometimes has a difficult time releasing the idea that it's always morally in the right.

You can say that again. I often have this problem with INFPs reading things into what I said that weren't there, and then implying I'm "superficial" or "cold" or something. No, I'm just not as sensitive as an INFP, nor am I sensitive to the same things. But that's another topic, it doesn't apply to all INFPs, and it's been done to death.

 

[Amargith]

Epp, if you are in fact allowed to react that strongly and demand others don't read into it, you should do the same for Fi-users who appear 'Emo' to you as they are usually just trying to explain themselves and are therefore just as entitled to express themselves in such a way as you are in expressing yourself the way you want to.

I suppose that would be true for someone who's totally unaware of his own feelings, but I think this is pretty rare even for NTs.

I don't see that I have to concede anything. I'd say I'm pretty aware of my own feelings most of the time; they're just not as strong a force in my decision-making as impersonal reasoning.

Well, no, they're just binging on F and have relatively poor T development.

Unfortunately that's the problem. You don't see how you're part of this, I guess, just that F's don't do T that well. The fact that your own lack of F is part of the issue, seems to be not your concern nor something you're willing to face. Can't expect a compromise or solution, if it's a one way street, unfortunately.

 

[alcea rosea]

Lol, so this thread starter from the "size" conversation.

I agree with Jennifer's first post.

 

[Totenkindly]

I suppose that would be true for someone who's totally unaware of his own feelings, but I think this is pretty rare even for NTs.

I don't see that I have to concede anything. I'd say I'm pretty aware of my own feelings most of the time; they're just not as strong a force in my decision-making as impersonal reasoning.

Hee. I went through that exact phase (said/wrote exactly the same things) in my early/mid-20's... until it was beaten out of me. Even my best friend, an INTP, told me later that I was insufferable. The more experience you get with people who are not like you, the more you'll start to see the world from new angles and realize the judgments one holds are just from one POV.

moving on... I'll say it did take me a long time to understand the ENTP variation of devil's advocate. I play devil's advocate but my point is usually clear and is hooked into my big frame of reference focused on "balance." You seem to take up positions that you don't necessarily hold, even if it unbalances things, because the goal isn't to create a large-scale philosophical framework that hinges together; Ne is in charge, and so the goal more is to explore whatever makes sense to explore in that moment. I kept looking for a large framework to hold it all together and would be confused when I couldn't find one, but that's because there doesn't tend to be.

It is interesting that NTs are more present in this thread then NFs.

yeah. I noticed that too.

 

[Lauren Ashley]

It is interesting that NTs are more present in this thread then NFs.

yeah. I noticed that too.

What do you think this means?

I just choose not to participate in discussions like this anymore. They are usually saying the same thing and nothing ends up being resolved for the reasons that Jennifer mentioned. In addition to the fact that I don't have any bones to pick with NTs as a group, on this forum or in real life. Many of these disagreements could be prevented by meeting a person halfway, which I try to do when I can.

 

[simulatedworld]

I think you can describe your personal view of this, but I'm not sure you should yet claim you have a handle on the NT view on it for the rest of us.

Hence the term "musings."

I totally disagree, because I don't think you've perceived the correct nuance here.

How we usually do this is to tell the NF that they're stupid and that we're smart, because we "understand the situation better" than they do and their values are inferior to our logic in terms of "truly understanding" it. Your recent argument and the others I typically see involve around trying to show the NF why the NT logic on how to frame the argument is actually the "best" frame, and their approach is irrelevant/inferior.


So the comparison is this:
NFs often insist they have a handle on what values are operating behind the NT's behavior.
NTs often insist that they have a handle on what logic is operating behind the NF's behavior.

The problem is being trapped in one's own frame of reference and having an marked inability to step into the other person's shoes and view it from their frame, insisting instead that one's frame of reference is "most valid" across the board.

True. I think that's how most people approach most situations; however, I also think that most people tend to hold each other to unrealistically high standards in their own areas of strength, i.e., NTs expecting people to maintain their level of rational consistency all the time, etc.

So here's another question, when you claim you're not "really upset."
How do you know that the NF is "really upset?"
Maybe they're really only as upset as you are, they just show it differently.

Umm, I don't? I can't recall ever having told an NF that I know how s/he feels better than s/he does. Did I actually say that? In fact, I sent an apology letter to berber and amargith telling them that my tone came off more harshly than I intended, which I should work on--and hey look, this also happened without unrequested mod intervention, and now the issue is settled.

And after reflecting on it I realized this and then started this thread in an attempt to better understand the situation/ask for other perspectives on it so I can try to avoid making this mistake in the future.

This thread's point is absolutely not NF bashing...hence my invitation to anyone with relevant opinions to share.

I can identify what you've said, when I've dealt with F people and things have soured. Yes, often I just feel "annoyed" even if I sound snippy -- it's basically anger but with detachment, which reduces it to "annoyance" -- and the focus on feelings and telling me what I might or might not be feeling is what pulls me in so that I can't detach myself and then I start taking it personally.

Uh huh, that's pretty much my point with the whole "self-fulfilling prophecy" thing. I don't hate NFs on principle; this is just one thing they do more often than other types that bugs me.

If you cared, I could explain lots of things that bug me about other types, too, and in fact I do. I'm sure I could pull lots of posts explaining strength vs. weakness analysis on virtually every type and type comparison--so I think your assertion that I "target NFs" with type criticisms more than others is kind of unfounded.

But nevermind that; I'm clearly a bitter NF-hater. (Despite living with an INFP roomie and working closely with NFs in almost every creative situation in my life...right.)

Do you know what surprises me? That NTs with supposedly strong Ti would fail to understand why their behavior is counterproductive in getting an F (or whomever else) to think in the same fashion they do. Been there, tried that, doesn't work... nor necessarily should it. These conversations are far more productive when both sides listen and flex and empathize (via both a feeling capacity AND an intellectual capacity).

You're right. This was my mistake, and such understanding is the point of this here little thread...not NF bashing. If I was out to bash NFs, I don't think I'd have sent them apology letters, admitted my own mistake and made an effort to better understand this situation for the future...

Do you?

I don't think young NTs really understand yet, due to lack of social experience, how some of their comments that they view as impersonal, are heavily laden with social, emotional, and personal implication even if they're unaware of it (or aware but dismissive), and that this can actually impact both T and F people alike. Face it, a lot of people read things personally, not detached. If everyone is of "equal value," then detachment is no better than attachment, so again it's going to have to flex if it plans to integrate well into community.

Yeah, you're also right about this, and it's certainly something I need to work on. It's hard for me to come at things from a personal perspective, but my point here is really that sometimes I do become upset in situations where it's unnecessary, simply because I respond emotionally to perceived threats to my freedom (like someone telling me how I do or don't feel.)

As I said, the point of this thread was learning/improving communication. If I was just in "GRR I AM A SUPER RATIONAL T" denial mode, I doubt very seriously that I would apologize to NFs for my recent tone and openly discuss how my emotions came into play in this situation.

And by the way, I don't mean to attack your credibility as a moderator. Here's another good example of the point you just made--I didn't really think about the personal implications of that statement before I said it, so, my mistake again.

I believe I also made an effort to say that operating outside of mod rules is "quite uncharacteristic" of you, which is true...I think it's cool that you took the trouble to discuss this in such detail, and frankly I have a lot of respect for your ability to handle forum issues so impersonally in most cases.

I can't really tell if you're upset or not from the tone of this post, but suffice it to say I didn't intend any offense and I apologize for any personal implications of it.

This whole exchange has actually been really helpful for me already--unfortunately the only way I know how to learn is through trial and error. I know you don't have time to go through a point-by-point analysis of the thread in question, but since I'm naturally weak at reading the emotional implications of my words, anything you can do to point out when I've made such mistakes is always appreciated.

Hee. I went through that exact phase (said/wrote exactly the same things) in my early/mid-20's... until it was beaten out of me. Even my best friend, an INTP, told me later that I was insufferable. The more experience you get with people who are not like you, the more you'll start to see the world from new angles and realize the judgments one holds are just from one POV.

moving on... I'll say it did take me a long time to understand the ENTP variation of devil's advocate. I play devil's advocate but my point is usually clear and is hooked into my big frame of reference focused on "balance." You seem to take up positions that you don't necessarily hold, even if it unbalances things, because the goal isn't to create a large-scale philosophical framework that hinges together; Ne is in charge, and so the goal more is to explore whatever makes sense to explore in that moment. I kept looking for a large framework to hold it all together and would be confused when I couldn't find one, but that's because there doesn't tend to be.

Yeah, ENTPs are ridiculous sometimes. Just like everybody else, we expect everyone to readily grasp our bizarre Ne trains of thought even when there's no real reason anyone should because they don't actually make sense! I definitely take up positions that I don't really hold because I can't really understand something until I've tried to approach it from every perspective.

Being in my early 20s myself, I am sure I'm going through a very similar process to what you went through--but would you really understand it now if you hadn't gone through it, made your own mistakes and learned the hard way?

It's all a function of completing the big picture--if I haven't gotten into the mindset of my opponent to determine how s/he thinks, I can't really figure out the best way to respond to him. (When I wanted to learn how to play against loose players in poker, for instance, I consciously loosened my own play to an absurd degree and lost a lot of money, all in the name of pushing it until I found the line so that I could understand where my own play lies in the broader context.)

I became irritated when you moved posts in the thread because I was in the middle of my learning process on this topic (though I know it really doesn't look that way on the surface) and you interrupted it by doing what I perceived as misreading the situation and its emotional implications.

Of course, a big part of that is my OWN deficiency in recognizing the emotional implications of my own words, and I see that now...so thanks again for that part. Haha. Unfortunately ENTPs tend to figure things out by pushing and pushing and pushing the line until it snaps, and then we're left to repair the pieces--truly I am sorry for this; it's just the only way I know how to learn.

 

[redacted]

I don't really think there's as wide of a communication gap as you seem to be implying. And, as someone said earlier on this thread, I think a bigger source of conflict seems to be Ti/Fe vs. Te/Fi.

I personally prefer a calm logical discussion to solve conflict, but I've learned to hone different skills for conflicts with different types of people over the years. I still think my hardest MBTI communication gap is with STJs.

It's also very different in face to face interaction. We all rely so much on body language and tone and seem to forget this on the internet. I argue with my ENFP friend all the time IRL, so we can decode each other's language very well. But the content of those debates is probably very similar to the conflicts on this forum.

The only advice I'd like to give everyone is this: the best way to solve a conflict is to try as hard as you can to take their assumptions and prove your own conclusions wrong. If you can't, you should explain where the logical or ethical disconnect is. People don't always mean what it seems like they do.

 

[Amargith]

SW, do you have that same thing where when someone indicates that they need you to back off, you find yourself not being able to comply?

It's something I've noticed in my dealings with some other ENTPs as well. For some reason, when I indicate I've had enough and I would like to leave the discussion to mull things over, they cannot seem to take no for an answer. And if you do leave, they'll hound you trying to provoke you back into the conversation by saying the things they noticed got to you the first time as well and building on that. At least, that's how I experienced it always.

What is up with that? And do you have any idea as to why someone would do that? It's..disrespectful, I feel, and depending on who it is, in some cases it actually *does* feel like mental rape as they won't let you have a choice almost in not sharing your thoughts on the matter.

 

[garbage]

What is up with that? And do you have any idea as to why someone would do that? It's..disrespectful, I feel, and depending on who it is, in some cases it actually *does* feel like mental rape as they won't let you have a choice almost in not sharing your thoughts on the matter.

I think it comes from wanting to make sense of everything and, potentially, removing any doubt. Completing the holistic model of a situation. If something doesn't fit quite right in an ENTP's mind, and if you have the answer as to why that is, he's gonna try to get it from you.

My ENTP friend does the same thing. He can't get it through his head that people can't discuss things when they're in a severely emotional state or when they need to process something; he completely ignores their feelings out of his search for an answer.

I know I've been guilty of it once or twice, but I've learned that prodding can generate more problems than it can solve, which completely defeats the purpose of doing so in the first place.

Situations still end up resolved in others' minds long before they're resolved in mine.

 

[BlahBlahNounBlah]

I think it comes from wanting to make sense of everything and, potentially, removing any doubt. Completing the holistic model of a situation. If something doesn't fit quite right in an ENTP's mind, and if you have the answer as to why that is, he's gonna try to get it from you.

My ENTP friend does the same thing. He can't get it through his head that people can't discuss things when they're in a severely emotional state or when they need to process something; he completely ignores their feelings out of his search for an answer.

I know I've been guilty of it once or twice, but I've learned that prodding can generate more problems than it can solve, which completely defeats the purpose of doing so in the first place.

Situations still end up resolved in others' minds long before they're resolved in mine.

My problem is more that Fs sometimes don't understand it's bad to argue with me when they feel emotional. When I realize they aren't making sense, I'll try to end the discussion until they're feeling more calm, but that sometimes makes them freak out even more.


What am I supposed to say to someone who is just blurting out irrational non sequiturs? They'll say "I didn't mean that. I was upset."


Well then how about we wait until you can say what you actually mean before we try to communicate?

 

[Laurie]

I've never had problems discussing things with NT's. I like that they don't get offended or take things personally and they like my passion.

 

[garbage]

My problem is more that Fs sometimes don't understand it's bad to argue with me when they feel emotional. When I realize they aren't making sense, I'll try to end the discussion until they're feeling more calm, but that sometimes makes them freak out even more.


What am I supposed to say to someone who is just blurting out irrational non sequiturs? They'll say "I didn't mean that. I was upset."

This happens, too (though it's not necessarily a F trait). And I propose that "I was upset" is as good of an excuse as being drunk is.

Some part of your true feelings about yourself or about other people do come out in these emotional states. You might not mean exactly what you say, but there's some truth to be gleamed from it.