Free Thinkers: Heart v. Head

[JustDave]

Why not use a word that is not in commonly known use to avoid confusion? Here let me give you a free one: swurn. Now create a definition and then we can debate which type is the most swurn.

Well I swurn through thoughts constantly and am possibly an INFJ so INFJs are the superior swurners???

 

[The_Liquid_Laser]

Well I swurn through thoughts constantly and am possibly an INFJ so INFJs are the superior swurners???

I don't just think swurn man. I live it!

 

[JustDave]

I don't just think swurn man. I live it!

Touche' (did i get that right?).

It's all about the swurn. That's were I get my mojo from.

But you are an ENTP and I an INFJ. We cannot, in this world of MBTI, both have superior levels of swurn? Or can we? This is dangerous thinking.

 

[The_Liquid_Laser]

Touche' (did i get that right?).

It's all about the swurn. That's were I get my mojo from.

But you are an ENTP and I an INFJ. We cannot, in this world of MBTI, both have superior levels of swurn? Or can we? This is dangerous thinking.

What are you kidding? ENTP and INFJ are like the swurn masters! ENTP swurn comes from Ne, so it's like universal swurn, but it's also uncontrollable. Other people find ENTP swurn to be too messy. INFJ swurn comes from Ni, so it's more focused and controlled. On the other hand it doesn't always work on everything all the time. It's kinda like Green Lantern's power ring.

 

[JustDave]

What are you kidding? ENTP and INFJ are like the swurn masters! ENTP swurn comes from Ne, so it's like universal swurn, but it's also uncontrollable. Other people find ENTP swurn to be too messy. INFJ swurn comes from Ni, so it's more focused and controlled. On the other hand it doesn't always work on everything all the time. It's kinda like Green Lantern's power ring.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[CzeCze]

I agree with Dave about the shield of logic. People by definition are subjective in their perceptions of the world. There is a lot of arrogance (with the implication that one does not know when one is wrong) in believing you area above bias or emotions and that your logic is infallible ergo you are infallible or somehow live in a land of universal truth known as Rational-ity.

I think an NT, especially an immature or unhealthy NT could get very caught up in always being right as opposed to actually trying to see the world 'objectively' or thinking independentally. You're not really much of a free thinker if you're obsessed with appearances, especially the appearance of being correct.

This is what I'm gleaning from what Dave said, or just superimposing my own take on it.

On the other hand, I think NFs and NTs who are very confident can display the best examples of free LIVING, doing things to a different drummer and doing it with passion.

I guess you could also argue that going by type SFs can also very much be free spirits with ISFP being the pinnacle example of someone completely doing their own thing and being quite content not to be part of a pack (and living up in the mountains where no one can bother them).

I think the definition of 'free thinking' is too open and up for debate. Free living though, now there's something I feel you can judge more easily.

When I read the question 'heart vs. head' I thought you would ask what rules you more. While by definition, I have to be typed F or T, I have always felt that don't think OR feel exclusively.

I live in this world simultaneously with all the parts that make me up. I think with my heart and feel with my head.

 

[JustDave]

I agree with Dave about the shield of logic. People by definition are subjective in their perceptions of the world. There is a lot of arrogance (with the implication that one does not know when one is wrong) in believing you area above bias or emotions and that your logic is infallible ergo you are infallible or somehow live in a land of universal truth known as Rational-ity.

I think an NT, especially an immature or unhealthy NT could get very caught up in always being right as opposed to actually trying to see the world 'objectively' or thinking independentally. You're not really much of a free thinker if you're obsessed with appearances, especially the appearance of being correct.

This is what I'm gleaning from what Dave said, or just superimposing my own take on it.

On the other hand, I think NFs and NTs who are very confident can display the best examples of free LIVING, doing things to a different drummer and doing it with passion.

I guess you could also argue that going by type SFs can also very much be free spirits with ISFP being the pinnacle example of someone completely doing their own thing and being quite content not to be part of a pack (and living up in the mountains where no one can bother them).

I think the definition of 'free thinking' is too open and up for debate. Free living though, now there's something I feel you can judge more easily.

When I read the question 'heart vs. head' I thought you would ask what rules you more. While by definition, I have to be typed F or T, I have always felt that don't think OR feel exclusively.

I live in this world simultaneously with all the parts that make me up. I think with my heart and feel with my head.

That was truly a beautiful answer. I am going to try my best to post a good response.

"The shield of logic". That's a good way to put it. The immature NTs hide behind logic as if it is inncorruptable. Yet, as you alluded to, anything born of the human is subject to some bias.

Next, I believe many younger NTs are playing a part, an act. They are trying to be very logical as they are NTs. And its only logical that they fulfill their role in the world.

I agree with your statement regarding the ISFPs. My brother is most likely and ISFP, and he does whatever he wants, when he wants without thought of popular opinion. Essentially, if it feels right it must be right.

What rules you more? That could be a good thread. Perhaps you should start one. Perhaps I will steal your idea and start my own although probably not as I do have a heart ... somewhere?

 

[Roger Mexico]

I agree with Dave about the shield of logic. People by definition are subjective in their perceptions of the world. There is a lot of arrogance (with the implication that one does not know when one is wrong) in believing you area above bias or emotions and that your logic is infallible ergo you are infallible or somehow live in a land of universal truth known as Rational-ity.

I think an NT, especially an immature or unhealthy NT could get very caught up in always being right as opposed to actually trying to see the world 'objectively' or thinking independentally. You're not really much of a free thinker if you're obsessed with appearances, especially the appearance of being correct.

This is what I'm gleaning from what Dave said, or just superimposing my own take on it.

On the other hand, I think NFs and NTs who are very confident can display the best examples of free LIVING, doing things to a different drummer and doing it with passion.

I guess you could also argue that going by type SFs can also very much be free spirits with ISFP being the pinnacle example of someone completely doing their own thing and being quite content not to be part of a pack (and living up in the mountains where no one can bother them).

I think the definition of 'free thinking' is too open and up for debate. Free living though, now there's something I feel you can judge more easily.

When I read the question 'heart vs. head' I thought you would ask what rules you more. While by definition, I have to be typed F or T, I have always felt that don't think OR feel exclusively.

.

This is actually interesting as a psychological study of an Idealist mentality. The topic of discussion is whether intentionally non-rational thought constitutes a superior method of exploring reality as opposed to a strict adherence to logic. The ENFP, on the other hand, decides to approach the issue tangentially by implying that claims of rational analysis are a mere facade designed to conceal a perceived weakness.

This is kind of what I was getting at-- CzeCze doesn't really care about answering the question; she just wants to analyze various persons' subjective experience of the issue.

And then, of course, mollify us all with cheap platitudes.

Whatever the merit of her points, the fact remains that "trying to see the world objectively" is essentially the definition of "logic." So, regardless of however short of perfecting this art any of us may fall, I still don't see a compelling case that the rational method is anything other than the best means available.

So, in summary,

 

[Athenian200]

This is kind of what I was getting at-- CzeCze doesn't really care about answering the question; she just wants to analyze various persons' subjective experience of the issue.

I doubt you would, but just in case: Try not to make the assumption that this is true of all/most Idealists. Underdeveloped FP's often seem to be much worse than FJ's in this aspect. I think I at least try to answer a question posed to me, and wouldn't just disregard it and demand my feelings be accepted without any examination.

 

[CzeCze]

So, in summary,

You know, the only thing I got when reading your response was "blah blah blah blah I hate DDR because it's fun blah blah blah blah"

At least you didn't drag ESFP women into it this time and turn it into some argument why "reptilian" gold digging is illogical. Though your new signature is just as charming.

And I love how you love my cheap platitudes. Your admiration of me is almost too much even for my silly cheerleading ENFP self. Seriously, stop, you're embarassing me. Or annoying me. Either way, my cheeks get red so same thing.

I doubt you would, but just in case: Try not to make the assumption that this is true of all/most Idealists. Underdeveloped FP's often seem to be much worse than FJ's in this aspect. I think I at least try to answer a question posed to me, and wouldn't just disregard it and demand my feelings be accepted without any examination.

Thanks for backing me up Athenian. It's good to know I fall into your book of underdeveloped FP'ness.

 

[The_Liquid_Laser]

Whatever the merit of her points, the fact remains that "trying to see the world objectively" is essentially the definition of "logic." So, regardless of however short of perfecting this art any of us may fall, I still don't see a compelling case that the rational method is anything other than the best means available.

Um...NO! Lol.

Logic is a way of reaching conclusions. It doesn't have to be related to seeing the world objectively and often it isn't. Pure logic is used to reach purely theoretical conclusions. Therefore it is totally separate from one's perception of the world. Logic and objectivity are two totally different things.

(The definition of logic I am using of course is the rigorous type of logic applied by mathematicians and philosophers. All other "logic" is fluff by comparison.)

 

["?"]

Idealists live life subjectively. Rationals live it objectively. (on a continuum of course) Objectivity implies freedom.

Uhh... no, Jung says that all introverted types are subjective and all extraverted types objective. In his distinction of thinking types, Jung says,

When describing extraverted thinking, I gave a brief characterization of introverted thinking, to which at this stage I must make further reference. Introverted thinking is primarily orientated by the subjective factor. At the least, this subjective factor is represented by a subjective feeling of direction, which, in the last resort, determines judgment. Occasionally, it is a more or less finished image, which to some extent, serves as a standard. This thinking may be conceived either with concrete or with abstract factors, but always at the decisive points it is orientated by subjective data. Hence, it does not lead from concrete experience back again into objective things, but always to the subjective content. External facts are not the aim and origin of this thinking, although the introvert would often like to make it so appear. It begins in the subject, and returns to the subject, although it may undertake the widest flights into the territory of the real and the actual.

 

[Athenian200]

Thanks for backing me up Athenian. It's good to know I fall into your book of underdeveloped FP'ness.

I wasn't really talking about you specifically. I was thinking about some FP's I knew that did this... dismissing what I was saying, sticking to their own ideas about what I meant and throwing accusations at me for no apparent reason, and only guessing at motivation, which can be hard to deal with.

I hadn't even read your post when I replied to that, and I agree with many of the points about perception and such. I just worried that because you were an NF, RM might make the assumption that what they applied to you applied to all NF's, and I wanted to make it clear that that behavior wasn't as typical of my type as it was to NFP's. It was meant to be defensive, not offensive. Sorry if I offended you, though.

 

[disregard]

Uhh... no, Jung says that all introverted types are subjective and all extraverted types objective. In his distinction of thinking types, Jung says,

Introverts and extraverts are certainly oriented to their inner and outer worlds, respectively, but that does not mean the introvert is more subjective and the extravert more objective.. it simply means the introvert must reflect and the extravert must (inter)act.

You will need to expound upon your claim for me to consider it seriously. As for now, I reject it.

 

["?"]

Introverts and extraverts are certainly oriented to their inner and outer worlds, respectively, but that does not mean the introvert is more subjective and the extravert more objective.. it simply means the introvert must reflect and the extravert must (inter)act.

You will need to expound upon your claim for me to consider it seriously. As for now, I reject it.

Tell Jung that, the quote was directly from his Chapter on the subject.

 

[disregard]

Jung wasn't referring to introvert thinkers.. he was referring to the cognitive function of introverted thinking. The subjective factor to which Jung refers in your quote is the decisiveness of introverted thinking which involves drawing from one's own vault of thoughts organised into and based on preexisting principles within the mind of the introverted thinker (not IxTx... Ti), not from experience, of which observation is a subset, and of which is objective.

 

[MerkW]

This thread has become derailed to the point of tragedy.

Of course, that reminds me...

When waiting for trains, I have always wondered how much junk it would take to throw onto the tracks to derail the entire train. I have thought of mathematically calculating how to strategically place only one dime to complete this entire task.

 

[The_Liquid_Laser]

This thread was derailed from the first post.

 

[Roger Mexico]

Um...NO! Lol.

Logic is a way of reaching conclusions. It doesn't have to be related to seeing the world objectively and often it isn't. Pure logic is used to reach purely theoretical conclusions. Therefore it is totally separate from one's perception of the world. Logic and objectivity are two totally different things.

(The definition of logic I am using of course is the rigorous type of logic applied by mathematicians and philosophers. All other "logic" is fluff by comparison.)

You're right. I must have confused the word logic with reason.

Thanks.

 

[Roger Mexico]

You know, the only thing I got when reading your response was "blah blah blah blah I hate DDR because it's fun blah blah blah blah"

I really don't see what Erich Honecker has to do with any of this...

Oh, wait, you were talking about those god-awful irritating plastic contraptions with the shitty music and flashing lights. Never mind.

At least you didn't drag ESFP women into it this time and turn it into some argument why "reptilian" gold digging is illogical. Though your new signature is just as charming.

On the contrary, it's eminently logical--ESFP's are carnivorous reptiles disguised as human beings, like in that movie V. Everybody has to eat.

I live in this world simultaneously with all the parts that make me up. I think with my heart and feel with my head.

Your nose runs. Your feet smell. You're built upside down!