Fluffy Ts and Cold Fs

[Night]

Curious... Would that mean that INTJs do not feel emotions as easily, or do not feel emotions at all? Meaning, is all sentiment from one based on thought mainly, vs heart.

All types feel some level of discernible emotion - INTJs included.

What we label emotion is really a series of complex instinctive behaviors learned from historical experience - the comprehension of which has organically sharpened into sophisticated, chemically-linked, biological adaptations.

To take it a step further (while simplifying my base considerably), I'd wager emotion is fundamentally responsible for what is commonly understood as "morality".

Conversely, protection of socio-political hierarchies (often as an indirect method towards self-preservation) could be distinguished as "ethics" - likely a T domain.


I suspect the notion of an "emotionless" type is less based on empirical properties than the active cultivation of a mythos.

 

[white]

All types feel some level of discernible emotion - INTJs included.

What we label emotion is really a series of complex instinctive behaviors learned from historical experience - the comprehension of which has organically sharpened into sophisticated, chemically-linked, biological adaptations.

To take it a step further (while simplifying my base considerably), I'd wager emotion is fundamentally responsible for what is commonly understood as "morality".

Conversely, protection of socio-political hierarchies (often as an indirect method towards self-preservation) could be distinguished as "ethics" - likely a T domain.


I suspect the notion of an "emotionless" type is less based on empirical properties than the active cultivation of a mythos.

I did not mean INTJs were emotionless, very much doubt anyone makes decisions based on thought or feeling alone - it is usually a mix of the both.

When I asked if INTJs do not "feel" emotions, I was questioning, where is the origination of the emotions for the Ts, vs the Fs. In response to the OP, it is merely the differences in our seats that causes one to regard the other as cold, isn't it.

The emotions remain the same (and you described what are emotions beautifully). The same as ethics and morals are governing principles. But the seats of origin are separate domains, as you pointed out. But they are both about the preservation of order, isn't it?

So I'm not certain what draws the line between what is thought, and what is emotion, or are they not derivatives of each other. Could one exist without the other?

"Thoughts are the shadows of our feelings: always darker, emptier and simpler." -Nietzsche

Making sense?

 

[MetalWounds]

I did not mean INTJs were emotionless, very much doubt anyone makes decisions based on thought or feeling alone - it is usually a mix of the both.

When I asked if INTJs do not "feel" emotions, I was questioning, where is the origination of the emotions for the Ts, vs the Fs. In response to the OP, it is merely the differences in our seats that causes one to regard the other as cold, isn't it.

The emotions remain the same (and you described what are emotions beautifully). The same as ethics and morals are governing principles. But the seats of origin are separate domains, as you pointed out. But they are both about the preservation of order, isn't it?

So I'm not certain what draws the line between what is thought, and what is emotion, or are they not derivatives of each other. Could one exist without the other?

"Thoughts are the shadows of our feelings: always darker, emptier and simpler." -Nietzsche

Making sense?

You could not have either one or the other. xxFx types build emotions, and then use thinking to justify. xxTx types build thoughts, and then emotions to justify. It is a reciprocal system, in which the dominant function determines which faculty has precedence.

 

[Night]

I
The emotions remain the same (and you described what are emotions beautifully). The same as ethics and morals are governing principles. But the seats of origin are separate domains, as you pointed out. But they are both about the preservation of order, isn't it?

So I'm not certain what draws the line between what is thought, and what is emotion, or are they not derivatives of each other. Could one exist without the other?
"Thoughts are the shadows of our feelings: always darker, emptier and simpler." -Nietzsche

Thank you for your kind words, aelan.

To your question, it seems unlikely that either process would flourish without its present counterpart.

Absent from emotion, logic might simply function as an endless interplay of detached stimulus-response models wherein motivation is seasoned around the probability of systemic success v. failure with little creative zeal paid to the diversities in abstract thought emotion currently grants our logical sensibilities.

If we were to consider life without reason, our decisions would likely be governed by polarities in mood. As emotional depth provides powerful clarity into imaginative, aroma-rich landscapes singularly flowered by the color of our immediate mood, so too would we be imprisoned by the very impulses we normally rely on to gain artistic perspective.

 

[Xander]

Wait...

There are SERIOUS ESTPs???

I thought that was a myth made to scare children?

As for type versus behaviour, MBTI is cognative wiring. It DOES influence your behaviour but not in specific. Hence how I'm an INTP who likes to be in a group... just a particular one with particular people who I've vetted

Oh and serious Fs are just plain scary! It's like living next to a volcano and having no house insurance!

 

[INTJMom]

Wait...

There are SERIOUS ESTPs???

I thought that was a myth made to scare children?

As for type versus behaviour, MBTI is cognative wiring. It DOES influence your behaviour but not in specific. Hence how I'm an INTP who likes to be in a group... just a particular one with particular people who I've vetted

Oh and serious Fs are just plain scary! It's like living next to a volcano and having no house insurance!

My father is an ESTP. He can get serious every now and then.

 

[Xander]

My father is an ESTP. He can get serious every now and then.

Well quit nicking his sweets and he should lighten up

 

[cafe]

My ESTP grandpa had a more of a dignified southern gentleman persona, so he did not come off as especially funny. He would tell jokes, funny stories, and tall tales and he loved to take us out to touristy places and restaurants, but he was never one to act silly. He was really a character, though.

 

[white]

My ESTP grandpa had a more of a dignified southern gentleman persona, so he did not come off as especially funny. He would tell jokes, funny stories, and tall tales and he loved to take us out to touristy places and restaurants, but he was never one to act silly. He was really a character, though.

Dignified southern gentleman.

They don't make them like they used to. *deflates*

Thank you for your kind words, aelan.

To your question, it seems unlikely that either process would flourish without its present counterpart.

Absent from emotion, logic might simply function as an endless interplay of detached stimulus-response models wherein motivation is seasoned around the probability of systemic success v. failure with little creative zeal paid to the diversities in abstract thought emotion currently grants our logical sensibilities.

If we were to consider life without reason, our decisions would likely be governed by polarities in mood. As emotional depth provides powerful clarity into imaginative, aroma-rich landscapes singularly flowered by the color of our immediate mood, so too would we be imprisoned by the very impulses we normally rely on to gain artistic perspective.

You're welcome, Night, it was little more than what was deserved.

That's what I was driving at. Ergo a fluffy T and a cold F, is but a part of a mature F and a mature T, beyond the stereotypes. A life without either reason or emotion would be a single tonal landscape. While probably easier to navigate, it will lack the clarity and depth an aural mix of thought and emotion could give.

All Fs have a T shadow, and all Ts, an F familiar. So perhaps the challenge of being human, is in developing the shadow to become an aid, vs. the reduction of ourselves.

 

[Xander]

Are people perhaps resting in the shade of the misconception that Ts are rational and Fs feel?

Maybe that's why people don't understand irrational actions from Ts or emotions and how an F who rationalises becomes a T in some people's eyes?

Just a thought.

 

[INTJMom]

Are people perhaps resting in the shade of the misconception that Ts are rational and Fs feel?
...

Stating the obvious, are you?

 

[Xander]

Stating the obvious, are you?

Moi? I would never state the obvious...well not often. It's not often I notice it

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

i did mean to say that it is rude to question it outloud. I do agree that some people might mistype themselves, but people need to figure that out for themselves.

I agree with your idea here. What is disappointing is when someone simply concludes you are a different type without asking how you came to your conclusion. It is only the individual who has the complete data set comprised of their entire history and nuance of interacting with the world. It is true that different people have differing levels of skill in analyzing personality systems, but only the individual has all the raw data. Because of this, the observing person would need remarkably greater skill in analyzing type to be on equal footing with the individual for coming to a reasonable conclusion. I also suspect that the observer who is most skilled at analyzing type would also be the one most likely to ask questions regarding how the individual arrived at his/her conclusions.

 

["?"]

I dunno... I don't think of it as a T/F thing... I tend to associate 'maximum bubbliness' with EP-ness, to varying degrees.

More so again it goes back to interaction styles. ENTP, ENFP, ESFP and ESFJ all have a bubbly interaction style per Berens' theory. ESTPs I would think, would have a much harder no non-sense directness about them.

 

[Othon]

I'm a cold prickly of a feeler. It's not that I'm mean, I'm just cold and socially awkward. Oh well.

 

[chippinchunk]

I enjoy thinkers that can have that feeler type of impression. It makes them seem more approachable and when you get to know them they actually have a lot to say. Personally, they have a talent, I admire that.

 

[MetalWounds]

I enjoy thinkers that can have that feeler type of impression. It makes them seem more approachable and when you get to know them they actually have a lot to say. Personally, they have a talent, I admire that.

Yeah, if I'm in a decent mood I can sometimes come off as an F. I'm usually pretty approachable on a daily basis, however, when I'm feeling a little froggy I turn into a sarcastic asshole.

 

[chippinchunk]

Yeah, if I'm in a decent mood I can sometimes come off as an F. I'm usually pretty approachable on a daily basis, however, when I'm feeling a little froggy I turn into a sarcastic asshole.

NTP thing there.

 

[Xander]

It may benefit those who doubt other's analysis to check into the Johari window theory. Not all outside observation is assumption on internal processes. Sometimes your internal processes are displayed in greater clarity on your outer surface which is more easily observed by people other than yourself.

 

[Tigerlily]

Yeah, if I'm in a decent mood I can sometimes come off as an F. I'm usually pretty approachable on a daily basis, however, when I'm feeling a little froggy I turn into a sarcastic asshole.

That's interesting and where I become confused about my type. I can be a loving, caring individual, but if I am frustrated, tired or hungry, get.out.of.my.way. I also become very sarcastic and assholish. "Fuck Off", "Dick Head" and Fucktard" are a few of my favorite words when I am in a mood. I also like to say "You're not fucking dying, so get over it!" Can I still be an INFJ?

Mind you I never say these things to or in front of our children, but I do mutter them when I am pissed off with adults. Driving is the worst for me and my mood.