• 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.

"Feeling" & "Thinking"

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
My initial point was to needle logic as a fragile entity.

The manner in which we perceive - as a telescope versus kaleidoscope - offers fundamental obstacles to our decision-making process. We cannot see all the available options to us at any given time. Education is a brilliant step towards mending this deficiency, but isn't to be trusted as a system of pure objectivity, as it was crafted with the same limitations it seeks to correct.


Education is learned conventionality - our best minds guessing together. There is nothing wrong with this. Look how far we've gotten.


Ultimately, perhaps the greatest lesson our perceptions can collectively teach is humility.

You know, deep down I know that I disagree with you on some point here, but your prose is so nice that it doesn't seem to matter at the moment :D.
 

SillySapienne

`~~Philosoflying~~`
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
9,801
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
You know, deep down I know that I disagree with you on some point here, but your prose is so nice that it doesn't seem to matter at the moment :D.
Oh man, that's kind of like a backhanded compliment.

Orangey's assessment of Night's post:

Presentation/prose: A+

Content/meaning: D-
 

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
Okay forgive me not reading everything here but I'm more restricted in my internet time these days...

The way I figure it the difference lies not in objectivity (that's almost always a veil) but where the objectivity is based.

F is more internal, values held by the person, where as T is more externally objective as in based in things which are commonly observable. Perhaps it could be further refined into observable and some better word than not-observable (the time restraint also stops me spending time on fancy words :( ).

Anyhow that's my two pennies for what it's worth.
 

edcoaching

New member
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
752
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
7
Ratio: a reckoning, account, calculation, computation; that faculty of the mind which forms the basis of computation and calculation, and hence of mental action in general, i. e. judgment, understanding, reason; in rhetoric, a showing cause, argument, reasoning in support of a proposition; in philos. lang., a production of proof, argumentation, reasoning.

What does it mean to say that Feelers use rational processes to come to rational conclusions if they don't rely on logic? That is, if their thoughts and arguments don't obey the laws of logic, (e.g., if it's possible for their premises to be true, yet their conclusions to be false), to what extent are their thoughts and arguments, (if they present any at all), rational? What authority does such a process posses such that it demands belief on pain of being irrational?

I'm on the road and really need to pull Jung off my shelf to get the semantics right (since they matter to so many of us :))
 

Nocapszy

no clinkz 'til brooklyn
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
4,517
MBTI Type
ENTP
You know, deep down I know that I disagree with you on some point here, but your prose is so nice that it doesn't seem to matter at the moment :D.

The quality of the content matches his writing.

Logic is built on assumed facts. If we misperceive, any conclusion is flawed.

It's like winning a race, but only because you went to the wrong track and no one else was there.

It's happened before.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
From the INTJs and ENTJs I know of objective isn't the word I'd use ;)

But I meant it in terms of the functions, not types. Like you said regarding T. The NTJs' Te might be "objective judgment in objective realm" (o/o), but their Ni is "subjective data from subjective source" (U/U)
 

INTJMom

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Messages
5,413
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w4
From the INTJs and ENTJs I know of objective isn't the word I'd use ;)
HA! WELL!
berry.gif
 

INTJMom

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Messages
5,413
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w4
Okay forgive me not reading everything here but I'm more restricted in my internet time these days...

The way I figure it the difference lies not in objectivity (that's almost always a veil) but where the objectivity is based.

F is more internal, values held by the person, where as T is more externally objective as in based in things which are commonly observable. Perhaps it could be further refined into observable and some better word than not-observable (the time restraint also stops me spending time on fancy words :( ).

Anyhow that's my two pennies for what it's worth.
That's excellent.
While I didn't read the whole thread either,
you've made the most sense out of it, for me at least.

But then one could argue that the T has chosen "externally objective" criteria, and then internalized them, so that the criteria do indeed feel personal to a T but not in an F way.
I don't think T is as arbitrary as some folks make it out to be.
 
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
1,026
MBTI Type
ENTP
Okay forgive me not reading everything here but I'm more restricted in my internet time these days...

The way I figure it the difference lies not in objectivity (that's almost always a veil) but where the objectivity is based.

F is more internal, values held by the person, where as T is more externally objective as in based in things which are commonly observable. Perhaps it could be further refined into observable and some better word than not-observable (the time restraint also stops me spending time on fancy words :( ).

Anyhow that's my two pennies for what it's worth.

Doesn't the reliance on observable phenomena bring in S/N issues?
 

Nocapszy

no clinkz 'til brooklyn
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
4,517
MBTI Type
ENTP
No.

Je employs the senses. If S and N are not developed in an E__J, that doesn't mean they never look at anything. Perception has less to do with the physical input of information (as per electricity, photons etc...) and more to do with the way our unconscious mind packages those signals to be un-boxed and configured by judgement.

Both Si and Ni's intake is done on their own time. The ideal is constructed when nothing is being dealt with externally.

Reliance on observable phenomena is... a human... deficit.

I don't care how introverted or intuitive you are. You need food just like the rest of us. You have to shit like everyone else. You gotta see the food to eat it. Gotta see the toilet to sit on it.

As I've seen it on this site, we're really letting theory overrun actual facts.

Get a grip guys. The way most of you guys here are addressing it, it's actually worse than astrology.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
No.

Je employs the senses. If S and N are not developed in an E__J, that doesn't mean they never look at anything. Perception has less to do with the physical input of information (as per electricity, photons etc...) and more to do with the way our unconscious mind packages those signals to be un-boxed and configured by judgement.

Both Si and Ni's intake is done on their own time. The ideal is constructed when nothing is being dealt with externally.

Reliance on observable phenomena is... a human... deficit.

I don't care how introverted or intuitive you are. You need food just like the rest of us. You have to shit like everyone else. You gotta see the food to eat it. Gotta see the toilet to sit on it.

As I've seen it on this site, we're really letting theory overrun actual facts.

Get a grip guys. The way most of you guys here are addressing it, it's actually worse than astrology.

yes!

even the least intuitive S uses intuition all the time -- any unconscious conceptual stuff is by definition N. to see a chair and think of it as a chair takes N and S. to decide to use the word chair takes F and T.

i've gotten caught up in these stereotypes as well. but now i see tons intuition in ISJs and ESPs. i see tons of feeling in ETJs and ITPs. etc, etc.
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
The quality of the content matches his writing.

Logic is built on assumed facts. If we misperceive, any conclusion is flawed.

It's like winning a race, but only because you went to the wrong track and no one else was there.

It's happened before.

Then it is perception that is flawed, and not logic per se.

Back on topic:

I've had an idea (and I apologize if someone already said this, which I think they might have). If feeling is about judgment based on value, and it outputs conclusions as to the "goodness" or "badness" of something (or "wrongness" and "rightness"), then these conclusions lead directly to emotional reactions. If something is good, then we have positive emotional reactions to it. If it is bad, then we have negative emotional reactions to it. These values are defined by the emotion that they produce. So the emotionality of feeling types has nothing to do with the process of the feeling function, nor does it have anything to do with the emotional-basis of the value system being used (even if the values are in fact emotionally based, which may not necessarily be true). The emotional response is subsequent to the judgment process, but it is always there nevertheless. In this way, we can say that the feeling function is not more emotional than the thinking function in essence, but its decisions always lead to emotional responses.

The thinking function, which is concerned with the values of true and false, does not automatically lead to emotional responses. Of course, it may lead to an emotional response, but only after we have done a feeling assessment and determined that "truth" is "good". The concept of truth is not defined by the emotional response that it produces. Truth can be valued, at any given point, as "good" or "bad". This evaluation is outside of whether or not something is true, which is the prerogative of thinking.

Again, I think pieces of this have already been stated throughout the thread, but this came as a sort of revelation to me.
 

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
That's excellent.
While I didn't read the whole thread either,
you've made the most sense out of it, for me at least.

But then one could argue that the T has chosen "externally objective" criteria, and then internalized them, so that the criteria do indeed feel personal to a T but not in an F way.
I don't think T is as arbitrary as some folks make it out to be.
Well that's the crunch isn't it, an F isn't illogical or non-objective just more based on personal targets than impersonal ones. In the same vein a T isn't making decisions just based on what is observed but also on internal values. There is no real black and white T and F to my mind. Just shades of grey.
Doesn't the reliance on observable phenomena bring in S/N issues?
N observes patterns between points, S observes points. Both make observations, it's what is observed and used that makes the difference.
 

edcoaching

New member
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
752
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
7
If feeling is about judgment based on value, and it outputs conclusions as to the "goodness" or "badness" of something (or "wrongness" and "rightness"), then these conclusions lead directly to emotional reactions. If something is good, then we have positive emotional reactions to it.

Myers didn't talk about "goodness" or "badness" but about "relative worth." That's why the emotions can stay out of it.

Jung states "For anyone who has known feeling only as something subjective, the nature of extraverted feeling will be difficult to grasp, because it has detached itself as much as possible from the subjective factor and subordinated itself entirely to the influence of the object...the valuations resulting from the act of feeling either correspond directly with objective values or accord with traditional and generally accepted standards."

For Introverted Feeling, Jung said, "It is extremely difficult to give an intellectual account of the introverted feeling process, or even an approximate description of it, although the peculiar nature of this kind of feeling is very noticeable once one has become aware of it. ..It is continually seeking an image which has no existence in reality, but which it has seen in a kind of vision. It glides unheedingly over all objects that do not fit with its aim." So here the criteria are the internal vision, still a basis for acceptance/rejection without emotion, necessarily.

To give an example, yesterday I sat in a meeting with my ESTJ executive director and listened to people from another organization suggest we take an action that would negatively impact the business of a key member of our professional organization. I extravert Feeling and immediately started thinking through how the community would react if we took that action--that guy doesn't have an enemy and it'd cause something akin to the wrath of Achilles in the wider community. My director who extraverts Thinking immediately went to fair/unfair considerations re: business practices. Neither of us reacted emotionally at the table during negotiations, but afterward over wine--I'm not sure that T and F had anything to do with our venting, just non-type-related outrage at injustice!! The guy is a friend to all and, well, geez the greed of some people!
 

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
I know one thing I'd like to see develop as MBTI gets older... Fs being comfortable without grasping for words like rational and logical. The way I see it yes it's more subjective... but I like it. Hell I repeatedly subordinate myself to NFs (don't know many SFs.. in case you were wondering) but that doesn't mean I think they make more sense than Ts... I just prefer their thinking as I find it easier to get comfortable with (to put such things in words is difficult but I think that's close).

Mind you I'd like to see T and F divided without resort to rationality or logic as most who I've seen lay claim to such titles are the most irrational zealots and to me exude over reation like cheap perfume.
 
Top