Letter #3: T or F - are you a Thinker or a Feeler?

[Blackwater]

Wrote on about the third letter. I want to hit some of the broader connotations of each letter, that are not always covered by the established litterature. As I said, a lot of the mainstream litt. uses weasel words and is very vague. Sometimes, something is implied (such as N > S) but never stated directly. I'd like to get past this, but the danger is of course that one goes wrong, which I may well have done. But be sure to check it out and get back to me with (helpful) criticism and/or personal impressions of the text.

People who have a strong preference for Feeling generally take pride in seeing themselves as empathetic, considerate, friendly, generous, and helpful. Some Feelers even experience such a strong sense of concern and involvement with regards to the problems of others that they can feel compelled to drop what they are doing and offer their aid to the other. Conversely, people who prefer Thinking more often take pride in being critical, logical, insightful and truthful. Taking a darker, less optimistic view of human nature than their Feeling counterparts, they are also less prone to spontaneously help people who are not their close friends or where they do not see a 'rational' reason to do so.

Another thing that could be nice is if people would do the same thing as they did in the other thread and bold the things that they think applies to them. For example, I am T and:

T / Thinking

Logic over sentiment
Critical, then supportive
Decides with head
Truth before tact
Sees conflict as natural
Good at being critical
At ease with the impersonal
Seeks to ignore emotion
Interested in things-then-people
Often prefer non-fiction

F / Feeling

Sentiment over logic
Supportive, then critical
Decides with heart
Tact before truth
Takes conflict personally
Good at being appreciative
At ease with the personal
Attach to emotion
Interested in people-then-things
Often prefer fiction

Of course, if your profile doesn't state your type, you must also say whether you are T or F for it to make any sense to the rest of us. That's some T right there

 

[entropie]

I think if you want to make a really realistic description that people can identify with, you'ld have to create a hybrid T/F description, cause thats what we all are. If you focus on either T or F people will never feel like they fit the description 100%, which can be an advantage or disadvantage dependant on what you want to achieve.

 

[Owfin]

Ti and Te are very different. Te looks at external evidence for proving something to be correct. Ti looks at internal proof.

Fi and Fe are very different. Fi sees opinions as subjective. Fe sees opinions as things that can be proven objectively.

 

[Mal12345]

Wrote on about the third letter. I want to hit some of the broader connotations of each letter, that are not always covered by the established litterature. As I said, a lot of the mainstream litt. uses weasel words and is very vague. Sometimes, something is implied (such as N > S) but never stated directly. I'd like to get past this, but the danger is of course that one goes wrong, which I may well have done. But be sure to check it out and get back to me with (helpful) criticism and/or personal impressions of the text.



Another thing that could be nice is if people would do the same thing as they did in the other thread and bold the things that they think applies to them. For example, I am T and:

T / Thinking

Logic over sentiment
Critical, then supportive
Decides with head
Truth before tact
Sees conflict as natural
Good at being critical
At ease with the impersonal
Seeks to ignore emotion
Interested in things-then-people
Often prefer non-fiction

F / Feeling

Sentiment over logic
Supportive, then critical
Decides with heart
Tact before truth
Takes conflict personally
Good at being appreciative
At ease with the personal
Attach to emotion
Interested in people-then-things
Often prefer fiction

Of course, if your profile doesn't state your type, you must also say whether you are T or F for it to make any sense to the rest of us. That's some T right there

You did not make a choice on a couple of those. Do you seek to ignore emotion, or attach to emotion?

 

[entropie]

Emotions are irrelevant you'll be assimilated into our "we dream the world up to be as we want" neverending blablabla

 

[garbage]

You did not make a choice on a couple of those. Do you seek to ignore emotion, or attach to emotion?

Maybe it's the "I don't really relate to either extreme" option. At least, that's how I'm gonna treat it.

In the following, strikeout doesn't apply to me at all, bold applies to me, untouched somewhat applies but not to any great strength.

T / Thinking

Logic over sentiment
Critical, then supportive
Decides with head
Truth before tact
Sees conflict as natural
Good at being critical
At ease with the impersonal
Seeks to ignore emotion
Interested in things-then-people
Often prefer non-fiction

F / Feeling

Sentiment over logic
Supportive, then critical
Decides with heart
Tact before truth
Takes conflict personally
Good at being appreciative
At ease with the personal
Attach to emotion
Interested in people-then-things
Often prefer fiction

so many bolds.. what have I done..

 

[Mal12345]

My answers are bolded:

T / Thinking

Logic over sentiment
Critical, then supportive
Decides with head
Truth before tact
Sees conflict as natural
Good at being critical
At ease with the impersonal
Seeks to ignore emotion
Interested in things-then-people
Often prefer non-fiction

F / Feeling

Sentiment over logic
Supportive, then critical
Decides with heart
Tact before truth
Takes conflict personally
Good at being appreciative
At ease with the personal
Attach to emotion
Interested in people-then-things
Often prefer fiction

None of the above implies that I am an unfeeling robot. I can have my "heart" moments, but my tendency is to go toward the "head."

 

[Qlip]

T / Thinking

Logic over sentiment
Critical, then supportive
Decides with head
Truth before tact
Sees conflict as natural
Good at being critical
At ease with the impersonal
Seeks to ignore emotion
Interested in things-then-people
Often prefer non-fiction

F / Feeling

Sentiment over logic
Supportive, then critical
Decides with heart
Tact before truth
Takes conflict personally
Good at being appreciative
At ease with the personal
Attach to emotion
Interested in people-then-things
Often prefer fiction

Not all these seemed either/or to me. I try to take a balanced approach to emotion, I listen to it, but I don't let it drive me. I personally don't see how 'things' are different than 'people'. Things are ultimately what people what and need and are effected by. I often prefer both fiction and non-fiction, though I'd have to do a lot of thinking to decide which I more often prefer.

 

[Silveresque]

T / Thinking

Logic over sentiment
Critical, then supportive
Decides with head
Truth before tact
Sees conflict as natural
Good at being critical
At ease with the impersonal
Seeks to ignore emotion
Interested in things-then-people
Often prefer non-fiction

F / Feeling

Sentiment over logic
Supportive, then critical
Decides with heart
Tact before truth
Takes conflict personally
Good at being appreciative
At ease with the personal
Attach to emotion
Interested in people-then-things
Often prefer fiction

 

[Antimony]

T / Thinking

Logic over sentiment
Critical, then supportive
Decides with head <- mostly
Truth before tact
Sees conflict as natural
Good at being critical
At ease with the impersonal
Seeks to ignore emotion
Interested in things-then-people
Often prefer non-fiction

F / Feeling

Sentiment over logic
Supportive, then critical
Decides with heart
Tact before truth
Takes conflict personally
Good at being appreciative
At ease with the personal
Attach to emotion
Interested in people-then than-things
Often prefer fiction

I love fiction and nonfiction, and I use tact and truth accordingly, though admittedly, I am often too truthful. I also enjoy both people and things

Not sure how to go about supportive then critical. No context. For example, with ideas, I am very critical. With other people being down, I may critique the situation but I may present a caring role in order to get the desired information so I can give them advice.

 

[Randomnity]

T / Thinking

Logic over sentiment
Critical, then supportive (situational)
Decides with head (ideally, not always)
Truth before tact (situational)
Sees conflict as natural (you'd have to define "natural" first...tentatively disagree)
Good at being critical
At ease with the impersonal (define "the impersonal" first)
Seeks to ignore emotion
Interested in things-then-people
Often prefer non-fiction (this one sounds dumb to me)

F / Feeling

Sentiment over logic
Supportive, then critical (situational)
Decides with heart
Tact before truth (situational)
Takes conflict personally
Good at being appreciative (depends what the threshold for "good" is)
At ease with the personal (again, define "personal" in this context)
Attach to emotion (what does this even mean?)
Interested in people-then-things
Often prefer fiction

The list does not seem particularly accurate.

 

[Mal12345]

I love fiction and nonfiction, and I use tact and truth accordingly, though admittedly, I am often too truthful. I also enjoy both people and things

Not sure how to go about supportive then critical. No context. For example, with ideas, I am very critical. With other people being down, I may critique the situation but I may present a caring role in order to get the desired information so I can give them advice.

Here's a list of options from LifeTypes:

I am more likely to act like a Thinker and:

Have truth as my objective.
Decide more with my head.
Prefer on principle to question others' findings, believing their findings may be inaccurate.
See my encounters with people as having a purpose.
Notice ineffective reasoning.
Choose truthfulness over tactfulness.
Critique and point out the negatives, overlooking the positives.
Focus my attention on universal principles.
Deal with people firmly, as required.
Expect the world to run on logical principles.

What others might say when you've overused your Thinking:

"You're hardhearted!"
"You're so cold; quit acting like a computer!"
'Why can't you at least be more pleasant?"
"How can you be so heartless?"
How could you say something so cruel?"

I am more likely to act like a Feeler and:

Have harmony as my objective.
Decide more with my heart.
Prefer to agree with others' findings, believing people are worth listening to.
See my encounters with people as friendly and important in themselves.
Notice when people need support.
Choose tactfulness over truthfulness.
Overlook people's negative points, stressing areas of agreement.
Focus my attention on personal motives. (I can do both, can't I?)
Deal with people compassionately, as needed.
Expect the world to recognize individual differences.

What others might say when you've overused your Feeling:

"You're a bleeding heart!"
"You're such a softy, a real people pleaser!"
"Why can't you be more logical?"
"Don't you ever use your head?"
"Quit taking it so personally!"

"Expect the world to recognize individual differences" seems to be opposed to "logical principles." This amounts to treating people according to the same principles, like the lady of justice with the balance scales and blindfold, versus treating them uniquely and subjectively. I kind of go both ways on this point.

 

[Owfin]

I think the problem is that these descriptions aren't describing base T vs F, they are describing Te vs Fe. Therefore, many don't identify with either.

 

[Mal12345]

T / Thinking

Logic over sentiment
Critical, then supportive (situational)
Decides with head (ideally, not always)
Truth before tact (situational)
Sees conflict as natural (you'd have to define "natural" first...tentatively disagree)
Good at being critical
At ease with the impersonal (define "the impersonal" first)
Seeks to ignore emotion
Interested in things-then-people
Often prefer non-fiction (this one sounds dumb to me)

F / Feeling

Sentiment over logic
Supportive, then critical (situational)
Decides with heart
Tact before truth (situational)
Takes conflict personally
Good at being appreciative (depends what the threshold for "good" is)
At ease with the personal (again, define "personal" in this context)
Attach to emotion (what does this even mean?)
Interested in people-then-things
Often prefer fiction

The list does not seem particularly accurate.

I can appreciate your Thinking modus operandi in dealing with this list. LOL.

 

[Antimony]

Have truth as my objective.
Decide more with my head.
Prefer on principle to question others' findings, believing their findings may be inaccurate.
See my encounters with people as having a purpose.
Notice ineffective reasoning.
Choose truthfulness over tactfulness.
Critique and point out the negatives, overlooking the positives.
Focus my attention on universal principles.
Deal with people firmly, as required.
Expect the world to run on logical principles.

What others might say when you've overused your Thinking:

"You're hardhearted!"
"You're so cold; quit acting like a computer!"
'Why can't you at least be more pleasant?"
"How can you be so heartless?"
How could you say something so cruel?"

The story of my life.

Have harmony as my objective. (more like seek a balance)
Decide more with my heart.
Prefer to agree with others' findings, believing people are worth listening to.
See my encounters with people as friendly and important in themselves.
Notice when people need support.
Choose tactfulness over truthfulness.
Overlook people's negative points, stressing areas of agreement.
Focus my attention on personal motives.
Deal with people compassionately, as needed.
Expect the world to recognize individual differences.

 

[Silveresque]

I am more likely to act like a Thinker and:

Have truth as my objective.
Decide more with my head.
Prefer on principle to question others' findings, believing their findings may be inaccurate. (Well, I do, but I often keep quiet about it)
See my encounters with people as having a purpose.
Notice ineffective reasoning.
Choose truthfulness over tactfulness.
Critique and point out the negatives, overlooking the positives.
Focus my attention on universal principles.
Deal with people firmly, as required.
Expect the world to run on logical principles.

What others might say when you've overused your Thinking:

"You're hardhearted!"
"You're so cold; quit acting like a computer!"
'Why can't you at least be more pleasant?"
"How can you be so heartless?"
How could you say something so cruel?"

I am more likely to act like a Feeler and:

Have harmony as my objective.
Decide more with my heart.
Prefer to agree with others' findings, believing people are worth listening to. (I may not agree, but I try not to criticize)
See my encounters with people as friendly and important in themselves.
Notice when people need support.
Choose tactfulness over truthfulness.
Overlook people's negative points, stressing areas of agreement. (I do both...It depends)
Focus my attention on personal motives.
Deal with people compassionately, as needed.
Expect the world to recognize individual differences.

What others might say when you've overused your Feeling:

"You're a bleeding heart!"
"You're such a softy, a real people pleaser!"
"Why can't you be more logical?"
"Don't you ever use your head?"
"Quit taking it so personally!"

 

[INTP]

Your interpration of what jung meant by rational and objective feeling arent true.

By rational function, jung meant processing information, opposed to irrational function, which is just about collecting/perceiving information. It has nothing to do with internal consistency of thoughts. This lack of internal consistency of thoughts are products of undeveloped functions.

Its true that by objective jung meant directed towards objective(external) world. But it doesent mean that the function is objective(in its general meaning) itself, just that its aimed towards objectivity. This "objective" F is ofc Fe. Now if you think about Fe, are you seriously saying that its not aimed towards external objective world or that it doesent strive for objectivity of feeling? Because this is exactly what Fe is about..

 

[lunalum]

T / Thinking

Logic over sentiment
Critical, then supportive
Decides with head
Truth before tact
Sees conflict as natural
Good at being critical
At ease with the impersonal
Seeks to ignore emotion
Interested in things-then-people
Often prefer non-fiction


F / Feeling

Sentiment over logic
Supportive, then critical
Decides with heart
Tact before truth
Takes conflict personally
Good at being appreciative
At ease with the personal
Attach to emotion
Interested in people-then-things
Often prefer fiction


I don't buy that part about thinkers being more cynical about human nature. It's almost a cliche for Fi types to think all sorts of things about human nature, often brooding on the dark side of it. Thinkers tend to be more neutral about "all that human nonsense"

 

[Stanton Moore]

All of this stuff is entirely context dependent. Sometimes thinking is better than feeling, sometimes visa versa, often a blend of both, as the situation dictates.

 

[Elfboy]

T / Thinking

Logic over sentiment
Critical, then supportive
Decides with head
Truth before tact
Sees conflict as natural
Good at being critical
At ease with the impersonal
Seeks to ignore emotion
Interested in things-then-people
Often prefer non-fiction

F / Feeling

Sentiment over logic
Supportive, then critical
Decides with heart
Tact before truth
Takes conflict personally
Good at being appreciative
At ease with the personal
Attach to emotion
Interested in people-then-things
Often prefer fiction

according to this, I'm a fairly strong T lol

[MENTION=14915]Owfin[/MENTION]

I think the problem is that these descriptions aren't describing base T vs F, they are describing Te vs Fe. Therefore, many don't identify with either.

this. I'm an ENFP, but I don't care for 95% of people and tend to be rational, level headed and not very emotional. descriptions make Feelers all sound like EFJ 2s and 4s (yuck!)