User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 24

  1. #1
    your resident asshole
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    4,407

    Default Thinkers prefer objectivity while feelers prefer subjectivity

    In an attempt to simplify things, I've created the above statement. It is for this reason that it would make sense for thinkers to prefer subjects like science and math, and feelers to prefer subjects like writing and the social sciences.

    So what do you think? Is this statement true or false?

  2. #2
    Senior Member Chiharu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFp None
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Hmm, I think this is an over-simplification.

    For starters, yes, some feelers prefer reading and social sciences, but not ALL do. Furthermore, their preference may have little to do with subjectivity. Furthermore, if you read your statement in a broad way, it sounds like you're talking about in terms of judgment or laws. Personally, I prefer to look at things objectively, impartially, because I think that's fairer to everyone. That's not to say I never make subjective decisions, but i think you could argue that virtually all PEOPLE do. Now this is a very Fi sort of standpoint. I do notice more subjectivity in Fe users, but that may be my personal bias.
    Be soft. Do not let the world make you hard. Do not let pain make you hate. Do not let the bitterness steal your sweetness." ― Kurt Vonnegut

    ENFP. 7w6 – 4w3 – 1w9 sx/so. Aries. Dilettante. Overly anxious optimist.

  3. #3
    your resident asshole
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    4,407

    Default

    Yes, I'm aware that there are many exceptions to this statement. However, I'm talking about preference in general. Based on my statement, I would assume that a thinker would much rather engage in activities that require more objective, impersonal thinking, while feelers would rather engage in the opposite.

    As for your statement on your decision-making, this sounds more like what a thinker would say than a feeler. After all, Te, Ti, Fe, and Fi are all known as the decision making (judging) functions.

    I'm trying to simplify the concept because this theory is somewhat difficult to grasp for me. I don't feel like I (or most people for that matter) make decisions in way such that my decision making is predominately made in either a detached or emotional (for lack of a better word) manner.

  4. #4
    Senor Membrae Eugene Watson VIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    MBTI
    iSFP
    Enneagram
    idk sp
    Posts
    832

    Default

    Je (Te/Fe) is considered objective, but all judging is rational. I would say all thinking strives to be logical, with Te being more impersonal/objective. I don't know if you could call Ti subjective and impersonal though.

  5. #5
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DisneyGeek View Post
    In an attempt to simplify things, I've created the above statement. It is for this reason that it would make sense for thinkers to prefer subjects like science and math, and feelers to prefer subjects like writing and the social sciences.

    So what do you think? Is this statement true or false?
    False.

    Hitler and Stalin did prefer subjectivity.
    When their aides objected to the atrocities, they said:
    - Do not be so emotional.

    A judge has a stroke. The right hemisphere is damaged, or the left.
    In either case, she is unable to continue her job.

    T and F are the rational functions.
    Dichotomy of E divides T and F.

    Three dimensions is a simultaneous dichotomy of four parties.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DisneyGeek View Post
    In an attempt to simplify things, I've created the above statement. It is for this reason that it would make sense for thinkers to prefer subjects like science and math, and feelers to prefer subjects like writing and the social sciences.

    So what do you think? Is this statement true or false?
    I think the statement itself is true, although I prefer subjects like writing and the social sciences and do not see them as necessarily subjectivity bound, in fact I struggle for objectivity in the same.

    The greatest thing that ever happened to what I consider was the pinnacle of waxing lyrical about subjectivity, ie post modernism, was its exposure through the production of a deliberately meaningless jargon bound volume by a so called "hard scientist".

    It didnt expose the social sciences or soft sciences as necessarily bunk but it definitely, for me, exposed some of the intellectual currents or trends within it as bunk. Definitely. I actually think the fault lines stem from the French but also more broadly what is refered to as "continental philosophy", its verbose, confusing, appeals to or is upheld often by the young, in contrast to the writing style of more objective sources, which can be repetitive or contestable but at least its clear.

    Personally I like a lot of this with a crisis which took place within the left wing or progressivist thinking camp as long ago as world war one, which never was reproduced in the right wing or reactionary (not simply stability or traditionalist focused thinkers either). The one trend lost heart, the other was too thick to know what was happening. The whole damn world has sufffered as a result.

    Although things are getting better, there's hope

  7. #7
    Away with the fairies Southern Kross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 so/sp
    Posts
    2,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DisneyGeek View Post
    In an attempt to simplify things, I've created the above statement. It is for this reason that it would make sense for thinkers to prefer subjects like science and math, and feelers to prefer subjects like writing and the social sciences.

    So what do you think? Is this statement true or false?
    I think it's true to a degree.

    But (to play devil's advocate) seeing the world through subjective eyes doesn't necessarily mean that you like the complexity that it adds. When I was in high school, in many ways, I preferred the order and clarity of Maths and Science. The way English and Social Sciences were marked made me uneasy because it seemed like a shifting target. Especially because I felt like continuous information was being marked as if it were discrete and clear cut - it seemed like forcing objective criteria onto something that was not easily categorised. I also found it frustrating at times because with Maths and Science, knowing the answer was enough; in the Humanities you had to also show that you know it and explain something possibly elusive and complex in simple and clear terms. This is much more difficult and it can be frustrating to know something but perhaps not be able to demonstrate it in a way that satisfies others. In my last year of high school my best subjects were Statistics and Physics and my worst was English. The main reason why I got a terrible mark in English was (along with the reasons I mentioned above) because I struggled to do it in exam conditions - it's a hard exam to study for and I wasn't good at writing under severe time constrains. I also think a lot of all this was my reaction as a teenager and being overwhelmed with and confused by the world, and looking for some order and clarity to help steady me.

    That said, I love the Humanities and went on to study them at university, and much more successfully at that.

    I guess what I say could apply similarly to Thinkers and objectivity. Perhaps so much of the world is obvious and straight-forward to them, that they may end up being drawn to the exceptions and the more elusive aspects of life.
    INFP 4w5 so/sp

    I've dreamt in my life dreams that have stayed with me ever after, and changed my ideas;
    they've gone through and through me, like wine through water, and altered the colour of my mind.

    - Emily Bronte

  8. #8
    darkened dreams labyrinthine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    isfp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,595

    Default

    What is important to remember is that reason can be applied to both. I have noticed that some extreme "T's" and various people do not know how to approach subjectivity and can dismiss it as something like a free-for-all with the assumption that there is no way to apply reason or to organize it into comprehensible systems, but rather it is assumed that each person just creates their own subjectivity and there is no other way to approach it. It is much like those who say that art is whatever a person likes, and assumes that there is no way to analyze or critique it.

    I have always been fascinated by subjective systems because they contain a complex integration of different types of data. To apply reason to these systems, one has to tease apart the different elements. Carl Rogers demonstrates this ability in his work because he was a champion of understanding and applying empathy, while also being a pioneer in establishing research methods in the field of psychology. I will use a few different examples of approaching subjective systems.

    Pain is subjective because it is experienced inside the person, but it is a complex layering of measurable physiology and internal perception. Because there is an element that cannot be objectively measured, this does not mean that pain is meaningless and useless. Elements of physiology can be measured to determine pain, but it is likely that two people can experience the same level of physical pain, but perceive it differently. To approach pain holistically it is necessary to combine external measurement and empathy.

    Art is also a subjective system that has externally analyzable elements and internal perception that come into play in fully comprehending it. An artistic expression contains many symbols, both conscious and subconscious, that represent the ideals, philosophy, culture, and perception of the individual. We can examine these symbols and what they communicate on all of these levels. There are also elements of proportion and inner coherency which can be analyzed using mathematics. I would venture to say that aesthetics cannot be fully comprehended without this understanding of both mathematics and philosophy expressed in a language of sensory-based symbolism. In addition to this, internal perception is relevant in a holistic approach to the arts since they often communicate the artist's personal experience creating a sensory-based visceral empathy.

    I find that individuals who are focused solely on "objectivity" have a fragmented approach to understanding the nature of reality. External measurement and fact-building is an important element, but unless the subjective elements are also acknowledged and understood, there is the danger of dismissing relevant information, and there is the danger of not being able to identify when subjective perception is playing a role in interpreting external, objective data.

    Individuals who focus solely on personal perception without comprehending these elements within the context of larger, more complex systems, and without acknowledging the impact that the external, measurable world has on our internal worlds, will also have a fragmented and incomplete concept of reality.

    Objective, external systems rely on precision of definition and measurement. The tools required to approach these systems are different from what is required to approach the subjective systems of perception and empathy. Subjective systems rely on approximation of definition and conclusion. To create an accurate empathy of another individual's perception and the expression of it, it is necessary to remain open to ever-shifting, ever-clarifying information. If precision of definition is forced onto these systems initially, the result is meaningless.
    Step into my metaphysical room of mirrors.
    Fear of reality creates myopic morality
    So I guess it means there is trouble until the robins come
    (from Blue Velvet)

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,501

    Default

    I am very objective and analytical. Though I would say in action I am very strong both subjectively and objectively and try to tie those 2 together to get the best overall results. My objectivity will see subjectivity and take that into account. I would say I am very objective, but do not force it upon others. Its just how I work and I can use my objectivity to allow subjectivity into the picture.
    Im out, its been fun

  10. #10
    Anew Leaf
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DisneyGeek View Post
    In an attempt to simplify things, I've created the above statement. It is for this reason that it would make sense for thinkers to prefer subjects like science and math, and feelers to prefer subjects like writing and the social sciences.

    So what do you think? Is this statement true or false?
    Hmm, sort of true, sort of false.

    I think I tend to be very fluid and negotiable and subjective about things at first. But there will come a point, a line, a moment when suddenly I am just done with the situation and I get very black and white about it. I look at "what is true here" and I don't care about anything else. And then I make a decision based on that, versus what I may want or desire. And that decision tends to be absolutely final despite how I may feel in regards to it later.

    As an aside, I was very good at math and science as well as language and art. I tend to crave the stark simplicity of math problems at times. :isweird:

Similar Threads

  1. The Kingdomality Personal Preference Profile
    By Sahara in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 06-01-2012, 05:21 PM
  2. Why would Julia Child be a Thinker, rather than a Feeler?
    By ChrisC99 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-20-2011, 12:44 AM
  3. Male Thinkers who are really Feelers in Disguise?
    By Elfboy in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 82
    Last Post: 02-21-2011, 06:08 PM
  4. [ENTP] ENTPs - courses/subjects in HS & college, & preferred professions
    By Kaizer in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 12-04-2008, 04:17 PM
  5. What kind of essays would you prefer to write?
    By SolitaryWalker in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-16-2007, 03:51 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO