User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 36

  1. #11

    Default

    I see it as more about accepting others perceptions as information.

  2. #12
    Senior Member The Great One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    6w7
    Posts
    3,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    This is my take on it....

    I'll preface this by saying that Feeling is rational reasoning to assign worth/meaning. You decide what is important or makes sense in terms of the human condition/experience. All the judging functions basically classify or organize "data", and in order to assign worth in this way, the data used will involve emotional responses in yourself & others. Of course, Ji & Je are quite different, with Je being more about viability and adjusting to the external, using it as a gauge to make decisions and to act. Ji is more about creating/refining internal concepts & using them as a guide as things arise. So that's why a Fi-dom would be less emotionally expressive than a Fe-dom because the emotion would be internalized as a part of an introverted process.



    I will add that when a function is dominant, it is supposedly most differentiated from non-cognitive stuff like emotions, memories, fantasy, etc. In other words, the individual experiences it as their most "pure thought". The lower down the totem pole, the less differentiated a function will be, hence inferior feeling being very mixed with emotion, and likely why people project their own emotionality onto F-dom. Jung seemed to even suggest that many people may not even have their dominant function all that differentiated. And as you "develop" functions, this would be differentiating them to a greater degree. As a side, this is also why the tertiary is not mentioned by Jung. Or at least to me it seems the idea is the dominant is differentiated (& is the ego), the inferior is an opposing force in the mind & a "gateway" to the unconscious (and when it rears its head the instability can open the way for integration or disintegration - fuzzy on that on), all the other functions are pretty much undifferentiated, and the aux is sort of moderately differentiated (perhaps more so with some individuals) and it supports the dominant by being complementary.

    I think that Nardi experiment showed ENFJs to not experience physiological signs of emotion when expressing their feeling-opinions strongly. This may seem "phony" to some, but really what they are doing is using Feeling rationally & just adding emotional expression to communicate the weight of what they are saying, not acting on or thinking with emotions in the moment. My memory is fuzzy on the details of that, but that's the gist of what I remember reading/hearing.
    So in other words, emotions and values are tied together?

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    They are separate but related. Emotion is a necessary condition for feeling functions because feeling requires value judgments, which require emotional attachment. A person with no emotions would have no use of the feeling functions; however using a feeling function at any given time does not mean being in a state of emotional arousal- only that emotions exist in the person throughout their life and judgments/evaluations have been made based on emotional attachments.
    So emotions come about when values are broken? Is that what you're saying.

    Quote Originally Posted by Qlip View Post
    Consider this, thinkers get angry when things make no sense. And then they get angry that they're angry. I don't know what that means, but it was fun to type.
    Yeah emotion is definitely related to certain enneagram types as well. For instance, 8w7's often struggle with anger regardless of whether they are a feeler or a thinker. Also, 4w5's tend to struggle with sadness whether they are F or T. Finally, 6w7's stuggle with anxiety whether they are T or F as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    Jung designated "Thinking" for a specific, impersonal way of judging, but all of the functions are thinking (cognition). In this quote, he is referring to the specific function of "Thinking", not to rational cognition in general, because Fe falls under rational cognition.

    Feeling is also rational, because it reasons to form judgments/conclusions. Jung even calls Feeling logical, because it seeks a consistency. It does not just reason to form a singular conclusion that stands alone, but considers how all of the values connect & relate because they must make sense in relation to each other. An F-dom will not consciously hold two contradicting values (something P-dom maddeningly may do). The harmonizing of their values is something they spend a lot of time doing. When inner harmony is spoken of for F-dom, this is what is meant, not emotional calm.

    "Feeling, like thinking, is a rational function, since values in general are assigned according to the laws of reason, just as concepts in general are formed according to these laws" - Jung

    "Feeling is distinguished from affect by the fact that it produces no perceptible physical innervation, ie, neither more nor less than an ordinary thinking process." - Jung

    "Once they (sensation and intuition) are distinguished from feeling, it becomes quite clear that feeling values and feeling judgments - indeed, feelings in general - are not only rational, but can also be seen as logical, consistent, and [as] discriminating as thinking." - Jung




    No, the evaluations are made with a consideration of what emotions signal, but not based solely on them. Emotions can be wholly dismissed as well.

    I will reiterate that Thinking types tend to project their own inferior Feeling onto F-doms, and being inferior, it is less differentiated from emotion. Dominant Feeling is as purely rational as any thought process can be. Of course an individual's maturity, intelligence, etc, always comes into play.
    So wait. Are you also saying that logic doesn't have anything to do with thinking either, because there's no way that I believe that.

  3. #13
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Great One View Post
    So in other words, emotions and values are tied together?
    Oversimplification misses the point.

    So wait. Are you also saying that logic doesn't have anything to do with thinking either, because there's no way that I believe that.
    No....
    Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

    INFP | 4w5 sp/sx | RLUEI - Primary Inquisitive | Tritype is tripe

  4. #14
    Senior Member The Great One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    6w7
    Posts
    3,461

    Default

    @OrangeAppled

    Well I missed your point. Can you simply it for me?

  5. #15

    Default

    I think that affect and emotion preceed reason in any case, I think this was something Jung, Freud and others shared a relative consensus about, that man was more rationalising than reasoning or rational.

    The difference, I believe, is that a Thinker would be more likely to be directed by or comfortable with or in a relaxed state with or reliant upon thoughts rather than emotions, whereas a feeler would actively rely upon etc. with emotions and affect, like gut reactions or feelings. I think either type could be more or less aware of unconscious affective or emotive drivers or determinants decision making, moods etc. but they will, naturally, repress or express or subliminate differently.

  6. #16
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Great One View Post
    So in other words, emotions and values are tied together?

    So emotions come about when values are broken? Is that what you're saying.
    No, the first thing you said. Yes, I think they are tied together. When you value something it means you have a personal connection to it such that when that thing suffers you suffer; when it is present you feel good and when it is absent you feel bad. Either way you feel. If you didn't feel any sort of attachment, you wouldn't value that thing. If you valued nothing, you wouldn't be using a feeling function, because everything related to use of a feeling function requires taking the well being of entities into account which you value; similarly abstract values exist because they are instrumentally valuable to entities which you value. None of this would be possible without emotion because you can't feel a connection without a corresponding emotion.

    Like: I value trees, my mother, and beauty. When trees are destroyed I feel sad. They make oxygen and are part of the global ecosystem, so logically I know that the interconnection I feel is real. I know that they and I are part of one larger system. When I am around them I feel happy. They are entities to which I have an emotional attachment. If I felt nothing at all in regard to them, and if I felt no emotional attachment to my survival or that of the other living things on the planet, I would not value trees. But I do.

    My mother and I are physically related, and she was responsible for my being here. We have a connection. I value her because her connection to me enhances my well being. When she is happy and well I am happy, and when she is not treated well or doesn't feel well I feel unhappy. If I didn't have these emotional responses I could not be said to value her. I value her more particularly than some other random woman because of the emotional attachment.

    I value beauty because it makes me happy and gives me a feeling of inner harmony. When I'm around beautiful things I feel good, and when I am around ugly things I feel bad. I deem it valuable to me because it enhances my quality of life; I know this is true because of my emotional responses to its presence or absence.

    Abstractly I know that trees are good for more than just me, most people value their mothers, and most people enjoy beauty; so I have more reason to value them because they are collectively useful. But if I had not emotional attachment I would not personally value them.

    Making a Feeling judgment would say either that these things are valuable or that they should constitute criteria which impact decisions. I do both because I have an attachment to them, because I have emotional responses to them. Try to find something Feeling related which does not follow the same pattern.

  7. #17
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Great One View Post
    @OrangeAppled

    Well I missed your point. Can you simply it for me?
    Emotions may be relevant data considered in evaluating. But the evaluating is its own process separate from the emotional affect. Emotion is not the only data nor always deemed relevant at all. It can be dismissed.
    The two are not inseparable.

    Jung says both thinking and feeling are logical but I believe he is speaking of consistency in their reasoning. The more narrow kind of logic that is dry, technical, impersonal - that is associated with thinking which also generally doesn't consider emotion relevant. This because they are organizing with a different focus. Thinking is classifying what things are, unrelated to being human, and feeling is determining worth in relation to being human.
    Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

    INFP | 4w5 sp/sx | RLUEI - Primary Inquisitive | Tritype is tripe

  8. #18
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    @OrangeAppled, since you said an F dom would not hold conflicting values but a P dom would, how does Fi manifest in ENFP's if Feeling is harmonizing values?

  9. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Great One View Post
    I've had this question for a long time: Do feeling functions have anything to do with emotions or not? I ask this because it seems as though feelers tend to be more in touch with their emotions than do thinkers. Also, it seems as though feelers tend to let their emotions weigh more on their decisions than do thinkers. However, Jung doesn't really correlate feelings with emotions and defines feelings as "value-based judgements", so this kind of throws me off. So what do you all think?

    @SolitaryWalker

    You may want to check this thread out. I read a little bit of your book, and this seems like a topic that you would want to comment on.
    It seems logical to me that emotions are driven by both thinking and feeling functions, so don't think too much or you'll abort the mission. Carry on.

  10. #20
    mod love baby... Lady_X's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/so
    Posts
    18,086

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    @OrangeAppled, since you said an F dom would not hold conflicting values but a P dom would, how does Fi manifest in ENFP's if Feeling is harmonizing values?
    i don't know what she meant by that but it wouldn't. it may appear that way if we're just ne'ing out ideas because we can switch back and forth proving opposing ideas in a ne way that has nothing to with us. i don't think infps always understand that because they start from their feeling core and explore it through ne...we're the opposite...so we can stay in ne land for conversations sake...and not check with fi unless that's the direction we want to speak from...

    if that makes sense...and it may be different for others...idk
    There can’t be any large-scale revolution until there’s a personal revolution, on an individual level. It’s got to happen inside first.
    -Jim Morrison

Similar Threads

  1. [JCF] Does Ne-aux/Si-tert have anything in common with Ni-dom/Se-inferior?
    By DBPhenomE in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-12-2017, 07:48 AM
  2. I don't really have anything to be upset about, but I still feel depressed.
    By The Wailing Specter in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-12-2015, 11:07 PM
  3. Does Paranoia have anything to do with any type?
    By Illmatic in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 07-22-2011, 10:26 PM
  4. Ultimate F vs T decision... To stay with friends or not?
    By Snow Turtle in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 06-19-2009, 07:47 PM
  5. McCain a maverick? Not if the Mavericks have anything to say about it!
    By IlyaK1986 in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-07-2008, 05:34 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