NFs, how do you deal with Thinking...

[SolitaryWalker]

This was my question to you in the last thread concerning the subject...

How do you cope with this being your third or fourth function when the world forces you too often to make impersonal judgments...

[targo]

If I am trapped in Fi mode thinking isn't easily done. but if I can bounce into Ne mode I tend to be more open to my thoughts and actually allowing cognitive thought!

[Eileen]

I don't think the world forces me to make too many impersonal judgments at all. The world forces me to make judgments--I tend to respond to that demand by engaging the problem with my ethics first (then my logic--and often a combination of the two because it's not as if ethics and logic are mutually exclusive systems). Most of my important judgments are not going to be impersonal at all; I will have some personal stake in them or see someone else's personal stake. I think that it's a matter of how you look at the judgments you make, not anything inherent about them. I do consider many of the judgments I make to be impersonal, but I am likely to think that they aren't very important judgments.

[FineLine]

Originally Posted by BlueWing

This was my question to you in the last thread concerning the subject...

How do you cope with this being your third or fourth function when the world forces you too often to make impersonal judgments...

Personally, I believe I use my Thinking function a lot. I think most people use all their functions on a regular basis.

When we're growing up, school teaches us that there are times and places when we have to put aside subjective judgments and use the objective criteria of science, math, analysis, logic, etc. At a minimum, we're taught to respect simple organizational rules: pay attention to thermometers to determine how we dress, obey rules of the road when we drive, meet deadlines for accomplishing goals, etc. I may prefer living by internal subjective criteria, but civilization teaches us that there are many times and settings when we have to respect (or at least pay lip service to) the dictates of outside objective criteria.

In the workplace I routinely use Thinking over Feeling. If I have to promote one person out of a pool of subordinates, I know better than to promote the person who appeals to me most on a purely personal level. I'm accountable to the organization and to my boss, so I'll pass over the person I like and decide in favor of one who better meets the outside objective criteria defined by the organization and my boss.

I think the difference in Feeling and Thinking arises mostly in areas where I'm free to follow my own dictates--recreation, relationships, etc, or where I honestly have no tools or guidance as to how to determine or apply objective criteria. But even in such areas as relationships or my personal life, I often apply rules, structures, thinking judgments, etc. Precisely because I'm a Feeler, I know how slippery and changeable emotions can be. I like to be in touch with my emotions, but I routinely disregard their promptings and impose organization, structure, and self-discipline on myself (such as following diets and heath regimens, observing the rules of monogamy, using moderation when indulging pleasures, etc.). Family, friends, and acquaintances often need the same basic kinds of long-term relationship stability, rational judgment, and self-discipline from me that coworkers and bosses need from me in the workplace. I routinely tone down my emotions or even act contrary to them for the good of a relationship.

Just one more example of how pervasive Thinking can be even for Feelers: MBTI professionals have often noted that when two Feelers are in a relationship together, one will often begin to act more like a Thinker. IOW, it's basically understood that some degree of Thinking structure is needed even between two Feelers.

This example (two Feelers in a relationship) indicates that Thinking and Feeling aren't diametrically opposed. All of us tend to recognize that both functions are needed to some extent on a regular basis. So I think the dichotomy shows up more in terms of relativity (such as a Feeler taking on the role of a Thinker relative to another Feeler) rather than absolutes.

FL

[SolitaryWalker]

Originally Posted by FineLine

Personally, I believe I use my Thinking function a lot. I think most people use all their functions on a regular basis.

When we're growing up, school teaches us that there are times and places when we have to put aside subjective judgments and use the objective criteria of science, math, analysis, logic, etc. At a minimum, we're taught to respect simple organizational rules: pay attention to thermometers to determine how we dress, obey rules of the road when we drive, meet deadlines for accomplishing goals, etc. I may prefer living by internal subjective criteria, but civilization teaches us that there are many times and settings when we have to respect (or at least pay lip service to) the dictates of outside objective criteria.

In the workplace I routinely use Thinking over Feeling. If I have to promote one person out of a pool of subordinates, I know better than to promote the person who appeals to me most on a purely personal level. I'm accountable to the organization and to my boss, so I'll pass over the person I like and decide in favor of one who better meets the outside objective criteria defined by the organization and my boss.

I think the difference in Feeling and Thinking arises mostly in areas where I'm free to follow my own dictates--recreation, relationships, etc, or where I honestly have no tools or guidance as to how to determine or apply objective criteria. But even in such areas as relationships or my personal life, I often apply rules, structures, thinking judgments, etc. Precisely because I'm a Feeler, I know how slippery and changeable emotions can be. I like to be in touch with my emotions, but I routinely disregard their promptings and impose organization, structure, and self-discipline on myself (such as following diets and heath regimens, observing the rules of monogamy, using moderation when indulging pleasures, etc.). Family, friends, and acquaintances often need the same basic kinds of long-term relationship stability, rational judgment, and self-discipline from me that coworkers and bosses need from me in the workplace. I routinely tone down my emotions or even act contrary to them for the good of a relationship.

Just one more example of how pervasive Thinking can be even for Feelers: MBTI professionals have often noted that when two Feelers are in a relationship together, one will often begin to act more like a Thinker. IOW, it's basically understood that some degree of Thinking structure is needed even between two Feelers.

This example (two Feelers in a relationship) indicates that Thinking and Feeling aren't diametrically opposed. All of us tend to recognize that both functions are needed to some extent on a regular basis. So I think the dichotomy shows up more in terms of relativity (such as a Feeler taking on the role of a Thinker relative to another Feeler) rather than absolutes.

FL

When you build your system of values, I assume it is founded on feelings.

Do those feelings stay the same, or do they tend to be slippery?

[FineLine]

Originally Posted by BlueWing

When you build your system of values, I assume it is founded on feelings.

Do those feelings stay the same, or do they tend to be slippery?

On first glance, most Feelers would probably tell you that their F values are fairly firm. But in practice, especially for FPs, they can be quite slippery. I'll find myself flip-flopping all over both sides of a debate as I learn more about a subject over time.

Given that situation, it's almost a relief to find a good T or J analysis tool that I can import into my system of values in order to impose some structure and finality on my personal decisions. As I get older and my world gets broader, I can't spend all my time flip-flopping and emoting over everything. So I have an ever-increasing respect for T analysis and J structure. And that's been an ongoing process since I was 20 or so.

The T tools don't supplant the F values entirely. I still refer back to the F values. But the T tools provide me a quick response for dealing with issues on a real-time basis; re-evaluation with F can then come later if necessary. (If that makes sense.)

FL

[SolitaryWalker]

Originally Posted by FineLine

On first glance, most Feelers would probably tell you that their F values are fairly firm. But in practice, especially for FPs, they can be quite slippery. I'll find myself flip-flopping all over both sides of a debate as I learn more about a subject over time.

Given that situation, it's almost a relief to find a good T or J analysis tool that I can import into my system of values in order to impose some structure and finality on my personal decisions. As I get older and my world gets broader, I can't spend all my time flip-flopping and emoting over everything. So I have an ever-increasing respect for T analysis and J structure. And that's been an ongoing process since I was 20 or so.

The T tools don't supplant the F values entirely. I still refer back to the F values. But the T tools provide me a quick response for dealing with issues on a real-time basis; re-evaluation with F can then come later if necessary. (If that makes sense.)

FL

Let me get this straight...it could very well be the case that an average XNFP today could think the world of you and tomorrow you could become a faceless number? And all of this could happen just totally arbitrarily?

[FineLine]

Originally Posted by BlueWing

Let me get this straight...it could very well be the case that an average INFP today could think the world of you and tomorrow you could become a faceless number? And all of this could happen just totally arbitrarily?

I'm not sure exactly what you mean. Describe a hypothetical (or not-so-hypothetical) situation in more detail, if you can.

FL

[SolitaryWalker]

Originally Posted by FineLine

I'm not sure exactly what you mean. Describe a hypothetical (or not-so-hypothetical) situation in more detail, if you can.

FL

Suppose you've been friends with an NFP for 2 years. Then you get to the point where you're forced to part company for a year. Could it very easily be the case that you will be coming back to a very different person then you've known earlier?

Simply because their feelings about you changed for a reason that you don't understand?

[FineLine]

Originally Posted by BlueWing

Suppose you've been friends with an NFP for 2 years. Then you get to the point where you're forced to part company for a year. Could it very easily be the case that you will be coming back to a very different person then you've known earlier?

Simply because their feelings about you changed for a reason that you don't understand?

Yes, maybe. Although it's important to remember that this is happening in the context of values. IOW, the reason for the change won't be arbitrary to the NFP, though it may seem arbitrary to the other person.

I can't speak for ENFPs; as extroverts, they're more relationship-oriented so the rules may be different. But INFPs do indeed cut people off, including long-time friends. There are even threads about it over at the INFP message board. And in retrospect, even the INFPs may admit the causes were trivial.

But still, it's usually a pretty traumatic event for the INFP at the time, involving a lot of emotion and (usually) a sense that the other party has betrayed them in some manner. So I would emphasize again that it's not an arbitrary thing for the INFP.

This is where T tools can be handy. A lot of INFPs really do need to get a better handle on their emotions and learn how to moderate them for the health of long-term relationships (IMHO).

FL