User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 53

  1. #21
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Owl View Post
    But this makes interpersonal standards the ultimate authority for Feelers...
    That's simply not true. F and T functions exist in concert, not as separate entities. No one can truly be completely "F or T free".

    Quote Originally Posted by Owl View Post
    It would be irrational to make that which is fallible your ultimate authority. In this case, were a Feeler rational, it'd be the result of epistemic luck (or grace) that the interpersonal standards to which he subscribed were rational, for there are entire worldviews and communities that are subjective, anti-realistic, and consciously illogical.
    Feelings are not necessarily fallible; that's a pretty biased assumption you are making.

    And Ti / Te are as equally fallible, and that's ultimately the point. Think of all the "common" knowledge that has been proven to be false throughout history. All those folks thought they were objective and "rational" but they didn't have all the data. Therefore their conclusions were proven to be incorrect and therefore must be deemed irrational! Everything from "the world is flat" to "hydrogenated fats are good for you".

    Reflect too on the fact the "world views" of communities, religions or even individuals don't necessarily appeal to Fi or Fe as functions. T as a judging function loves structure and guidelines and ascribes to ideological structures to forge order. Many "believers" follow because of the influence of Ti or Te, NOT because of the feeling functions .....

    Here is where feeling has the potential to prove ultimately rational to the higher truth, revealing that the shallow customs we follow sometimes are just that, because the truth is sensed to be beyond ritual.

  2. #22
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Owl View Post
    But this makes interpersonal standards the ultimate authority for Feelers, but it's clear that interpersonal standards, (e.g., tradition, ad populum, etc.), are fallible.
    Well, to Fi it is objectively obvious what's ethical and what isn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Owl View Post
    It would be irrational to make that which is fallible your ultimate authority. In this case, were a Feeler rational, it'd be the result of epistemic luck (or grace) that the interpersonal standards to which he subscribed were rational, for there are entire worldviews and communities that are subjective, anti-realistic, and consciously illogical.
    Fi sees considering people and the way they feel to be inherent in logical discourse...not saying I necessarily agree, just that Fi can't really separate itself and discuss in impersonal terms very well because it doesn't think there exist any situations where interpersonal reasoning shouldn't be applied.

    Much like Ti's insistence on applying impersonal logic to everything.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  3. #23
    "Everything in its place" fill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    753
    Posts
    507

    Default

    I think, at least in terms of Te and Fe, that they are simply ways in which other functions are applied to the outside world. For example, an INTJ with high Te is commonly interested in the sciences, while an INFJ with a high Fe is commonly interested in people and their role in the world.

    I don't quite understand Fi as I do Ti because Fi, and many of those who use it as a dominant function, have always confused me. But I think I might have it:

    Fe - The world is subjective
    Fi - Morals are subjective
    Ti - Morals are objective
    Te - The world is objective

    I'm not sure how Intuition or Sensing plays a part in this. And, yes, I (one with Fe) do believe morals are subjective, but I also believe that the 'good' ones can be found naturally; so I suppose that isn't complete subjectivity.

    Oh, and I have absolutely no evidence to back this up. Don't take it too seriously.
    "Poor bastard. Wait 'till he sees the bats. "
    enneagram - 7/5/3

  4. #24
    desert pelican Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    That's simply not true. F and T functions exist in tandem, not as separate entities.
    This may be so, but I was responding to SimW's theory that Feeling bases its logic on interpersonal standards, whereas Thinking bases its logic on impersonal constructs--(which, btw, may also be fallible. (Oh, you pointed this out below.) This definition would not rule out the possibility of irrational Thinkers. Of course, I'm assuming that it's irrational to subscribe to any form of fallibilism). This would make the two (Thinking and Feeling) distinct, even if they operated simultaneously. <--worst paragraph ever.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    Feelings are not necessarily fallible; that's a pretty biased assumption you are making.

    And Ti / Te are as equally fallible, and that's ultimately the point. Think of all the "common" knowledge that has been proven to be false throughout history. All those folks thought they were objective and "rational" but they didn't have all the data. Therefore their conclusions were proven to be incorrect and therefore must be deemed irrational! Everything from "the world is flat" to "hydrogenated fats are good for you".

    Reflect too on the fact the "world views" of communities, religions or even individuals don't necessarily appeal to Fi or Fe as functions. T as a judging function loves structure and guidelines and ascribes to ideological structures to forge order. Many "believers" follow because of the influence of Ti or Te, NOT because of the feeling functions .....
    I don't know about Te, but Ti isn't fallible. (*INTP preens himself*)

    Honestly, I think the F/T dichotomy collapses upon analysis. No, scratch that. I think Myers-Briggs, Kiersian, socionics whatever is wrong, and that the F/T dichotomy would need to be collapsed in order to maintain systemic integrity. I think the closest interpretation to Jung's intent would be to maintain that F's are more concerned with ethics, whereas T's are more concerned with logic, (or philosophy of language), epistemology, and metaphysics. Alas, F's are frequently portrayed as people/relationship oriented types, not as rational agents using their minds both to distinguish the valuable from the base, and to determine what is valuable and what is base.

    edit: however, this would likely make many F's concerned with people, because there is little that is more valuable than human relationships.

  5. #25
    On a mission Usehername's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    3,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noigmn View Post
    I would've said more of a misunderstanding of the OPs intent. I think this is where the difference in focus between F and T lies. I know the Jungian categories "thinking" and "feeling" probably won't be in my Oxford, I actually saw this problem in a flash when I read the message, but the more interesting thing for me to focus on is the misunderstanding of the OP. ie. communication breakdown because the person's intent was not considered when reading the message, so it was taken in the wrong context.
    I was referring only to the quoted part, i.e. the notion that words inhabit some sort of meaning in pristine form, disassociated from the individuals who wield the words. Dictionaries have their place, but people use language to construct meaning and they most often do not crack open their OED before employing the words as tools to accomplish their objectives--when one seeks after meaning, referring to the dictionary definition is often a moot point.
    *You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body.
    *Faith is the art of holding on to things your reason once accepted, despite your changing moods.
    C.S. Lewis

  6. #26
    desert pelican Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Well, to Fi it is objectively obvious what's ethical and what isn't.
    I'm going to get in trouble with the F's on the board, but this is exactly why I think T's should run the world. F's are more likely to assume that the epistemological/metaphysical frame they're given in childhood or that's widely believed in their community is true: value/ethical pondering F's are not inclined to think about logic, epistemology, and metaphysics, and so are more likely to assimilate the worldview of their family or culture osmosis like, and just run with it. That is, ethics rests on metaphysics, which rests on epistemology, and someone who isn't inclined to ponder these more basic disciplines is less likely to ferret out any errors in them.

    Thus, F's need T's to tell them what to think. (*runs and hides in his mother's basement*)

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Fi sees considering people and the way they feel to be inherent in logical discourse...not saying I necessarily agree, just that Fi can't really separate itself and discuss in impersonal terms very well because it doesn't think there exist any situations where interpersonal reasoning shouldn't be applied.

    Much like Ti's insistence on applying impersonal logic to everything.
    ^This is where my ideas don't square with Myers-Briggs at all. I 'spose there really are people like this, and that Fi is used to try to capture this reality, but, if this is the case, then F truly is irrational. Seriously, interpersonal dynamics aren't the be all and end all of all decisions.

  7. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrRandom View Post
    Isn't that a bit harsh?
    I mean... a lot of people figure things out by asking others. Not all are the bookworm type. And he clearly has done some reading, but currently has conflicted ideas about the subject, so he initiated a discussion about it. Isn't that why we're all here for?
    Apologies if it sounded harsh. I had just come home from a night shift, I hadn't taken my ADD meds, and I was a little miffed at having to wait an hour and a half to take my morning shower.

    That was my point, harsh as I worded it. Dictionaries always list the most relevant definitions of a word first; int he case of "feelings," they would list feelings as a thought process along with feelings as opinions and feelings as emotions. A quick look-up would easily answer most questions an OP would have about the word's meaning. It would also cut back on the number of threads posted by people unaware that "feelings" does, in fact, relate to an actual rational thought process.

    To answer the OP's question in a more civil tone, the four letters in an MBTI type stand for the four parts of our thought pattern. Feeling and thinking are the third letter, which defines how we interpret information. Feeling types interpret based on the effect on people. Thinking types interpret based on the effect on logic. INFJs and INTJs are good examples of this contrast.

  8. #28
    RETIRED CzeCze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    GONE
    Posts
    9,051

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Owl View Post
    I 'spose there really are people like this, and that Fi is used to try to capture this reality, but, if this is the case, then F truly is irrational. Seriously, interpersonal dynamics aren't the be all and end all of all decisions.
    OMG, where do NT's (by this, I mean, you Sim!!! YOUUU!!!! Nah, I'll save that for your thread in the graveyard) jump to this conclusion from? I think people who prioritize interpersonal dynamics from a rational stand point are very very very few and far between.

    Also, it's kinda a moot point because even in terms of Myers-Briggs theory, everyone uses all the function (not just the top 4) and use them in tandem/simultaneously. We just have preferences (which do not necessarily correlate to strengths).

    And HA, I will laugh politely at your 'T's need to teach F's how to think' and not chase you into your mom's basement. Lucky for you, I'm tired today. :altongue: I give lessons on "how to feel" though if you're interested, I go on a self-help tour next month. :altongue: x 2
    “If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.” ― Oscar Wilde

    "I'm outtie 5000" ― Romulux

    Johari/Nohari

  9. #29
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CzeCze View Post
    OMG, where do NT's (by this, I mean, you Sim!!! YOUUU!!!! Nah, I'll save that for your thread in the graveyard) jump to this conclusion from? I think people who prioritize interpersonal dynamics from a rational stand point are very very very few and far between.

    Also, it's kinda a moot point because even in terms of Myers-Briggs theory, everyone uses all the function (not just the top 4) and use them in tandem/simultaneously. We just have preferences (which do not necessarily correlate to strengths).

    And HA, I will laugh politely at your 'T's need to teach F's how to think' and not chase you into your mom's basement. Lucky for you, I'm tired today. :altongue: I give lessons on "how to feel" though if you're interested, I go on a self-help tour next month. :altongue: x 2
    How exactly the four non-natural functions are used is quite a matter of debate.

    To put it as succinctly as possible, we find it very hypocritical that Fs:

    A) Have no problems pointing out all the ways Thinkers could learn to improve upon their personal reasoning, and
    B) Don't seem to believe there's anything at all they can or should do to work on their impersonal reasoning.

    It's as if you think Fi is just automatically superior in all situations. You see our inferior Feeling skills and treat us like children because your Fi doesn't see any reason you should have to bother learning anything about Ti and/or assumes you understand it fully (trust me, you don't.)

    I get tired of hearing, "You are such an insensitive jerk who really needs to learn to pay attention to people's feelings...but ME? I can't possibly remove my emotions from my viewpoint, why...that'd just be removing the very essence of who I am! You Ts should really grow up and learn to act more like Fs though. kthx"

    And my GOD, I don't even have enough exaggerated words to properly express how frustrating that is.

    See SciVo in the "Simulated Hijacks..." thread. Look at the end where he:

    A) Declares that I'm an emotional child in need of learning about emotional intelligence,
    B) Declares that having a math degree means he knows everything there is to know about the Thinking perspective, and
    C) Considers the Feeling perspective to be obviously and objectively superior.

    Why should he bother learning anything about an obviously inferior system that he clearly already knows everything there is to know about?

    And self-improvement is supposed to be high on Fi's value list! How the hell do you communicate with someone who won't acknowledge, and moreover ISN'T EVEN AWARE, that he could possibly learn anything from your value system or that his isn't 100% objectively the best?

    That sounds like the definition of closed-mindedness to me. At least thinkers ACKNOWLEDGE our Feeling deficiency from time to time...half the time it seems Feelers aren't even aware that there's anything of value to be learned from Thinking, which is rather a bit distressing for those of us Thinkers who are trying to better understand Feeling.

    You need to meet us half way.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  10. #30
    Senior Member vince's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w
    Socionics
    EII
    Posts
    321

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCat View Post
    Feeling is subjective judgment, Thinking is objective judgment.
    There's no such thing as objectivity in an individual.

Similar Threads

  1. [Tri] Is there such thing as an integration tritype?
    By badger055 in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-04-2014, 01:43 AM
  2. Is there such thing as society?
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-27-2013, 06:41 PM
  3. [NT] Is there such thing as infinity?
    By guesswho in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 01-24-2011, 12:41 PM
  4. Is there such thing as society?
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 08-24-2010, 03:46 AM
  5. There is no such thing as personality.
    By ygolo in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-12-2009, 10:13 AM

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