User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 53

  1. #31
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    How exactly the four non-natural functions are used is quite a matter of debate.

    (snip)

    You need to meet us half way.
    Very well. Instead of singling out the T's, I'll just apply the word "jackass" to BOTH sides. Because putting it bluntly, both sides need to SHUT THE HELL UP AND GET A BLOODY GRIP!

    *Takes a deep breath*

    As I said before, "thinking" and "feeling" only describe how a personality type rationalizes information. Emotions have just as much effect on one type's decision-making abilities as it does the other's, meaning neither Thinkers nor Feelers are no more sensitive or resolute than the other.

    Feelers are not a bunch of dull and dimwitted flower children. They rationalize information by how it effects people's opinions on a subject...their feelings on it. If the conditions are right, an ESFP can still grasp hard logic.

    Thinkers are not a bunch of cold and insensitive robots. They rationalize information by how it effects the logic of the subject...the way of thinking about it. If the conditions are right, an INTJ can still be caring and sensitive.

    Now, can we PLEASE knock off this bullsh*t debate?!

    *exhales* I need to go to bed...

  2. #32
    Senior Member The Outsider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    2,428

    Default

    More generalizations please.

    I love it.

  3. #33
    Senior Member Wild horses's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Posts
    1,917

    Default

    There are definately two different types of emotions, those that affect a physiological change and those that don't. A large part of my feeler function is based in the later section and as a result I often struggled classifying myself as a really emotional person. I could often state in quizes that I make decisions based on my emotions, however, the way I made decisions didn't 'feel' very emotional to me. I think this is why even two NFs can be very different with regards to their emotional lives and I found the enneagram system to shed some light on this issue basically seperating ENFPs into two main types; 4 and 7 (I think the difference between these two can be laregly explained by the difference between the two types of emotions) I also find myself judging emotins as much as the Ts on the board do, however, whilst they often judge them as rational or irational I often judge emotions based on whether or not they fit my personal set of values. For example, would anger be moral in this particular situation.

    Thus said I still don't know if I would call this type of emotional rational. It depends how you arrived at you personal value system surely. You could have arrived at it by completely irational means, it could be a spiritual value system or a factual one. So whilst I do see the differecen in the two types of emotions I am unsure whether or not this can classified as rationality
    ... couldn't drag me away

    Željko Ražnatovic: argus
    Željko Ražnatovic: do you want heir's?
    WildHorses: HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
    Željko Ražnatovic: to carry your genealogical code??

  4. #34
    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 MFJAGgernaut-B View Post
    Very well. Instead of singling out the T's, I'll just apply the word "jackass" to BOTH sides. Because putting it bluntly, both sides need to SHUT THE HELL UP AND GET A BLOODY GRIP!

    *Takes a deep breath*

    As I said before, "thinking" and "feeling" only describe how a personality type rationalizes information. Emotions have just as much effect on one type's decision-making abilities as it does the other's, meaning neither Thinkers nor Feelers are no more sensitive or resolute than the other.

    Feelers are not a bunch of dull and dimwitted flower children. They rationalize information by how it effects people's opinions on a subject...their feelings on it. If the conditions are right, an ESFP can still grasp hard logic.

    Thinkers are not a bunch of cold and insensitive robots. They rationalize information by how it effects the logic of the subject...the way of thinking about it. If the conditions are right, an INTJ can still be caring and sensitive.

    Now, can we PLEASE knock off this bullsh*t debate?!

    *exhales* I need to go to bed...
    Wow great job, you just solved Thinking vs. Feeling in three paragraphs.

    Give yourself a pat on the back.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  5. #35
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Wow great job, you just solved Thinking vs. Feeling in three paragraphs.

    Give yourself a pat on the back.
    I would, but growing the extra elbows is a pain in the right ass, and I don't think the designated back-patter's ready to come out of his clone vat, yet.

    Seriously, though, I hate petty arguments over stupid crap. The only thing that comes out of the Feelers VS Thinkers debate is evidence that people on neither side fully understand the subject. I was trying to talk some sense into the debate by answering the OP's original question: Is "Feeling" as rational as "Thinking"? Looking back, though, I do admit that my own answer wasn't very definitive.

    My answer that is yes and no. As I've explained before, "feeling" simply means your thinking is centered around people and their opinions, whereas "thinking" means your thinking is centered around logic. Both can be rational or irrational, depending on the situation and the maturity level of the person using either one. The above argument is an example of both being irrational; An F type condemns a T type for being insensitive, and the T type responds by slamming the F type for being immature.

    An example of a Feeler being rational would be grief counseling. The grief counselor's job if to connect with survivors of the recently-deceased on a personal level (a skill inherent to feeling types), and then find a way to help them cope with their loss.

  6. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,702

    Default

    No the feeling preference is not "rational" by definition

    Correct me if I'm wrong, though is your real question "Can F types BE rational?"

    My answer:

    Of course!

    Just like I used N about 6 seconds ago despite being an S a feeler can use thinking when necessary... they just prefer otherwise

  7. #37
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Unique View Post
    No the feeling preference is not "rational" by definition

    Correct me if I'm wrong, though is your real question "Can F types BE rational?"

    My answer:

    Of course!

    Just like I used N about 6 seconds ago despite being an S a feeler can use thinking when necessary... they just prefer otherwise
    Since we seem to have trouble locating our dictionaries in this thread, I took the liberty of looking up both words.

    The definition of "rational," as defined by Webster's:
    1 a : having reason or understanding b : relating to, based on, or agreeable to reason : reasonable <a rational explanation> <rational behavior>
    2 : involving only multiplication, division, addition, and subtraction and only a finite number of times
    3 : relating to, consisting of, or being one or more rational numbers <a rational root of an equation>
    The definition of "feelings," as defined by the same:
    1 a (1) : the one of the basic physical senses of which the skin contains the chief end organs and of which the sensations of touch and temperature are characteristic : touch (2) : a sensation experienced through this sense b : generalized bodily consciousness or sensation c : appreciative or responsive awareness or recognition
    2 a : an emotional state or reaction <a kindly feeling toward the boy> b plural : susceptibility to impression : sensitivity <the remark hurt her feelings>
    3 a : the undifferentiated background of one's awareness considered apart from any identifiable sensation, perception, or thought b : the overall quality of one's awareness c : conscious recognition : sense
    4 a : often unreasoned opinion or belief : sentiment b : presentiment
    5 : capacity to respond emotionally especially with the higher emotions

    6 : the character ascribed to something : atmosphere
    7 a : the quality of a work of art that conveys the emotion of the artist b : sympathetic aesthetic response
    8 : feel 4

    "Rational" does NOT mean "logical." It means "reasonable," which means "within reason," which means "not taken to the extreme." "Logical" means "valid," which can apply to anything considered to be "within reason."

    "Feelings" does NOT mean "emotions." It also means "opinions," "thoughts," and "impressions."

    Therefore, when you put the two words in their proper context, "feelings" can be "rational." This is the basis of the Feeling function; we rationalize what other people will rationalize about the subject. What thoughts and opinions people will have toward the subject. How they will feel about it. ("If X happens, then people will think Y about it.") This is in contrast with the rationalization of a Thinker, which is generally focused directly on the subject. ("If X happens, then it will mean Y.")


    As for the Thinker VS Feeler argument, both sides are right about one thing: their respective accusations against each other. The Feelers in the argument ARE immature and hypersensitive, and the Thinkers in the argument ARE insensitive pricks. If they weren't, there would be no "Thinkers VS Feelers" argument, because everybody would be too busy not giving a damn.

    Feelers, you are NOT the Guardians of the Loving Heart. If you were that emotionally solid, you wouldn't get riled up every time a Thinker posts a thread slamming feelings as rational. It doesn't do anybody any good when one of you gets a hair up your ass because one Thinker didn't have his facts quite right. Swallow your pride and go do something else.

    If you MUST post a rebuttal, do it with hard facts, not a river of tears. Thinkers don't pity; they respect. To earn their respect, you show them you're at least half as intelligent as they are. You do that by providing them with documented evidence to the contrary, not by flying into a rage and telling him he's an A-hole.

    Thinkers, you are NOT the Grand Intellects of the human race. If you were that smart, you wouldn't engage in stupid arguments over who spouts the stinkiest bullsh*t. Check your egos at the door and stop belittling every Feeler that gets his panties in a wad.

    If you MUST post a response, post "sorry, my bad" instead of sarcasm or a counter-argument, even if it wasn't your fault. Believe me, nine times out of ten, we'll drop the issue in a heartbeat. And you'll save on Advil!

  8. #38
    Retired Member Wonkavision's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    1,155

    Default

    Very interesting discussion, you guys.

    I still would like to know what you think about the quotes I posted in the O.P.

    Jung, Meyers, and Thompson all seem to be defining "Feeling" as a "rational" function, every bit as reasonable as "Thinking".

    Is that your understanding of the quotes, or are they saying something else to you?


    I'm trying to figure out if there is any kind of consensus about what these terms mean, and whether people accept these definitions or prefer something else.

    Do you find the quotes from Jung, Meyers, and Thompson helpful?

    Do they make sense to you?

    Do they seem accurate to you?

    Do you think they should be re-examined? Redefined? Totally thrown out?
    __________________


    I'M OUTTA HERE.

    IT'S BEEN FUN.

    TAKE CARE.

    PEACE OUT!!!


  9. #39
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wonkavision View Post
    Very interesting discussion, you guys.

    I still would like to know what you think about the quotes I posted in the O.P.

    Jung, Meyers, and Thompson all seem to be defining "Feeling" as a "rational" function, every bit as reasonable as "Thinking".

    Is that your understanding of the quotes, or are they saying something else to you?


    I'm trying to figure out if there is any kind of consensus about what these terms mean, and whether people accept these definitions or prefer something else.

    Do you find the quotes from Jung, Meyers, and Thompson helpful?

    Do they make sense to you?

    Do they seem accurate to you?

    Do you think they should be re-examined? Redefined? Totally thrown out?
    Explained by someone who isn't concerned with boosting his ego by bashing someone else's, perhaps?

    Seriously, being the first person to give an informed answer using actual research to an honest question is very disconcerting. Especially when the overall consensus among all the other posts is "I'm important, screw you."

    *sigh*

    In answer to your question, if you put all the terms in their proper context, all of the quote are 100% accurate. I pretty much outline my reasons in my previous post.

    To summarize, "feelings" is used to define opinions and reactions, which are measurable parts of human psychology. People's feelings in this context occur in a predictable cause-effect pattern. Feelers rationalize (or "reason") people's possible feelings about a subject based on that pattern, using existing feelings about parts of the subject. ("X is a part of Y, and people think Z about X. Therefore, they will also think Z about Y"). This presents a logical equation that some Thinkers don't recognize right away, because they don't always see feelings as something that can be evaluated logically.

  10. #40
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,426

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCat View Post
    Feeling is subjective judgment, Thinking is objective judgment.
    Bingo.

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