• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

[NF] NF Arrogance

ancalagon

New member
Joined
Feb 22, 2014
Messages
57
MBTI Type
INTP
NTs often dismiss emotions, but not because they don't think emotions are important (especially their own) but because they don't think emotions are relevant. For example, I don't think people's emotions are pertinent in this thread. The idea of emotions is germane since that is a topic of discussion. But not people's emotions themselves, since this is not a discussion about values but about truth--ie, is this argument true? Not is this argument good or bad?

And it is because NTs are usually concerned with truth that they don't take emotions into consideration. Not because they don't think emotions and values are important.
Very well said.
 

ancalagon

New member
Joined
Feb 22, 2014
Messages
57
MBTI Type
INTP
I wonder if it's less about NFs thinking they're stronger with their weakness (for those who have noticed this about themselves), and more about having to defend having any strength at all in their 'weakness'. Seems as if they have to always be reminding someone that they are very capable of being rational in discussions like these, so maybe there is a connection.

Either way, though, I haven't come across NFs who downplay their strengths (that I can remember right now). More often they have to explain that their strengths ARE strengths at the same time they have to explain that their 'weakness' can still be very strong.
I did notice that, in both the NT and NF case, it's the T that's supposed to be valued, and the F that's supposed to be less important. So it's entirely possible the phenomenon (to the extent that it exists) is due to a societal pro-T bias.
 

á´…eparted

passages
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,265
I just have so much love to give. I cannot help myself.... So much love!

:wubbie:



While I do totally agree with you here. The one point where I diverge is that style does need to be taken into consideration (sometimes quite heavily). It can and does easily cause the other individual to shift how receptive they are to what you're trying to say and can ultimately make things counter-productive. If someone can't explain things in a way that isn't mean, overtly harsh, overly sarcastic, and a multitude of other distasteful manners I will write them off and ignore them. To me, not trying to shift is a sign of lacking in respect which I don't take well to. If they can't talk in a civil manner, they shouldn't be worth my time.
 

prplchknz

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
34,397
MBTI Type
yupp
While I do totally agree with you here. The one point where I diverge is that style does need to be taken into consideration (sometimes quite heavily). It can and does easily cause the other individual to shift how receptive they are to what you're trying to say and can ultimately make things counter-productive. If someone can't explain things in a way that isn't mean, overtly harsh, overly sarcastic, and a multitude of other distasteful manners I will write them off and ignore them. To me, not trying to shift is a sign of lacking in respect which I don't take well to. If they can't talk in a civil manner, they shouldn't be worth my time.

do you mean solely in debates?
 

á´…eparted

passages
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,265
do you mean solely in debates?

For the most part (as that is the context of what she was referring to).

Out side of that though, if someone isn't willing or able to be serious, friendly, or neutral for the majority of the time I will very often not take them seriously. People that are consistently sarcastic and trollish I usually end up hating and not give them attention or the time of day. I have one friend who is a slight exception to this because I have been around him for a long time and if he goes on too long I'll snap him out of it and he'll tone it back.
 

prplchknz

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
34,397
MBTI Type
yupp
For the most part (as that is the context of what she was referring to).

Out side of that though, if someone isn't willing or able to be serious, friendly, or neutral for the majority of the time I will very often not take them seriously. People that are consistently sarcastic and trollish I usually end up hating and not give them attention or the time of day. I have one friend who is a slight exception to this because I have been around him for a long time and if he goes on too long I'll snap him out of it and he'll tone it back.

o ok.
 

Southern Kross

Away with the fairies
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
2,910
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
so/sp
I did consider the argument, so by your reasoning doesn't that show I don't regard NFs as "illogical"?
It was a joke.

How often do you even hear NTs talking about emotions? Maybe this is why you don't hear it. I readily admit I'm better at handling logic than emotions.
There are so many ways of talking about emotional elements that it can easily be done without even realising it. It's not always as literal as "I feel this" or "you feel that". The point is emotions and Feeling-based impressions govern far more of the world around us than NTs believe they do. They don't admit to being bad with emotions, because they often fail to recognise their existence and/or degree of influence in any one situation. Many NTs appear to believe that if they just ignore emotional elements then they will no longer be a factor. This is helpful for the process of Thinking, but it will fail to give them a complete picture of the world around them (and of themselves).

NTs often dismiss emotions, but not because they don't think emotions are important (especially their own) but because they don't think emotions are relevant. For example, I don't think people's emotions are pertinent in this thread. The idea of emotions is germane since that is a topic of discussion. But not people's emotions themselves, since this is not a discussion about values but about truth--ie, is this argument true? Not is this argument good or bad?
I get that, but emotional elements are part of this thread, and many other things in life, whether you like it or not. The issue is that, as objective as you claim to be, you are making subjective (emotional) choices about which information you deem significant or not in order to fulfil your pre-established beliefs. It's like the blind men and the elephant analogy. We all do this; it is human nature. But as [MENTION=14857]fia[/MENTION] so brilliantly pointed out, NTs can be even more at risk for these sort of fallacies, because of the blind hubris of 'objectivity'. NFs accept the subjective nature of the world, and consequently their inclination to question the objective 'reality' can potentially put them in a far better position to assess the 'truth'.

I offer this merely as a counter-argument and am not attempting to argue NFs are superior. Honestly, I believe there is value in both Thinking and Feeling; in NFs and NTs.

No, what NTs mean when they say they are better at NT-type thinking is they are better at logic. At assessing the truth of propositions.
Please. You honestly mean to say to me that you don't think NT style thinking more important/significant/valuable than NF style thinking? :rolleyes:

NTs are better at hard, impersonal logic - I have not issue with them saying so - but no one type is better at assessing Truth.

If you don't explain it, then how can I be bothered to understand it?
OA has been attempting it. I will defer to her.

Do you have evidence NFs are "more capable of rational thought"?
I said "more than capable", not "more capable".

Show me where that ENFP says NFs can't think rationally?
Show me where I claimed the ENFP did? You falsely attributed my statement to the wrong motivating thought. Another case where a little subjective, logical assessment would have helped you to comprehend the truth.

On the contrary, he said NFs can think rationally, only not as well as NTs can. And since you admit you can't use Ti-Te as well as NTs, you apparently agree. So why your post? One word: Strawman.
Oh no! You got me, oh wise-one! :aquiver: :worthy:

I find it highly ironic that this is itself a logical fallacy. :laugh: Just because I said I'm not as good at using Ti an Te, it does not follow that this then makes me less rational. It is your assumption that Fi and Fe are less rational; I never argued this. What it does mean is that I'm not as good at hard, impersonal logic; it takes greater effort and concentration when going about it. However, this doesn't mean that in doing so I am, "inflating [my] perceived thinking abilities to compensate" (which is what I was actually arguing against). I am merely using an existing part of my brain and putting it to good use. I find it ridiculous (and insulting) that you basically attribute the appearance of intelligent thought in NFs primarily to a façade created out of insecurity.

Also, "rational thinking" in the Jungian sense is used in both Feeling and Thinking. Jung defined the Judging functions as such. To say otherwise is to undermine the fundamentals of JCF, and by extension MBTI, which would render this whole discussion pretty pointless.
 

Bush

cute lil war dog
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Messages
5,182
Enneagram
3w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
What in the actual fuck
 

prplchknz

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
34,397
MBTI Type
yupp
What in the actual fuck

in the actual fuck if we're talking about how people are conceived, the man puts his penis into a woman's vagina they thrust and stuff then the dude ejaculates the woman's egg gets fertilized 9 or so months later a baby pops out.
 

Bush

cute lil war dog
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Messages
5,182
Enneagram
3w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
in the actual fuck if we're talking about how people are conceived, the man puts his penis into a woman's vagina they thrust and stuff then the dude ejaculates the woman's egg gets fertilized 9 or so months later a baby pops out.
Hmm. I wasn't aware :shrug:
 

Oaky

Travelling mind
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
6,180
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
There lacks 'right' arrogance and 'wrong' arrogance. Arrogance holds the ego as a charge within the patchwork of social enmity. The truth of fact, perception, tact, understanding and wisdom plays all its roles on where arrogance becomes problematic. An issue in the first post within the thread is the NF and NT divide and the formulation of something called NT-type thinking. If one were to look at the functions of the types, it is clear the differences in the manner in which every type would think would, on an abstract level, be different to any other type. As of the example that an XNTJ would have a highly different thinking process to an XNTP. The play in the very nature of these temperaments now go on to NF types of the 4 arrogantly believing they have the same style of thinking than the NT-types... to which one could ask which NT-type? Is it believed that an ENFP, INFJ, INFP or ENFJ believes they are able to think like... well one of the four NT-types? The thought is quite petty. Indeed there are of the arrogant in all the 16 types however the practice of the average human is among multiple threads of various unrelated dichotomies. For the thought in that an NT type who wishes to rise beyond the scope of average understanding in areas of wisdom may find that the egotistical nature is only that which is highly irrelevant to successful social interaction. And with such the NFs may strive for such similar wisdom also and yet this may be to do with not the irrelevancy of a successful social interaction but of the emotional harmony of such. The very thought and process of goals and desires may direct a similar road. The other aspect is understanding an underlying goal of success and of the happiness that aligns with that. Such is not void in anyone including those of a psychopathic nature. Our drive is always a contentment or happiness in whatever actions we take whether it be skiing or committing suicide for one is content without the suffering of what we suffer from. Perhaps the analysis has taken a turn too detailed however it is important to understand human nature against the very temperaments we stereotypically portray to the masses causing confusion and ignorance.

On a personal note: I dislike NFgeeks. It uses a basic understanding as well as generalisations/stereotypings of the MBTI model with Keirsey temperaments to give people a quick intuitively created model in the mind of what a person's type is, causing people to trust simplistic nuances of an individual as a weighted indication of a type or temperament.
 

Galena

Silver and Lead
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
3,786
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
What if I told you...that emotion can cloud feeling? :shock:
 

Southern Kross

Away with the fairies
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
2,910
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
so/sp
I just have so much love to give. I cannot help myself.... So much love!

:wubbie:
Sort of like this?


:laugh:
 

HongDou

navigating
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
5,191
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
One of my favorite pastimes is watching [MENTION=5871]Southern Kross[/MENTION] and [MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION] deconstruct an entire thread centered around misconceptions and biases to toss it into the fiery pits of hell. :popc1:
 

ancalagon

New member
Joined
Feb 22, 2014
Messages
57
MBTI Type
INTP
There are so many ways of talking about emotional elements that it can easily be done without even realising it. It's not always as literal as "I feel this" or "you feel that". The point is emotions and Feeling-based impressions govern far more of the world around us than NTs believe they do. They don't admit to being bad with emotions, because they often fail to recognise their existence and/or degree of influence in any one situation.
The claim was "Secondly, it's kinda bullshit, because NTs rarely admit they are bad at feelings."

If I thought the OP's admission wouldn't be sufficient, I'd have admitted it as well in an earlier post. I am bad at feelings, at least compared to an NF or SF. I can't see any reason for other NTs to hesitate to admit the same.

Not seeing when emotions apply may be a flaw of NTs, but it is not the same as the claimed flaw: that we don't admit to being bad at it.

Many NTs appear to believe that if they just ignore emotional elements then they will no longer be a factor.
Ignoring emotional elements can cause them to no longer be a factor. Even if we can't ignore emotional elements, separating them out and considering them separately from everything else is often reasonable, and can simplify analyzing the rest. Even when emotional elements are inextricably intertwined in something, at least some parts of it can be separated out and considered apart from emotional considerations.

the blind hubris of 'objectivity'
Pursuing objectivity is neither blind nor arrogant. It's a very good idea. Even if we can't reach the goal of perfect objectivity, getting a reasonably close approximation is well worth the effort.

Done right, it's not a blind spot, it's something that *helps us find our blind spots*.

NTs are better at hard, impersonal logic - I have not issue with them saying so - but no one type is better at assessing Truth.
Is there a difference? If so, what is it?
 

Siúil a Rúin

when the colors fade
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
14,037
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
496
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
NTs often dismiss emotions, but not because they don't think emotions are important (especially their own) but because they don't think emotions are relevant. For example, I don't think people's emotions are pertinent in this thread. The idea of emotions is germane since that is a topic of discussion. But not people's emotions themselves, since this is not a discussion about values but about truth--ie, is this argument true? Not is this argument good or bad?
Very well said.
Right here, though, is an interesting point. First of all the Feeling function isn't just about emotions, but subjective information and experience. The assumption that this is separate from truth is an interesting one because all of these things occur as part of reality. The question isn't whether or not subjective data is truth, but what are the best kinds of reasoning tools to process that data and in what way is it truth.

One of the best ways to demonstrate this is in a discussion of pain. Pain is rooted in our perception as well as in our direct, concrete interaction with reality. Does the part that cannot be measured on medical equipment exist? Or is the perception part of it separate from truth?

"Fact" is not the only relevant data in the universe. To throw out entire aspects of reality simply because they cannot be definitively measured and reduced to definable, logical systems is a completely arbitrary and subjective choice. Everything that occurs in reality is a part of reality and arguably relevant to the "big picture". While it's true that an emotion is not relevant to answering a specific math question, the larger, the more complex the system that one is analyzing, the more likely a variety of types of data are relevant. To dismiss anything except measurable fact, definition, and logic can lead to distorted conclusions about "Truth". It is like the surgeon who will only use a scalpel to get the job done and any aspects of surgery that do not require a scalpel are deemed irrelevant. Important perhaps, but not relevant.
 

kyuuei

Emperor/Dictator
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
13,964
MBTI Type
enfp
Enneagram
8
I wrote about this briefly in my blog. I''ll post part of a quote from a thread in that group that was posing the idea to describe your life through a picture.

This is what one guy/girl wrote:

Swimming at sunset- or is it sunrise?- in tropical green seawater on top of luminescent jellyfish and, every once in a while, being catapulted by nematocyst-resistant dolphins through and above the water so I get a clear view. But, it's only when I come down down down into the deep ocean that I join my family & community in the school of life.

I think that's all I need to display to say Yes, NFs are arrogant in the wrong ways.
 
Top