• 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] Why Immature F-ers give me the creeps?

heart

heart on fire
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
8,456
i didn't say she was right. i said i got what she was saying.

for instance, i didn't assume she started the thread or had an observation, right or wrong, because some F must have broken her heart.

I didn't assume that either, I read it on this board. She went straight from that thread to this one and said basically the same things here about Feelers that she did about her Feeler BF.


For the sake of this discussion. Lets assume that the OP was inspired by a bad experience with an F. Just like you once were led to have negative feelings about Ts due to bad experiences with them.

In your case, it was only an emotional reaction.

In this case, it is an emotional reaction, but not only that. It is also an argument for the existence of the vices of Feelers mentioned in the OP.

The emotional reaction bit is irrelevant. What is relevant is whether or not the statement made is true. Above we see an argument for why making decisions based on Feelings is irresponsible. We have not yet seen an argument for the vices of Thinkers from you.

For this reason, we cannot hold the two claims side by side.

You won't see an argument for the "vices" of thinkers from me. I already admitted it was a failed attempt to search for a solid, sure way of avoiding pain in life by placing an extreme view on the situation and people.
 

digesthisickness

✿ڿڰۣஇღ♥ wut ♥ღஇڿڰۣ✿
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
3,248
MBTI Type
ENTP
I didn't assume that either, I read it on this board. She went straight from that thread to this one and said basically the same things here about Feelers that she did about her Feeler BF.

yeah, actually, i should have made it clearer that i didn't mean you personally. i assumed you had a good reason for being suspicious as to what was behind it as i've found you to be pretty reasonable.

when i said it, i was only using that as an example of what i've seen others do without having a good reason (like factual background) to think that. i've seen that happen quite a few times. a T asks a question that hints at something unfavorable about Fs, and Fs come back with, "awww, one broke your heart!! poor thing!!! :wubbie: does someone need a hug?????? :rolleyes:" thus dismissing the Ts genuinely honest question completely.

like you can only say 'bad' things (for lack of a better word) if you too are an F.
 

Maabus1999

New member
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
528
MBTI Type
INTJ
Think of it this way.

I heard a statistic once that about 75% of women are feelers and 45% of men.

This can make thinkers rather lonesome. One can only be called an 'unfeeling psychopath' so many times before it starts to get under one's skin.

2/3 of women and 1/3 of men is one I got out of a book published 2 years ago. I think 45% is too high honestly.
 

Giggly

No moss growing on me
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
9,661
MBTI Type
iSFj
Enneagram
2
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
First of all don't be offended by the title I just thought it was funny.

F people creep me out. I don't understand them. I see making decisions off of your feelings as selfish and irrisponsible. The worst excuse ever, "I felt like it", like that matters. If people justify their actions according to their feelings where is the line that says what you were feeling is wrong. It seems immature. How is putting your feelings on someone else productive to anything? Where is the self control? You cant argue against what someone is feeling and asking someone to take your feelings into account is like asking them to cater unobjectively to you.

I am not trying to make people mad here I am trying to understand. What makes you all tick?

Oddly enough, even though I am a Feeler, I understand what you mean and have experienced this myself. I think both Thinkers and Feelers have to be responsible in how they impose their thinking or feeling on others. Thinkers aren't always responsible in this way either.
 

Tigerlily

unscannable
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
5,942
MBTI Type
TIGR
Enneagram
3w4
I can see how a thinker would become frustrated with having to watch what they say around certain people. I find myself frustrated with overly sensitive people as well and communicating with certain thinkers here is refreshing for me.

a T asks a question that hints at something unfavorable about Fs, and Fs come back with, "awww, one broke your heart!! poor thing!!! does someone need a hug?????? " thus dismissing the Ts genuinely honest question completely.
When I was younger I would react this way often to others. I felt as it was my duty to make people feel good about themselves probably because I was insecure and wanted the affection back. Now I am much more realistic and while I don't mind being there for people when it's convenient, it's not my job to uplift people outside of work. I get just as annoyed with the scenario you've describe above as you do and prefer for people to tactfully say what they mean.
 

Siúil a Rúin

when the colors fade
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
14,037
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
496
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
First of all don't be offended by the title I just thought it was funny.

F people creep me out. I don't understand them. I see making decisions off of your feelings as selfish and irrisponsible. The worst excuse ever, "I felt like it", like that matters. If people justify their actions according to their feelings where is the line that says what you were feeling is wrong. It seems immature. How is putting your feelings on someone else productive to anything? Where is the self control? You cant argue against what someone is feeling and asking someone to take your feelings into account is like asking them to cater unobjectively to you.

I am not trying to make people mad here I am trying to understand. What makes you all tick?
Does being an F mean focusing on emotion? Every person has similar hardware in their brain to produce emotional responses. I understand the different cognitive styles to reflect more how emotions and all thought are processed. There are T's who make decisions for self interest alone, although they might be less likely to label it "I felt like it". From what I understand, the F function has to do with understanding internal systems and those that can't be objectively measured. F reasoning is likely to address issues of beauty, emotion, perception, etc. F cognitive processing has to do with understanding the illogical or systems with fuzzy boundaries, which are based on individual perspective. Emotions are a subset of this overall subjective train of thought, but are not the single ruling force.

The above is at least my understanding of it. I have been struggling with this whole T vs. F thing for some time. I have known individuals who are rather distilled versions of each, and that produces a consistent internal system, but there are so many people who fall inbetween who confuse the issue for me completely. When T's express ideas which personally define their self/ego, or when F's remain calm and detached amidst conflict in response to analysis of subjective systems at work, I start to wonder where the lines are really drawn and what both categories really define.
 

runvardh

にゃん
Joined
Jun 23, 2007
Messages
8,541
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Oddly enough, even though I am a Feeler, I understand what you mean and have experienced this myself. I think both Thinkers and Feelers have to be responsible in how they impose their thinking or feeling on others. Thinkers aren't always responsible in this way either.

ixney on the esponsiblerey :peepwall: that's a dirty dirty dirty word in these times. :D
 

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
I like the way you put it, but I disagree on F not being productive. If there was no feelers, there wouldn't be many groups that would stay together. People just wont survive without groups and their organization is very much feeling based.

+1. Diverse groups of specialized people increase productivity--in art, science, industry, etc.

Well, of course. I probably should have made that clearer. I meant that they're not directly productive. Indirectly? They definitely make a difference. ;) Feelings don't directly contribute to getting an impersonally defined task done (which is what Ts are interested in), per se, but they are (to a degree) the source of the energy and cohesion/agreement needed to do so.

You might say that Thinking is part of a machine or computer that operates in a particular way, Feeling is the fuel or energy that powers such a thing.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Many thousands of years ago... ancient Indians, both Vedantic and Buddhist, told us that being in touch with our selves, including our emotional selves, would enable us to change not only ourselves, but also the world. They operated not 'mystically', but experimentally and rationally, to come to this insight, though they also opened themselves up to feel themselves and the world around them, thus enabling their intellectual insights to come to fruition... Other people in other times and places have come to the same conclusions by similar means...

Today, quantum physicists are reluctantly telling us the same thing.

So I'd say Feeling is not only all-too-human (which should recommend it most highly), but also all-too-important to be dismissed as lightly as some are wont to do... <ahem, Bluewing>

What you are describing here is rational (Thinking) analysis of Feeling. Most Fs do not do this, they are merely ruled by their torrential passions.

You won't see an argument for the "vices" of thinkers from me. I already admitted it was a failed attempt to search for a solid, sure way of avoiding pain in life by placing an extreme view on the situation and people.

Then the bottom line the view you had of Thinkers is false, and the view she has of Feelers is true. Your reasoning for attributing negative qualities to Thinkers was 'I felt like it', as described in the OP. ThatGirl's claim has a rational foundation.


Making decisions based only on the emotions of the moment is almost always a bad idea for long-term happiness. There are a lot of factors that go into making a good decision. How one is feeling right now is only one of those factors and, IMO, not a very big one.

Maybe not a very big one for you as you're not a radical F.

I didn't assume that either, I read it on this board. She went straight from that thread to this one and said basically the same things here about Feelers that she did about her Feeler BF.

What is the relevance of this? She is not talking about her ex Feeler BF. She is only talking about an idea concerning the Feeling type.
 

heart

heart on fire
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
8,456
Then the bottom line the view you had of Thinkers is false, and the view she has of Feelers is true.

I would say that the view I had was true for some thinkers and the view she has of feelers is true for some feelers.

ThatGirl's claim has a rational foundation.

She's certainly wrapped it up as if it were a rational foundation but she's scarely made the case that it is the case for all feelers, nor has she made an adequate case that all thinkers are immune to having flawed logic.

I like to say that her choice of lanugage reveals a feeling source for her post. The creeps is more of a "it feels like" type of a statement. Whether she did so as a joke or not, the fact that it came to her as title is very telling.

I think the most troubling aspects of the Feeler/Thinker divide are those people who are unbalanced too much in either direction. The feeler who doesn't apply logic and the thinker who fears/distrusts the shadow F side and yet is possessed by it again and again and unwittingly uses logic to justify its dictates.

It's the extremes that cause most of the difficulties in this world. That's the view I am coming to more and more.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
I would say that the view I had was true for some thinkers and the view she has of feelers is true for some feelers. .

The only Fs who are an exception to her view are those who are able to use the Thinking function properly. This is the only way one can avoid being dominated by 'what I felt like'.





She's certainly wrapped it up as if it were a rational foundation but she's scarely made the case that it is the case for all feelers, .

Where does it say that the message depicts all feelers?


nor has she made an adequate case that all thinkers are immune to having flawed logic..

Relevance? She is only talking about Feelers, not thinkers.


I like to say that her choice of lanugage reveals a feeling source for her post. The creeps is more of a "it feels like" type of a statement. Whether she did so as a joke or not, the fact that it came to her as title is very telling...

That is a peripheral remark. Her thesis was that Fs tend to make decisions based on how they felt due to lack of adequate support of the Thinking function.

You overlooked that in favor of citing an emotional reaction. This is just like the scenario where I am explaining a case to an F and they dont hear any of it because they were too busy studying my body language, intonation and facial expressions. Their excuse is but Ts do it too! Yes, Ts do it to the extent that they rely on their Feeling function. As some in this thread have said Thinkers can be whimsical too. Yes, just less whimsical. There is a fine line between getting thrown off the rails by your emotions here and there and being completely ruled by them.

I think the most troubling aspects of the Feeler/Thinker divide are those people who are unbalanced too much in either direction. The feeler who doesn't apply logic and the thinker who fears/distrusts the shadow F side and yet is possessed by it again and again and unwittingly uses logic to justify its dictates.

So, the more F you are the more whimsical you are likely to be. One could say, but what about the shadow or tertiary F. Is not it also the case that the lower the function, the more difficult it is to control? Yes. But in most cases when it spins out of control, it is supressed by Thinking. When it does manifest externally, it is usually the case that the Thinker sees no problem with letting it show. Does not see any negative rational consequences behind this.

It's the extremes that cause most of the difficulties in this world. That's the view I am coming to more and more.

Feeling is clearly more responsible for the difficulties in this world. Too much thinking will merely lead the person to avoid being able to recognize the implicit needs of other people. But they would be able to think clearly and make sound decisions.This could only lead to very few problems, namely some people will just be getting trampled over. It is their fault. They should have just been stronger. A Feeler could say that a lack of Feeling leads to a very uncooperative society. That is not true. A good thinker will see when it is time to cooperate and when it is time to fend for oneself by virtue of analysis.

If anything supressing Feeling will retrench whimsical acts of cooperation and other banalities Feeling is responsible for.

Thinkers use logic unwittingly to justify its dictates? Yeah. The dictates of logic is doing what is rational. The bad news for the 'feeler' is that the sympathy card gets removed from the table. Without this, it is difficult to persuade the thinker to do the bidding of a feeler based on simply 'I want you to', or 'I feel like it'.

I see no problem at all with this.

Excessive on Thinking is not nearly as problematic as excessively reliance on Feeling because the former in the former case one is able to make sound decisions, in the latter one is not because they are governed by erratic winds of passion.
 

SquirrelTao

New member
Joined
May 28, 2008
Messages
198
MBTI Type
INXX
Most Fs do not do this, they are merely ruled by their torrential passions.

My Dear Mr. BlueWing, if it makes you feel any better, I assure you that feelers who encounter you are not likely to feel torrential passions.
 

heart

heart on fire
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
8,456
Excessive on Thinking is not nearly as problematic as excessively reliance on Feeling because the former in the former case one is able to make sound decisions, in the latter one is not because they are governed by erratic winds of passion.

If it were possible for humans to be purely thinking beings then yes likely you would be right. The problem I was describing is when feeling exists but is either not percieved or not admitted to or it is even feared.
 

Haphazard

Don't Judge Me!
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
6,704
MBTI Type
ENFJ
Uhhm. Let's put it this way.

We have to separate feelings from Feeling.

According to MBTI, there are two ways that people decide things -- one, by looking at the faces of the people around them, and two, by reaching for the figures concerning the situation. My original post was concerning the people who yell at those who pick up the figures. It can certainly make good decisions, if one calculates correctly.

Feeling, because it's explicitly tied to people, can be benevolent, malevolent, greedy, generous, etc, for better or for worse, while Thinking cannot. That's not to say that feelings (not Feelings) cannot affect Ts. They can cause them to turn a blind eye to important variables when making decisions and make their processes rather sloppy. Feeling (with that capital F) in its inferior position to thinking, might warrant them to be actually vindictive rather than just moody, or have an attack of conscience rather than just decide according to 'best outcome.' The difference between the two is doing badly on some math homework because you were distracted and explicitly writing 'FUCK YOU TEACHER' on the problem set.

Intense Thinking preference is not able to tell whether one's decisions are being affected by feelings because they neglect Feeling, which understands the human element to the decision, that their reasoning may not be sound because they themselves are prone to human error, especially when stressed and upset like the rest of us. Intense Feeling preference is instead unable to tell what is fiesable and what non-Feeling consequences actions have because they can't think outside of that human range.

Or... something.
 

Domino

ENFJ In Chains
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
11,429
MBTI Type
eNFJ
Enneagram
4w3
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Well-said, Hap.
 

heart

heart on fire
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
8,456
That is a peripheral remark.... You overlooked that in favor of citing an emotional reaction.

No I didn't overlook anything, I simply pointed that out intentionally as an example of a thinker using "logic" to justify feeling motives.



Where does it say that the message depicts all feelers?

I don't read here where she's made the delineation about feelers that you claim she has. She just says F people and F'ers. Since she hasn't, why should I assume she's making any exceptions?


First of all don't be offended by the title I just thought it was funny.

F people creep me out. I don't understand them. I see making decisions off of your feelings as selfish and irrisponsible. The worst excuse ever, "I felt like it", like that matters. If people justify their actions according to their feelings where is the line that says what you were feeling is wrong. It seems immature. How is putting your feelings on someone else productive to anything? Where is the self control? You cant argue against what someone is feeling and asking someone to take your feelings into account is like asking them to cater unobjectively to you.

I am not trying to make people mad here I am trying to understand. What makes you all tick?



Humans and values are flawed and there is nothing to enforce the deffinition of value other than through individual interpretation, again making Fers selfish by design.

Intense Thinking preference is not able to tell whether one's decisions are being affected by feelings because they neglect Feeling, which understands the human element to the decision, that their reasoning may not be sound because they themselves are prone to human error, especially when stressed and upset like the rest of us. Intense Feeling preference is instead unable to tell what is fiesable and what non-Feeling consequences actions have because they can't think outside of that human range.

Or... something.

Yes, exactly. The two dangerous extremes.
 

Magic Poriferan

^He pronks, too!
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
14,081
MBTI Type
Yin
Enneagram
One
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I probably don't have the time to disassemble BlueWing's statements like I usually have, but I can't resist a little...

First of all.

Feeling is clearly more responsible for the difficulties in this world. Too much thinking will merely lead the person to avoid being able to recognize the implicit needs of other people.

I think most people on this forum will be able to recognize how skewed it is to simply pass over that issue as though it were a small one.

"not recognizing the implicit needs of humanity? No biggy."

But they would be able to think clearly and make sound decisions.This could only lead to very few problems, namely some people will just be getting trampled over. It is their fault. They should have just been stronger.

And most will also agree that this statement has great potential for inhumanity. It has also BlueWing's typical vagueness. We can apparently presume that all people suffering in a Thinking society are to blame for their suffering, due to a lack of strength, which seems unreasonably general/presumptuous. Also, what defines this strength, and what degree of it counts as strong enough, is left a total mystery. Nor is there even a hint at how this happens. The statement is basically empty fluff, it could mean almost anything. It's only clear quality is that it states people who suffer are weak, and it's not a problem if weak people suffer. This is an ethically unagreable statement, and most likely an ignorant one as well.



A Feeler could say that a lack of Feeling leads to a very uncooperative society. That is not true. A good thinker will see when it is time to cooperate and when it is time to fend for oneself by virtue of analysis.

Analysis based on what imperatives? I agree that a purely Thinking/aFeeling society would not be uncooperative, but that does not satisfy me, since such a society would hardly be anything at all. No Feeling means no drive.

If you refer to a society that has enough Feeling to posess personal desire, but lacks ethical code or sentimental sensitivty, then you essentially have a society of socipaths. Such a society would not work because sociopaths are cooperative in a parasitic manner. Society could not hold itself together without conduct respectful of emotions and morals.

If anything supressing Feeling will retrench whimsical acts of cooperation and other banalities Feeling is responsible for.

What act of cooperation would qualify as whimsical?

Thinkers use logic unwittingly to justify its dictates? Yeah. The dictates of logic is doing what is rational. The bad news for the 'feeler' is that the sympathy card gets removed from the table. Without this, it is difficult to persuade the thinker to do the bidding of a feeler based on simply 'I want you to', or 'I feel like it'.

First of all, I've already made it as clear as possible that the definition of rationality concerns all Judgement. It does not have an bias toward Thinking.

Secondly, this paragraph strongly suggests that a world without sympathy would be a better one. Am I correct? Is that what you are suggesting?

Excessive on Thinking is not nearly as problematic as excessively reliance on Feeling because the former in the former case one is able to make sound decisions, in the latter one is not because they are governed by erratic winds of passion.

But in the former case, invdividuals will be lacking in comprehension of good and bad acts. Such a disability would essentially turn society inert. Now, I suppose a subjective debate from here, as to whether society would be worse if it was filled with a bunch of do-nothings or a bunch of know-nothings.
 

SquirrelTao

New member
Joined
May 28, 2008
Messages
198
MBTI Type
INXX
Feeling, because it's explicitly tied to people, can be benevolent, malevolent, greedy, generous, etc, for better or for worse, while Thinking cannot.

I agreed with most of what you said, but I see a problem with this statement, namely that thinking is not done in a vacuum and has consequences. It may not be directly concerned with people, but it will still indirectly affect people.

Now, having pointed that out, I have only ever met one person in my whole life who really seemed close to being a pure thinker, and she was one of the coolest people I have ever known. Because ironically, she had so much acceptance of other people, that she was a good influence on them!
 
Top