User Tag List

First 12

Results 11 to 20 of 20

  1. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lizzy1813 View Post
    I don't think you can defend any F choice by logic--that's kinda part of being an 'F'--you have to "feel" and deduce by processing your inner thoughts, not through reasoning.

    I don't really know how to put it in words, but I hope my meaning got across.
    I have to disagree, that's incredibly stereotypical. Just because people are 'F's doesn't mean they lack strong 'T' cognitive functions. As an example, INFJ has Ti as a tertiary function. Personally I don't believe, in any type, that a decision can be made without unconsciously or consciously using a little bit of logic.
    Because everyone (T's more so than F's obviously) uses logic, even if not very well. And plus, most F's will develop some Ti and Te in their lifetime in response to their environment. And vice versa.

    Anyway back to the question, for me, I'm very analytical, so even though I'm (pretty sure) 'F' most of my decisions have really strong bases in logic. Even if occasionally I might make the decision mostly on what I feel, and then think of logic for it later. But that's how I've been raised, in my family if I was totally 'F' I would be having huge family problems.

    Why do we choose the values we choose? Is it simply because they "feel right" or is there something more complicated than that going on? How do you evaluate one value over another? If someone asked you to justify one of your values could you do it, using strictly F, not supporting it with T? What would a debate between too Fs with different values look like if they defended it using only F?
    I'm using abortion as my example, and I'm a weird INFP so don't take this as typical. I think when I first decided to be pro-abortion, I just did it because it coincided with my other values, and I thought that individual women, not men in Congress, should determine that fate of themselves and their baby. But later (a couple of years), thinking about it, my F took over and I felt bad because I began to imagine what would've happened had my mom had an abortion, because you really are denying someone a potential life (even if they don't know it yet).

    But I think the core values for me I originally decided on when I was younger through my feelings when I was more F than I am now. And now I habitually make decisions that coincide with my former values, because they're so engrained in me I can't really do otherwise, and then possibly go back later and rethink them.

  2. #12
    Senior Member Nonsensical's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4
    Posts
    4,010

    Default

    why try to figure out? I say we all a little but of every type in us, so try to find out for yourself ( and I don't mean that in a mean way)..but look inside and build off of what you find out.
    Is it that by its indefiniteness it shadows forth the heartless voids and immensities of the universe, and thus stabs us from behind with the thought of annihilation, when beholding the white depths of the milky way?

  3. #13
    Senior Member Ilah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    274

    Default

    Thanks everyone, this is a really interesting discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by lindsay5889 View Post

    I'm using abortion as my example, and I'm a weird INFP so don't take this as typical. I think when I first decided to be pro-abortion, I just did it because it coincided with my other values, and I thought that individual women, not men in Congress, should determine that fate of themselves and their baby. But later (a couple of years), thinking about it, my F took over and I felt bad because I began to imagine what would've happened had my mom had an abortion, because you really are denying someone a potential life (even if they don't know it yet).

    But I think the core values for me I originally decided on when I was younger through my feelings when I was more F than I am now. And now I habitually make decisions that coincide with my former values, because they're so engrained in me I can't really do otherwise, and then possibly go back later and rethink them.
    I think this is an example of what I was thinking of. There is reasoning behind the choice but it is all F reasoning, thinking about what values are behind each choice and weighing values against each other.

    Quote Originally Posted by edcoaching View Post
    One characteristic of Fi's is that they can have a hard time expressing their values because it can bring on emotions. In fact, Dick Thompson makes sure in workshops that no Feeling exercise taps Fi for anyone because the emotions get too raw for even the T's. He makes sure people externalize by talking of others.
    This is really interesting. I see myself as being fairly high Fi, but low Fe. So when I express feeling it tends to be Fi. I do have this problem sometimes, so I am glad to know it is not just me.


    Quote Originally Posted by cascademn View Post
    For myself, it's not because it 'feels right'. I think I have pretty solid reasons for why I believe in what I believe, and put a lot of thought into most things. If I don't have solid reasons and a good framework for all of it, and if it doesn't all tie together and I don't feel 'consistent', I don't think it means much. Personal life choices are not done on whims, for the most part - again, I put a lot of thought into pretty much everything, and I've never had it pointed out to me that I'm irrational, or anything like that. Many things have to 'make sense' for me to believe them, or for me to make a decision (not that emotions/values aren't a component of my decision-making process, because they are - they're just not the sole component).
    Just wanted to clarify that when I used the term "feels right" I didn't mean to imply that my value judgements were whims. I tend to go over them quite a lot in my mind and sometimes writing things down till I get something I feel comfortable with. I just can't really describe the process very well or what I am using to get there.

    In response to some of the other comments:

    I feel reasonably comfortable with my F itself, I just don't feel I understand it very well. On the other hand I don't know that I can explain or understand Ni very well either and that is my primary.

    And I know what my values are, I am not entirely sure how I choose those values though. I mean it wasn't random, there was lots of time and mental effort involved, I just can't really explain it very well and I would like to be able to - if it is possible.

    I think that some values can be justified with logic, but the logical reason is not the reason we choose them. For example some people are vegitarians because they don't want any animals killed, but when you ask them to justify it they go into the health benifits of being a vegitarian. They didn't become a vegitarian because of the health benefits, but it is easier to argue health benifits than the ethics of killing animals. Note: I am not a vegitarian just using this as an example.

    Ilah

  4. #14
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lindsay5889 View Post
    Just because people are 'F's doesn't mean they lack strong 'T' cognitive functions.
    True. And likewise T people can have strong F values functions.

    I'm using abortion as my example, and I'm a weird INFP so don't take this as typical. I think when I first decided to be pro-abortion
    You think everyone should have an abortion?

    I just did it because it coincided with my other values, and I thought that individual women, not men in Congress, should determine that fate of themselves and their baby. But later (a couple of years), thinking about it, my F took over and I felt bad because I began to imagine what would've happened had my mom had an abortion, because you really are denying someone a potential life (even if they don't know it yet).

    But I think the core values for me I originally decided on when I was younger through my feelings when I was more F than I am now. And now I habitually make decisions that coincide with my former values, because they're so engrained in me I can't really do otherwise, and then possibly go back later and rethink them.
    That is interesting.

    I find that I only cling to old values when I feel a lot of pressure from other people (i.e., they will make my life hell if I "break the values" they thought I held and that they were depending on). So I would cling to particular values out of a sense of integrity, even if I did not hold those values as strongly as I used to... or perhaps not at all... but it always left me feeling miserable. Because it was not honest.

    Maybe integrity is a value in itself... but basically it always comes down to not being able to make decisions based on what I want to be true, it has to be something I believe to be true. (That is the T function at work -- it has to "make sense" independently of my feelings and values, unless it is a specific area that I intellectually believe is flexible and thus gives room for personal belief.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ilah View Post
    I think that some values can be justified with logic, but the logical reason is not the reason we choose them. For example some people are vegitarians because they don't want any animals killed, but when you ask them to justify it they go into the health benifits of being a vegitarian. They didn't become a vegitarian because of the health benefits, but it is easier to argue health benifits than the ethics of killing animals. Note: I am not a vegitarian just using this as an example.
    That's a valuable point.

    Many people don't intellectualize through an idea first, then lay claim to the result. They will start with their values first, then arrange intellectual-style arguments to buttress them. (This especially happens with the Te/Fi combo).
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  5. #15
    Senior Member Into It's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Posts
    664

    Default

    have you ever been right on the edge of a potential relationship with two people? And you could logically work things out: this guy's got security, that guy's more sociable, etc. But that part of you that didn't have to use that style of thinking, but just sort of "rates" one person higher than the other...That's your F, my friend. You may have gone with your T conclusion instead, or your T conclusion could have led to your F feeling.

  6. #16
    Member Lizzy1813's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Posts
    37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nolla View Post
    I don't see how you come to this conclusion... I can logically defend "you shall not kill" any day. Of course people can counter it by mentioning war and such when it suddenly is "right" to kill people, but even if they win the argument still I tried to make the point logically, and so I was defending it by logic. How could anyone defend any stance if it wasn't by logic?
    I'm sorry, I said I didn't really know how to put my thought into words, and I realize that I generalized where I shouldn't have.

    I shouldn't have said that any F decisions can't be defended logically. I take it back--I didn't really think it out before posting ...just an ENFP moment to add to my ever-growing list.

  7. #17
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    9

    Default

    I'm using abortion as my example, and I'm a weird INFP so don't take this as typical. I think when I first decided to be pro-abortion
    Haha sorry not thinking, no I don't want everyone to have an abortion. I'm just saying you should have the choice to have an abortion if you want to.

  8. #18
    Senior Member placebo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    492

    Default

    My thinking drives me insane. I don't know how to analyse it and if I could figure it out...

    It kind of feels like wanting to FEEL right about something and wanting to BE right about something at the same time and those are coming from two different places and they just get mixed up and confused in the process of figuring things out.

  9. #19
    homo-loving sonovagun anii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    infp
    Enneagram
    9
    Socionics
    fuck
    Posts
    900

    Default

    Almost every big decision I make takes into account the potential human impact. It just does. I can't tell you why and I can't not do it. Pros/cons and balance sheets are only useful to me *after* I've explored the human impact of a pending decision.

    IMO this kind of decision-making is valid. Just as valid as the T way of thinking. Not better or worse, just different. I would be so bold as to say that MBTI theory backs me up on this.
    There's reason to be afraid, and reason to open your heart. ~ Seal

    Refreshment for your ears: www.kexp.org

  10. #20
    Senior Member TenebrousReflection's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    INFp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    449

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ilah View Post
    I don't intend this to be some criticism of F or asking feelers to justify their thought process. I am genuinely interested in how it works, partly to understand my own F.

    As a bit of a background: Although I am a T, I think I have a pretty strong Fi. I tend to make value choices that are different from the norm and often am given a hard time about them. I have often been asked to explain/justify my choices (not usually in a nice way) and am usually at a loss on how to do it.

    Why do we choose the values we choose? Is it simply because they "feel right" or is there something more complicated than that going on? How do you evaluate one value over another? If someone asked you to justify one of your values could you do it, using strictly F, not supporting it with T? What would a debate between too Fs with different values look like if they defended it using only F?

    For me, when something is decided by my T, I generally feel that I can defend my choices fairly well using logic. However, with my F choices I may feel very strongly about something, but I am hard pressed to defend them. I don't really feel comfortable with not being able to come up with the F equivelent of a "logical defense" to my position. Sometimes a logical explaination will coincide with my F choice and I can back it up using logic, but other times there is no convenient F choice.

    I am not sure if this makes a difference or not but I am thinking of both big values (religion, politics, ethics) and little values (taste in music, clothing styles).

    Ilah
    About the things I feel strongest about (individuality, civil liberties, freedom of expression and speech, responsibility (far more than just those, but those are common ones that might infleunce conversations on a regular basis)) it is more of "those values feel right to me" type of thing than anything I would arive at by logic. On things that don't fall into a category that I have a strong feeling about, I often have to weigh my existing values with the implications of each of the possibilities to arive at a decision about somethignt hat I can say is "right for me". Once I arive at that decision, I then look for ways to rationalize it and defend that position with logic (or simply keep my feeling about it to myself if I don't feel I can adequatly defend the position through logic). I'm sure there are plenty of times I think I'm being logical but I'm not actually being logical or have not thought things through well enough to defend a position with logic. Sometimes I will know what I beleive about the values of something, but cant find a way to articulate a persuasive argument for it but will eventually see someoen else argue for it, and if they do that in a way that still aligns with my values, I will use that as a basis to work out a way to create an argument for it that works for me. Winning the argument is not as important to me as it is to make the other person think about their own views in the process of disagreeing with me, and as long as I feel their views are well founded, I don't mind agreeing to disagree on most things.

    If you can match something you believe to a value you feel strongly about, then arguing on the basis that ____ value is important to you, and thats why you support _____ seems very valid to me.

    Arguing about matters of personal taste is futile to me as it is a matter of individual prefference. I would not want to change someoen elses likes and dislikes since thats what shapes their own individuality - If I think they have poor taste, sure that may influence my opinion of them, but I keep those opinions to myself - if they openly critique my tastes, then that will result in a negative opinion of them (not for differeing tastes, but for making the presumption that I should share their likes and/or dislikes), but I don't see any way to argue over it.

    Politics can be argued on the basis of arguing the effects and implications of various policies, and even though I prefer to avoid political arguments, if I do get in one, I'll argue on the basis of long term implications and possibilities and chaing reactions and human nature (thats a blury area of feeling and logic in that human nature can be somewhat predictable as a whole, but humans are far from logical as a whole).

    Religion. Is not logical to begin with, and its pretty much unknowable, so its pointless to try to make a logical argument for why someone should believe one thing or another. What is important in matters of religion to me is that the person made a choice thats right for them. I will nto argue FOR my own beliefs, but if someone brings up the subject, I will explain why I feel the choices I've made are right for me based on what I value and I will often proceed to question them to see if their own beleifs and values are in agreement and if they are not, then I will poin out that they are not being true ot themselves, and what they do with that is up to them.

Similar Threads

  1. So I'm trying to figure out the appeal...
    By ygolo in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-15-2009, 04:53 PM
  2. I'm trying to figure out...
    By alcea rosea in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-03-2009, 02:12 PM
  3. Curious INTx trying to figure out the "x" part
    By Fuent in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 04-07-2008, 01:36 AM
  4. Trying to figure out my friend.
    By Ypsilon in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-20-2008, 10:43 PM
  5. Greetings of an INxx (trying to figure out what I am)
    By TenebrousReflection in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 10-05-2007, 01:56 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