[NT] The NT Prejudice Against Feeling

[Nocapszy]

I'm just curious to see an example of what Synaech is talking about in his OP.
I get the feeling I'm not rightly educated here.

 

[substitute]

In general, making the assumption that the T/F diff is somewhat biological in origin-evolution is a whore of a mistress. She finds the best solution via trial and error and implements it. The solution we currently have, was the best combination of types/functions to keep humans alive as a functional species. Thus you need both thinking driven and feeling driven decision making in combination it seems to have a balanced society.

Yes, exactly, and it seems much more realistic to me to let some people lean more one way and some the other and then just cooperate together, than to try making out that every individual should aspire to attain a perfect inner balance of both inclinations. This might be the Taoist in me speaking, but I tend not to like things that recommend trying to alter your innate nature by internal struggle because of external pressure. I mean, if you're ready to make a change in yourself and it's necessary, you will naturally do it anyway. Lecturing a T that s/he should be more value and feeling driven or an F that s/he should be more logical and objective isn't really going to achieve anything except to either put their backs up, or else make them feel down on themselves, like they're "not good enough", I think that witih most mortals it only stands in the way of them finding self-acceptance.

 

[jenocyde]

Yes, exactly, and it seems much more realistic to me to let some people lean more one way and some the other and then just cooperate together, than to try making out that every individual should aspire to attain a perfect inner balance of both inclinations. This might be the Taoist in me speaking, but I tend not to like things that recommend trying to alter your innate nature by internal struggle because of external pressure. I mean, if you're ready to make a change in yourself and it's necessary, you will naturally do it anyway. Lecturing a T that s/he should be more value and feeling driven or an F that s/he should be more logical and objective isn't really going to achieve anything except to either put their backs up, or else make them feel down on themselves, like they're "not good enough", I think that witih most mortals it only stands in the way of them finding self-acceptance.

My goodness, this is so perfect and true.

I guess I'm too old for most of you to get my reference: You Are There (series) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sigh.

Yes, I am old enough to remember *sniffle*

 

[substitute]

Thanks, heh!

I mean there's a difference between learning to understand and value the functions you're weak in, and therefore respecting and valuing the people who are profficient in them - and actually trying to alter your own nature so as to acquire profficiency in them yourself. I can admire someone who's good at sports without feeling the need to become good at sports myself, at the expense of excellence in the things I'm already good in. And that guy didn't get so good at sports by studying linguistics all his life to be more "rounded"

We're all such a delicate balance of qualities, strengths and weaknesses that in trying to alter that balance there's as much chance of doing harm as there is good. Might as well just understand and embrace it as it is, instead, rather than chase after an unattainable ideal - none of us will ever be perfect

 

[entropie]

One of the unfortunate consequences of a classification system like MBTi is that it encourages a reactionary mindset against other types and tendencies rather than encouraging the view of there being a boundary-less, complex spectrum of behavior in which the value of each "type" expression is largely situational. Factionalism is a consequence of defining type.

One problem I have is with the NT prejudice against Feeling. As if being dispassionate is a virtue, applied generally. There seems to be this idea that being an NT means cutting loose from emotional motivations or values, as if this is even possible. Rational sense must work in concert with emotional sense to achieve wholeness as a person. There is really no division. So, why do we NT's devalue "feeling" or at least leading with a feeling orientation? How do you personally define feeling? Can you be healthy and dispassionate?

Yes I aggree. Sometimes this whole MBTI thing seems like grouping from High School and too often its used to generalize unique personalities into much more larger groups. I think tho, it is not possible to get rid of that, cause most humans cannot live with the concept of infinity diversity in infinite combinations.

It would drive them insane

 

[ergophobe]

I mean there's a difference between learning to understand and value the functions you're weak in, and therefore respecting and valuing the people who are profficient in them - and actually trying to alter your own nature so as to acquire profficiency in them yourself. I can admire someone who's good at sports without feeling the need to become good at sports myself, at the expense of excellence in the things I'm already good in. And that guy didn't get so good at sports by studying linguistics all his life to be more "rounded"

This seems like a weak analogy because being good at sports or linguistics is not a necessary condition to lead a rich and satisfying life (feelers) or even a healthy life (thinkers). Being good at sports is neither necessary nor sufficient for most people to lead healthy lives. However, learning the value of exercise and being able to incorporate in our lives could be valuable to most people. Similarly, realizing the importance of both and making an effort to incorporate more of the weaker function (be it thinking or feeling) could help with leading healthier lives.

 

[substitute]

This seems like a weak analogy because being good at sports or linguistics is not a necessary condition to lead a rich and satisfying life (feelers) or even a healthy life (thinkers). Being good at sports is neither necessary nor sufficient for most people to lead healthy lives. However, learning the value of exercise and being able to incorporate in our lives could be valuable to most people. Similarly, realizing the importance of both and making an effort to incorporate more of the weaker function (be it thinking or feeling) could help with leading healthier lives.

I don't think being as good with Fe as an EXFJ is essential to a fulfilling life either, same goes for any function. Hell, my grandma had to be the most useless woman when it came to organizing stuff, she had the most atrocious Te, yet she was one of the happiest and wisest people I ever knew. I know my Fi is awful, but people comment on how I seem more confident and at peace than most people my age.

Self-acceptance is though. And the process you're describing happens naturally in most people anyway - call it growing up, maturing, gaining wisdom or whatever you like, but it happens to most people without having to make a point of it all the time. Like I say, when people are ready to change or grow and they see the need, they do naturally, and it's usually experience that's the catalyst and crucible, not self-improvement books or do-goody psychologists. No need to bash people over the heads with their weaknesses. God, it's like some kind of religious evangelist, always trying to tell you what you need to be happy, when what you really need is to be left alone to find your own way and accept yourself, to be accepted and loved and just use your own life experiences to gain wisdom like people have since time began.

Sure, some people don't seem to learn too well, but I'd argue that they wouldn't anyway - because they're not ready, maybe they never will be, but either way, it's not an occasion for neurotically railing against their inner selves. Maybe they just need to accept themselves as not being particularly wise, and other people need to accept that too, since I'm sure they have other strengths that can be appreciated.

Compassion can be developed through T just as well as through F, and if people were more compassionate about others' flaws rather than demand they change all the time, it'd help those people to accept and love themselves, then that'd spontaneously lead to better behaviour anyway.

And besides, there's more to life than just trying to be as happy as I can possibly be. To some people, stuff like that just seems peculiar as a thing to focus your life and energy on. We're not all individualists you know

 

[ThinkingAboutIt]

I do not see prejudice, just 'defense' from both sides. And, I do not think it is generalized, it is more a focus on certain behavioral traits in each group that the other does not like. It isn't resolvable because people are people, and the first thing that happens when you attack someone for being who they are made to be is that they stop listening and start defending. A good relationship - even friends - involves celebrating the differences, not focusing on the negatives

 

[ergophobe]

I don't think being as good with Fe as an EXFJ is essential to a fulfilling life either, same goes for any function. Self-acceptance is though. And the process you're describing happens naturally in most people anyway - call it growing up, maturing, gaining wisdom or whatever you like, but it happens to most people without having to make a point of it all the time. Like I say, when people are ready to change or grow and they see the need, they do naturally. No need to bash people over the heads with their weaknesses. God, it's like some kind of religious evangelist, always trying to tell you what you need to be happy, when what you really need is to be left alone to find your own way and accept yourself, to be accepted and loved and just use your own life experiences to gain wisdom like people have since time began.

1. I agree with you - it is an individual path to either decide (active) to work on or naturally let the weaker function develop (passive).
2. The point I was trying to make above wasn't that NTs should attempt to become as proficient in dealing with their emotions or that NFs should work to become as objective as NTs. I don't even know if that is possible or a worthwhile goal. Gaining some skills in the weaker function could help, that's all. Hey - there's a difference between acknowledgment that something is useful and proselytizing for the cause. I lean towards the former as proselytism is loathsome in any form.
3. I also assume that having the N sort of assumes a natural propensity towards improvement in conditions - personal and impersonal. Hence the assumption that developing the weaker function would be desirable.
4. I couldn't agree with you more - accepting oneself for who one is is a good first step in general. It seems to involve emotions though, doesn't it?

 

[violaine]

Um okay, so I didn't read any of the replies simply because I cannot be bothered, I just wanted to add that I feel that prejudice as well. One T boldly told me that "feelers are fucking weak" I was like, "Oh really?" because if not myself, I know a lot of feelers that are hella strong.

Yes. 'Tis annoying that having an F in your type means some people regard you as a powder puff until you prove otherwise. Hardly. I do, however, have much concern for others and am inclined towards giving to and doing for others. I push myself, I don't run from challenges, I don't run away from things that are difficult to deal with. I analyze constantly, it's just that humans are my preferred interest. This is how my 'F' is expressed. I much prefer the umbrella word 'Ethical' used in Socionics which implies that judgement and rationality are used in decision making rather than the almost pejorative term that 'Feeling' has become.

Yes I aggree. Sometimes this whole MBTI thing seems like grouping from High School and too often its used to generalize unique personalities into much more larger groups. I think tho, it is not possible to get rid of that, cause most humans cannot live with the concept of infinity diversity in infinite combinations.

It would drive them insane

Yup. I found MBTI very useful when I was first delving into personality typing. It isn't built for deeper analysis though. Too many exceptions to apparent rules when applied finely. It can obscure the individual. (bleh!) Also, I notice when people adhere to it rigidly they seem to stagnate in a mindset, it becomes limiting. I prefer the Enneagram as a system in that respect, it seems to promote growth and examining oneself rather than holding a party line.

 

[entropie]

[...] And, I do not think it is generalized, it is more a focus on certain behavioral traits in each group [...]

Thats exactly the kind of generalizations I am talking about. People dont belong to groups

 

[ThinkingAboutIt]

Thats exactly the kind of generalizations I am talking about. People dont belong to groups

It is grouped by nature, via differences. That is the point - you can't say a man is a woman any more than a woman is a man. They are different, period. A thinker and a feeler approach, process, and handle things completely differently; whether someone considers that a bad thing or not is a different story, but trying to say that they are not different or different 'groups' is ridiculous.

 

[entropie]

So but even according to MBTI every person posseses feeling and thinking and interaction between people often is a mixture of them both. So do you either want to split up interactions in so many tiny bits of information to single-out which bit belongs to thinking and which belongs to feeling or are you rather intrested in what unique new forms of mind- and soullife are created because of the mixture in one person ?

 

[Misty_Mountain_Rose]

The feeling, be it Fe or Fi, is surely there for me. The difference imo is that the 48.1% of the feeler i really think i am only accounts for roughly 20% of the decisions/choices i make.

I think you hit the nail on the head here. Being 'T' or 'F' doesn't mean you think or feel more than others, but maybe only indicates what will motivate you more to take action.

I still don't think there's much separation between what you think and what you feel though. I don't know that you can separate them the way we try to sometimes. Thoughts can lead to feelings, feelings can lead to thoughts... its all a cycle where each is dependent on the other. The kind of 'yin' and 'yang' of a person's soul perhaps.

If you've ever heard how Bruce Lee describes the function of Yin and Yang you'll know where I'm coming from here. There isn't 'good' and 'bad', 'black' and 'white', there is only balance and, like a rubber band that pulls in one direction, it must go back the other direction with equal force. They're all the same thing... thoughts and feelings. Just two halves of a whole.

 

[entropie]

yes, just my thoughts, thank you

 

[sculpting]

So but even according to MBTI every person posseses feeling and thinking and interaction between people often is a mixture of them both. So do you either want to split up interactions in so many tiny bits of information to single-out which bit belongs to thinking and which belongs to feeling or are you rather intrested in what unique new forms of mind- and soullife are created because of the mixture in one person ?

I think there is value in appreciating both the group, with its splitness and then the individual within any sort of grouping.

For instance, my favorite INTP. Due to the "group" definitions I can predict reliably that he wont be into pda too much, will be highly analytical, be very logical, will delay conversations concerning "feelings" till he is very comfortable with me, and may not always immediately touch base after an email or call as he needs time alone to think things over so I should not be bothered by these things. Also, when he speaks, I know to be patient and let him ruminate a little and wait for him to finish as he likely has more to say, but has to think about it a bit.

However this tells me nothing about his soul-insides-uniqueness, ie that his favorite cloud shapes are the ones that you see before dawn from a plane when they drift over water, his favorite author is john steinbeck, his favorite color is pink, or that time he was wondering around lost in the desert (something about a girl..),

Type won't tell me about why our noses touched when we slept or why he likes shrimp instead of sausage on his sandwich or why he thinks venomous snails are fascinating... It wont tell me about his cat, or his parents or his theories on algorithms for data processing, or why he likes odd, special scotches and also knows a lot about wine...

So I get a type- a model-which helps understand how to relate in general -then I dive in and enjoy all the specifics and appreciate them for what they are and enjoy that diversity and uniqueness.

 

[entropie]

I am sorry but I cant follow you on this one, I simply dont classify people or think of them in groups. Come as you are, Nirvana knew that

A reason I am here is to find something that actually makes sense and to classify people in groups one day, but it eluded me thus far

To me grouping is sensor talk, my concept is still infinity diversity in infinite combinations

 

[sculpting]

I am sorry but I cant follow you on this one, I simply dont classify people or think of them in groups. Come as you are, Nirvana knew that

A reason I am here is to find something that actually makes sense and to classify people in groups one day, but it eluded me thus far

To me grouping is sensor talk, my concept is still infinity diversity in infinite combinations

you know maybe it is my Te coming through. It REALLY likes to organize things it turns out, and likes to add structure. So maybe I find the thought appealing and more natural as Ne-Fi makes me fascinated by people and why they do what they do, then Te wants to organize it, model it, and structure it so it can be predicted?? I dont know..

 

[entropie]

Yes maybe and ultimatively its necessary. I do organize and structure people myself, its necessary to understand them. But I am never satisfied with how to describe them. If I say for example about someone that he is analytical, what does that mean ? If he were analytical he would be a Computer but he is not, he is composed of a lot of different tones and notes and you can never find the right way to describe him.

But what you can and you probably do yourself is to enjoy this. So when I am categorizing I am basically riding a wave of emotions towards someone and I am either attracted or repelled by what he says. With this attitude life isnt easy, cause 90% of the times you get different vibes than they intended to send. But a few select people, they emitt waves that I like and that dont change. They never do something I would say I felt alone or I hated. And I think this then is my group of people.

Ultimatively at old age tho, I am pictureing me more to live alone. Cause the company of people is taxing sometimes, if you want to get to know everyone and dont say from time to time, ok this guy I will exclude from my "getting-to-know-attitude"

 

[jenocyde]

Ultimatively at old age tho, I am pictureing me more to live alone. Cause the company of people is taxing sometimes, if you want to get to know everyone and dont say from time to time, ok this guy I will exclude from my "getting-to-know-attitude"

+1