Definitions of T/F

[FFF]

I've been studying big five so long, I think I might be confused about T/F now. So please, someone:

Define the T/F dimension of personality.

Describe someone who is extremely T.

Describe someone who is extremely F.

 

[Simplexity]

"Rationality loses real estate when our perceived way of life is threatened.

How one reacts is subjective to the threat itself." --Night

Draw your own conclusions from that. I think its very helpful and accurate.

 

[mlittrell]

T's make decisions by standing back from the situation and logically deducing what to do. (i really hate that description because i used the word logic but you get the point)

F's make decisions by throwing themselves into the situation and making a decision based on their personal value system.

 

["?"]

Eric B gives a good account of distinguising T/F in saying:

So "fair" is assumed to be something universal, and a Thinker would (in an objective, detached fashion) give to all equally, while an F would take into account other factors such as some starting off disadvantaged (sort of like many of the political debates in the US for the past few decades, involving the poor and social programs).

 

[FFF]

I'm really just trying to figure out how T/F matches up with big five traits. If you look at that test in Eric B's signature, it appears that T types are low neuroticism (N) and that F types are high agreeableness (A). That would make it a weird sorta blend of two big five traits. I know from being low N and high A, that one can be empathetic and logical, compassionate and reasonable, accommodating and questioning, and tough and tender.

The one unique thing about A is that it's a trait that only surfaces in response to people (or sometimes animals). I'm reading a book that says A is the most difficult trait to detect simply by looking at someone's bedroom. Anyway, I find the list above that may seem like opposites can coexist if one involves how you deal with people (or animals), and the other involves how you deal with non-living things.

I can be empathetic with people, yet logical when dealing with math.
I can be compassionate with people, yet reasonable with scientific things.
I am definitely accommodating, but I question the hell out of every established system and institution.
I can be tough when my own car goes off the road, but tender when I see someone in a motorcycle accident.

Someone low on N is logical and positive. Someone high on N has a higher capacity for negative emotions (positive emotions are linked to extraversion), such as fear, anxiety, depression, and anger, making that person a drama queen.

Someone high on A is a team player, wants to get along with everybody, hates competition, and is very willing to adapt to get along with anyone. Someone low on A is competitive and selfish. They have a sort of "my way or the highway" attitude and think that people should adapt to them.

I remember an example of 12 salesmen. It was 6 of them low in A that were doing best and 6 who were moderates that were doing well. Their ignant company decided that they should all get together and work as a nice, happy team, not realizing their competitive, anti-team nature made them good salesmen. It only took a few months for most of them to go, including all the low A types.

 

[Jack Flak]

How I define them is:

Feeling is emotion-based information processing/value assignment

Thinking is logic-based information processing/value assignment

What occupies your mind more, the preference, defines T/F.

 

[Venom]

if you listen to the kohlberg "heinz story"...

A woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $ 1,000, which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said, "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it." So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife.

...and conclude that the drug company should of given the drug at a lower price, then might be an F. An F might be more likely make that special exception, while a T would realize how lowering prices just so "everyone gets to have one, even if they cant afford it" cant work on a universal scale.



Also it should be noted, that sometimes:

We must also remain aware of the fact that the 'inferior' function of an individual may be experienced with intensity and frequency, and might thus be mistaken for the individual's 'superior' (or 'primary' function). For instance, if an individual revels in eating (an 'S' function) this may not be because he is a 'sensing' type - and may even be an indication that 'sensing' is his inferior function, to the extent that it is through the sensing function that he falls 'into the grip' of the unconscious (to use Von Franz's phrase). For such an individual eating is experienced as 'numinous', mysterious, compelling - it is experienced with intensity and threatens to overwhelm the individual.

relating the above to someone with inferior T or F might lead to some mistakes in typing individuals

 

[ptgatsby]

Someone low on N is logical and positive. Someone high on N has a higher capacity for negative emotions (positive emotions are linked to extraversion), such as fear, anxiety, depression, and anger, making that person a drama queen.

Be careful about moving descriptions into the real world. N-s are not logical or positive: they are non-reactive, in that when something happens, they don't have a strong negative reaction to it. On the other hand, E- tend to be equally non reactive in the positive sense - they don't have a strong positive reaction to things.

Drama queens will tend to be N+, for sure, but it's not an inherent thing. They simply are reacting stronger and longer than others.

The relationship between A and T/F is fairly strong, but not absolute. And more to the point, MBTI doesn't use the same concepts as FFM. That is, the theory behind MBTI simply won't connect T/F to A in FFM. The tests, however, give you a fairly good idea of how they do. In general, F/T and A+/- will share empathy and the urge to get to know people. They also will tend to be more accepting of others, such as diversity of groups and what not (not directly asked, but highly correlated.)

The other aspects, like logical and so forth, are more directly asked in MBTI, whereas they are more reductionist from the FFM A subtraits. This is largely because our definitions of each don't cross: selfish = logical, for example, or that A- will tend to seek conflict (which often translates to "logical arguments") and the A+ will try to get along.

Re: Your sales example. In a A+ sense, sales people are trying to take advantage of their customers. There isn't a full T equivalent for that situation, except in terms of empathy being the wrong strategy.

 

[Willfrey]

I am T, and my co-worker is F.

We each worked on different price guides in Excell, I sat back, sketched what I wanted it to look like in pencil, and then made it.

He went straight to entering data and ended up getting it done faster whist I was still struggling with Excell's formatting dynamics (No 'Text Box' Function?! Preposterous!)

 

[Eric B]

I'm really just trying to figure out how T/F matches up with big five traits. If you look at that test in Eric B's signature, it appears that T types are low neuroticism (N) and that F types are high agreeableness (A). That would make it a weird sorta blend of two big five traits. I know from being low N and high A, that one can be empathetic and logical, compassionate and reasonable, accommodating and questioning, and tough and tender.

My signature is based on Step II, which does not directly include Neuroticism. It is just subscales of the existing four dichotomies. Now there is an extension of the subscale system called Type Differentiation Indicator which adds a dichotomy called "Comfort/Discomfort", which corresponds to Neuroticism. In the factor analysis, some of its subscales loaded on J/P; not T/F, IIRC.

Agreeableness would most closely correspond to role-directive/informative, and hence be T/F for Sensors and J/P for iNtuitors. Structure vs Motive (the reverse of that) also seems to be a kind of Agreeableness.

It seems another way to describe T/F is that T determines what's valid while F determines what's desired.

 

[Haphazard]

if you listen to the kohlberg "heinz story"...

...and conclude that the drug company should of given the drug at a lower price, then might be an F. An F might be more likely make that special exception, while a T would realize how lowering prices just so "everyone gets to have one, even if they cant afford it" cant work on a universal scale.

I kind of think stealing was the best choice in this situation, actually. But then again, that's just me.

Then again, charging ten times the cost of production (including shipping, etc) would be considered by many to be, well, just plain price gouging. I mean, around here there are laws to keep gas stations from price gouging, so it's not like it would be too difficult to do the same for prescription drugs. And you can't tell me that you can't because of the prescription drug lobbies, because gasoline has a pretty damn big lobby, too.

So, I suppose it's not a matter of making a special exception, rather than there's just something flawed in this situation.

 

[Venom]

I kind of think stealing was the best choice in this situation, actually. But then again, that's just me.

Then again, charging ten times the cost of production (including shipping, etc) would be considered by many to be, well, just plain price gouging. I mean, around here there are laws to keep gas stations from price gouging, so it's not like it would be too difficult to do the same for prescription drugs. And you can't tell me that you can't because of the prescription drug lobbies, because gasoline has a pretty damn big lobby, too.

So, I suppose it's not a matter of making a special exception, rather than there's just something flawed in this situation.

if there wasnt such huge incentive for drug companies...there wouldnt be as many drugs to help people. with all the shit they have to go through with the FDA... not to mention a lot of the drugs they invest RnD $ in never even make it to market. The incentives have to be astronomical to make it work.

 

[Haphazard]

if there wasnt such huge incentive for drug companies...there wouldnt be as many drugs to help people. with all the shit they have to go through with the FDA... not to mention a lot of the drugs they invest RnD $ in never even make it to market. The incentives have to be astronomical to make it work.

Or we could just go back to patent medicine.

Fine. We need incentive. We also need competition, so there would have to be a generic brand of the drug in question. But there's still something wrong. What if the person in question had been older? Then it would be entitlements that are trying to pay for this. And there wouldn't be enough, but the cost just keeps going up and up for taxpayers who must pay into them, while so much of the time it's futile, such as in cases like these.

I dunno. I just consider something to be broke here, but there's nothing that steps forward to be fixed. :steam:

The only thing I could possibly think of is to shift most of the the burden of reward from the individual and distribute it amongst taxpayers. One could say that some taxpayers would complain, but then again, everyone ends up on some sort of prescription sooner or later.

Aaaand... at this point, I believe that I am off topic.

*bows out*

 

[G-Virus]

T = Objective Truth with a big T.
F = Subjective approach to things.

 

[G-Virus]

Ambien ran out of patent, hehe, don't worry here comes the all new and improved ambien CR. Fluoxetine no longer on patent, don't worry duloxetine here to save the day.

 

[SillySapienne]

T = Objective Truth with a big T.
F = Subjective approach to things.

Therefore Ts are delusional and Fs are honest, cool, gotcha.

 

[G-Virus]

Therefore Ts are delusional and Fs are honest, cool, gotcha.

Agreed.

 

[FFF]

Be careful about moving descriptions into the real world. N-s are not logical or positive: they are non-reactive, in that when something happens, they don't have a strong negative reaction to it. On the other hand, E- tend to be equally non reactive in the positive sense - they don't have a strong positive reaction to things.

Drama queens will tend to be N+, for sure, but it's not an inherent thing. They simply are reacting stronger and longer than others.

Introversion with N-- would make for someone realistic and unemotional and very logical.
Extroversion with N-- would make for someone happy and positive most of the time.

 

[Orangey]

if you listen to the kohlberg "heinz story"...

...and conclude that the drug company should of given the drug at a lower price, then might be an F. An F might be more likely make that special exception, while a T would realize how lowering prices just so "everyone gets to have one, even if they cant afford it" cant work on a universal scale.

Also it should be noted, that sometimes:

I'm not seeing why they wouldn't agree to let him pay the rest later. That would seem to make sense, since they could potentially have made more money from interest, and the woman could have received the treatment in time. Win, win. Refusing to let the guy pay later just seems like it was motivated out of greed.