Kneejerk Judgments as possible T/F indicators?

[epp]

according to NLP that makes a lot of sense. i.e. people would make judgments according to what they personally think (or feel) is most important. i.e. thinkers' very first judgment would be somewhat impersonal and would have probably something to do with logic, intelligence or something like that, feelers' first judgment would have something to do with values and perhaps 'common sense'?

for example (even though this is not a 'kneejerk judgment') - when i'm trying to insult someone i always always end up insulting their logic

just a thought that needs to 'set' before i can say what i mean exactly, but i think OP had a good point there.

 

[Eric B]

I've felt people were boring or stupid in their thoughts and actions, but I don't take it personally if I don't think it's directed to me. I judge stupidity in terms of fairness and morality, and human rights. I do take these kinds of injustices personally.

And that definitely shows an F orientation. (I guess I might also jusge immorality in terms of stupidity!

I feel I have a lot of common sense, maybe this is Te. I can bring out/highlight the obvious and this helps me decide when who and what I'm dealing with is moronic and lacking basic reasoning processes. But I sort of lump people together in this case. Very little Fe comes into play in this situation, just thinking (when I have this process I do use it to the best of my ability).

My feeling directs my attention to what I deem important though. Never do I believe my thinking leads me to what's important. Intuition is my absolute, feeling is my ray, and thought is the medium. I threw intuition in there because I'm not sure what to say about it and kneejerk. I'd say my intuition couldn't be kneejerk in the least. It has nothing of substance. Maybe I have no intuition to speak of? Could be.

I'm now coming to see that we should move away from this sort of thinking. We tend to try to fit our every thought into a specific "process/function", or even an archetype. I've just raised the subject here: http://www.typologycentral.com/foru...s/1416-archetypes-functions-6.html#post748446
I'm moving towards the view that beyond our preferred processes, the other functions are largely undifferentiated (to the ego), so many of these things are just general human reactions, and do not reflect type. In various situations, such as different levels of stress, the lower complexes may surface; but not in every single use of particular processes.

(I would also think that "kneejerk" reactions would involve judging functions more than perception. You are reacting against something (already perceived) and making a judgment on it. So you don't have to question your intuition there).

 

[Totenkindly]

...All of that is so much like me, except what I have tended to do with religous hypocrites and others imposing morality, is hit them back with their own medicine (You've already seen at least one of my Christian doctrine treatises, as we were just discussing!)

it could partly be age, partly be the social situation I was part of.

Back then, I was in a ministry position and felt like I'd lose my opportunities if I made too many waves. I did do quite a bit of e-mail/online arguing though, which was a different social circle than my RL existence at that time.

Nowadays I don't even see the point because usually people are not interested in a discussion... they usually just want, like a virus, to overwrite other people with their memes. Time has shown me that natural selection will eventually disenfranchise most of these extreme viewpoints except within their little subculture.

note: I saw your essay (and noted you have others up); I thought you did a tremendous job. I think at one point I had that much stamina, but now it was just exhausting to read (I've only gotten a quarter of the way through), let alone write myself. I will keep chewing off a bit at a time.

sorry for the tangent. But I think I've basically stayed on top of my judging tendencies, know their boundaries, and do what I can to minimize any unfairness within them...

 

[heart]

Stupid is my most frequent kneejerk negative judgment of things. But I likely have a Feeler's impression of what stupid really means. So it's complicated.

But positive judgment is that a person has great sensitivity, meaning that they can apply a refined and multifaceted type view on things, hence they are not stupid, senseless, animal, base, morally coward, intentionally blind.

 

[onemoretime]

Stupid is my most frequent kneejerk negative judgment of things. But I likely have a Feeler's impression of what stupid really means. So it's complicated.

Yeah, I notice that. One of the most tell-tale signs between a T and an F is whether they can say the word "stupid" dispassionately.

 

[heart]

Yeah, I notice that. One of the most tell-tale signs between a T and an F is whether they can say the word "stupid" dispassionately.

I am Fi so I am not exactly saying the word stupid in the same way Al Pacino would.

 

[onemoretime]

I am Fi so I am not exactly saying the word stupid in the same way Al Pacino would.

Michael Corleone, or Tony Montana-era Pacino?

 

[Totenkindly]

It would be stupid not to define "stupid" correctly.

 

[Fluffywolf]

I knee jerk judge people when I see someone trying to knee jerk judge someone else without proper arguements or any form of validation.

What you can do, I can do better.

 

[onemoretime]

If you want to call it knee-jerk judging, then I would say that it is the unfortunate habit I have of stereotyping - that I can figure out how someone ticks by a few actions that follow a certain pattern. It's a lot more fun to try to figure out motivations when someone's being boring than to actually put up with the situation.

 

[heart]

General comment: Any human being is prone to making knee jerk reactions in their own mind, especially when tired or stressed. The most one can do is become aware of it. jmo.

And it's stupid to worry about what definitions of stupid other people use in their own minds. ---Kneejerk reaction!

 

[Eric B]

Back then, I was in a ministry position and felt like I'd lose my opportunities if I made too many waves. I did do quite a bit of e-mail/online arguing though, which was a different social circle than my RL existence at that time.

Nowadays I don't even see the point because usually people are not interested in a discussion... they usually just want, like a virus, to overwrite other people with their memes. Time has shown me that natural selection will eventually disenfranchise most of these extreme viewpoints except within their little subculture.

note: I saw your essay (and noted you have others up); I thought you did a tremendous job. I think at one point I had that much stamina, but now it was just exhausting to read (I've only gotten a quarter of the way through), let alone write myself. I will keep chewing off a bit at a time.

Thanks!
Those were written years ago, and in the last couple of years, I had gotten very tired of the arguing online I used to engage in and no longer have the stamina for that stuff as well. Just beating your head against the wall, and then the faith is preached with such certainty, so the dissension where no one can agree on what the faith is just makes it all harder to have faith. So the essays remain up that I can point others to (and some of my views have even changed a bit since then).