• 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.

Do feeling functions have anything to do with emotion or are the two seperate?

The Great One

New member
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
3,439
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
6w7
I've had this question for a long time: Do feeling functions have anything to do with emotions or not? I ask this because it seems as though feelers tend to be more in touch with their emotions than do thinkers. Also, it seems as though feelers tend to let their emotions weigh more on their decisions than do thinkers. However, Jung doesn't really correlate feelings with emotions and defines feelings as "value-based judgements", so this kind of throws me off. So what do you all think?

[MENTION=14179]SolitaryWalker[/MENTION]

You may want to check this thread out. I read a little bit of your book, and this seems like a topic that you would want to comment on.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
This is my take on it....

I'll preface this by saying that Feeling is rational reasoning to assign worth/meaning. You decide what is important or makes sense in terms of the human condition/experience. All the judging functions basically classify or organize "data", and in order to assign worth in this way, the data used will involve emotional responses in yourself & others. Of course, Ji & Je are quite different, with Je being more about viability and adjusting to the external, using it as a gauge to make decisions and to act. Ji is more about creating/refining internal concepts & using them as a guide as things arise. So that's why a Fi-dom would be less emotionally expressive than a Fe-dom because the emotion would be internalized as a part of an introverted process.

orangeappled post from another forum said:
Feeling types may appear more emotional because they USE emotion to clarify meaning. Emotion is used for emphasis, which conveys how important or unimportant the meaning of a statement is. Since Feeling types prefer to judge in an evaluative way, they can be concerned with representing value accurately in their expressions. Emotion is the communication tool for that. Fe types are most likely to use it, as they seek to affect others with their valuations to create consensus, which is important for harmony in relationships. Extroverted types in general tend to seek to affect others more (and are more open to being affected), which tends to make them more expressive. IRL, Fi types often don't show much emotion unless it's in response to a violation of one of their values. After all, getting upset with people is a way to communicate that they've crossed a boundary, right? Their feelings tend to remain hidden also, as they have less desire to affect others with their personal values. It's not uncommon for them to express both feelings and emotions in indirect ways (ie. art). EFPs will more commonly fit the extroverted tendencies though, which is to seek to affect & to be more likely to show emotion.

Since emotion is a signal for value, Feelers also pay attention to their own & others' emotions a lot, as signs to the significance of something. Just as hunger alerts us to a need to eat, emotions alert us to other needs we have. Figuring out those needs & how to take care of them is a reasoning process though, and that's just one way Feeling evaluates in a rational way. This quote from a science blog sums up the relationship between emotions & rational cognition (Feeling):

"The function of emotion is to assign value and salience to stimuli and responses -- in essence, to guide cognition by incorporating goals and reward."

So I don't believe F types necessarily experience emotion more, but they may dwell on it more & use it more, making them appear more affected by emotion.

Gifts Differing notes that T types see F types as irrational because their own feeling is infantile, and they don't know how to use their emotions as well, so they assume it is the same for everyone else. This leads them to imagine F types are in less control of their emotions, when really its the exact opposite. This can make T types feel like emotional expressions cloud meaning & interfere with communication and thinking, but the F type sees it as clarifying significance of a statement's meaning & as a useful signal to reason on what may be significant.

I will add that when a function is dominant, it is supposedly most differentiated from non-cognitive stuff like emotions, memories, fantasy, etc. In other words, the individual experiences it as their most "pure thought". The lower down the totem pole, the less differentiated a function will be, hence inferior feeling being very mixed with emotion, and likely why people project their own emotionality onto F-dom. Jung seemed to even suggest that many people may not even have their dominant function all that differentiated. And as you "develop" functions, this would be differentiating them to a greater degree. As a side, this is also why the tertiary is not mentioned by Jung. Or at least to me it seems the idea is the dominant is differentiated (& is the ego), the inferior is an opposing force in the mind & a "gateway" to the unconscious (and when it rears its head the instability can open the way for integration or disintegration - fuzzy on that on), all the other functions are pretty much undifferentiated, and the aux is sort of moderately differentiated (perhaps more so with some individuals) and it supports the dominant by being complementary.

I think that Nardi experiment showed ENFJs to not experience physiological signs of emotion when expressing their feeling-opinions strongly. This may seem "phony" to some, but really what they are doing is using Feeling rationally & just adding emotional expression to communicate the weight of what they are saying, not acting on or thinking with emotions in the moment. My memory is fuzzy on the details of that, but that's the gist of what I remember reading/hearing.
 
W

WALMART

Guest
"But nothing disturbs feeling so much as thinking. It is at once intelligible, therefore, that this type should repress thinking as much as possible. This does not mean to say that such a woman does not think at all; on the contrary, she may even think a great deal and very ably, but her thinking is never sui generis; it is, in fact, an Epimethean appendage to her feeling. What she cannot feel, she cannot consciously think."

In the sense that it does not wish to have the immediate impression of an object superimposed solely with logic, yes, it is emotional.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
They are separate but related. Emotion is a necessary condition for feeling functions because feeling requires value judgments, which require emotional attachment. A person with no emotions would have no use of the feeling functions; however using a feeling function at any given time does not mean being in a state of emotional arousal- only that emotions exist in the person throughout their life and judgments/evaluations have been made based on emotional attachments.
 

Qlip

Post Human Post
Joined
Jul 30, 2010
Messages
8,464
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Consider this, thinkers get angry when things make no sense. And then they get angry that they're angry. I don't know what that means, but it was fun to type.
 

Standuble

New member
Joined
Aug 23, 2011
Messages
1,149
It has been stated over and over again feeling is not emotion. I have a strong suspicion that some if not most T types are mentally incapable of making this distinction. However in regards to your original question I would say they are related. Emotion in relation to feeling is that of one independent variable amongst many in an equation or formula. They have their roots there but become something else. Feeling leads to values and determination of worth which creates abstinence - in other words the many emotions and temptations which run through the psyche are tolerated but not acted upon or embraced when they deviate from what you want or what the collective wants. Another entity stands alone which keeps the whimsical flurry in check and that is feeling.

By the way SW I loved your infamous INFP description. Talk about pseudo-intellectual nonsense!
 

unicorncandy

New member
Joined
Jul 20, 2013
Messages
34
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Feelers =/= feeling emotion. Thinkers =/= thinking about things. Everyone feels emotion. If you claim you don't, you are either a sociopath, out of touch with reality, or lying to yourself. Everyone thinks... I have no idea why I'm responding to this. :dry:
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
"But nothing disturbs feeling so much as thinking. It is at once intelligible, therefore, that this type should repress thinking as much as possible. This does not mean to say that such a woman does not think at all; on the contrary, she may even think a great deal and very ably, but her thinking is never sui generis; it is, in fact, an Epimethean appendage to her feeling. What she cannot feel, she cannot consciously think."

In the sense that it does not wish to have the immediate impression of an object superimposed solely with logic, yes, it is emotional.

Jung designated "Thinking" for a specific, impersonal way of judging, but all of the functions are thinking (cognition). In this quote, he is referring to the specific function of "Thinking", not to rational cognition in general, because Fe falls under rational cognition.

Feeling is also rational, because it reasons to form judgments/conclusions. Jung even calls Feeling logical, because it seeks a consistency. It does not just reason to form a singular conclusion that stands alone, but considers how all of the values connect & relate because they must make sense in relation to each other. An F-dom will not consciously hold two contradicting values (something P-dom maddeningly may do). The harmonizing of their values is something they spend a lot of time doing. When inner harmony is spoken of for F-dom, this is what is meant, not emotional calm.

"Feeling, like thinking, is a rational function, since values in general are assigned according to the laws of reason, just as concepts in general are formed according to these laws" - Jung

"Feeling is distinguished from affect by the fact that it produces no perceptible physical innervation, ie, neither more nor less than an ordinary thinking process." - Jung

"Once they (sensation and intuition) are distinguished from feeling, it becomes quite clear that feeling values and feeling judgments - indeed, feelings in general - are not only rational, but can also be seen as logical, consistent, and [as] discriminating as thinking." - Jung


They are separate but related. Emotion is a necessary condition for feeling functions because feeling requires value judgments, which require emotional attachment. A person with no emotions would have no use of the feeling functions; however using a feeling function at any given time does not mean being in a state of emotional arousal- only that emotions exist in the person throughout their life and judgments/evaluations have been made based on emotional attachments.

No, the evaluations are made with a consideration of what emotions signal, but not based solely on them. Emotions can be wholly dismissed as well.

I will reiterate that Thinking types tend to project their own inferior Feeling onto F-doms, and being inferior, it is less differentiated from emotion. Dominant Feeling is as purely rational as any thought process can be. Of course an individual's maturity, intelligence, etc, always comes into play.
 

Vilku

New member
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
406
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
in my experience, my best theory on what emotions are is the mixture of F and S functions.

like istp's when they dont use Fe, can have sensations without emotionality in it.
and infj's without using Se, can have things like anxiety without experiencing it emotionally.

but when they mix, then comes emotions.

my Se has been offline for some years now, so ive gathered a lot of frustration and anxiety that makes me do all kinds of obsessive things to escape it, but i dont really experience them emotionally at all. at times i open up to it, and i just feel an unbearable emotional pain take over my existence.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
An F-dom will not consciously hold two contradicting values (something P-dom maddeningly may do). The harmonizing of their values is something they spend a lot of time doing. When inner harmony is spoken of for F-dom, this is what is meant, not emotional calm.
I think values are meaningful in conjunction with specific circumstances, like Kant's Hypothetical Imperative; if you want result R, you must will X in circumstances C. Therefore, different values are held in relation to different circumstances. Many of them hold over the vast majority of circumstances, so they are ones I hold in general (like harmony, truth, beauty, etc.). So I guess you could say I hold conflicting values, because what's useful in one situation may not be the best in another.

No, the evaluations are made with a consideration of what emotions signal, but not based solely on them. Emotions can be wholly dismissed as well.
I don't think they can be wholly dismissed, even though I agree with this. Even if notions of value are made in consideration of what emotions signal, emotions in the psyche are still a necessary condition for effective use of the feeling function. Values would be meaningless without emotional attachment- try to think of something you value which does not in any way produce a positive or negative emotional reaction in you. To the degree that you are considering your own or others' well being, you are considering in part an emotional state based on the decision, since positive emotions tend to be associated with high well being and negative (unpleasant ones) with low well being (this is the purpose of them).
 

wolfy

awsm
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
12,251
I see it as more about accepting others perceptions as information.
 

The Great One

New member
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
3,439
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
6w7
This is my take on it....

I'll preface this by saying that Feeling is rational reasoning to assign worth/meaning. You decide what is important or makes sense in terms of the human condition/experience. All the judging functions basically classify or organize "data", and in order to assign worth in this way, the data used will involve emotional responses in yourself & others. Of course, Ji & Je are quite different, with Je being more about viability and adjusting to the external, using it as a gauge to make decisions and to act. Ji is more about creating/refining internal concepts & using them as a guide as things arise. So that's why a Fi-dom would be less emotionally expressive than a Fe-dom because the emotion would be internalized as a part of an introverted process.



I will add that when a function is dominant, it is supposedly most differentiated from non-cognitive stuff like emotions, memories, fantasy, etc. In other words, the individual experiences it as their most "pure thought". The lower down the totem pole, the less differentiated a function will be, hence inferior feeling being very mixed with emotion, and likely why people project their own emotionality onto F-dom. Jung seemed to even suggest that many people may not even have their dominant function all that differentiated. And as you "develop" functions, this would be differentiating them to a greater degree. As a side, this is also why the tertiary is not mentioned by Jung. Or at least to me it seems the idea is the dominant is differentiated (& is the ego), the inferior is an opposing force in the mind & a "gateway" to the unconscious (and when it rears its head the instability can open the way for integration or disintegration - fuzzy on that on), all the other functions are pretty much undifferentiated, and the aux is sort of moderately differentiated (perhaps more so with some individuals) and it supports the dominant by being complementary.

I think that Nardi experiment showed ENFJs to not experience physiological signs of emotion when expressing their feeling-opinions strongly. This may seem "phony" to some, but really what they are doing is using Feeling rationally & just adding emotional expression to communicate the weight of what they are saying, not acting on or thinking with emotions in the moment. My memory is fuzzy on the details of that, but that's the gist of what I remember reading/hearing.

So in other words, emotions and values are tied together?

They are separate but related. Emotion is a necessary condition for feeling functions because feeling requires value judgments, which require emotional attachment. A person with no emotions would have no use of the feeling functions; however using a feeling function at any given time does not mean being in a state of emotional arousal- only that emotions exist in the person throughout their life and judgments/evaluations have been made based on emotional attachments.

So emotions come about when values are broken? Is that what you're saying.

Consider this, thinkers get angry when things make no sense. And then they get angry that they're angry. I don't know what that means, but it was fun to type.

Yeah emotion is definitely related to certain enneagram types as well. For instance, 8w7's often struggle with anger regardless of whether they are a feeler or a thinker. Also, 4w5's tend to struggle with sadness whether they are F or T. Finally, 6w7's stuggle with anxiety whether they are T or F as well.

Jung designated "Thinking" for a specific, impersonal way of judging, but all of the functions are thinking (cognition). In this quote, he is referring to the specific function of "Thinking", not to rational cognition in general, because Fe falls under rational cognition.

Feeling is also rational, because it reasons to form judgments/conclusions. Jung even calls Feeling logical, because it seeks a consistency. It does not just reason to form a singular conclusion that stands alone, but considers how all of the values connect & relate because they must make sense in relation to each other. An F-dom will not consciously hold two contradicting values (something P-dom maddeningly may do). The harmonizing of their values is something they spend a lot of time doing. When inner harmony is spoken of for F-dom, this is what is meant, not emotional calm.

"Feeling, like thinking, is a rational function, since values in general are assigned according to the laws of reason, just as concepts in general are formed according to these laws" - Jung

"Feeling is distinguished from affect by the fact that it produces no perceptible physical innervation, ie, neither more nor less than an ordinary thinking process." - Jung

"Once they (sensation and intuition) are distinguished from feeling, it becomes quite clear that feeling values and feeling judgments - indeed, feelings in general - are not only rational, but can also be seen as logical, consistent, and [as] discriminating as thinking." - Jung




No, the evaluations are made with a consideration of what emotions signal, but not based solely on them. Emotions can be wholly dismissed as well.

I will reiterate that Thinking types tend to project their own inferior Feeling onto F-doms, and being inferior, it is less differentiated from emotion. Dominant Feeling is as purely rational as any thought process can be. Of course an individual's maturity, intelligence, etc, always comes into play.

So wait. Are you also saying that logic doesn't have anything to do with thinking either, because there's no way that I believe that.
 

The Great One

New member
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
3,439
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
6w7
[MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION]

Well I missed your point. Can you simply it for me?
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
I think that affect and emotion preceed reason in any case, I think this was something Jung, Freud and others shared a relative consensus about, that man was more rationalising than reasoning or rational.

The difference, I believe, is that a Thinker would be more likely to be directed by or comfortable with or in a relaxed state with or reliant upon thoughts rather than emotions, whereas a feeler would actively rely upon etc. with emotions and affect, like gut reactions or feelings. I think either type could be more or less aware of unconscious affective or emotive drivers or determinants decision making, moods etc. but they will, naturally, repress or express or subliminate differently.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
So in other words, emotions and values are tied together?

So emotions come about when values are broken? Is that what you're saying.
No, the first thing you said. Yes, I think they are tied together. When you value something it means you have a personal connection to it such that when that thing suffers you suffer; when it is present you feel good and when it is absent you feel bad. Either way you feel. If you didn't feel any sort of attachment, you wouldn't value that thing. If you valued nothing, you wouldn't be using a feeling function, because everything related to use of a feeling function requires taking the well being of entities into account which you value; similarly abstract values exist because they are instrumentally valuable to entities which you value. None of this would be possible without emotion because you can't feel a connection without a corresponding emotion.

Like: I value trees, my mother, and beauty. When trees are destroyed I feel sad. They make oxygen and are part of the global ecosystem, so logically I know that the interconnection I feel is real. I know that they and I are part of one larger system. When I am around them I feel happy. They are entities to which I have an emotional attachment. If I felt nothing at all in regard to them, and if I felt no emotional attachment to my survival or that of the other living things on the planet, I would not value trees. But I do.

My mother and I are physically related, and she was responsible for my being here. We have a connection. I value her because her connection to me enhances my well being. When she is happy and well I am happy, and when she is not treated well or doesn't feel well I feel unhappy. If I didn't have these emotional responses I could not be said to value her. I value her more particularly than some other random woman because of the emotional attachment.

I value beauty because it makes me happy and gives me a feeling of inner harmony. When I'm around beautiful things I feel good, and when I am around ugly things I feel bad. I deem it valuable to me because it enhances my quality of life; I know this is true because of my emotional responses to its presence or absence.

Abstractly I know that trees are good for more than just me, most people value their mothers, and most people enjoy beauty; so I have more reason to value them because they are collectively useful. But if I had not emotional attachment I would not personally value them.

Making a Feeling judgment would say either that these things are valuable or that they should constitute criteria which impact decisions. I do both because I have an attachment to them, because I have emotional responses to them. Try to find something Feeling related which does not follow the same pattern.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
[MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION]

Well I missed your point. Can you simply it for me?

Emotions may be relevant data considered in evaluating. But the evaluating is its own process separate from the emotional affect. Emotion is not the only data nor always deemed relevant at all. It can be dismissed.
The two are not inseparable.

Jung says both thinking and feeling are logical but I believe he is speaking of consistency in their reasoning. The more narrow kind of logic that is dry, technical, impersonal - that is associated with thinking which also generally doesn't consider emotion relevant. This because they are organizing with a different focus. Thinking is classifying what things are, unrelated to being human, and feeling is determining worth in relation to being human.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
[MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION], since you said an F dom would not hold conflicting values but a P dom would, how does Fi manifest in ENFP's if Feeling is harmonizing values?
 

ENfiniTy x INFinity

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 2, 2013
Messages
4
I've had this question for a long time: Do feeling functions have anything to do with emotions or not? I ask this because it seems as though feelers tend to be more in touch with their emotions than do thinkers. Also, it seems as though feelers tend to let their emotions weigh more on their decisions than do thinkers. However, Jung doesn't really correlate feelings with emotions and defines feelings as "value-based judgements", so this kind of throws me off. So what do you all think?

[MENTION=14179]SolitaryWalker[/MENTION]

You may want to check this thread out. I read a little bit of your book, and this seems like a topic that you would want to comment on.

It seems logical to me that emotions are driven by both thinking and feeling functions, so don't think too much or you'll abort the mission. Carry on. :bye:
 

Lady_X

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 27, 2008
Messages
18,235
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
784
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
[MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION], since you said an F dom would not hold conflicting values but a P dom would, how does Fi manifest in ENFP's if Feeling is harmonizing values?

i don't know what she meant by that but it wouldn't. it may appear that way if we're just ne'ing out ideas because we can switch back and forth proving opposing ideas in a ne way that has nothing to with us. i don't think infps always understand that because they start from their feeling core and explore it through ne...we're the opposite...so we can stay in ne land for conversations sake...and not check with fi unless that's the direction we want to speak from...

if that makes sense...and it may be different for others...idk
 
Top