Does having a dominant/secondary feeling function indirectly justify one's ignorance?

[Population: 1]

I once felt an iron....it burnt me so bad....I've yet to be able to fully trust appliances since... it was not bunny soft.

It's okay. The dry cleaners can handle the ironing for you, for a fee of course. They'll return your clothes as soft as a bunny wrapped in silk sitting atop a velvet cushion.

 

[Red Ribbon]

I once felt an iron....it burnt me so bad....I've yet to be able to fully trust appliances since... it was not bunny soft.

It is because you are a feeling type who is ignorant that such accidents happen to you. I have no such issues because I am a thinker.

 

[The Cat]

It is because you are a feeling type who is ignorant that such accidents happen to you. I have no such issues because I am a thinker.

I thought it was because it was hot...

 

[Red Ribbon]

I thought it was because it was hot...

Clearly you are incapable of handling hot objects, you ignorant feeler.

 

[Poki]

I know this sounds crazy, but hear me out, I've actually put a lot of thought into this before coming to this conclusion: So feelers value making judgements/decisions based on how they feel rather than on facts/data/evidence. So essentially, isn't that like saying they can get away with being more ignorant? For instance, say there is a red stop sign in front of me. It is a concrete, observable fact that it is red, but if I were making decisions based on how I felt, couldn't I easily "feel" it is a blue sign, since I don't need fact or logic to support my decision to believe it's blue, only feelings? See what I mean? Couldn't this be more dangerous than we assume in that we can justify making (potentially selfish) decisions based on how we are feeling in the moment instead of taking the more thoughtful, considerate approach to trying to consider all the facts and variables before coming to a conclusion. What do you guys think? Do you see how/agree that this could be used as a way to justify one's ignorance or disregard for the importance of taking into account objective facts before reaching a conclusion? Why or why not?

Question...if feelers judge based on how they feel as opposed to data...what are the feelings based off of? I have yet to see a judgment function judge without data...i also know lots of feelers who objectively judge, while so called thinkers disagree because they dont coke to the same conclusion while most.

The biggest issue i see with Fi and ignorance is lack of understanding of realities big picture...but you know what...i have seen this same issue just as strong among thinkers as well. People who use logic that is small picture thinking just as feelers can use feeling on small picture feeling.

 

[HisKittyKat]

WOW, and I don't mean that in a good way. Speaking of Ignorant.

So feelers value making judgements/decisions based on how they feel rather than on facts/data/evidence. So essentially, isn't that like saying they can get away with being more ignorant?

Do you really honestly believe that F types base all their decisions on feeling rather than facts/data/evidence ? If you do, WOW. Do you actually believe F types can't determine what is clearly in front of them whether it be facts, data or evidence. What do you think Te is for, just a few letters sitting pretty. Gosh I can't even begin to say how Ignorant it is to actually believe this stuff. I for one am very capable of knowing facts from fiction, also am very accepting of new data and evidence. Not subjective evidence Ti, but actually evidence.

Fi is subjective yes, it says nothing about not knowing the difference between what society deems as good bad right or wrong. First we would have to define all of these things objectively in order to make that decision.

Each and everyone of us make dumb choices and decisions on our feelings consistently. Whether you use Ti, Te, Fe, Fi, we are more alike than different. Tis is why we have objective functions to balance out our emotions and rational thinking. You can have an subjective thought and it be logical and rational, just bc everyone in the group perceives it differently doesn't make it Irrational.

You really need to understand that it is perfectly rational and logical to make independent Judgments without needing approval by society or group think. Ti does it, Fi does it, Ni does it and so does Si. I really wish people would stop with all this foolishness of feelers are Irrational or can't muster up a logical thought. Every decision made by a feeler is not based on emotion to start with, decisions are more opt to be made by the heart rather than the mind, but what if I told you the heart is more Intellectual than the mind, what would you say to that huh ? lol. It is easier to make a person think than feel, so feelers are in a winning position. Take that MR. INTJ.

 

[Poki]

WOW, and I don't mean that in a good way. Speaking of Ignorant. So feelers value making judgements/decisions based on how they feel rather than on facts/data/evidence. So essentially, isn't that like saying they can get away with being more ignorant? Do you really honestly believe that F types base all their decisions on feeling rather than facts/data/evidence ? If you do, WOW. Do you actually believe F types can't determine what is clearly in front of them whether it be facts, data or evidence. What do you think Te is for, just a few letters sitting pretty. Gosh I can't even begin to say how Ignorant it is to actually believe this stuff. I for one am very capable of knowing facts from fiction, also am very accepting of new data and evidence. Not subjective evidence Ti, but actually evidence. Fi is subjective yes, it says nothing about not knowing the difference between what society deems as good bad right or wrong. First we would have to define all of these things objectively in order to make that decision. Each and everyone of us make dumb choices and decisions on our feelings consistently. Whether you use Ti, Te, Fe, Fi, we are more alike than different. Tis is why we have objective functions to balance out our emotions and rational thinking. You can have an subjective thought and it be logical and rational, just bc everyone in the group perceives it differently doesn't make it Irrational. You really need to understand that it is perfectly rational and logical to make independent Judgments without needing approval by society or group think. Ti does it, Fi does it, Ni does it and so does Si. I really wish people would stop with all this foolishness of feelers are Irrational or can't muster up a logical thought. Every decision made by a feeler is not based on emotion to start with, decisions are more opt to be made by the heart rather than the mind, but what if I told you the heart is more Intellectual than the mind, what would you say to that huh ? lol. It is easier to make a person think than feel, so feelers are in a winning position. Take that MR. INTJ.

They are stuck in old school thinking that feeling is not part of cognition.

 

[The Cat]

 

[Scapegoated 4 fun]

Question...if feelers judge based on how they feel as opposed to data...what are the feelings based off of? I have yet to see a judgment function judge without data...i also know lots of feelers who objectively judge, while so called thinkers disagree because they dont coke to the same conclusion while most.

The biggest issue i see with Fi and ignorance is lack of understanding of realities big picture...but you know what...i have seen this same issue just as strong among thinkers as well. People who use logic that is small picture thinking just as feelers can use feeling on small picture feeling.

Feelings could be based off any number of things that may or may not be related to the actual thing they are having a feeling about. Perceptions are not always based on facts. I would argue that perceptions can be entirely inaccurate unless we are to fact check them. For instance, I might have the perception that you're a shitty person because you remind me of someone who used to be a shitty person to me, but that perception could be entirely inaccurate when you look further into who I am as a person.

 

[Scapegoated 4 fun]

Do you really honestly believe that F types base all their decisions on feeling rather than facts/data/evidence ?......Do you actually believe F types can't determine what is clearly in front of them whether it be facts, data or evidence.....

Actually, yes.

Take that Mr/Mrs. xNFP!

 

[Scapegoated 4 fun]

They are stuck in old school thinking that feeling is not part of cognition.

They being the people who invented the MBTI system?

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

I know this sounds crazy, but hear me out, I've actually put a lot of thought into this before coming to this conclusion: So feelers value making judgements/decisions based on how they feel rather than on facts/data/evidence. So essentially, isn't that like saying they can get away with being more ignorant? For instance, say there is a red stop sign in front of me. It is a concrete, observable fact that it is red, but if I were making decisions based on how I felt, couldn't I easily "feel" it is a blue sign, since I don't need fact or logic to support my decision to believe it's blue, only feelings? See what I mean? Couldn't this be more dangerous than we assume in that we can justify making (potentially selfish) decisions based on how we are feeling in the moment instead of taking the more thoughtful, considerate approach to trying to consider all the facts and variables before coming to a conclusion. What do you guys think? Do you see how/agree that this could be used as a way to justify one's ignorance or disregard for the importance of taking into account objective facts before reaching a conclusion? Why or why not?

I get the gist of how you are thinking about this, but realize that subjective systems are not so entirely subjective and irrational. If I 'felt' that a stop sign was blue, rather than dismissing it as an anomaly, I would address my subjective response as significant and needing to be evaluated and corrected. Processing values requires an interplay of the external objective world with the internal perception. It isn't that logic is purely external and objective while values are purely internal and subjective. There is always an interplay, but there is an issue of emphasis.

Subjective systems are not arbitrary or random, but they also operate with cause-and-effect just as logical systems. A good example of subjectivity that is relevant and real is the experience of pain. In many instances there is not a way to objectively measure the pain levels of another human being, but that does not mean it isn't a real phenomenon. From a purely logical standpoint, if someone says to me, 'I'm in incredible pain', but their heart rate is not elevated, and there is no way to measure that pain, how do I evaluate it? There is no way to objectively determine the truth value of the statement beyond the idea that there is a possibility the individual is in pain because humans are known to experience it, and I have experienced pain I can reference.

This is where the role of empathy comes in, which focuses on perception and experience over externally measurable data. It is more of an approximation than objective systems because one is required to guess and even trust in the validity of a subjective statement. The empathic response is to realize there isn't a reason to dismiss the statement of pain, and that dismissing a true statement of pain is a worse moral violation than believing a false statement of pain (in most cases), and so one goes with the approximation that it is true that there is some level of authentic pain that needs to be addressed. In some cases an empathic response can be more specific than objectively measured information if the entirety and complexity of the experience is comprehended. If a person declares intense pain of a migraine and another individual who shares a similar experience hears this, they will comprehend levels of complexity and nuance that externally measured, objective data cannot replicate.

Subjective systems are incredibly complex with many different kinds of data and so the manner in which these are processed can be both more approximate and more specific than externally measurable, falsifiable, objective data.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

Another example of how subjective, value-based processing can be dealing with reality and provide solutions is the following.

Imagine a child has started a new school and has become depressed because they are still learning how to make friends. The problem is of a subjective nature, and it isn't a problem that Mr. Spock would ever have because it is subjective and emotional. How do you solve the problem? Dismiss the non-logical nature of it and tell the child that friends are irrelevant? You could, but what if the child asked about getting a new puppy, and you got a feeling that this would build the child's social self-esteem, bring an emotional feeling of happiness, and perhaps result in helping the child also stabilize at school?

Both the problem and solution are not logical in the strictest sense of the term, but they are dealing with concrete reality. There isn't a break with reason. The stop sign isn't falsely perceived as blue, but the holistic nature of being human, needing social connection, have a range of emotional responses, etc. are all taken into account in the problem-solution, the cause-and-effect.

 

[Scapegoated 4 fun]

Another example of how subjective, value-based processing can be dealing with reality and provide solutions is the following. Imagine a child has started a new school and has become depressed because they are still learning how to make friends. The problem is of a subjective nature, and it isn't a problem that Mr. Spock would ever have because it is subjective and emotional. How do you solve the problem? Dismiss the non-logical nature of it and tell the child that friends are irrelevant? You could, but what if the child asked about getting a new puppy, and you got a feeling that this would build the child's social self-esteem, bring an emotional feeling of happiness, and perhaps result in helping the child also stabilize at school? Both the problem and solution are not logical in the strictest sense of the term, but they are dealing with concrete reality. There isn't a break with reason. The stop sign isn't falsely perceived as blue, but the holistic nature of being human, needing social connection, have a range of emotional responses, etc. are all taken into account in the problem-solution, the cause-and-effect.

Well my experience with feelers has been that they come to highly illogical/unsupported conclusions based on how they feel and don't feel they should need to back their claims up with evidence. My experience has also been that they are often highly insecure of their own opinions because they get insecure/resentful very quickly when people disagree with them. From my experience they have been the types who use all sorts of desperate means to get people to agree with their opinions because being "right" is more important than genuinely learning things for them. Of course these traits are more obvious/overt in extroverted types of feelers. Introverted feelers tend to be better at keeping their impulses in check, although they still fall victim to the "I'm right no matter what, no need to explain why/provide facts to back up the claim that I'm right" perspective more than I'm personally comfortable with

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

Well my experience with feelers has been that they come to highly illogical/unsupported conclusions based on how they feel and don't feel they should need to back their claims up with evidence. My experience has also been that they are often highly insecure of their own opinions because they get insecure/resentful very quickly when people disagree with them. From my experience they have been the types who use all sorts of desperate means to get people to agree with their opinions because being "right" is more important than genuinely learning things for them. Of course these traits are more obvious/overt in extroverted types of feelers. Introverted feelers tend to be better at keeping their impulses in check, although they still fall victim to the "I'm right no matter what, no need to explain why/provide facts to back up the claim that I'm right" perspective more than I'm personally comfortable with

It is true that a lot of people do that, and a lot of those people could test as "Feelers" in this personality system. There are also analytical, reasoned Feeler types. I know the question is whether or not it is exclusive to Feelers. I do think that there are Thinker type who do this, and you will encounter them in debate here if you haven't irl.

It may even be that you will tend to have a better time conversing with IxTx's. There are individuals of these types who also have to always be right, but they will likely use more external data and/or outline their reasoning in debate. From everything you have described that you have experienced here and elsewhere, I could see why you could prefer to deal with less emotional people overall.

 

[Scapegoated 4 fun]

It is true that a lot of people do that, and a lot of those people could test as "Feelers" in this personality system. There are also analytical, reasoned Feeler types. I know the question is whether or not it is exclusive to Feelers. I do think that there are Thinker type who do this, and you will encounter them in debate here if you haven't irl.

It may even be that you will tend to have a better time conversing with IxTx's. There are individuals of these types who also have to always be right, but they will likely use more external data and/or outline their reasoning in debate. From everything you have described that you have experienced here and elsewhere, I could see why you could prefer to deal with less emotional people overall.

Yeah I guess I just see it as a lot more selfish if you expect to be seen as right but don't expect to have to back up why you're right with an explanation or facts.

 

[Scapegoated 4 fun]

Do you agree?