[MBTI General] Thinking vs Feeling...a false dichotomy?

[Amargith]

Regarding T and F as it relates to NTs and NFs, what do you think about this conjecture:

NFs are more easily offended.

NTs are more stubborn.

I kind of like the advice/criticism commentary. But I don't think NTs are closed to advice per se. They are more likely to receive criticism the same way as they do advice. An NT will learn from either if it makes it past any potential stubborn opposition. But an NT won't quickly take offense from criticism, they'll just reject it.

Where NFs, when presented with advice that comes in, shall we say, an attractive package are more likely than NTs to consider that advice. Criticism (which can really be called advice in a stinky package) may be extremely constructive for an NF, but the odor of the package will greatly minimize an NFs ability to receive it.

Can I keep you around as an NT-translator?

 

[Virtual ghost]

When push comes to shove, an overall highly intelligent person, at least in my books, is someone who understands a lot of things well, which includes understanding their own feelings as well as the feelings of others.

Thoughts, oftentimes, evoke feelings and feelings, oftentimes, evoke thoughts. To be honest, I cannot imagine any other way of processing experience.

I can say this though, not all thoughts evoke or stem from feelings, whereas *all* feelings stem from and evoke thoughts.

I am curious

What do you(or any other F) thinks about process

thoughts-->thoughts-->thoughts-->thoughts

In my case this process can go for hours without creating emotional reactions which appear when I am done with thinking/analysing.
They are probably just a shadow of yours and mostly we are talking about
"It is good, no it is not good"

 

[redacted]

Incidentally, you know there's two kinds of logic, right? Deductive and Inductive. Deductive logic--as a logic system--is rock solid: if Y is deduced from X, then when X is true, Y definitely is true too. Inductive logic--as a logical system--is weasly: if X is true, then Y is very likely true too.

My naive understanding of MBTI stuff correlates Ti with Deductive logic and Te with Inductive. Ni, as far as I understand, doesn't have any kind of logical properties at all. It's all just, gee whiz, wow, check out the wonderful strands of stuff that float of this thing... It's just a mass of could be's, might be's, possibilitiez. That mass is totally undifferentiated without the imposition of some order--in the INJ cases, Te or Fe.

No no no no no. Both forms of Thinking are entirely deductive. Anything that can be labeled inductive logic (at least the inductive leap itself) is Intuition. The thing with inductive logic is that the conclusion does not follow from the premises. This is exactly the type of thing that Intuition does -- make educated guesses.

For INTJs Ni goes "wow, what a blast" and Te says, "Yeah, and it gets refined like so," and then Fi chimes in with "I concur, and you better do it too, :sob:"

For INFJs, Ni goes "wow", Fe goes, "Yeah, and it gets refined like so", and then Ti chimes in with... what? A categorisation of the Fe result into true's and false's?

But none of it is so simple and discrete. Ni doesn't work on it's own, the judgment function is always there differentiating immediately, and guiding Ni attention, and the third function is always there too sitting in the background guiding too. It's all a mix. It's all a constant processing activity. It's all "thinking." How do you tell the difference between Fe reflection on a topic with a Ti guiding hand, and a Ti focus on categories and details? (Or, hell, you hear about these people with different function orders--maybe, Evan, you're one of those. What's a good way of finding out?)

A good way of finding out is counting the number of times you think "x is true/false" and counting the number of times you think "x is good/bad" and comparing the two to each other over some amount of time. It's essentially impossible to do this way, but you can approximate.

INXJs take in information and produce rich theories of what it all means. They produce those theories for the purpose of perhaps one day doing something. Only they don't so often do something as they do go over the theory a few more times. If pressed, they'll produce advice. (We're not E's, our action is more often to advise than to do, to orchestrate rather than to enact...).

Yes or No?

INFJ focus is inside the people around them (those people's hearts and souls and the origin of their deeds.) INTJ focus is outside the people around them (those people's computers, their chairs, their military maneuvers).

This is way oversimplified, which, again, is the point the OP was making. It's true that INFJs focus more on tangible evidence to make their good/bad distinctions, which probably directs their attention towards other people more. But it's not so cut and dried.

And there is a fine and fabulous distinction to be made between thinking and feeling. I don't know what it is, but there is one. Something like feeling is affective and thinking is... deductive?

No. Both Thinking and Feeling are entirely deductive. This is the confusion everyone is getting into. Feeling is NOT emotional. Feeling LABELS emotional responses, but it's not emotional. It's a deductive judgment. Emotions fall in the realm of perceiving functions, as perceiving functions span all of unconscious/subconscious cognition.

I have no idea if you're into computer science, but I'm gonna use a computer science metaphor. Both Feeling and Thinking are incredibly simple functions -- they simply take in some inputs/arguments/premises and parse that data with a few If/Then statements. Thinking outputs true/false, while Feeling outputs good/bad.

 

[redacted]

Regarding T and F as it relates to NTs and NFs, what do you think about this conjecture:

NFs are more easily offended.

NTs are more stubborn.

I kind of like the advice/criticism commentary. But I don't think NTs are closed to advice per se. They are more likely to receive criticism the same way as they do advice. An NT will learn from either if it makes it past any potential stubborn opposition. But an NT won't quickly take offense from criticism, they'll just reject it.

Where NFs, when presented with advice that comes in, shall we say, an attractive package are more likely than NTs to consider that advice. Criticism (which can really be called advice in a stinky package) may be extremely constructive for an NF, but the odor of the package will greatly minimize an NFs ability to receive it.

Hm, I think this might be true on average, but definitely not for all individual cases. I know an INTJ who gets offended much more easily than I do, like when people don't carry out his vision the way he wants them to . I very rarely get offended (way moreso on the forum because I have no tone of voice/body language to use to pick up on sarcasm), but when I do, it's more of an appropriate/inappropriate distinction.

I think Fe users in general are much more concerned with appropriateness/inappropriateness whereas Fi users tend to be concerned with a more idealized kind of "good" and "bad". For me personally, I only get offended if someone deliberately makes anyone else uncomfortable with no tangible gain. Only when I deem the inappropriate outburst pointless do I take offense, I'm not necessarily against breaking social convention. But when the only reason is to get a high-five or whatever from your friends, and you cause someone else some kind of distress, I do get angry.

Also, I'm more stubborn than most NTs Although NTJs can out-stubborn me a lot of the time..

I am curious

What do you(or any other F) thinks about process

thoughts-->thoughts-->thoughts-->thoughts

In my case this process can go for hours without creating emotional reactions which appear when I am done with thinking/analysing.
They are probably just a shadow of yours and mostly we are talking about
"It is good, no it is not good"

I think you're exaggerating.

 

[Erudur]

Also, I'm more stubborn than most NTs Although NTJs can out-stubborn me a lot of the time..

I think NTPs are plenty stubborn, they are just less compelled to keep up an argument to prove a point. They're stubborn on the inside.

I also think NTs are way more prone to make inductive leaps that they think are deductive conclusions than they realize (myself included). This became obvious to me on the NTs and God thread. Whether that is a product of Thinking or Feeling is a topic for this thread I suppose.

 

[redacted]

I think NTPs are plenty stubborn, they are just less compelled to keep up an argument to prove a point. They're stubborn on the inside.

I also think NTs are way more prone to make inductive leaps that they think are deductive conclusions than they realize (myself included). This became obvious to me on the NTs and God thread. Whether that is a product of Thinking or Feeling is a topic for this thread I suppose.

Inductive leaps are by definition in the realm of Intuition. Making inductive leaps without realizing is due to lack of judgment, mainly Thinking. So it seems unlikely that NTs would make this mistake more often on average than NFs, just because Thinking is essentially the only tool possible to make a deductive argument.

Anyway, the more dominant the Intuition, the more inductive leaps one will take. Whether or not they will fill in the gaps with Thinking depends on the importance the user places on an exact step-by-step deduction.

 

[Erudur]

I think Fe users in general are much more concerned with appropriateness/inappropriateness whereas Fi users tend to be concerned with a more idealized kind of "good" and "bad".

Totally. My NF friends sometimes point out where I've inadvertently made people feel uncomfortable related to appropriateness/inappropriateness values. But I have a very strong sense of justice, and desire to treat people with dignity. And sometimes I feel my NF friends make compromises that undermine justice.

 

[Virtual ghost]

I think you're exaggerating.

This is the main reason why I ask. I got many reasponses like this in real life.
And people that appear to be F all ways react like this.
They say I am lying, that I am denying my feeling, that I don't know about what I am talking about ..... and stuff like this.

When I am in my analising mode I only only motice flaws in logic,facts and numbers.
When I am done I can start to thik about is that realy good or bad what is personal value.

I am curious about this because

1.you can't relate since you don't experiance this
2.or we have differences in meanings of words?

Or both.

 

[redacted]

I am curious about this because

1.you can't relate since you don't experiance this
2.or we have differences in meanings of words?

Or both.

I think 2. Also, Feeling is necessary to decide what to Think about. I'm not talking about emotion when I'm talking about Feeling, I'm talking about good/bad. Good/bad can even be something like, "this is interesting", or "this is boring". Feeling serves to direct Thinking.

In regards to 1, I can totally relate to what I'm assuming you're talking about. I, too, can sit for hours and think about systems, how they are flawed, how they could be improved, etc. I also find myself out of touch with the way I feel about things -- I usually have to reason backwards to figure it out. Like, I'll look at my actions and find a pattern. Then I'll say to myself, "well, maybe I acted that way because I was feeling x" and I'll test out whether or not that makes sense. If not, I'll try Feeling y. Eventually, I can pick out a pretty accurate description of what I must have been Feeling, but it's certainly not a direct process.

 

[redacted]

Totally. My NF friends sometimes point out where I've inadvertently made people feel uncomfortable related to appropriateness/inappropriateness values. But I have a very strong sense of justice, and desire to treat people with dignity. And sometimes I feel my NF friends make compromises that undermine justice.

Heh, I feel like NFPs are at least as bad as NTJs with appropriateness. NTPs are even better than NFPs a lot of the time. (Although a drunken ENTP can be waaaay ridiculous sometimes...)

 

[Erudur]

Inductive leaps are by definition in the realm of Intuition. Making inductive leaps without realizing is due to lack of judgment, mainly Thinking. So it seems unlikely that NTs would make this mistake more often on average than NFs, just because Thinking is essentially the only tool possible to make a deductive argument.

Anyway, the more dominant the Intuition, the more inductive leaps one will take. Whether or not they will fill in the gaps with Thinking depends on the importance the user places on an exact step-by-step deduction.

Perhaps on topics like a person's cosmology, the underlying premise has been so long held and thoroughly considered that when looking at somebody else's logic (with a different underlying premise) it all looks like an inductive leap. And with one's own premise, all the deductive reasoning stacked on top of it feels like fact.

 

[Erudur]

Can I keep you around as an NT-translator?

Oh, you can definitely keep me around, uh as a translator.

 

[BlueScreen]

Totally. My NF friends sometimes point out where I've inadvertently made people feel uncomfortable related to appropriateness/inappropriateness values. But I have a very strong sense of justice, and desire to treat people with dignity. And sometimes I feel my NF friends make compromises that undermine justice.

Yeh that's Fi. It maybe be less obvious as a tertiary though. I'm not hugely concerned with justice (well in some senses), but the dignity part is true. I cringe when old or disabled people are treated like children or forms of charity. And when people with things like cerebral palsy are approached as idiots. The fact is in terms of thinking their brain is probably functioning as well or better than the stupid people who do this.

On being inappropriate.. As an NFP I am good at having total disrespect for the rules of society when they breach no internal rules. But accept most because I can see they are important for stability and functioning. I have no will to be the unique exception that no one else gets to be either. If there is a rule I break I normally feel that it is not important, bears no real effect on people and their well being (indirect and consequential effects included), and all people should be free to break it if I can.

F style thinking is very underrated also. There is a whole side of the Fi and Fe thing that is used in logical problems, as much as T can be used for people problems. The idea that a cognitive process is purely about one external subject and substitutes for thinking, does not seem to make sense. An F type obviously has whatever the alternative problem solving tool to rationale is. This tool seems to suit understanding of human and social systems more than rationale, hence the stronger link with empathy and the emotions.

 

[Darjur]

So technically this boils down to F's and T's are essentially the same or F's and T's think in a fundamentally different fashion which in the end limits their capability of understand each other clearly.


This might be stupid. But I tend to look at it as the second option.

 

[Amargith]

From personal experience I can also say that overall I notice that though F's and T's have different priorities, they often arrive at the same conclusion when it matters, though they may take a very different road to get there.

 

[Erudur]

From personal experience I can also say that overall I notice that though F's and T's have different priorities, they often arrive at the same conclusion when it matters, though they may take a very different road to get there.

Though I suppose the Fs will probably say what you just said, and the Ts will probably say, "See, I was right!"

 

[Eric B]

Thinking/Feeling is certainly a false dichotomy.

Function theory gets around the binary distinction.

MBTI types are merely adjectives, like calling someone shy. They should only be descriptive, not predictive, and not based on ability.

(As an F who is commonly called "Ev-bot" because I'm so obsessed with logic, this has always been a big qualm I've had with the system.)

Another thing I've realized -- I'm gonna use Ni dominants as an example -- if you're an Ni dominant, there are two choices for MBTI type: INTJ and INFJ. You are INTJ if you use Te/Fi and INFJ if you use Fe/Ti. But what if you're an Ni dominant that uses Fe/Ti but prefers Ti to Fe? You can't call yourself INTJ because the functions don't match. But INFJ implies that you use Fe more than Ti. Neither type is a particularly good description of your function usage.

(I'm using this as an example because it's the situation I'm in. I call myself INFJ, but I hate the fact that people box me into the non-logical category. In fact, I'm more logical than almost anyone I've known besides my INTP father.)

The solution is to throw out function order, and to make sure not to use MBTI as a predictive tool. Only adjectives.

The tertiary function in Beebe's theory is called "inflated", meaning it can become very strong, and even appear to "outdo" those who prefer the function. So that would make perfect sense for you. The thing is not to throw the order out entirely, but to realize the order refers more to roles they play.

 

[BlueScreen]

So technically this boils down to F's and T's are essentially the same or F's and T's think in a fundamentally different fashion which in the end limits their capability of understand each other clearly.


This might be stupid. But I tend to look at it as the second option.

I'd agree with the second option also. There is a difference in the thinking steps as Amargith mentioned, but they come to the same answer when there is a correct one.

Personally I tend to smooth out the rigidness of logic to work closer to reality. Things don't need to be made true/false or yes/no if they are not. The proof needs to be less absolute. And absolution is achieved if needed by filling in the gaps where it is questionable (I am normally quite aware of where the weaknesses in my theories are).

Thought experiments often substitute for logical working. I tend to go for the quickest path from A to B, working laterally and incorporating whatever justifies it the most simply. There is normally as much brainpower working on evolving my approach to the problem and thinking patterns, as the actual problem. It could sometimes seem like working purely with Ne because most of this is intuiting, but the Fi plays an important role which is hard to pinpoint. It moves the intuiting toward first principles and underlying truths. It also makes me instinctively aware of inconsistency between concepts. I know if something is out of place almost immediately. I don't always know what to do with it immediately though.

My mind works well instinctively with probabilistic systems with loss/gain and risk also. Probably why ENFPs do okay in merchant banking.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

The solution is to throw out function order, and to make sure not to use MBTI as a predictive tool. Only adjectives.

There are two ways you can throw out the function order. Claim that there is only one function. (Pretend that other functions do not exist).

Or proclaim the following absurdity, the members of each pair of functions and attitudes are not antithetical to each other, extroversion and introversion, sensation and intuition, thinking and feeling, judgment and perception. (I have already explained thoroughly elsewhere why they are antithetical. Principles of Typology)

--------------------------------------------------------------

The axioms of Junging typology are as follows.

Axiom 1: 8 Functions and 2 attituded exist.

Axiom 2: For every function and an attitude that exists, there is another function or an attitude that is antithetical to such a function.

Axiom 3: Because the system contains an antithesis to each function, no two functions can have an equal amount of natural influence. This is the case because if the two antithetical functions in question had an equal amount of influence, cognitive paralysis would ensue. Or quite simply one would not be able to think in any particular way at all.

The entailment of axioms 2 and 3 is that all of the functions must be placed in a specific order. There will be a function that is the most prevalent of all, therefore the function that is an antithesis to that function would be the most supressed. Then there will be a function that is the second most prevalent of all, and the antithesis to that function will be the second most supressed of all. What I have described above is the model for the order of functions.

Thinking/Feeling is certainly a false dichotomy.

Function theory gets around the binary distinction..

MBTI types are merely adjectives, like calling someone shy. They should only be descriptive, not predictive, and not based on ability...

In MBTI, a Thinker is one who is more comfortable using logic than relying on emotions for decision making. In Jungian typology a Thinker is one who has a stronger natural disposition towards dispassionate judgment than processing of emotion. This often entails a personality trait described by MBTI, but does not necessitate it. What this means is that a Feeler is less likely to be logical than a Thinker, but it is possible for a Feeler to be more logical than a Feeler. Humans, unlike animals have the ability to do differently from what their instincts or dispositions urge them to do. Hence, we can do contrary to our typological dispositions and develop a function that we have a weaker natural disposition towards using more than the function that we have a stronger natural disposition towards using.

But INFJ implies that you use Fe more than Ti. Neither type is a particularly good description of your function usage. ...

In MBTI it does, in Jungian typology it does not.

I'm more logical than almost anyone I've known besides my INTP father.)
...

I don't know about that, you do utter many absurdities.

 

[BlueScreen]

I'm more logical than almost anyone I've known besides my INTP father.

yeh, I don't think anyone can be more logical than an INTP . Having an INTP father would've helped your Ti develop too. Probably why your Ti is high.