[NT] Intellectualization of affect.

[Athenian200]

Please don't mess with me. Thank you.

^^^^
Jen messing with Athenian!

You're getting good at this.

I know your secret Achilles Heel!

...ummmm, not so secret anymore, oopsie, my bad.

I'm a J. It was never a secret, but it is a weakness.

But what IS that? How does an SF process emotions? You are mixing ISFJ and ISFP here, who run off completely different functions, so I'm honestly not sure what you mean by "typical SF processing."

Did you just mean to insinuate SFJ processing?

Well, they process them in a concrete, value-based fashion, unlike NFs who process them in an abstract, value-based fashion. I'm implying that NTs are much more likely to initially process their emotions in a concrete manner than they are their logic, especially when they're not consciously focused on them.

But the implication is that NTPs would tend towards SFJ processing, while NTJs would tend towards SFP processing. Well, unless the NTP had a ton of Se and Fi training, or the NTJ had a lot of Si and Fe training, but in general. An NT would likely need to really focus and open their mind if they wanted to process reality in a value-based, abstract manner (just as NFs would if they wanted to process reality in a logic-based, abstract manner). And of course, I theorize that would be easier for the N-dominant ones, because they experience less natural opposition to the opposite form of judgment.

 

[Totenkindly]

Well, they process them in a concrete, value-based fashion, unlike NFs who process them in an abstract, value-based fashion. I'm implying that NTs are much more likely to initially process their emotions in a concrete manner than they are their logic, especially when they're not consciously focused on them.

I'm having trouble grasping this, honestly.

You mean when they feel nice towards someone, they want to give little cute gifts or acts of service? Stuff like that? Overt signs of caring?

I'm not sure I buy that.

Do you mean they tend to be more literal in noting and choosing to act on their emotions, while abstracted feelers are internally nuanced or something?

I watch typical female INFJs get icy cold with their emotions despite being Fe and looking an awful lot like ISFJs in how they enact their Fe, usually. Same goes for ENFJ vs ESFJ, I'm not grasping the difference here as you state it -- the biggest diff to me is that SFJS have one standard framework ('the Truth') they see and operate in, while NFJ has Ni which is limitless possibility and so they are far more flexible and able to adjust to other frames easily.

Examples would be good.

But the implication is that NTPs would tend towards SFJ processing, while NTJs would tend towards SFP processing.

What, where SFP is inner-directed and suddenly will just dig in if challenged too hard, passing harsh judgments? (This tends to be INTJ too, at least from the outside.)

Why wouldn't you identify NTPs with NFJs, then? They all use Fe... just like the SFJs. Why not just FJs in general? Why not TPs with FJs? (And there actually I've seen texts, like the Speedreader book by Berens, mention the similarities between TP vs FJ, because they both express Fe, but then explain the nuances of difference there.)

I don't think there is a lot of difference between SFJ and NFJ in the way you're using it here, so I am unsure why you are making the distinction, unless there is a reason I am totally missing... which is why I keep asking.

 

[Athenian200]

Do you mean they tend to be more literal in noting and choosing to act on their emotions, while abstracted feelers are internally nuanced or something?

Yes, that. Not the other thing.

What, where SFP is inner-directed and suddenly will just dig in if challenged too hard, passing harsh judgments? (This tends to be INTJ too, at least from the outside.)

Why wouldn't you identify NTPs with NFJs, then? They all use Fe... just like the SFJs. Why not just FJs in general? Why not TPs with FJs? (And there actually I've seen texts, like the Speedreader book by Berens, mention the similarities between TP vs FJ, because they both express Fe, but then explain the nuances of difference there.)

I don't think there is a lot of difference between SFJ and NFJ in the way you're using it here, so I am unsure why you are making the distinction, unless there is a reason I am totally missing... which is why I keep asking.

In terms of expression style, you could. But there's a very big difference in how they experience emotional nuance internally. SFJs tend to experience their emotions in a more concrete, literal way, based on tangible experience and and consciousness of tradition, while NFJs experience them in a more abstracted way, a bit more removed, but not to the point of being detached like an NT. Ns are more removed from the momentary experience on some level than an S would be, but NTs are removed from it both perceptually and personally/emotionally, so their detachment is the most apparent. In other words, NFs don't detach from their emotions, but they do detach from the environment... which means they process their emotions consciously, but in relation to an abstraction rather than tangible reality. In other words, NFs aren't directly emotionally impacted by tangible reality to the same degree as an SF, or even an NT. In other words, we're emotionally affected far more by abstractions rather than anything tangible. Tangible things often leave us cold, where they'd have meaning to an SF or an NT (though it would likely be a negative meaning in the latter case).

But FJs and TPs try to express their emotions to others using the same mechanism, so they'll look roughly the same on the outside.

 

[Totenkindly]

... NFJs experience them in a more abstracted way, a bit more removed, but not to the point of being detached like an NT.

That's the part I don't get about y'all.

I don't understand how someone can only be partly detached from the emotions, lol, it fascinates me to try and grasp.
It's like either I'm swimming in them or I'm out of the pool.

I guess I can dangle my feet in the water, but I'm still objectifying the emotions as simply 'another line of input' that has to be taken into account in order to have Thinking reach a conclusion. Even internal desires/values (Fi) were sort of calculated by Thinking and are stamped as approved or turned away by Thinking when a decision is made.

I tend to follow a more Fe basis for showing my feelings because I use it like a "language" to express feelings in ways that show my commitments and motivations in a way that I know people will read properly, by social convention. So it's still a rational process to me.

 

[Athenian200]

That's the part I don't get about y'all.

I don't understand how someone can only be partly detached from the emotions, lol, it fascinates me to try and grasp.
It's like either I'm swimming in them or I'm out of the pool.

Yeah! That's exactly what I mean. You got it! NTs tend to be more either/or in that department.

I guess I can dangle my feet in the water, but I'm still objectifying the emotions as simply 'another line of input' that has to be taken into account in order to have Thinking reach a conclusion. Even internal desires/values (Fi) were sort of calculated by Thinking and are stamped as approved or turned away by Thinking when a decision is made.

I tend to follow a more Fe basis for showing my feelings because I use it like a "language" to express feelings in ways that show my commitments and motivations in a way that I know people will read properly, by social convention. So it's still a rational process to me.

Yep, I'd say any choice you make without totally surrendering to your emotions in the moment is going to be a rational choice. Agreed.

The reason we can do it, is the same reason STs can do it... we process the physical environment, the here-and-now, in a more logical, practical way rather than seeing emotional value in it or letting ourselves be moved by it emotionally. In other words, I process concrete things in an ST-ish fashion (which is probably why I freaked out and accused you of being frivolous once when I heard you purchased decorations when you were low on money). Another example is that whenever I got cards at Christmas, I'd often just toss the card aside carelessly after checking it for money. I would also only send thank you cards to people who got me expensive gifts or cash. In fact, by some S-dominant types, I'm seen as totally heartless and utilitarian because they only see my ST shadow, and don't look for NF-style feelings, often just assuming I'm a stressed ST with low confidence (these same people often ask if someone died in my family recently when they first meet me).

 

[Salomé]

Yes, but it's a bit old-fashioned. Many people don't know what it means, or how it differs from "effect."

It's not in the least archaic. It's a widely used psychiatric term.
It seems South Americans have a better grasp of English than those in the North.

To the OP, Yes. It's impossible not to as a Ti-Dom, I'd have thought.

 

[Totenkindly]

It's not in the least archaic. It's a widely used psychiatric term.

Yes, exactly.

If you're an average joe on the streets in the USA, you don't use it; and the majority of even college students seem to think it's incorrect. They think "effect" = noun, "affect" = verb; it's their only exposure, they don't run across it elsewhere, language is dumbed down.

I've used it and know it only because I've done a lot of reading, especially in the psychology realms.

When we corrected each other's creative writing in college, I used to get pissed because everyone in the class except for the teacher (who was better read) thought some of the words I used weren't actual words.

In other words, I process concrete things in an ST-ish fashion (which is probably why I freaked out and accused you of being frivolous once when I heard you purchased decorations when you were low on money).

Aw gee, did ya, now?
No wonder I probably got annoyed.

Another example is that whenever I got cards at Christmas, I'd often just toss the card aside carelessly after checking it for money.

Wow. I hope your parents beat that out of you.
My kids think cards are just envelopes for money, though.

In fact, by some S-dominant types, I'm seen as totally heartless and utilitarian because they only see my ST shadow, and don't look for NF-style feelings, often just assuming I'm a stressed ST with low confidence (these same people often ask if someone died in my family recently when they first meet me).

Interesting.

You definitely outwardly project that.
(The stark side.)

 

[braziljoe]

It’s interesting that someone pointed out the differences between ENTJ /INTP intellectualization and INTJ/ENTP intellectualization and how the former has a more emotional tone while the latter has a more rational tone. I’ve seen this before and totally agree. I.E., I was talking to an INTJ friend about his break up with his girlfriend and he said that it really broke him apart and that he cried for it for three days. I could see no emotional response while he was telling me that, but somehow I felt it was true inside him. I, on the other hand, would never do something like that, no matter how sad I would be. In my case, I would become obsessed with what didn't work in the relationship and what I could have done to improve it.
I blame it on thinking taking over the other functions, be it introverted or extroverted.