• 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.

[NT] The separation between emotion and rationality is a myth.

eternal recurrence

New member
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
46
MBTI Type
iNfj
I was reading this thread of 'what do you like about feelers' and one complaint is that there is a tendency to not be logical in arguments, make emotional appeals, or base their decisions on their emotions.

So heres a question: Do you think its possible to actually step away/remove ourselves from 'emotions' when looking at an issue?

This line: "I am being more rational than you" - may be an illusion for your rationality is just a set of learned ways of interacting that appear to lack emotion, HOWEVER! are not all decisions/arguments ultimately moral and emotional ones?

TO put it in a strong way: I think people are fooling themselves if they think in life they are making 'clean' decisions, 'unemotional' arguments, or undertaking entire 'rational' courses of action.
 

Craft

Probably Most Brilliant
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
1,221
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
5w7
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I agree that emotions are a permanent factor in discussion/decisions. However, I view emotions as the values that pushes me to think logically. In other words wherein in a game of soccer,though emotions are not the actual main players, they are the coach.

Values and emotions are the energies and the reasons why I try to reason logically. I can't deny however that, pride, an emotion, has always been my problem. Nonetheless, in a positive manner, emotion itself has also lead me to my problem's indirect maintained balance.

yet I do agree with "there is a tendency for feelers to not be logical in arguments, make emotional appeals, or base their decisions on their emotions as compared to thinkers." That is "tendency" not exclusive to thinkers but simply more dominant from my own observation alone. perhaps it requires reliable statistics...
 

Synapse

New member
Joined
Dec 29, 2007
Messages
3,359
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4
I tend to believe there is more to it than that, yet I do have similar views. That indeed emotional thoughts and rational thoughts come from the same source, same underlining expression just shaped, switched differently to manifest a more manageable language to express.

If emotional thoughts and logical thoughts were different languages that were changed from an earlier mother language than that is how I see it. Two sides to the same coin branching out thinking and feeling in their separate yet common denominators. While you could say emotional thinkers make more feeling based appeals in their language which is a fair assay, it could be said that rational thinkers make more logical assessments in their discourse.

Of course, if pinching a rational person didn't elicit a feeling response, a sensation of pain then ha. O_kay slightly different to emotions, if a human being is able to feel hot and cold, lukewarm. All manner of sensations from the nervous system that is given to us then I have to wonder. How much emotional investment is needed for rationally minded people in order to hold onto their core beliefs. And then to expend the amount of energy, the love of critical analysis, debate and thinking when expressing their values. The challenge of needing to be correct in their logical arguments, to corroborate in their own mind their logical understanding of subject matter. In much the same way emotional appeals are made from emotionally thinking people.

Its almost like when it comes to a understanding emotions, through rational thoughts, the more that is written, the more you come to realise how emotionally invested a person gets in their passionate disapproval or approval of the feeling functions in favour of rational functions.
 

tinkerbell

New member
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
3,487
MBTI Type
ENTP
no i don't, I think ultimately we as NT's attempt to create criteria on whihc we base decisions, I personally beleive it is bogus and that we are still to a degree making emo decisions. There is also a superiority within this
 

eternal recurrence

New member
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
46
MBTI Type
iNfj
Its almost like when it comes to a understanding emotions, through rational thoughts, the more that is written, the more you come to realise how emotionally invested a person gets in their passionate disapproval or approval of the feeling functions in favour of rational functions.

ya...exactly.
 

foolish heart

New member
Joined
Dec 26, 2008
Messages
470
MBTI Type
ISTP
ive been trying to tell u ppl this for a long ass time. the same cognitive facility is used to dictate whether a feeling or a thought is right or wrong. there is no such thing as human rationality, but you can have an emotional sensitivity towards logical ends like math and science. some people are neurochemically tuned with structure while others are more in tune with fluid concepts like emotion and social dynamics.
 

yvonne

A passer by
Joined
Mar 1, 2010
Messages
534
MBTI Type
INfP
Enneagram
5w4
yes, i think this is true. in my experience, it has been valuable for me to first value emotions and then try to understand what they are telling me and how they are affecting me. if you totally dismiss them, you are fooling yourself and actually can damage your decision making process. if you open your mind to the world of emotions and learn to use them in a controlled manner to our collective advantage, you are taking a step forward, imo.

we are wired differently and there's nothing wrong about that, though, but i think it would be to everyone's advantage to meet somewhere half way... and i think most of us already do.
 

eternal recurrence

New member
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
46
MBTI Type
iNfj
the same cognitive facility is used to dictate whether a feeling or a thought is right or wrong. there is no such thing as human rationality, but you can have an emotional sensitivity towards logical ends like math and science. some people are neurochemically tuned with structure while others are more in tune with fluid concepts like emotion and social dynamics.

I love this idea - "an emotional sensitivity towards math". It makes me think of the guy who could feel numbers (e.g. nine was associated with a certain emotion). Daniel Tammet from the doc. "The Boy With The Incredible Brain".

But my actual interest is in the implications of this. If rationality, as we speak about it, or imagine it to function (e.g. as non-emotion), is an illusion...then what?

For instance, I think we could take any scientific research and find a moral basis for it although this starting point is not discussed. Just like in conversation where someone makes a claim as if it is self-evident or does not represent a value/as if it is non-emotional. Yes yes yes - there are facts and values - I'm talking about the impetus for (and our interaction within) a conversation or a programme... how we think about what impels our words or actions. Ya and im conflating morals and emotions but is that a problem?

I'm gonna be pulled off stage by a cane soon I know it.
 

ceecee

Coolatta® Enjoyer
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
15,908
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
8w9
ive been trying to tell u ppl this for a long ass time. the same cognitive facility is used to dictate whether a feeling or a thought is right or wrong. there is no such thing as human rationality, but you can have an emotional sensitivity towards logical ends like math and science. some people are neurochemically tuned with structure while others are more in tune with fluid concepts like emotion and social dynamics.

This. Thank you.
 

sculpting

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
4,148
I love this idea - "an emotional sensitivity towards math". It makes me think of the guy who could feel numbers (e.g. nine was associated with a certain emotion). Daniel Tammet from the doc. "The Boy With The Incredible Brain".

Bra-ket notation makes me feel distinctly emotive-I find the symbolism and ability to redefine entire symbolic universes via a few math functions utterly enchantingly euphoric. I also feel an emotive response to any complex symbolic representation. Protein structures, simulated annealing, any complex math equation. There is magic in them-there letters....

I suck at emo on people. But all of my organizational choices that seem very Te centric-very logical-they have an Fi component. I will make a logical choice about which part to purchase for an instrument-and subconciously be computing how and where it will impact segments of the entire organization. Fi/Te is doing on-the-fly calculations to find the most optimal solution based in logistics and finances-with the least negative impact on the people. Typically this final choice is the most practical if not obviously logical-if you negatively impact people, they will fuck up your plans-so best to keep em happy if you can.

My ENTP and I balance one another here as she will say fuck the people, fix the system. She can identify the system breaks, I can identify the people breaks.
 

yvonne

A passer by
Joined
Mar 1, 2010
Messages
534
MBTI Type
INfP
Enneagram
5w4
But my actual interest is in the implications of this. If rationality, as we speak about it, or imagine it to function (e.g. as non-emotion), is an illusion...then what?

For instance, I think we could take any scientific research and find a moral basis for it although this starting point is not discussed. Just like in conversation where someone makes a claim as if it is self-evident or does not represent a value/as if it is non-emotional. Yes yes yes - there are facts and values - I'm talking about the impetus for (and our interaction within) a conversation or a programme... how we think about what impels our words or actions. Ya and im conflating morals and emotions but is that a problem?

why should that be a problem? it makes things more complicated, if you realize that things can't totally be taken apart, but for me that is what it is. the next question is what to do with what is? i use logic as my primary and "emotional logic" as secondary... just because there is this complexity we don't quite understand, doesn't mean we should be discouraged by it. collectively we are well equipped to deal with this and are constantly evolving.

this is a vague statement, but something to think about, perhaps...
 

freedom geek

New member
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
158
MBTI Type
INTx
Enneagram
5
The base values we start with are arbitrary and can be handled by emotions but the way we move from these to our choices and actions is not and should be handled by rationality. Emotions don't preclude rationality but filtering what is rather than simply what ought to be through them instead of rationality is.
 

yvonne

A passer by
Joined
Mar 1, 2010
Messages
534
MBTI Type
INfP
Enneagram
5w4
Emotions don't preclude rationality but filtering what is rather than simply what ought to be through them instead of rationality is.

do you wish to elaborate on this? personally, i'm very interested in this subject.
 

JHBowden

New member
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
201
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
3
The separation between emotion and rationality is a myth.
Please prove the number of Mersenne primes with your emotions alone.

As much as I hate rationalizations, not all reasons are rationalizations. That we're prone to making rationalizations only shows the importance of eliminating bias via impersonal methods when arriving at truth, e.g. an experimental set-up, a mathematical demonstration, etc.
 

Fluffywolf

Nips away your dignity
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
9,581
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I agree with the concept that is provided within the context of this topic.

An F, being totally emotional, would be in their own perspective, acting rationally. Thus, emotion and rationality are not mutually exclusive, from a single perspective.

That which makes the rational NT's, rational. Is that we try not to rely on incomplete information and variables. And go only on that which we know to be true.

The seperation of rationals and non-rationals, has nothing to do with being emotional or not emotional. Rather, it has to do with how we reach our conclusions and descisions.

Rationals see problems in everything, non rationals take many things for granted. Both may take the same course of action, but only the rational would be aware of it.

So what defines rationality in NT's, is not the fact that we are more rational than others per se. But that we define ourselves by using rational factors to the best of our ability while making descisions, consciously.

So, whilest everyone can be considered rational from their perspective. NT Rationals are the ones that do so proactively.
 

yvonne

A passer by
Joined
Mar 1, 2010
Messages
534
MBTI Type
INfP
Enneagram
5w4
i disagree to an extent. i have witnessed rationals using "false logic", because they aren't aware that they also sometimes, to an extent, come to conclusions based on their beliefs (which are affected by feelings). they sometimes deny their feelings, which is something a feeler can intuitively sense. still, rationals strive to be rational in their approach, which is admirable. sometimes i wish they'd put a little effort to the feeling department, though. i don't see why these human behaviors should be mutually exclusive.

this is up for debate, though.
 

Aleksei

Yeah, I can fly.
Joined
Mar 10, 2010
Messages
3,626
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I was reading this thread of 'what do you like about feelers' and one complaint is that there is a tendency to not be logical in arguments, make emotional appeals, or base their decisions on their emotions.

So heres a question: Do you think its possible to actually step away/remove ourselves from 'emotions' when looking at an issue?

This line: "I am being more rational than you" - may be an illusion for your rationality is just a set of learned ways of interacting that appear to lack emotion, HOWEVER! are not all decisions/arguments ultimately moral and emotional ones?

TO put it in a strong way: I think people are fooling themselves if they think in life they are making 'clean' decisions, 'unemotional' arguments, or undertaking entire 'rational' courses of action.
I would agree to the extent that it is altogether impossible to separate motivations and goals from emotions. There is no inherent meaning to our lives, thus there is no such thing as a rational goal: We pick an outcome we desire because we like it better than the alternative. Beyond that, however, it is indeed possible to be rational and objective in making a choice, which is most evident when we make a choice we don't like because we consider it necessary.
 

yvonne

A passer by
Joined
Mar 1, 2010
Messages
534
MBTI Type
INfP
Enneagram
5w4
^ but why do we concider it necessary? is it because we are in fact using our feelings/ beliefs and logic to predict the outcome?
 

durentu

New member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
411
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
OP:

First I'm throwing MBTI into the wind and talking about humans in general. I'm willing to bet that many people don't have the slightest idea what T/F preferences actually mean. (ref: Psychological Types: Jung)

It is not possible to be involved in any issue without some emotive response. I speak in the neurological context. If you have zero emotive response, it would not enter your consciousness, therefore you would not have the mental activations to engage an issue and summon your cognitive faculties. If there is no emotive response, then you are indifferent to it and it would appear it would have never existed.

Illustrative thought: How many steps does it take for you to get to the bathroom? Do you know for sure? Did you really count? Why not? (less OCD).

Rationalization is not synonymous with truth. It is at best an opinion or a belief. If rationalization was indeed truth, there would be no need for peer reviewed journals at all.

This, along with "I'm more rational than you" is a delusion and a logical fallacy. Specifically that of 'begging the question' or petitio principii.

While it's not possible to remove emotions from an argument, there are tools to make a strong case. You start with a rationalization, then you work to remove all the objections and you arrive at some sort of truth.

All decisions contain emotions, regardless of what that person believes. Even psychopaths
All decision involve moral/ethics if it interacts with another human, regardless if it's wise.

To make decisions that are clean, rational, and unemotional is a misnomer. In most cases, what they really mean to say that the decisions are without empathy.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
No life decision can be purely rational because people are going to have attitudes and preferences which are based in emotion that influence their rational choices. It's impossible for a human being to be 100% unbiased. Even people who routinely completely discount emotion in their decision making could in the long run be making irrational choices for themselves, because feelings and relationships are a vital part of the human experience, and to attempt to completely do without those things is absurd and illogical based upon the very make-up of the human social animal, and the adult need for companionship and sex.

I like what lucky said as well.
 
Top