Really? So if there are disproportionately more NTs in the hard sciences, for example, that would be an accident, the outcome of mere chance and not skill or cognitive ability?
More cherry-picking.
Convenient of you to separate this block from the part you responded to:
Since it has not been defined, I can only presume by “NT thinking†or “rationality†you mean things of an intellectual nature. This likely has more to do with intelligence, followed by an interest in such matters. Given that NFs are commonly interested in such matters, then it’s a matter of intelligence.
Here's one test of IQ and its correlation with MBTI types. There are others and you've probably seen them. Four of the top six performers are NTs. Only one NF appears in this group.
Intelligence Test Performance and Myers Briggs type | Personality Research
More cherry-picking. I’ve seen many, many others,
as I'm sure you have also . The INFx types are almost always in the top 4 types, along with the two INTx type. All the iNtuitives typically average above Sensing types. That one you posted is the only one I’ve ever seen with an ST in the top 4. Most show no correlation with Thinking, only with iNtuition.
This only means something if you think IQ means something, and if the type test results are remotely accurate (people mistype a lot). Even if you do think it's valid, approaching this as NTs vs NFs seems faulty. The groupings have more meaning as IN vs EN.
So feeling is not emotions, yet there is no clear line. So if there's no clear line, how do you know they are different?
Nope, that’s not what I said. Cognition does not equal feeling….."no line between cognition and emotions" refers to ALL cognition, not just the Feeling variety. There is no actual Feeling thought process(es) in reality; it's about the ego, not specific, real time thought processes we use. That was & is my point, which keeps going over your head.
I spelled it out for you, but you are willfully misunderstanding it, in addition to cherry-picking and inventing strawmen.
Was Jung an INTP? If not, how is this passage relevant to the one above or to this thread? Unless you're now claiming the ENFP is really an INTP in disguise?
Jung's type is heavily debated, so I'm not sure your point there. I DO think he was INTP, as a side.
A person is capable of seeing outside their ego, but his bias does come through and is even acknowledged by him.
He notes he struggled to see Feeling as rational at first (paraphrasing, of course).
I never said a type dooms you to a certain bias, but it does lead to certain dynamics between people that begin to form larger social dynamics. Again, the sarcasm is lost on you. You're the one wanting to narrowly assign traits and abilities to people based on type. You refuse to see this in terms of ego & the visible personality which arises from it, which is really what this typing system is about, not intelligence or skills.
The ENFP is irrelevant to this now that we've established it was not a personal conversation between you & him...
However, it's easy to explain his admission - he is not a dominant feeling type anyway. He experiences Feeling as less differentiated than an F-dom, and his dominant function is not a rational one. The observation that ENFPs & INFJs are the most guilty of this supposed undue arrogance may have more to do with them being dominant iNtuitives, not having tertiary Thinking.
Anyhow, you are the one making the argument here and you are given the burden to defend it. You seem unable to do so.
Again, it was an ENFP who made this claim, not me. And since Fe is my inferior function, why don't you elucidate this rational feeling function for me. Examples?
I already explained to you why it doesn’t matter where the claim originated. You have yet to address this, likely because it hits a sore spot with your ego.
Do your own research. I already told you to read more. I am not your personal reference library. As I first noted, the conversation cannot continue if you do not grasp the basics of this theory.
I think addressed the posts you made following the quoted one as well, even if I did not quote them.
So we’re done. Go rile up another type. This topic is tired.