[MBTI General] Why NFs think that they understand NTs ?

[Virtual ghost]

Actually, I think for some folks, the availability and sensitivity to conducting a 'logical approach' to life can be paralytic.

The desire (urgency) to behave reasonably can intellectually freeze behavior, both as an expression of contemplation and insecurity at the notion of failure (being 'illogical' in thought/practice).

Of course, this methodology suffers from the same extremism as the 'thin-skinned' ideology currently under review. Intensity of focus and efficiency in movement don't always march in cadence; more often than not, the greater visibility one has, at some point, must successfully integrate with mechanical effort for it to have real-world 'relevance' - both in external reinforcement for the user and real-time application for his theories.

Unless satisfaction is derived from the relationship between paralysis and wisdom. Fleshing this connection is probably more about what one seeks on an individual level.



Thanks -

What do you think of Amargith's counterpoint? Does emotion/logic exist on a continuum where one's 'ideal' frame of reference is centered on moderation in awareness?

That is to say, do people who know a 'good amount' have a greater chance at implementation than those who only have a slight -or- profound understanding of either/both trait? (Think of the Bell Curve and real world success)

1. To be honest I think you have a hole in your logic. Which is that you presume that NTs are "suffering" becuse of their logic.
disagree with that because I think that their emotions are what is creating problems for them. Since they feel that they are not doing it good enough. It is their emotions that is "the problem" in cases.
Especially since many don't know how to deal with them and they start to feel less and less logical because of that. What creates a closed circle.
On the other hand this is exactly why NFs can see them as alive or think they are sweet.



I am saying all of this from experiance. Since I have gone too far in thinking/logic and I have lost a "soul" in the process. I am so thickskined that people are wondering if I even have something expect that skin.
Actually I think that this analogy with skin is wrong in my case. Since emotions simply go through me so I don't have to fight them and in a way I can't. The only thing I have is that minimum of Fi that keeps me going.
What means that I don't have a problems with confidance, depression , self pitying, crying and stuff like this.
Maybe I am wrong but I think that all people find this intimidating. Especially if you add a lot of Ni and Te into the mix.



2. Yes, understanding is the key of implementation.

 

[Night]

1. To be honest I think you have a hole in your logic. Which is that you presume that NTs are "suffering" becuse of their logic.
disagree with that because I think that their emotions are what is creating problems for them. Since they feel that they are not doing it good enough. It is their emotions that is "the problem" in cases.
Especially since many don't know how to deal with them and they start to feel less and less logical because of that. What creates a closed circle.
On the other hand this is exactly why NFs can see them as alive or think they are sweet.

Ah. I should have been more clear in my language.

I wasn't suggesting that wisdom and suffering are mutually braided terms; in truth, the advent of either requires far greater psychological examination than a simple alienation/acceptance sociological breakdown.

As I (briefly) mentioned, the relationship between paralytic logical analysis and psychological burden is an individual experience; no two people are likley to respond the same variables in exactly the same way. Taken further, it's even less reasonable to presume that emotion is universally felt the same way, or that it is conceived with the same ingredients.

Quite the contrary, actually - as we know from personal experience, it is unlikely that a single emotion will remain a constant, motivational force in our lives (short of chemical imbalance - see: Depression; ADD; etc.) Instead, we enjoy an ecosystem of emotion as a response to, and means to better interact with, stimuli in our environment.

Emotion itself is transient; its expression (and what brings it on) is more about the individual/culture of origin than it is about the emotion as an ideal unto itself.

2. Yes, understanding is the key of implementation.

Does understanding necessarily require implementation for it be valid? Or does implementation simply extrapolate theory into behavior, thereby transforming one's internal 'model' into something entirely foreign to its origin?

 

[Salomé]

I'm sure you can tell when someone dislikes you. But I doubt you pick up on every subtle emotion you cause in others and actually feel what they feel or are probably feeling . Otherwise I'm pretty sure you would care.

I doubt you can either, in truth. Though I've no doubt that you believe you can. Abandoning delusions is liberating. And I'm pretty sure I wouldn't care if I could. I don't take ownership of other people's emotional states. Also liberating.
Damn! It's good to be NT!

ETA: If you can choose to stop caring what others think of you, as you say you can, why don't you just do so more often? Or are you not in any control of that ?

I think placing too much importance on what others think of oneself is actually just a sign of immaturity rather than a distiguishing feature of F-ness. Just as being completely insensitive to others feelings is not a defining T trait.

 

[Salomé]

Actually, I think for some folks, the availability and sensitivity to conducting a 'logical approach' to life can be paralytic.

One cannot be too logical. It is binary and beautiful and entirely benign. Effective logic will prove that an exclusively "logical approach" to life is a flawed approach.
You seem to be heading down the same road as wildcat in the Asperger's thread. It is the deficit that is the problem, not the gift.

Paralysis and an inability to act or implement solutions is related to fear, and is therefore irrational. Again Logic is not at fault, although the individual's logic may well be.

 

[Night]

One cannot be too logical.

Can one be too emotional?

What does this suggest about the inherent efficacy of their comparison?

Effective logic will prove that an exclusively "logical approach" to life is a flawed approach.
You seem to be heading down the same road as wildcat in the Asperger's thread. It is the deficit that is the problem, not the gift.

Paralysis and an inability to act or implement solutions is related to fear, and is therefore irrational. Again Logic is not at fault, although the individual's logic may well be.

Very well said.

What then is the purpose of implementation of 'prudent' theory (Antisocial's as-yet unanswered question), especially as it relates to the associated theory of its origin?

Does 'reproduction' create honest reconciliation with imagination? If not, is it ever possible to sincerely balance thought with movement, so that neither side is sacrificed?

 

[Bamboo]

My cold, rational, mechanical explanation:

Assumptions made for the following:
You're a human.
You don't have traumatic brain damage.

Thus:
You have a limbic system. Simplified, it makes you feel things (and effects your memory).

Quick diagnostic:
Answer this: do you ever get hungry? If you answered yes, that means your hypothalamus (one small but important component of the limbic system) is functional. Mazel tov.

Now that you've found that your hypothalamus is functional, you also know by extension that you: have a fight/flight response, and you have a desire for sex, among other things. Why? Because the hypothalamus also controls/strongly influences these functions. They are all related to basic emotions that people feel.

So to answer your question:

Is it that really that hard to accept that a person does not feel over some period of time? (if we take classical everyday definition of feelings)

Assuming you have a hypothalamus, than yes, it is very hard to accept that a person does not feel over some period of time.

 

[Amargith]

ETA: If you can choose to stop caring what others think of you, as you say you can, why don't you just do so more often? Or are you not in any control of that ?

I think placing too much importance on what others think of oneself is actually just a sign of immaturity rather than a distiguishing feature of F-ness. Just as being completely insensitive to others feelings is not a defining T trait.

I choose to take on board and consider what other think as it can improve communications. I don't assume that my way is perfect, and if they have suggestions as how to improve, I'll gladly consider them. I don't turn it off more often as I don't like creating a divide between people. If I'm able to understand where they come from, we have a better chance at working things out. Sure, it is possible to overdo this, as the pain from poorly formulated critiscism is something you automatically want to avoid.

And I'd say that being completely insensitive is the other side of the medal. It's just another cooping mechanism for dealing with what others think of you. And a trait often found in unhealthy NTs.

 

[jenocyde]

I choose to take on board and consider what other think as it can improve communications. I don't assume that my way is perfect, and if they have suggestions as how to improve, I'll gladly consider them. I don't turn it off more often as I don't like creating a divide between people. If I'm able to understand where they come from, we have a better chance at working things out. Sure, it is possible to overdo this, as the pain from poorly formulated critiscism is something you automatically want to avoid.

And I'd say that being completely insensitive is the other side of the medal. It's just another cooping mechanism for dealing with what others think of you. And a trait often found in unhealthy NTs.

I don't understand this extremity. Why does there have to be a divide or a need to work something out? If I don't care about every single subtle (possibly irrational) emotion, does this then mean that we can't get along? Or that I am incapable of "connecting" with others?

Also are you talking about being insensitive to one's own emotions, or to those of others?

 

[Virtual ghost]

Ah. I should have been more clear in my language.

I wasn't suggesting that wisdom and suffering are mutually braided terms; in truth, the advent of either requires far greater psychological examination than a simple alienation/acceptance sociological breakdown.

As I (briefly) mentioned, the relationship between paralytic logical analysis and psychological burden is an individual experience; no two people are likley to respond the same variables in exactly the same way. Taken further, it's even less reasonable to presume that emotion is universally felt the same way, or that it is conceived with the same ingredients.

Quite the contrary, actually - as we know from personal experience, it is unlikely that a single emotion will remain a constant, motivational force in our lives (short of chemical imbalance - see: Depression; ADD; etc.) Instead, we enjoy an ecosystem of emotion as a response to, and means to better interact with, stimuli in our environment.

Emotion itself is transient; its expression (and what brings it on) is more about the individual/culture of origin than it is about the emotion as an ideal unto itself.

Ok, but what are you actually trying to imply with this.

Does understanding necessarily require implementation for it be valid? Or does implementation simply extrapolate theory into behavior, thereby transforming one's internal 'model' into something entirely foreign to its origin.

Well, sometimes you can do things which you don't understand but in general you need understanding to ensure good implementation. (unless you are experimenting)

At least that is my Jish opinion.

 

[Salomé]

Can one be too emotional?

What does this suggest about the inherent efficacy of their comparison?

I don't understand where this comparison has come from. Logic and emotion are not at opposite ends of a continuum. Logic doesn't have an opposite. Neither does emotion. Individual emotions may have opposites. Like love and hate, although many would argue that the opposite of love is actually indifference, and the opposite of feeling is not feeling, (i.e., it isn't Thinking).

There is a time and place for logic, and a time and place for emotion, and never the twain shall meet, as anyone who has tried to reason with someone in the grip of a strong emotion - be it love, hate, jealousy, fear - will testify. Similarly, one doesn't want a lover to recite Kant whilst in the throes of ecstasy.

Context is all.

Thinkers are just as susceptible to being overcome by emotion as Feelers.

The difference is in the value attributed to that state. Thinkers who value feeling too little, or even fear it, are at risk of alienation from self and others and of making errors in judgment. Feelers who value it too much, are susceptible to gullibility and whimsy and making errors in judgment.
Both states can be said to be irrational.

What then is the purpose of implementation of 'prudent' theory (Antisocial's as-yet unanswered question), especially as it relates to the associated theory of its origin?

"Prudent theory"?

Since I have gone too far in thinking/logic and I have lost a "soul" in the process. I am so thickskined that people are wondering if I even have something expect that skin.

I don't think you have gone too far. I think you still have a long way to go. You have simply neglected your emotional life. It isn't necessary to choose one or the other. Both are important. Perhaps the neglect came first and the obsession with logic is symptomatic, rather than causal?

And I'd say that being completely insensitive is the other side of the medal. It's just another cooping mechanism for dealing with what others think of you. And a trait often found in unhealthy NTs.

It's not a coping mechanism. It is a GENUINE insensitivity to what other's think of them. That in itself is not a fault. It's only a fault if it leads a person to treat others unfairly.

 

[FemMecha]

Then a handful of NFs decided to hijack the thread to complain about their feelings of inferiority. Thats the only upset I'm seeing here.

If this refers to comments about power imbalances based on T and F stereotypes, I can only speak for myself, but upset is not the right word. On one hand I find it interesting to deal with this sort of power dynamic because I learn a great deal from it and can apply it in situations where I belong to the dominant social group. Assuming an emotion is present in this instance is much like the miscommunication described in the OP. It is useful to experience these things from both vantage points. Inaccurately assuming the presence of emotion in another person is quite easy to do - even for Ts.

This is an interesting point, Amargith.

Does familiarity with emotion necessarily presume vulnerability to emotion?

Could it be conversely argued that comfort with emotional expression should instead permeate a sense of resilience, and not susceptibility?

I find it has both effects in a way, but overall produces more resilience. It makes me more immediately aware of an emotional response, but if a person possesses skill at problem solving, in this case emotional problem solving, then having access to good information, it aids in the ability to regulate emotion. My level of emotional tolerance is quite high. I have many systems of regulating emotion and only a couple of areas which I have not mastered that typically related to some physiological issues. This is in part because I have high emotional intelligence, but also my profession as a performer requires emotional regulation to an extreme degree, so I have had to deliberately practice it. If I find out a loved one has died, but the concert is tonight, I have had to learn to refocus in the present and express the emotion required for the performance and then find the right time to address the personal hurt. I love that I am emotionally tough.

Edit: If emotions are seen as something that causes personal weakness, the tendency is to either ignore them or to fixate on them. What makes emotions into something other than a weakness is the ability to just take them straight on and not think of them as being a big deal. They are just a natural bodily functions that come and go.

 

[Virtual ghost]

I don't think you have gone too far. I think you still have a long way to go. You have simply neglected your emotional life. It isn't necessary to choose one or the other. Both are important. Perhaps the neglect came first and the obsession with logic is symptomatic, rather than causal?

That was a just a figure of speech.
Actually I am like this since birth and I am pretty sure this is not caused by some traumatic event.
Obsession is emotion.(just saying)

 

[Salomé]

Obsession is emotion.

Precisely. (Well, not exactly, but it is driven by it).

I wasn't thinking about a traumatic event.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Precisely. (Well, not exactly, but it is driven by it).

I wasn't thinking about a traumatic event.

That depends on how you classify things in this matters.
But I can see your point.

 

[TaylorS]

Puppy, I don't know... I'm just saying that I have never presumed to know what someone was thinking or feeling before. And I have never been told what I am feeling and had that assessment been correct.

A lot of it is also the fact that it seems people are just looking for emotions to have something to talk about. I don't know if I'm explaining this correctly, but it seems with my girlfriends, fun is talking about things that bother you? Trying to evoke an emotional response or something...? Is this your way of bonding? I don't really understand (and don't presume to ). If something is bothering me, I'll talk about it with whomever is physically closest to me at that moment (but this does not mean that we are now "best friends", ok?). But once I think it through, it's over. So when you see me every day, you don't need to keep asking me if I'm fine. Because I am. Trust me, I would know.

Whatever - there are things about me that annoy you guys too, so it's a give and take. But the question was asked, so...

OMG, that bolded part is SO me it's not funny!

 

[Amargith]

I don't understand this extremity. Why does there have to be a divide or a need to work something out? If I don't care about every single subtle (possibly irrational) emotion, does this then mean that we can't get along? Or that I am incapable of "connecting" with others?

Also are you talking about being insensitive to one's own emotions, or to those of others?

I said that's how I do it. Did I say that just because you don't work that way, you're doing it wrong?

Being in tune with someone elses emotions just increases the bond and your insights into who they really. This in turn tones down misunderstandings and miscommunications and promotes harmony. Which is my motivation for doing this.

I don't like the idea that just because I wasn't thoughtful, I'd cause someone to feel bad or ruin their mood. It's a small gesture that can smoothen many ruffled feathers between people who are all their own unique individual and therefore bound to occasionally not see eye to eye.

It's not a coping mechanism. It is a GENUINE insensitivity to what other's think of them. That in itself is not a fault. It's only a fault if it leads a person to treat others unfairly.

I'd have to disagree, it's perfectly possible for an NT to develop their F side and actually be sensitive to this. And I've known enough NTs that are very sensitive to what others think of them and rebel agains it by using an 'I don't care'-attitude, usually complimented by cyniscism. But I was talking mostly about the insensitivity towards others, though likely, the two are linked.

I have no doubt, however, that you believe that you're genuinly insensitive to this and that there is nothing you can do about that, nor should you

 

[Salomé]

If this refers to comments about power imbalances based on T and F stereotypes, I can only speak for myself, but upset is not the right word. Assuming an emotion is present in this instance is much like the miscommunication described in the OP. It is useful to experience these things from both vantage points. Inaccurately assuming the presence of emotion in another person is quite easy to do - even for Ts.

As you say, you can only speak for yourself. This thread is rife with misunderstandings. Helpfully.


I don't really see the power imbalances you are pointing out. As an NT female, I'm both subject to the standard prejudices against women, and some special ones reserved for us 'unnatural' types. I've been accused of all sorts of things, both on this board and elsewhere. And I get considerably less support than NF females do, for example.

Sticks and stones...

I'd have to disagree, it's perfectly possible for an NT to develop their F side and actually be sensitive to this. And I've known enough NTs that are very sensitive to what others think of them and rebel agains it by using an 'I don't care'-attitude, usually complimented by cyniscism. But I was talking mostly about the insensitivity towards others, though likely, the two are linked.

You're in no position to disagree. You don't know what you are talking about.

Developing a mature Feeling function does not leave one exposed to over-sensitivity to the opinions of others. As I said, it's immature and undesirable. Not all Fs are emo teens, either.

I have no doubt, however, that you believe that you're genuinly insensitive to this and that there is nothing you can do about that, nor should you

I don't like the idea that just because I wasn't thoughtful, I'd cause someone to feel bad or ruin their mood.

You weren't very thoughtful there, now were you? Quite feelful though.

Why isn't that a word? I blame the T/F power imbalance!!

 

[jenocyde]

OMG, that bolded part is SO me it's not funny!

lol - how does this translate into fun for you?

I said that's how I do it. Did I say that just because you don't work that way, you're doing it wrong?

I was just curious - it wasn't a judgment.

I'd have to disagree, it's perfectly possible for an NT to develop their F side and actually be sensitive to this.

Because you think that you understand NTs? Surely some NTs are sensitive and others are not. There are a great many more who pretend to be and learn to mimic social cues in order not to be ostracized and judged for being an "abnormal" female...

 

[jenocyde]

As an NT female, I'm both subject to the standard prejudices against women, and some special ones reserved for us 'unnatural' types. I've been accused of all sorts of things, both on this board and elsewhere. And I get considerably less support than NF females do, for example.

Wow, just saw this. +10000000000

 

[FemMecha]

As you say, you can only speak for yourself. This thread is rife with misunderstandings. Helpfully.


I don't really see the power imbalances you are pointing out. As an NT female, I'm both subject to the standard prejudices against women, and some special ones reserved for us 'unnatural' types. I've been accused of all sorts of things, both on this board and elsewhere. And I get considerably less support than NF females do, for example.

Sticks and stones...

I believe that wholeheartedly and admire the focus and resilience of people who are willing to be their true self and not submit to social pressures. Although, I try not to make any judgment call on those who do submit. My philosophy has been leaning more towards seeing people are merely cause and effect of nature and nurture rather than seeing any one person as though they are supposed to be something other than they are.