Workflow of Thinkers vs Feelers...

[Halla74]

Just a moment ago I typed this out in an effort to document (in simplistic terms) the differences in how THINKERS react to environmental stimulii vs how FEELERS do the same. This is what I came up with:

<DISCLAIMER> This is not intended to offend anyone, I am merely trying to understand T/F differences today. Tomorrow I will tell you how I feel about them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEELERS feel out a situation and act on it accordingly before they generate alot of thoguhts about its effects: (They do what feels right)

Their series of events is:

STIMULUS -> EMOTIONS -> ACTIONS -> THOUGHTS(later...)

For FEELERS, being led by your emotions can be tidal and get you into charged situations unecessarily, right?

But on the other hand, if you correctly feel out what the energy of the event you are experienceing is and react to that, then maybe you are good to go.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
THINKERS think through a situation and act on it accordingly before they generate feelings about its effects: (They do what they think is the right thing to do)

Their series of events is:

STIMULUS->THOUGHT->ACTIONS->EMOTIONS (later...)

For THINKERS, being led by your thoughts can make you consistent (think first, then act. Look before you leap. Measure twice, cut once, etc.), right?

But on the other hand since you rarely consider emotions you can be perceived as a cold hearted bastard.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Does any of this hold water?

I am taking on the role of Professor Obvious today?

Thoughts or Feelings about the above?

-Alex

P.S. Now getting ready to eat chicken breasts stuffed with lobster and scallops + a yummy green salad splattered with Italian dressing and a dab of Bleu Cheese + a large glass of red wine so I can take a nappy before finishing my studying for a 5:30 PM exam.

Cheers!

-Alex

 

[cascadeco]

Actually I think I relate more to your Thinker description than the feeling one. i.e. Think First, then Act, and internal consistency in my thoughts/actions/behaviors is pretty important to me, and I become vexed when I notice contradictions within myself. I also don't often follow solely my 'emotion', simply because I recognize it's transitory - and so sometimes I ignore it. I will often wait until I become more neutral, esp. when making important decisions.

A distinction between feelers/thinkers may be that Feelers tend to factor in their emotions/values/feelings as an important variable in the decision making process, whereas Thinkers may not deem the emotion/feeling as a necessary factor/component to their decision-making process. Of course this is all generalized. Feelers may also be more apt to weigh in non-objective factors (and non-objective does not necessarily equate to 'Emotion')

 

[kyuuei]

Here's how it goes for me, usually.

Small issues: STIMULUS->THOUGHT/EMOTION (depending on the issue. An insult would receive more thought, whereas someone skipping work would be more emotion)->ACTIONS->(The one I left out later..)

Big issues: STIMULUS->INITIAL ACTION (Whatever action I need to do to calm down the situation)->THOUGHT->ACTION (Resume myself once I know the situation I want to be in and how I want to handle it). Emotion is throughout that process to help guide those actions, never in just one slot.

 

[Stanton Moore]

INFP's tend to be very strict about doing 'the right thing', despite being feelers primarily.

 

[Halla74]

Interesting stuff so far! Cool. I will revise H1 to H2 later tonight...

Keep it coming!

:hi:

 

[Saslou]

I actually go on the thinkers theory. Only on 2 occasions have i lost it with work colleagues. That wasn't due to feelings though, that was because they were both acting dumb and pissed me off. (i don't like incompetent people)

In the work place, i am in a totally different frame of mind.

 

[nightning]

You know what they say about people do very poorly in describing their thought processes after the fact? We "rationalize" a great deal more about how we think/feel then when we actually do at the moment before we respond.

A general pattern I noticed in myself.

Stuff that requires immediate response.

Signal detection => reflex auto behaviour without thought
|
V
Two streams of processing (parallel processing)

1) emotional response (parallel to behaviour or a slight step behind) -> feedback to modify auto behaviour
2) logical analysis (slower stream, conscious deliberate process, initiation one step after emotional response) -> feedback to both emotional and auto behaviour, modulation and/or complete system override.

My guess with the difference of Thinkers and Feelers has to do with the strength of two streams (which has the tendency to take precedent/speed of processing) as oppose to a truly different route of processing.

 

[Halla74]

A general pattern I noticed in myself.

Stuff that requires immediate response.

Signal detection => reflex auto behaviour without thought
|
V
Two streams of processing (parallel processing)

1) emotional response (parallel to behaviour or a slight step behind) -> feedback to modify auto behaviour
2) logical analysis (slower stream, conscious deliberate process, initiation one step after emotional response) -> feedback to both emotional and auto behaviour, modulation and/or complete system override.

My guess with the difference of Thinkers and Feelers has to do with the strength of two streams (which has the tendency to take precedent/speed of processing) as oppose to a truly different route of processing.

I really like this, Nightning. I'm breaking out Visio later to make this graphical.

 

[Poki]

I follow the thinker in that I detach from what is being said to logically analyze, later when I process it the feeling appears. Its not that I repress my emotions, but I actually detach emotionally to hear what is said only to reattach later.

 

[Poki]

My wife(ENFJ) with me follows the emotion first and then thinks.

My mom with me follows the thinker path at first and the other ENFPs I know do this with me also. With ENFPs its like I make them think about what I say before they react. I can actually see them get in there head at times, like wait a minute. Its like I make them think about what I said and what I meant. I think I may confuse what they think and they have to think about it before they know how to react. I provide a different side of things than there used to seeing. I think its the Ne/Se difference.

 

[nightning]

My wife(ENFJ) with me follows the emotion first and then thinks.

My mom with me follows the thinker path at first and the other ENFPs I know do this with me also. With ENFPs its like I make them think about what I say before they react. I can actually see them get in there head at times, like wait a minute. Its like I make them think about what I said and what I meant. I think I may confuse what they think and they have to think about it before they know how to react. I provide a different side of things than there used to seeing. I think its the Ne/Se difference.

Now I must say what you said there made me sit and think a bit before I "got" what you meant.

I think there's two different things going on in terms of thinking processes...
1. T vs F
2. N vs S

Your wife's (and my) system of thinking (N) is different than your's (S). So the "making them think before they react" might simply due to a process of translating what you've said in "S language" into something understandable by the "N system". Therefore a T vs F comparison here has an extra step in between.

*scratches head* Do you know of any ESFP or ISFP? Perhaps a thought flow comparison with them will be easier to handle.

 

[King sns]

For me its more like

Stimulus-feel(not react, just feel)- think(with feelings under consideration)- act.. thoughts and feelings again afterwards. The two work together.

 

[nightning]

Thanks for the ESFP perspective shortnsweet

It seems to fit the model...

 

[Poki]

Now I must say what you said there made me sit and think a bit before I "got" what you meant.

I think there's two different things going on in terms of thinking processes...
1. T vs F
2. N vs S

Your wife's (and my) system of thinking (N) is different than your's (S). So the "making them think before they react" might simply due to a process of translating what you've said in "S language" into something understandable by the "N system". Therefore a T vs F comparison here has an extra step in between.

*scratches head* Do you know of any ESFP or ISFP? Perhaps a thought flow comparison with them will be easier to handle.

What I let out was pretty much Se and the difference I notice in how people respond.

I think with my wife we are both Se and Ni, just opposite so when we communicate we get different responses from the same exact input and since its similiar in how we deal with the world its like instant feeling, but not the same as the other person.

With ENFP yeah its NeSi vs SeNi and TiFe vs FiTe so things kinda have to be figured out before emotion can come into play. Its like they have to create a whole new mapping of trying to understand before they know how they feel.

 

[wolfy]

Stimulus Emotions Thoughts Actions. I think I go like this usually. I don't play directly off my emotions, I check them and refine them. That might be emotions on emotions though. Ha, who the hell knows...I just play it by ear. I see a situation and know how I want it to look and take action to make it that way.

 

[heart]

FEELERS feel out a situation and act on it accordingly before they generate alot of thoguhts about its effects: (They do what feels right)

Their series of events is:

STIMULUS -> EMOTIONS -> ACTIONS -> THOUGHTS(later...)

In my adult life there has been a greater and great compulsion to think about things before acting which generally leads to indecision and inaction, endless speculation. So the best course turns out for me to give a problem up to my subconscious and wait for inspiration as to what feels most logical to come to me.

For FEELERS, being led by your emotions can be tidal and get you into charged situations unecessarily, right?

No, because in my right mind, I won't allow charged emotions to take the lead. I'll do what I said above, give it sometime and see what comes to me as feeling the most logical course of action and then I weigh it against my conscience and how it all affects others.

 

[alcea rosea]

I would rather see that you put it this way:
The primary thinkers
and
The primary feelers

because I'm neither.
i'm primary intuition user
and ESTP's are actually primary sensors not primary thinkers.

, i'm on a mission for my new "theory" here.

 

[entropie]

I never think during STIMULUS

 

[BlueScreen]

My wife(ENFJ) with me follows the emotion first and then thinks.

My mom with me follows the thinker path at first and the other ENFPs I know do this with me also. With ENFPs its like I make them think about what I say before they react. I can actually see them get in there head at times, like wait a minute. Its like I make them think about what I said and what I meant. I think I may confuse what they think and they have to think about it before they know how to react. I provide a different side of things than there used to seeing. I think its the Ne/Se difference.

It's a type relation. I have this with my sister too. And you actually do a pretty good job of seeing our side of it. It scares me how perceptive ISTPs seem to be, and I get cautious about what reactions they will have to things. So it's a study of what you said, but also the situation. I tend to care more about the big picture than specific words. I also don't live in the moment as much as Se types, so it can also be a wandering mind if interest levels drop.

On the thinking part, we are more intuiting, which is the main thing we do. Introverted feeling doesn't really overpower it, except on important issues.

 

[Poki]

It's a type relation. I have this with my sister too. And you actually do a pretty good job of seeing our side of it. It scares me how perceptive ISTPs seem to be, and I get cautious about what reactions they will have to things. So it's a study of what you said, but also the situation. I tend to care more about the big picture than specific words. I also don't live in the moment as much as Se types, so it can also be a wandering mind if interest levels drop.

On the thinking part, we are more intuiting, which is the main thing we do. Introverted feeling doesn't really overpower it, except on important issues.

I feed my Ti off of data from Se so I am forced to be very perceptive. Sometimes the cautious seems like your trying to figure out my motive, and eventually ENFPs may flat out ask. The thing that Js dont always realize that is when you try to steer anything in life you miss the natural reaction and in turn control what you see. I usually let the ENFP steer the conversation, I noticed that they usually stick to something you both have in common, but at times can hold an entire conversation on there own as long as they know your paying attention.

I have seen an ENFP go straight from Ne to Fi. Its when it bypasses Te and Si. It gets fed Te in a logical way with enough Si that it goes straight to Fi.