"Thinking" is more about assessing methods rather than being logical?

"Thinking" is more about assessing methods rather than being logical?

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Results 1 to 5 of 5
Thank Tree2Thanks
  • 2 Post By MD_analyst

This is a discussion on "Thinking" is more about assessing methods rather than being logical? within the Cognitive Functions forums, part of the Personality Type Forums category; Based on Carl Jung's descriptions of the thinking functions in his book, "Psychological Types", it seems like they are more ...

  1. #1

    "Thinking" is more about assessing methods rather than being logical?

    Based on Carl Jung's descriptions of the thinking functions in his book, "Psychological Types", it seems like they are more about evaluating decision methods rather than being logical. This is especially for Te, which seems to mainly be about ensuring that methods have effective outcomes. Jung categorized Sensing/Intuition into the irrational types and Thinking/Feeling into the rational types, so Thinking/Feeling are about assessing decisions-- "Thinking" is assessing the decision method and "Feeling" is assessing the decision value.
    He also described any extraverted function as looking outside of oneself, so Te and Fe assess the decision outcome-- Te specifically focuses on external evidence of effectiveness when assessing a decision method.

    Introverted functions are based on the subjective-- understanding that comes from within oneself-- so it sounds like Ti and Fi are about understanding a decision (Ti understands the personal reasoning for choosing certain decision methods, Fi understands the personal value of a decision). Ti is about understanding the method, specifically using personal reasoning and one's personal understanding when assessing a decision method.

    Being "logical," therefore, is more of a byproduct of Te/Ti usage, or a consequence of using Te/Ti appropriately-- Te can draw a logical conclusion based on how effective the outcome of a decision method is, Ti can draw a logical conclusion based on how one can personally understand the reasoning behind a decision method. Doesn't mean a logical conclusion is always reached, however. Just as "Feeling" isn't all about emotions, "Thinking" isn't all about logic...it seems like emotion and logic are consequences and/or common influences for feeling and thinking, respectively. And most important, being logical and emotional are personality traits, not cognitive functions, otherwise Jung would have called it "Logic" rather than "Thinking." Anyone can be logical when using any function-- heck, Fi can be logical if one has a rational/logical basis for adopting personal values, and that can be more logical than the Ti user who has a false conclusion about a method just because of poor personal understanding.

    So in sum, Thinking seems to be more about assessing the methods of a decision, with Te ensuring effectiveness of the methods and Ti using personal reasoning to understand the methods. Any use of logic is often an influencing factor and/or a consequence, rather than being a characteristic of the function itself. Same goes for emotion in feeling-- its an influencing factor or consequence rather than a characteristic of the feeling function. Overall:

    Thinking= prefers assessing decision methods; judges "what makes sense"
    Te = ensuring methods for decision outcomes are effective
    Ti = understanding personal reasons for choosing decision methods

    Feeling= prefers assessing decision value; judges "what is meaningful"
    Fe = ensuring decision outcomes are valued by others
    Fi = understanding the personal value in a decision


    Does anyone agree/disagree with this?
    Last edited by MD_analyst; 12-15-2018 at 10:25 AM.
    soop and Lady of Clockwork thanked this post.



  2. #2
    ISTP

    This is interesting but I don't have the time right now to post my thoughts on it. I hope I will remember to come back to this thread when I have time (if not and you really want to hear my thoughts...which are probably not anything very insightful tbh...just send me a reminder)

  3. #3

    Quote Originally Posted by soop View Post
    This is interesting but I don't have the time right now to post my thoughts on it. I hope I will remember to come back to this thread when I have time (if not and you really want to hear my thoughts...which are probably not anything very insightful tbh...just send me a reminder)
    No worries, feel free to share whenever you're ready!

  4. Remove Advertisements
    PersonalityCafe.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4

    Logic is subjective. Everyone thinks they are logical.

    It's not like Fi/Fe Doms think to themselves ''MUST........REFRAIN.......FROM BEING ILLOGICAL'' in a teeth-grinding, panicky sweat, whenever they're about to do or say something.

  6. #5

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevester View Post
    Logic is subjective. Everyone thinks they are logical.

    It's not like Fi/Fe Doms think to themselves ''MUST........REFRAIN.......FROM BEING ILLOGICAL'' in a teeth-grinding, panicky sweat, whenever they're about to do or say something.
    If we take into consideration that Ti and Te are both focused on objectivity and/or cleanliness and integrity of data, then yes they can be categorized as "logical". Because logic is like maths, if both parties use the same numbers and equations, then both will arrive at the same result. If you start factoring in "value" of each number or equation, and start twisting the sequence of the equation based on "what deserves to be calculated, and what doesn't", that's when you throw logic out of the window, and succumb to Feeling.
    You can claim that feeling is logical too... but the integrity of F logic suffers by its very nature, for it chooses to evaluate pieces of the puzzle based on their moral or personal worth, rather than to focus on attaining a clean result.
    This is the typical clash between realism and idealism in philosophical and political thought.
    The T (realism) would claim that if A leads to B, and B leads to C, then human beings are fickle and corrupt.
    The F (idealism) would claim that: even if A leads to B, and B leads to C, we shouldn't conclude that humans are fickle and corrupt, because it is morally wrong to conclude that.
    In whatever weird world you may claim that the F (idealism) position is logical, but you can't deny that it disregards the integrity of the logical chain and its conclusion, in favor of value-ing (F-ing).
    Last edited by kiribek; 12-16-2018 at 02:25 PM.


     

Similar Threads

  1. [Enneagram Type 4] SX 4 is "More 8 than an 8?" What about 8s being "More 4 than a 4?"
    By Animal in forum Type 4 Forum - The Individualist
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 04-08-2017, 01:43 PM
  2. Which is more logical, Extraverted Thinking or Introverted Thinking?
    By WintersFlame in forum Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-10-2017, 04:32 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:26 AM.
Information provided on the site is meant to complement and not replace any advice or information from a health professional.
© 2014 PersonalityCafe
 

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0