NF critical thinking skills

NF critical thinking skills

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Results 1 to 9 of 9
Thank Tree12Thanks
  • 4 Post By Llyralen
  • 1 Post By Lady of Clockwork
  • 1 Post By BigApplePi
  • 1 Post By ButIHaveNoFear
  • 1 Post By Lady of Clockwork
  • 1 Post By Vivid Melody
  • 1 Post By Llyralen
  • 1 Post By raschel
  • 1 Post By Panorama

This is a discussion on NF critical thinking skills within the NF's Temperament Forum- The Dreamers forums, part of the Keirsey Temperament Forums category; I’ve been meaning to write something about this for a while. Do you feel like you can cut through the ...

  1. #1

    NF critical thinking skills

    I’ve been meaning to write something about this for a while. Do you feel like you can cut through the BS to the heart (maybe I should say the core) of a matter? What functions help you to do this? Or is it just training? Like you train your mind to think critically.

    I think critical thinking can be used with value-based systems (F) as well as Logic-based systems (T) . And I think in life many many things we deal with are a mix of the two. Do you agree NFs?
    What do you think?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking
    Last edited by Llyralen; 02-27-2018 at 08:56 PM.
    BigApplePi, Vivid Melody, MeltedSorbet and 1 others thanked this post.



  2. #2

    I'm not sure if filtering through Fi -- personal values/morals -- is critical thinking. The very first sentence in that link states, "Critical thinking is the objective analysis of facts to form a judgement," but Fi is too subjective to take that approach. It would be too prejudice of an analysis by the time Te takes place.

    It is a form of training and self-discipline, particularly for those who are Judging-dominant, as one would have to consciously avoid making a judgement before all the facts and concepts have been absorbed (Se|Ne) - If you're unaccustomed to that process of thought, you might hurt yourself. You'd then have to organise those facts and concepts (Si|Ni) whilst stripping away the inessentials (Te|Fe) by what's required for the subject at hand. Applying any form of personal values or reasons (Fi|Ti) would cloud the thinking process. Scrolling through that link, there is the section of Critical Thinking and Rationality which talks about the application of imaginations through the Critical Thinking process, with the use of abstract thinking, but that would go back to Ne.

    INFPs are more likely to be Creative Thinkers - which is more subjective and visual, where personal values can be expressed - than Critical Thinkers; and it would take some true dedication and work to be able to master both, and consciously use one without the other. That's my understanding of it all, anyway. Anybody can be Creative or Critical Thinkers, but one or the other would come more naturally to them, whether by mistake or design.

  3. #3

    I suppose there is all kinds of thinking. Some logical and some have to do with recognizing the way we are. There are lots of factors. Try to be aware of them and try to recognize what needs to be defined. Logic is not just linear deduction, but wider.

    I didn't read the Wiki link. Do you think I should?
    ======================

    Quote Originally Posted by Alesha View Post
    I’ve been meaning to write something about this for a while. Do you feel like you can cut through the BS to the heart (maybe I should say the core) of a matter?
    I don't believe in B.S. What is said always means something.


    What functions help you to do this?
    All of them.


    Or is it just training?
    Yes. Training by looking at my mistakes. How many times have a looked into something and found I missed important stuff.


    Like you train your mind to think critically.
    If you want to.
    Last edited by BigApplePi; 03-01-2018 at 07:11 PM. Reason: Better response to #1
    Llyralen thanked this post.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    PersonalityCafe.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4

    Feeling and Thinking are Judgment functions, and critical thinking is judgment or discernment. How you apply what you have gathered. Anyone can think critically, and it is required to solve the simplest to the most complex problems. People are born helpless, and children do childish things, and teenagers do stupid things, but as our ability and skill in critical thinking grows, we are able to become increasingly independent.

    One definition of critical thinking is "includes a commitment to using reason in the formulation of our beliefs," and this sounds very Fi to me. A lot of introspection is implied here, and don't tell me that you just feel your values and don't ever try to apply them or refine them! (Because that would mean you would still believe the same things you did when you were 5, and I hope you've matured a bit since then!)

    -----------
    I'll relate F and T critical thinking to math:
    So a logic-based system(T) can be represented by an actual number in our math problem. Logic doesn't try to mask anything or pretend to be anything other than what it is. Prior to writing out our math problem, the T judger solved many logic systems, which provided the judger with numbers to use in the new problem. So the T judger gets to simply plug the numbers into their critical thinking problem they have encountered, and they arrive at a solution. This solution is another number that they can now use in different problems.

    For the value-based system(F), I'll use an equation containing a variable to represent this in our math problem. F-Values are not an exact thing like a number, but they do follow logical rules. Before writing out the math problem, the F judger takes stock of their particular values/rules towards a situation. When something can replace the variable in the equation, the equation will simplify into a number. Even if an exact number for the variable doesn't exist, the judger can still simplify the equation as much as possible, and depending on other variables, they may be able to solve the critical thinking problem completely. If they can't solve it, they have still gained another equation/rule that they can use in further critical thinking problems.

    Both methods are logically sound ways of solving problems. The F and T solvers both followed the same rules for problem-solving, and they arrived at a logical end(though not always an exact end), and that is critical thinking.
    Last edited by ButIHaveNoFear; 03-01-2018 at 07:56 PM. Reason: reading clarity
    Llyralen thanked this post.

  6. #5

    Quote Originally Posted by ButIHaveNoFear View Post
    One definition of critical thinking is "includes a commitment to using reason in the formulation of our beliefs," and this sounds very Fi to me. A lot of introspection is implied here, and don't tell me that you just feel your values and don't ever try to apply them or refine them! (Because that would mean you would still believe the same things you did when you were 5, and I hope you've matured a bit since then!)
    That definition states using reason in the form of our beliefs, not your own beliefs. This is Fe, as you're using externally validated beliefs. I don't understand how you can objectively reason and think critically if you're using your own set of values to reason and make judgements. You state to not ever apply one's values, but the definition differs - I don't understand the contradiction.

    If we were to put this example into the mindset of the jury, wouldn't that be a bias form of judgement? Those personal values and beliefs, although not necessarily ignored, will have to be overpowered by what's provided evidently before the jury. The jury may feel for one side of the case, but knows the evidence is in favour of the other. Critical Thinking is supposed to be a process free of prejudice, so personal reasons (Ti) and values (Fi) would have to taken place after the process has been made, which means it's not apart of the Critical Thinking process.
    Llyralen thanked this post.

  7. #6

    Do you feel like you can cut through the BS to the heart (maybe I should say the core) of a matter? What functions help you to do this?
    Yes, but especially when it concerns people or personal matters. I think NF's tend to shine at that when they are healthy. The intuition helps for sure because it allows us to see the bigger picture, cut to the heart of a matter and think creatively. I thought this person put it well:


    "Kerry S. Walters (Re-thinking Reason, 1994) argues that rationality demands more than just logical or traditional methods of problem solving and analysis or what he calls the "calculus of justification" but also considers "cognitive acts such as imagination, conceptual creativity, intuition and insight" (p. 63). These "functions" are focused on discovery, on more abstract processes instead of linear, rules-based approaches to problem solving. The linear and non-sequential mind must both be engaged in the rational mind.


    The ability to critically analyze an argument – to dissect structure and components, thesis and reasons – is important. But so is the ability to be flexible and consider non-traditional alternatives and perspectives. These complementary functions are what allow for critical thinking a practice encompassing imagination and intuition in cooperation with traditional modes of deductive inquiry."


    As an INFJ, Ti helps me as well because it helps me see where the inconsistencies are in an argument - but this is more so with personal subjects, as I said. Learning the different logical fallacies years ago was also helpful to me. It made me feel more protected as well. I started developing Ti more in my early 20's.
    Llyralen thanked this post.

  8. #7

    Sample Scenario (exaggerated) borrowed from https://think.dasa.ncsu.edu/wp-conte...s-Workshop.pdf

    A scientist working in a government agency believes that an ingredient
    commonly used in bread causes criminal behavior. To support the
    hypothesis, the scientist notes the following evidence:
    • 99% of criminals consumed bread prior to the criminal activity.
    • Crimes rates are extremely low in areas where bread is not
    consumed.
    Questions:
    1. Do the data strongly support the hypothesis?
    2. Are there other explanations for the data besides the scientist’s
    hypothesis? If so, describe.
    3. What kind of additional information or evidence would support or
    oppose the scientist’s hypothesis?

    Sample Scenario from PerC. (This happened a while back). A ESTP posts the following in the ENFP forum: "I told my ENFP co-worker that our coworker was cheating on his wife. The ENFP went to his house later and told the wife. Do you guys even think before you talk?!?"
    Half of us just answered the question (a valid and self-reflective thing to do), the other half did some critical thinking and called the post ironic and why.

    I have to use critical thinking every day and since I'm a diabetes educator/dietitian I have to figure out how to politely point out flawed thinking about something as universal as food.... and, really, I am always welcoming any training that sharpens my CT skills. I watch our doctors and it's what they constantly do-- sort through information, rule out possibilities, look at other possibilities.

    Anyway, what would you respond with?
    Last edited by Llyralen; 03-03-2018 at 07:59 PM.
    Vivid Melody thanked this post.

  9. #8

    I think that I imagine myself putting my T-hat on =) Feelings and too much caring can get in the way. With T you can still respect a person/yourself.
    This is just what the T represents for me.
    Llyralen thanked this post.

  10. #9

    Quote Originally Posted by Alesha View Post
    Sample Scenario (exaggerated) borrowed from https://think.dasa.ncsu.edu/wp-conte...s-Workshop.pdf

    A scientist working in a government agency believes that an ingredient
    commonly used in bread causes criminal behavior. To support the
    hypothesis, the scientist notes the following evidence:
    • 99% of criminals consumed bread prior to the criminal activity.
    • Crimes rates are extremely low in areas where bread is not
    consumed.
    Questions:
    1. Do the data strongly support the hypothesis?
    2. Are there other explanations for the data besides the scientist’s
    hypothesis? If so, describe.
    3. What kind of additional information or evidence would support or
    oppose the scientist’s hypothesis?

    Anyway, what would you respond with?
    1. Are criminals more likely to eat bread? What percentage of non-criminals eat bread everyday? How do they define criminals? Petty-theft? Murderers? or simply all crimes, maybe all violent crimes.

    Reminds me of the studies linking violent video games to anti-social behavior. Yet there was evidence to show that violent people were more likely to play violent games... so it's a big leap to use the word 'cause'.



    To think critically is to think scientifically, based on evidence and logic. What is the theory and is the hypothesis testable and are the results able to be replicated by others?

    In the workplace most things run off rumors. People simply believe what the majority believe because that is the easier and safer route. They are unwilling to challenge the people who spread the rumors because doing so could be counter to their own self-interests. It's kind of spineless is someway but can you blame some people for simply doing what they see as beneficial to themselves. Sure, feelings and gut instincts are valid to a degree but they run counter to any form of critical thought.

    That's not to say we should believe all things that are 'scientific', either:


    How Two Grad Students Uncovered An Apparent Fraud — And A Way To Change Opinions On Transgender Rights


    A UCLA grad student named Michael LaCour and Columbia University political science professor Donald Green had just published some game-changing research showing that straight people who met a real, live gay person and listened to that person’s story could be persuaded to support marriage equality, and that this change of heart could be long lasting. The study was a big deal..,.And that was how David Broockman figured out Michael LaCour likely fabricated his results.

    So, that said, even scientific theories are not immune from popular opinion.
    Last edited by Panorama; 03-10-2018 at 09:00 PM.
    Llyralen thanked this post.


     

Similar Threads

  1. [INFP] Critical Thinking Skills
    By Aqualung in forum INFP Forum - The Idealists
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-19-2017, 12:06 AM
  2. Many Colleges Fail to Improve Critical-Thinking Skills
    By ae1905 in forum Education & Career Talk
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 07-10-2017, 06:31 PM

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 05:48 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