Personality Cafe banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,229 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
This is pretty disorganized. If you don't like the sort of thing, you have fair warning.

--------------------------------

I always thought a good way to describe F was the usage of the emotion center of the brain.

But apparently, it doesn't matter if we use the logical part of our brain more than the emotion center of the brain, as an F, and it only matters that rational considerations are focusing more on the emotions rather than the logic.

How does that make sense?

Is it based on how much we experience emotions vs logic. The whole pleasantville color vs non color, or the whole star trek vulcan vs human thing.

Or is it simply what we focus on FIRST?

I'm just unclear her.

It could be what we experience most.

What we focus on most.

What we focus on FIRST.

What we focus on LAST.

I could be F in one of these and T in another.

So the descriptions of F and T, really have to be SPECIFIC, to an exact thinking pattern, otherwise they just seem ambiguous and meaningless.

Someone could have a very small emotion, and base their entire life around that one emotion, but use logic the entire time.

Someone could use logic most of the time, but any time an emotion comes up, then stop being logical, however, emotions powerful enough to have awareness only come up once in a while.


Of course, the brain scans that show Fi and Fe in opposite hemispheres, make the definition seem something else altogether.

People start saying things like "humane values."

Well, what if someone considered rocks humane?

What if someone considers logic a personal extension of themselves, akin to a religious spirit?

My contention is that there is no definition of F and T that can be called "humane" that can be agreed upon.

Unless people agree on "what is humane."


These are two very different definitions of T and F, but both have serious problems in my mind.

They seem to be culturally dependent, in where what most people consider F to be ends up being it, or we have to try and figure out what Jung or MBTI thought F was. But did they ever really explain it enough?

Where are the lines? Did they talk about people treating rocks as spirits, or logic as if it was its own entity?

Everyone must admit, I think, that there are some things in life that are rational processes that are neither F nor T in the way we define them.

And they are in the middle.

It seems to be a cultural thing as well as a brain thing.

Where in the brain, seems to be a cultural thing.

Idk, enlighten me please.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,124 Posts
setting aside how much emotions affect your decision-making process.

F's tend to be more people focused in their decision making. T's tend to make more impersonal decisions.

Or even in politics, F's often take political positions where helping people is the top priority (even if they help isn't logical and may ultimately do more harm than good) T's would be more concerned with putting a sound system in place, even if they realize it may not help everyone.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
898 Posts
I'm a Feeler, particularly fi so I could tell you what that's like for me... For the most part I just know when something doesn't feel right deep down. I couldn't vocalize why right away...and honestly, I usually don't...but I have this definite feeling in my gut that something isn't right, whether I ignore it or not. Now, often times when I have reflected on some issue that has gotten under my skin like that I have come across pretty rational and even cold in regards to my thoughts on it, but I'm still not a Thinking type; I'm just using Extraverted iNtuition to make better sense of this intensity of feeling in me. I don't know exactly how a Thinker would differ...I'm enough of a novice at this so that sometimes I can only speak for myself...but I might venture to guess that these people are more in tune with their heads than their guts; the gut would be more the domain of Feeling types. So for example, as an INFP, something significant happens and I get this intense gut feeling about it, and I use my facility for generating and exchanging ideas in order to figure out what to do about it. Whereas for an INTP, something significant happens and they instinctively think to themselves, "Wait, there's an error in the system here..." and they use their facility for generating and exchanging ideas to come to an alternate solution.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,604 Posts
This is pretty disorganized. If you don't like the sort of thing, you have fair warning.

--------------------------------

I always thought a good way to describe F was the usage of the emotion center of the brain.

But apparently, it doesn't matter if we use the logical part of our brain more than the emotion center of the brain, as an F, and it only matters that rational considerations are focusing more on the emotions rather than the logic.

How does that make sense?

Is it based on how much we experience emotions vs logic. The whole pleasantville color vs non color, or the whole star trek vulcan vs human thing.

Or is it simply what we focus on FIRST?

I'm just unclear her.

It could be what we experience most.

What we focus on most.

What we focus on FIRST.

What we focus on LAST.

I could be F in one of these and T in another.

So the descriptions of F and T, really have to be SPECIFIC, to an exact thinking pattern, otherwise they just seem ambiguous and meaningless.

Someone could have a very small emotion, and base their entire life around that one emotion, but use logic the entire time.

Someone could use logic most of the time, but any time an emotion comes up, then stop being logical, however, emotions powerful enough to have awareness only come up once in a while.


Of course, the brain scans that show Fi and Fe in opposite hemispheres, make the definition seem something else altogether.

People start saying things like "humane values."

Well, what if someone considered rocks humane?

What if someone considers logic a personal extension of themselves, akin to a religious spirit?

My contention is that there is no definition of F and T that can be called "humane" that can be agreed upon.

Unless people agree on "what is humane."


These are two very different definitions of T and F, but both have serious problems in my mind.

They seem to be culturally dependent, in where what most people consider F to be ends up being it, or we have to try and figure out what Jung or MBTI thought F was. But did they ever really explain it enough?

Where are the lines? Did they talk about people treating rocks as spirits, or logic as if it was its own entity?

Everyone must admit, I think, that there are some things in life that are rational processes that are neither F nor T in the way we define them.

And they are in the middle.

It seems to be a cultural thing as well as a brain thing.

Where in the brain, seems to be a cultural thing.

Idk, enlighten me please.
You've look at brain scans of cognitive functions? Wow, that's interesting! Any links?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,025 Posts
According to Jung F is evaluation. This is something he emphasized over and over again because people constantly misunderstood him, thinking that F has something to do with emotion.

T = categories and concepts
F = evaluations like good, bad, strange, boring, odd, etc.


When you say you like something that is F.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,229 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
According to Jung F is evaluation. This is something he emphasized over and over again because people constantly misunderstood him, thinking that F has something to do with emotion.

T = categories and concepts
F = evaluations like good, bad, strange, boring, odd, etc.


When you say you like something that is F.
Well, its not that we misunderstand it at all. You aren't actually giving a definition of it, you are just giving examples.

Its hard to give a definition, but I know what you mean.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,583 Posts
I guess it depends on Fe and Fi, but both of them are feeling. I think it comes down to decision making. My dad is a strong Te user, and he keeps telling me to decide on the thing that'll give me the best result, regardless of how I feel about it. He never forces things upon me, but he always recommends that I do something that'll have a noticeable, logical result. On the other hand, I almost always do what'll make me happiest, even if it won't have a particularly good result. Being a Fi user, I have a bit of an outburst if anyone tries to say I should do otherwise. My Fe-aux mother just sides with who she can to avoid conflict (as peace and harmony is what makes her happiest).
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
13,780 Posts
This is simple.

First of all I'd like to makes something clear. Both Fs and Ts feel emotions and they feel them according to each individual's capacity. Being emotional or in touch with emotions is not related to MBTI functions. The accurate way to see "F" is "values and ethics". The term "feeling" is used but the meaning isn't what we would understand normally, just as "arousal" doesn't mean the same in psychological terms.

...also one is not a "feeler" or a "thinker", one merely has a preference for one or the other.

Fi - subjective values and ethics. F is concerned with what feels right and what doesn't. It isn't necessarily just morality. A song can feel right or someone's speech, the actions of an individual can feel right or wrong, being in a certain situation can as well. Fi manifests as "gut feelings" about "stuff" and everyone has Fi. Remember Fi is subjective judgment. It is "twisted" by the individual that uses it. Fi values can be very different from one person to another. In essence Fi cares about what the user considers. The focus is internal, so the Fi user will be in touch with personal needs and wants.

Fe - is objective values and ethics. Fe preference manifests when the user prefers to make the surrounding environment's values their own. In essence Fe cares about what the outside objective values are. This is why as opposed to Fi, Fe cares about how others feel, what other people's values are. The focus is external, on them and the Fe user will be in sync with others needs and wants.

Another thing we should mention is that functions work together. Fi and Fe doesn't function on their own, they need different functions working with them.

So in essence if you are a robot, then you have some other problem and it doesn't mean you are NT or ST. Also being smart and capable of using logic doesn't make one a T. Same thing applies to Fs. We are not emotional sad-sacks or people with out of control emotions. Whoever has that kind of problem needs to work on it.

Difference between Fi and Fe would be things along the lines of Fe not wanting to go against objective values, while Fi may break these very values because they are not necessarily the one's the user values. Despite this Fe can and will go against foreign values, like other culture's values will be difficult or if the Fi user's values don't agree with general value systems ^^ Fe may decide "fuck you Fi, you don't belong here"...etc

Example:

Fi and Fe live in chocolate society, but Fi likes lemon "stuff". So Fi will value "lemon stuff" and maybe talk about it or act on it. Now Fe values what is around it, so it values chocolate and gets used to chocolate, it cares about chocolate and when Fi comes around with it's lemons Fe is annoyed. Fi ofc is annoyed by all the chocolate or just doesn't give a damn. <.<..now vanilla land decides to "flaunt" it's stuff in chocolate land and Fe gets pissed, Fi gets pissed because both dislike vanilla. XD big fight ensues as I just licked my 3 flavored ice cream >D but it doesn't matter because all them flavors are in one boat heading for my stomach...yummm...*drool*...ice cream....oh man, I want some now!

\o/ time to watch some ponies!...
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top