Feeler Stereotypes
It seems natural to stereotype us as irrational however I think we need to show people that feeling means we base a lot of our decisions on feelings which are thought out and NOT raw emotion. We don't decide on raw emotion and the idea of that being true would make me ashamed to be a feeler.
Do you feel people see us as that?
Do you feel people see us as that?
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
People forget the things necessary to function as an adult in society when stereo" typing". So we could effectively blame "N" types for this.
Feeling vs. thinking, in MBTI sense, has little to do with emotions. Feeling is just another way of thinking. Feelers rely on values while thinkers rely on logic. That doesn't mean a feeler can't be logical.. Or that a thinker can't have values. If the feeler stereotype is dumb and irrational, the thinker stereotype is cold and emotionless.
People making a connection that goes feeler = irrational = dumb.
Overconfident Ts thinking that what they don't understand is automatically stupid and, so if they cannot understand point of view of feelers then this must be problem with the feelers.
Overconfident Ts thinking that what they don't understand is automatically stupid and, so if they cannot understand point of view of feelers then this must be problem with the feelers.
I think the presence of science in our early education convinces a lot of people that objectivism and rationalism are the end all be all of comprehension. Feelers on the other hand tend to function outside the confines of that perspective though.. so i think for us it appears to be a parallel state, where for others it just seems "wrong". Rationalism almost causes people to draw the assumption that non-rational = non-real.
On a lot of the online quizzes they ask if governed by head or heart, logic vs feelings, etc.
I would agree with you on relying on values and people for decisions vs the most logical or efficient decision. We do base some of our decisions on feelings though and tend to be more emotional however.
I would agree with you on relying on values and people for decisions vs the most logical or efficient decision. We do base some of our decisions on feelings though and tend to be more emotional however.
I think that thinkers also base many of their decisions on feelings, though the feelings might have roots in logic where the feelers' feelings have roots in values.
The reason feelers might be more emotional might have something to do with the fact that values are more easily violated than logic.
By all means, correct me if I'm wrong. This is just a theory and I'm still learning about MBTI. I would like to hear a thinker's point of view on what I wrote... And, of course, an MBTI expert's point of view..
The reason feelers might be more emotional might have something to do with the fact that values are more easily violated than logic.
By all means, correct me if I'm wrong. This is just a theory and I'm still learning about MBTI. I would like to hear a thinker's point of view on what I wrote... And, of course, an MBTI expert's point of view..
Volition itself could be described as emotional.
Hopes, fears, goals, self esteem all Fi.
Hopes, fears, goals, self esteem all Fi.
It has more to do with whether a person is subjective or objective. As the words suggest, Feelers focus more on the subject; values, people involved, and how things affect people, and vice versa for Thinkers: situation, impersonal goal, detached assessment, etc.
nope, feelers are no more subjective than thinkers, however introverts are more subjective than extraverts
all extraverted functions are objective, they interact and derive values from world outside
all introverted functions are subjective, they interact and derive values from within the individual
Fe is no less objective than Te while Ti and Fi are both subjective functions
thinkers call feelers are more subjective simply because they do not understand and give value to same things as feelers do
all extraverted functions are objective, they interact and derive values from world outside
all introverted functions are subjective, they interact and derive values from within the individual
Fe is no less objective than Te while Ti and Fi are both subjective functions
thinkers call feelers are more subjective simply because they do not understand and give value to same things as feelers do
I have many Feeler friends and best friends IRL. Most of them are smart. I would definitely won't call them irrational. That's why I don't type people IRL. Humans has more to offer out of their type.
I think that it really depends on the type. Ti and Te are very different, as are Fe and Fi.
As I was describing in the 'vulnerability' thread in the psychology section, I have absolutely no idea how to deal with other peoples' emotional reactions. To avoid these, I hide my own emotions as well as other things. I may come off as completely emotionless or cold even if I'm not. I can tell when people are expecting some kind of emotional reaction from me, and I can't easily give those as they need. And I sometimes feel guilty for that. Other than that, I'll try to keep emotions out of the equation because I feel as if letting heaps of them into situations will make it something totally uncontrollable when exposed to other people. That doesn't mean that I look down on 'feelers' or people who view that differently...People have different ways of handling things :crazy:...
I don't think that Fi has to do just with emotions or ethics. From what I've read, it's about understanding yourself and people. I actually think that 'feeling' is more about people than it is about ethics or feelings, really. Emotions may be included in that, but then they may not be depending on the person. And you'll see some thinkers who claim to not have any emotions at all. And then you'll see some who freely admit that they're emotional, but that they don't show it readily.
I don't know what you mean by 'basing decisions on feelings', though.
As I was describing in the 'vulnerability' thread in the psychology section, I have absolutely no idea how to deal with other peoples' emotional reactions. To avoid these, I hide my own emotions as well as other things. I may come off as completely emotionless or cold even if I'm not. I can tell when people are expecting some kind of emotional reaction from me, and I can't easily give those as they need. And I sometimes feel guilty for that. Other than that, I'll try to keep emotions out of the equation because I feel as if letting heaps of them into situations will make it something totally uncontrollable when exposed to other people. That doesn't mean that I look down on 'feelers' or people who view that differently...People have different ways of handling things :crazy:...
I don't think that Fi has to do just with emotions or ethics. From what I've read, it's about understanding yourself and people. I actually think that 'feeling' is more about people than it is about ethics or feelings, really. Emotions may be included in that, but then they may not be depending on the person. And you'll see some thinkers who claim to not have any emotions at all. And then you'll see some who freely admit that they're emotional, but that they don't show it readily.
I don't know what you mean by 'basing decisions on feelings', though.
Feeler stereotypes likely originated with dominant thinkers (ENTJ, ESTJ, INTP, ISTP), because the feeling function is in the inferior. Our inferior function is often somewhat inaccessible or uncontrollable, on a conscious level, and encounters with it, in others, are typically demonized. Dominant thinkers are uncomfortable with basing decisions on that which matters most to feelers, personal values and feelings about things. Similarly, thinker stereotypes almost assuredly derived from dominant feeler (INFP, ISFP, ENFJ, ESFJ) types, because they base decisions on personal standards, and are loathe to do otherwise. They may think it cold, callous, etc. to do such a thing, because it's directly opposed to what they're naturally inclined to do.
However, I wouldn't say feelers were truly more emotional. A great many ENTJ profiles, for example, mention anger problems and some even suggest anger management, suggesting this is a very common trait of the type. Furthermore, I've witnessed an INTP deteriorate into the immature SFJ mode, when they couldn't get Ti's needs met, in a debate, and interacted with an ENTP, who actually seemed to be slipping into clinical depression, because they were currently in an environment where their ideas were constantly being attacked or instantly dismissed. Yes, even the stone cold NT's can be emotional creatures. All it takes is the right triggers. After all, we're all human. Emotions have little, if anything to do with type. Perhaps, at most, type may decide, to some extent, how we deal with them or what triggers them.
However, I wouldn't say feelers were truly more emotional. A great many ENTJ profiles, for example, mention anger problems and some even suggest anger management, suggesting this is a very common trait of the type. Furthermore, I've witnessed an INTP deteriorate into the immature SFJ mode, when they couldn't get Ti's needs met, in a debate, and interacted with an ENTP, who actually seemed to be slipping into clinical depression, because they were currently in an environment where their ideas were constantly being attacked or instantly dismissed. Yes, even the stone cold NT's can be emotional creatures. All it takes is the right triggers. After all, we're all human. Emotions have little, if anything to do with type. Perhaps, at most, type may decide, to some extent, how we deal with them or what triggers them.
Stereotyping us as illogical is one of the most ridiculous things ever...
I can be very logical when I talk about politics and how I see the world..It just so happens that I usually combine my reason with my intuition and there have been times when my intuition get ahead of my reason, thus I appear ''out of touch.'' It just so happens that I put value on subtle emotions and my subjective world more than what people can usually do, and thus I appear unaware.
Whatever, the idea that thinking differently means being out of touch with logic is one of the most illogical things I have ever heard.
I can be very logical when I talk about politics and how I see the world..It just so happens that I usually combine my reason with my intuition and there have been times when my intuition get ahead of my reason, thus I appear ''out of touch.'' It just so happens that I put value on subtle emotions and my subjective world more than what people can usually do, and thus I appear unaware.
Whatever, the idea that thinking differently means being out of touch with logic is one of the most illogical things I have ever heard.
That actually comes down to E vs I. For example a Te user will be objective since they gather energy from the outer world and a Ti user will look inside themselves, thus being subjective.
Same goes for Fi vs Fe.
Same goes for Fi vs Fe.
About the "feelers use no logic" notion: I don't base my decisions on feelings or the wishes of other people. Why would I? It makes no sense. If OPTION 44 is clearly more fruitful than OPTION 81, of course I want 44. I might have to fire the people involved with OPTION 81, but their future misfortune is irrelevant to the conclusions presented by the facts. So that throws a piece of the stereotype out the window. I base my decisions more on logic, careful analysis of solid data, and in many cases, past experience.
In fact, on those dichotomy tests, I score at least 90% T. THAT SAID... I decided that I am ENFJ because I know the benefits of using Fe. You know the saying, "it's not WHAT you know, it's WHO you know"?
The Fe is what enables me to obtain contacts, and persuade people, so that it's faster and easier to accomplish my real goals.
Which reminds me...for ENFJs, we have this association with CULT LEADERS. :crazy: As you can see from my perspective, I can see how that idea could come up, but I'm no maniac looking to kill flocks of humans. What would that accomplish? I'd rather be CEO and make millions. ;-D
In fact, on those dichotomy tests, I score at least 90% T. THAT SAID... I decided that I am ENFJ because I know the benefits of using Fe. You know the saying, "it's not WHAT you know, it's WHO you know"?
The Fe is what enables me to obtain contacts, and persuade people, so that it's faster and easier to accomplish my real goals.
Which reminds me...for ENFJs, we have this association with CULT LEADERS. :crazy: As you can see from my perspective, I can see how that idea could come up, but I'm no maniac looking to kill flocks of humans. What would that accomplish? I'd rather be CEO and make millions. ;-D
@vel
I use it in the sense that feelers tend to focus on the SUBJECT of a situation rather than the OBJECT. A simple sentence: "I play ball". Feelers focus on the subject, thinkers the object of the sentence. "Jim broke into a store and stole bread". He ought to be punished like any other criminal who "broke into a store and stole things". But wait. It's JIM. He would never do that unless he's got a good reason. He just lost his job and can't take care of his three young kids. Does he really deserve the same sentence? It has nothing to do with whether thinkers or feelers are more subjective in the sense that they react less based on impersonal, outside standards. Both are equally subjective. Whichever approach to the above dilemma makes more sense to you, however, is equally rational.
If that makes sense.
I use it in the sense that feelers tend to focus on the SUBJECT of a situation rather than the OBJECT. A simple sentence: "I play ball". Feelers focus on the subject, thinkers the object of the sentence. "Jim broke into a store and stole bread". He ought to be punished like any other criminal who "broke into a store and stole things". But wait. It's JIM. He would never do that unless he's got a good reason. He just lost his job and can't take care of his three young kids. Does he really deserve the same sentence? It has nothing to do with whether thinkers or feelers are more subjective in the sense that they react less based on impersonal, outside standards. Both are equally subjective. Whichever approach to the above dilemma makes more sense to you, however, is equally rational.
If that makes sense.
Well...the thing is, I'd never say anything unneccessarily harsh, but I guess I can be blunt at times. Stereotypically, feelers always lie to spare feelings, but I value honesty too much to lie like that all the time. At the same time, though, I'd like criticism to actually serve a purpose. You should give criticism so a person can improve themselves, not to de-motiave them or anything.
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
