Personality Cafe banner

21 - 40 of 46 Posts

·
Registered
ISTP
Joined
·
1,203 Posts
I see ISTPs as being very emotional, although they might not be good at showing it. Also they have that INFP super ego.
... what, in your definition, then is the meaning of "very emotional"? Currently, your sentence is the equivalent of ordering a burger, except without bread, patties, sauce and extras.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,557 Posts
... what, in your definition, then is the meaning of "very emotional"? Currently, your sentence is the equivalent of ordering a burger, except without bread, patties, sauce and extras.

I don't have a personal definition of "very emotional". I used and meant that phrase the same way most people would use it. I think.

Your analogy (that's the right word right ???) to my sentence doesn't make sense to me.
 

·
Registered
ISTP
Joined
·
1,203 Posts
@Hicks: My understanding of "very emotional" as relating to a person is someone who very easily breaks out in obvious manifestation of emotions. Which you promptly nixed with "not good at showing". I don't know anyone who would call a person that never showed emotions (for whatever reason) "emotional". That's why I asked. If I had understood your sentence, I would have engaged the content :bwink:

Rephrasing: Could you describe in which way you think we are emotional?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,557 Posts
@Hicks: My understanding of "very emotional" as relating to a person is someone who very easily breaks out in obvious manifestation of emotions. Which you promptly nixed with "not good at showing". I don't know anyone who would call a person that never showed emotions (for whatever reason) "emotional". That's why I asked. If I had understood your sentence, I would have engaged the content :bwink:

Rephrasing: Could you describe in which way you think we are emotional?

I don't think of emotional in that way. That definition in Myers Briggs terms sounded more like Fe. The way I see it ISTPs (the healthier ones) are emotional but not very expressive about it. INFP super shadow means that they use Fi subconsciously, I think.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,557 Posts
Yes, but what does that mean? I don't understand. Do you have an example, perhaps?
I don't understand what you don't understand about that. No, I don't have any specific examples, not ones that I could point out for you to observe if that makes sense. I'm mainly talking about my own experience with them. They strike me as being guarded for fear of being taken advantage of or hurt by vicious people. They seem to get attached to people very intensely and are extremely loyal and protective to the ones they care about. (the healthy ones at least).

Here's one example actually. I know an ISTP who had a friend who was a heroin addict. He tried to help him get off drugs for a long time. He eventually cut him out of his life entirely because he knew that he wasn't going to get clean. Now my perception of why he did that is because he knew that his friend was probably going to die from an overdose and he knew that he was too sensitive to be able to handle it if it did happen. This is why ISTPs are prone to emotional detachment I think. Because they are overly sensitive to bad results. Hope this helps.
 

·
Registered
ISTP
Joined
·
1,203 Posts
@Hicks: You told me my definition of that word was not what you had in mind. Given that I have no other, I literally didn't understand what you were saying. I asked in the same way you would ask if I said "You are akwtzfget". That kind of "don't understand".

This post cleared it up, though. "Sensitive" makes sense, and the example did, too. I disagree with regards to both :)

I would cut out a friend as well, but not because of fearing the emotional end, but rather, because in the end, I prioritise my life over theirs on the one hand, and on the other, in this situation, it's also factually correct -- it's established that if anything can (and there is little chance anything will), setting clear boundaries and distancing yourself has a chance of working on addicts. To corroborate: My grandparents are old and could die anytime (not sick or anything -- just old). I don't fear the hurt -- for that matter, I know there will be no big hurt, even though I love them very much, simply because I don't do big emotions.

It's going to be a muted kind of sadness, a dull pain that stays with you always; and consequently, my response is not to distance myself to somehow lessen the pain -- not least, because I don't think about the future enough to plan it that way, my domain the the present --, but rather, in the last few years, I've taken to spending as much time with them as I can, because the shared moments is what I'll remember them by. What does make me concerned is all the other people's emotions I will have no clue how to deal with. Like I said: Out of my depth. I know family will turn towards me as well for emotional support, and I will have no idea what to do: I cannot provide what they need. That's an uncomfortable situation.

And as regards "sensitive", and fear of being taken advantage of by vicious people: By some accounts, we are those "vicious people". When bluntness tips over into cruelty, when instead through ignorance offence is caused deliberately, when the imbalance of our insensitivity regarding emotional hurt compared to other people's is exploited to hit where it hurts without having to fear retribution in kind -- then that is still us, and rather the opposite of what you describe.

I maintain what I said: Emotional detachment is not something we do. It's something in us that is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,557 Posts
@Hicks: You told me my definition of that word was not what you had in mind. Given that I have no other, I literally didn't understand what you were saying. I asked in the same way you would ask if I said "You are akwtzfget". That kind of "don't understand".

This post cleared it up, though. "Sensitive" makes sense, and the example did, too. I disagree with regards to both :)

I would cut out a friend as well, but not because of fearing the emotional end, but rather, because in the end, I prioritise my life over theirs on the one hand, and on the other, in this situation, it's also factually correct -- it's established that if anything can (and there is little chance anything will), setting clear boundaries and distancing yourself has a chance of working on addicts. To corroborate: My grandparents are old and could die anytime (not sick or anything -- just old). I don't fear the hurt -- for that matter, I know there will be no big hurt, even though I love them very much, simply because I don't do big emotions.

It's going to be a muted kind of sadness, a dull pain that stays with you always; and consequently, my response is not to distance myself to somehow lessen the pain -- not least, because I don't think about the future enough to plan it that way, my domain the the present --, but rather, in the last few years, I've taken to spending as much time with them as I can, because the shared moments is what I'll remember them by. What does make me concerned is all the other people's emotions I will have no clue how to deal with. Like I said: Out of my depth. I know family will turn towards me as well for emotional support, and I will have no idea what to do: I cannot provide what they need. That's an uncomfortable situation.

And as regards "sensitive", and fear of being taken advantage of by vicious people: By some accounts, we are those "vicious people". When bluntness tips over into cruelty, when instead through ignorance offence is caused deliberately, when the imbalance of our insensitivity regarding emotional hurt compared to other people's is exploited to hit where it hurts without having to fear retribution in kind -- then that is still us, and rather the opposite of what you describe.

I maintain what I said: Emotional detachment is not something we do. It's something in us that is.

Can I ask you a question though. A lot of what you described as what you see as your weaknesses were Fe and I agree that Fe is a potential trouble spot for ISTPs. But if you ever read up on socionics it says that ISTPs have and use Fi. So my question is how do you relate to Fi ?? I understand that ISTPs are not walking around all the time being emotional but is it something that randomly shows up in your life every now and then ?? Oh yeah, and before you say MBTI and socionics are different systems let me just say that yes, they are different systems but they're both trying to explain the same thing which is the cognitive functions.

Have you ever read the socionics explanation of how ISTPs relate to Fi ?? If you haven't you might wanna give it a go go. It might help you to better answer my question. https://www.sociotype.com/socionics/types/LSI-ISTj/
 

·
Registered
ISTP
Joined
·
1,203 Posts
@Hicks: I'll try my best. I have to say, though, that I prefer MBTI in letters, and that I don't know and don't think much of Socionics -- I relate to the ISTp, there, which I understand is a problem for that theory. So in terms of you linking the ISTj: No, I don't relate to that and never have. It sounds, in many ways, like the opposite of what I am, really. (And for that matter, it is the opposite if you compare any random MBTI ISTP profile -- clearly, something is not working here.)

As far sometimes showing emotions go: As I mentioned, I never (or rarely, and I'm terrible at it ...) hide what I feel. What you see is what you get. Which includes e.g. (very -- like, once-in-a-decade) rare bursts of anger, but mostly minor stuff: annoyance, irritation (those are the main negative ones), happieness, and the default one, contentment. So the relevant thing is not that I don't show emotions but sometimes I do. But rather, that I always show emotions, and usually, it's a tiny blib on the radar, because that's all that's there.

There's also a very convenient imbalance between good and bad feelings. I regularly feel immensely happy. Ice-skating under the moonlight, just me, the clear, cold night, and the ice. Sitting on a hill I climbed, feel the wind, see the land, and watch the sundown. Those are magic moments that fill me with happiness until it's almost too much to contain and I think it'll overflow. Conversely, I can't remember any moment in my entire life that had the equivalent in terms of anger.

So, Fi ...? I really dunno. As far as I am aware, typically it's described as personal subjective values and judgement based on that. I hardly ever think about things in terms of moral "wrong" or "right". I think in terms of (subjective) facts -- "true" or "false". Makes sense, doesn't make sense. Those are my judgements. I struggle to assign values to things -- consequently, in terms of ethics, I work along the lines of Kant, constructing rational considerations for oughts and oughtn'ts as best I can. I suppose you can look at this and say it's a deficit in "Fi", and that's how "Fi shows itself" in me, as a weakness -- but then, I'd argue, this is just the same as defining Fi as "Not Ti", which, if you go by the usual function model, indeed is the case, as IxTPs lack "Fi", and IxFPs lack "Ti".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,248 Posts
@Hicks:

So, Fi ...? I really dunno. As far as I am aware, typically it's described as personal subjective values and judgement based on that. I hardly ever think about things in terms of moral "wrong" or "right". I think in terms of (subjective) facts -- "true" or "false". Makes sense, doesn't make sense. .
I think everyone have fi it's just not used the same way

Anyhow curiosity- if someone was the rape their own child for pure pleasure- would that be a matter of wrong or right or true or false in your eyes?


Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
ISTJ
Joined
·
1,547 Posts
Discussion Starter #31
@Northern Lights

Super interesting stuff, although also super foreign to me. How can you not assign value to things and how can you not feel a giant, sharp throb of pain at the death of dearly beloved ones? Those are just rhetorical questions, no judgment or anything like that intended. Just so different from me. Actually, I think my husband is very similar. Every time we watch something extremely sad on TV like that movie In This Corner of the World and I'm bawling my eyes out, I look at him and he just blankly staring and I ask him if he feels sad, and he's like not really. He's by no means a psychopath or evil or anything like that, he's actually very caring and loving, but it's like you mentioned, his default mode is like 90% contentment. 10% would be those rare moments of other, and it really takes somebody extremely close to him to trigger it. Strangers could never. How fascinating, seriously.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,952 Posts
I see ISTPs as being very emotional, although they might not be good at showing it. Also they have that INFP super ego.
I would never have considered myself and ego in the same breath or sentence. That just didn’t tabulate for me. I do consider myself confident in areas I have been trained in or where I have ample experience. But you may be correct. It could be that what seems to me to be confidence projects to others as ego. You may have just shared a very valuable observation.

Thanks, I needed that.
 

·
Registered
ISTP
Joined
·
1,203 Posts
I think everyone have fi it's just not used the same way

Anyhow curiosity- if someone was the rape their own child for pure pleasure- would that be a matter of wrong or right or true or false in your eyes?
@ai: Also compare my post in your forum, here.

The thing is this: Certainly either of those things is "wrong". But "right" and "wrong" are entirely abstract to me. It's nothing concrete, nothing tangible -- it's a concept I can treat intellectually, an issue I have an opinion on, but that's it. In particular, "it's wrong" isn't what is stopping me from doing anything. It couldn't, not if it's that abstract. What is stopping me e.g. from your example is that it doesn't make sense. It's incomprehensibly irrational. And that is my indictment -- and from my perspective, it equals your "it's wrong", in bite and meaning. It certainly possesses the same conviction, the same quality of just knowing this is the case.

@Bunniculla : Keep in mind I haven't experienced it yet, although my projection of how I would react is nearly infallible. Anyway, funnily enough, I easily get teary-eyed at emotional scenes in movies and stuff. Say, Frodo leaving at the end of LotR. It's just that it's ... well, this is hard to describe. Like it's an externally induced reaction? Like, not my feelings. I don't feel sad. It is sad. And I react to that, involuntarily. Does that make any kind of sense?
 

·
Registered
ISTJ
Joined
·
1,547 Posts
Discussion Starter #34
Keep in mind I haven't experienced it yet, although my projection of how I would react is nearly infallible. Anyway, funnily enough, I easily get teary-eyed at emotional scenes in movies and stuff. Say, Frodo leaving at the end of LotR. It's just that it's ... well, this is hard to describe. Like it's an externally induced reaction? Like, not my feelings. I don't feel sad. It is sad. And I react to that, involuntarily. Does that make any kind of sense?
Conceptually, yes it makes sense, but personally (like can I imagine myself doing it and put myself in your shoes), flat out no lol. I can't imagine how it would be to absorb the actual/universally accepted interpretation of external vibe/emotion but not knowing that it was also my own from within? Now, I don't know if that makes sense to you lol. If I was watching those sad movies and got teary eyed or cried, I couldn't actually know how that would have felt because I've never been in that situation but somehow, it still feels sad on a personal level, like a heart throbbing kind of sad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,248 Posts
@ai: Also compare my post in your forum, here.

The thing is this: Certainly either of those things is "wrong". But "right" and "wrong" are entirely abstract to me. It's nothing concrete, nothing tangible -- it's a concept I can treat intellectually, an issue I have an opinion on, but that's it. In particular, "it's wrong" isn't what is stopping me from doing anything. It couldn't, not if it's that abstract. What is stopping me e.g. from your example is that it doesn't make sense. It's incomprehensibly irrational. And that is my indictment -- and from my perspective, it equals your "it's wrong", in bite and meaning. It certainly possesses the same conviction, the same quality of just knowing this is the case.

[
Interesting how you described it - my istp partner tends to view matters in a sense on whether or not its rational as well , often time we agree on the same thing however his thought process of getting to that point differs from mine.
Anyhow- my response was on how fi works- since you mentioned that you lack having it - I think everyone can use a function if talked about it.
Fi for me works this way - my feelings/thought process/reflection derives from within and it runs like a systematic map interlace with logic and ethic nonstop- I can pin point my emotions and know where it derives from and control it , i don't have any problems with controlling my emotions- it's on my will on whether i choose to express it or not. I notice with low fe it's the opposite( or at least from what I've observed from those with inferior fe) they could care less about showing how they feel or expressing their feelings - it's their thoughts that is kept within- which lead me to asking the next question( I hope I'm not offending you bc this pertains to my extreme curiosity )

If you were to save a train full of unknown people vs 5 of the people you care for most in this world - which option would you choose and what's the explanation behind that

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
ISTP
Joined
·
1,203 Posts
( I hope I'm not offending you bc this pertains to my extreme curiosity )
You hope you don't, but in any case you'd never not ask <3

Nah. Offending me works better with talking bullshit and assuming I believe it. You're right though, I wouldn't answer this in person. Praise the internet and its anonymous closeness.

If you were to save a train full of unknown people vs 5 of the people you care for most in this world - which option would you choose and what's the explanation behind that
You hit on the one dilemma that isn't a dilemma for me. I'm selfish, and I'm fine with that. (As opposed to many people, who are still selfish, but beat themselves up about it ... perfectly pointless.) So this isn't even a question I have to think about -- it's the five people. And I very much suspect I wouldn't have any trouble living with that decision.

You can make it arbitrarily complicated, of course. What if I have a duty to the train in some capacity, or what if it wasn't a train, but a city, or not a city, but the entire world ... eh. I guess at that point, I'd take the entire world, simply because I don't care about being the last persons on earth. But my five people are worth a lot of random people, in any case.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,763 Posts
I think the ambiguity of interpreting emotion from behavior for ITPs stem from the unintegrated Fe. This creates a Jekyll/Hyde or hot/cold dynamic where a somewhat autonomous complex can manifest through the inferior to temporarily wrest away control from the differentiated ego with regards to interpersonal relationships. e.g. I can show interpersonal warmth / interest in you one day and neglect you the next if I caught feelings for you as the ego wars it out with the anima/animus. To the observer, such behavior is inconsistent and the relationship unstable; a differentiated Fe will instead channel emotions into the behaviours afforded by varied social roles that could be inhabited. e.g. mentor-mentee, colleague, acquiescence, friend have different boundaries for emotional expression.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,248 Posts
You hope you don't, but in any case you'd never not ask <3

Nah. Offending me works better with talking bullshit and assuming I believe it. You're right though, I wouldn't answer this in person. Praise the internet and its anonymous closeness.


You hit on the one dilemma that isn't a dilemma for me. I'm selfish, and I'm fine with that. (As opposed to many people, who are still selfish, but beat themselves up about it ... perfectly pointless.) So this isn't even a question I have to think about -- it's the five people. And I very much suspect I wouldn't have any trouble living with that decision.

You can make it arbitrarily complicated, of course. What if I have a duty to the train in some capacity, or what if it wasn't a train, but a city, or not a city, but the entire world ... eh. I guess at that point, I'd take the entire world, simply because I don't care about being the last persons on earth. But my five people are worth a lot of random people, in any case.

° no it's not much of a dilemma here for me either - or at all to be frank and I didn't ask you this question in terms of thinking that it would put you in any sort of dilemma
I had a feeling you would pick the 5 people and likewise my answer is similar to yours

" But my five people are worth a lot of random people, in any case"

Only difference between us is that I don't find my action selfish for saving the 5 people that I'm closest with over a group of people that I don't know- because the group of stranger brings no meanings to me , I wouldn't feel any regrets for my decision either ( that's fi subjectivity for you) :)

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
639 Posts
You hit on the one dilemma that isn't a dilemma for me. I'm selfish, and I'm fine with that. So this isn't even a question I have to think about -- it's the five people. And I very much suspect I wouldn't have any trouble living with that decision.
And if the train will kill either yourself or the five you care about the most?
 

·
Registered
ISTP
Joined
·
1,203 Posts
Only difference between us is that I don't find my action selfish for saving the 5 people that I'm closest with over a group of people that I don't know- because the group of stranger brings no meanings to me , I wouldn't feel any regrets for my decision either ( that's fi subjectivity for you) :)
Hah, indeed it is -- as the "selfish" judgement was made from the POV of everyone else. I'm assuming people would consider it that, and by that token agreed. Thinking about this subjectively doesn't make much sense to me, but then again, that's what you'd expect.

And if the train will kill either yourself or the five you care about the most?
Hmm ... tough. Do you have an answer ready?

Simplify it: Trade your life for your partner's? Presumably, the appreciation is bi-directional. I think it'd be only fair to discuss it, if at all possible. Respect seems to demand this. I wouldn't want people randomly sacrificing themselves for me, anyway. It's easier with children, I suppose; the years-left-to-live thing is a compelling argument.

So ... yeah. Lots of individual cases so that I don't think there is a one-size-fits-all answer, here. Nice one :)
 
21 - 40 of 46 Posts
Top