Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I myself have never been... big on emotions. INTP after all... but Still whenever i'm in a committed relationship and so on I tend to get lonely and have the occasional bout of... feeling from well I suppose not having enough intimacy. I think ive read somewhere that we INTPs tend to not grant emotions... "ground" unless we find a certain... level of... IDK how to put it. but I still wonder. out of every thinking type of thinkers, from INTPs to ESTJs... is the occasional bout of feelings like I described normal in a relationship, for a thinker?
 
  • Like
Reactions: marybluesky

·
Registered
Joined
·
829 Posts
INTP here. My emotional side is unknown and immature (if it shows up ever): I can experience a violent rush of emotions in some circumstances, such as the intense early steps of some relationships or mood swing, however I don't exactly know how to channel it, and such a rush doesn't last anyway.
I have never been in committed relationships but always, after I allowed someone to enter my life as a potential romantic partner, I have felt succumbed shortly after and missed my lonely days, even if they were distant themselves. It is much worse if the other party is pushing or controlling: then I almost literally feel suffocated.
To be honest, I have been always happier spending time alone doing my hobbies or being with like-minded people who have no expectation other than friendship rather than going on dates. I also fear dependency and being hurt. On the other hand, the communication sucks in romantic relationship: you should work on yourself and be open about your needs- which isn't my strength- while the other party may appreciate it or not. I find something unnatural here.
 

·
exploring space
Joined
·
9,975 Posts
My INTP boyfriend of almost a decade likes to express his emotions by being physically affectionate to me. This way he sees my reactions and is emotionally pleased himself. It's the Fe. He has a very hard time understanding what he feels, except when he relates with my emotional reactions.

Other than that he tends to have outbursts of anger or frustration at times and he won't listen when I warn him beforehands that he is getting emotionally charged. To me the signs are obvious but he just can't utilize that well.
 

·
MOTM Dec 2011
Joined
·
8,651 Posts
INTP here. My emotional side is unknown and immature (if it shows up ever): I can experience a violent rush of emotions in some circumstances, such as the intense early steps of some relationships or mood swing, however I don't exactly know how to channel it, and such a rush doesn't last anyway.
I have never been in committed relationships but always, after I allowed someone to enter my life as a potential romantic partner, I have felt succumbed shortly after and missed my lonely days, even if they were distant themselves. It is much worse if the other party is pushing or controlling: then I almost literally feel suffocated.
To be honest, I have been always happier spending time alone doing my hobbies or being with like-minded people who have no expectation other than friendship rather than going on dates. I also fear dependency and being hurt. On the other hand, the communication sucks in romantic relationship: you should work on yourself and be open about your needs- which isn't my strength- while the other party may appreciate it or not. I find something unnatural here.

How do you think you compare to Ti men?

I can relate a lot to this, but would probably express it a bit differently. Not to sound condescending, but I might have a more indepth understanding of my emotions and the whys behind it all, which is why I continue to identify as INFP and not INTP. For example, my emotions are well known to myself and nuanced, but I too experience spontaneous rushes that I don't know what to do with, and the vulnerability of not knowing what to do and feeling clumsy and silly makes me withdraw. I know exactly what it means, why it occurs, what causes it, etc; and I ultimately know where I want it to lead to, but I just don't know how to "harness" it and use it for a purpose.... It usually comes out either heavy-handed and too intense, which puts people off, or too nonchalant and not conveying its actual strength/depth, which also puts people off (i.e. I'm deemed cold and indifferent). I over explain my emotions too, because I feel some need to rationally justify them.

So my behavior is probably similar.

I've only ever dated one person that I did not eventually feel smothered by. This is largely because I've rarely dated anyone I was really into. I tend to just give people a chance out of curiousity. My tendency to only get really into people not available to me has worried me, making me wonder if I'm turned off by availability because it threatens my autonomy..... As much as I say I need to be pursued, it has to be casually and lightly. Consistency is good, but with space to breathe in-between.

I can't say I am content with friendship because intimacy is important to me, as is physical touch, which often occurs less with friendship than romance. As much as I can be a loner, I prefer to be around the same few people I like and will get drained by them or get sick of them much less easily than others. This can make me feel clingy with those people, although no one has ever expressed that about me (probably the opposite). I suppose I like to be around them more than I let on, but probably fear they may feel burdened by me (projection of my own feelings of being burdened by people? Probably). I can easily imagine spending my life with one person I adore, because commitment doesn't scare me nor does intimacy...I just don't want to be engulfed and drained, so it seems to be about "the right person".

As I am kind of socially dense, I prefer to be upfront about intentions. Something growing out of friendship would likely leave me paranoid because I might sense the shift in emotion, but not be sure what to do with it. I am very aware of emotional vibes from others, but again, not sure what to do with that info and I may question my reading of it when I am involved (whereas my reading of it can be very good when I am an observer only). So I don't mind formal dating because it clarifies things for me, but I don't want pressure from it, no. I like to be upfront that attraction exists and interest is beyond the platonic, but I am not eager to be exclusive early on. I find most men eager to give me the girlfriend title earlier than I am comfortable with.

I'm quite romantic at heart, even if family & friends say otherwise because I don't like their brand of sentimentality. I like poetry and dramatic romantic movies when well-done. I also enjoy being affected and carried away emotionally, but it doesn't happen in relation to stuff that may affect others. Because I am affected by such different things, my emotion can feel embarrassingly out of place, which just adds to my feeling awkward about it. You hear about how poets and artists will see, say, a dew drop on a petal and be emotionally affected, and that's my kind of emotional response. It's a different kind of cliche, really, and I notice it has a lot to do with responding to aesthetics over emotions in other people, unless that person has particular significance to me personally. So a movie scene or speech contrived to get an emotional response may go right past me. I will intellectually understand the meaning it's conveying, but I won't feel the intended emotion. This doesn't mean I am only empathetic to people who I personally value; it just means I experience a more intellectual variety which can actually make me more principled & acting with the right feeling, whereas when I am personally affected, I can be more irrational. So I think in relationships I fear the irrational emotional response taking over, whereas when I don't care much, then I am quite mature and seemingly emotionally intelligent as far as handling conflict or expressing what I need.

Anyway, didn't intend a wall of text, but wanted to explore the similarities/differences since as a 4w5, I'm kind of a blend of Ti/Fi in my general demeanor, even if I identify as a Feeling type.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,303 Posts
Other than that he tends to have outbursts of anger or frustration at times and he won't listen when I warn him beforehands that he is getting emotionally charged. To me the signs are obvious but he just can't utilize that well.
This is very interesting. I don't notice when I become emotionally charged until it's too late. Can you explain what the signs are? Please feel free to share anything related which you think is useful.
 

·
exploring space
Joined
·
9,975 Posts
This is very interesting. I don't notice when I become emotionally charged until it's too late. Can you explain what the signs are? Please feel free to share anything related which you think is useful.
It's not exactly signs, more like I know that what he's doing will affect him emotionally and warn him and he either refuses it or at best acknowledges but in passing, without giving the proper significance and then keeps going until it happens. And when he's about to burst I usually see him being more active, more hyper, more stressed, he'll fidget more or talk more about the topic that is triggering him and things like that. He's old enough now to understand emotions better than a decade ago but he does have a hard time controlling them/dealing with them before they go over his limits. Fortunately all in all this doesn't happen frequently, he's not quick to anger or something, it's just that he has outbursts instead of slow diffusion. And I'm guilty of sending him off the edge sometimes because of the topics we argue about at times. Not that I do it on purpose it just happens because he is more sensitive to me given our relationship so he gets emotional more easily.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,713 Posts
Actually yes. I do find myself feeling things for a girl that I've got a crush on from time to time. What usually accompanies is finding 10,000 ways to escape the feelings and introspection. Something about ESTPs being terrified of introspection. Or feeling. Might be both.

Usually going to the gym and lifting gets rid of said feelings. There's something therapeutic about lifting heavy things.

It's normal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,142 Posts
This is very interesting. I don't notice when I become emotionally charged until it's too late. Can you explain what the signs are? Please feel free to share anything related which you think is useful.
The signs are you get really loud and abrasive with your voice, but then when someone reacts to it you don't know why they become loud and abrasive, it's largely due to your own loudness and abrasiveness. So since you have Fe you can tell your are mad if someone you are speaking to is getting angry for no reason, it's probably due to your own tone of voice that's causing them to behave this way.

I had an argument with an INTP one time and he started to raise his voice at me, I started to raise my voice back at him because he was angering me, then all of the sudden he stopped and said "Why are you getting made, I feel like your getting angry". I'm like......"WTF?!". I couldn't understand why he could not see I was getting mad because he was YELLING at me, it was very very strange, but after MBTI I understand now, so that is one of the signs, when you start YELLING at someone lol.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
8,873 Posts
If you like this sneak peak; we can talk. I'm a little shy.

Well we're already talking

The one thing i noticed about intjs because I've been studying their psychological behavior you know.. I study your species.
Intjs are thinking too much and they always think they cannot do it. They lack confidence to just do it..

Remember, if you want something, there's always two results: failure or success

Open your mind to failure. Immune yourself. It's part of life. Better to fail than do nothing at all

With success, that's a product of trying something and not giving up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,303 Posts
The signs are you get really loud and abrasive with your voice, but then when someone reacts to it you don't know why they become loud and abrasive, it's largely due to your own loudness and abrasiveness. So since you have Fe you can tell your are mad if someone you are speaking to is getting angry for no reason, it's probably due to your own tone of voice that's causing them to behave this way.

I had an argument with an INTP one time and he started to raise his voice at me, I started to raise my voice back at him because he was angering me, then all of the sudden he stopped and said "Why are you getting made, I feel like your getting angry". I'm like......"WTF?!". I couldn't understand why he could not see I was getting mad because he was YELLING at me, it was very very strange, but after MBTI I understand now, so that is one of the signs, when you start YELLING at someone lol.
True, those are some external indicators. A person's behavior affects another's internal and external state. I don't question that type of cause and effect :bwink: But it takes me a long time to arrive at that negative state (exceptions definitely exist).

Usually, my emotions have built up for months (often years) before I either completely shut down or explode indiscriminately. Typically, the build up comes from other people -
(1) using me as a dumping ground for their emotions/problems
(2) disregarding my personal boundaries
(3) throwing drama left and right into my life

Unfortunately, I don't notice that internal build up because I always tell myself "I can handle it. This is not a big deal. They need my strength + problem solving skills. I'm here to give it to them so that they can solve their problems and move on." But their problems inevitably turn out to be never ending. At that point (when it's too late), I feel incredibly used for my generosity of time, patience and willingness to help. That's when my lid pops off in multiple parts of my life.

I was hoping for something more focused on internal behavioral indicators or patterns. Then again, maybe the solution is to first create much thicker boundaries so that these problems can't happen in the first place. Later, if necessary, I can focus on the nuanced internal indicators.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,765 Posts
and so on I tend to get lonely and have the occasional bout of... feeling from well I suppose not having enough intimacy.
Would you care to explain or expand? specially on "not having enough intimacy". Intimacy is to many about physical-emotional-contact and also sex, but intimacy is also about self exposure and contact (emotional) between two. I don't see clear indicators on what you mean. Usually thinkers can have lots of sex or not if they want to etc, but intimacy is another thing...

Thinkers can as other types, get a deep, profound and meaningful knowledge and understanding of the other person problems/emotions/situations. Diff types can do it in diff ways, thinkers can achieve it using logic and exploring multiple paths until one is confirmed as the "model", in short: we are able to identify how our loved one works, you can call it cognitive if you want to, then again there are multiple ways. And if you are an introvert you end up usually, building what some might call virtual models inside your mental simulator (it's been called like that on other forums).

So at times when a thinker explains intimate stuff, it takes other people to get it, not just about "the thing" but the whole dimension of "it", where it begins and where it ends. More than often introvers + thinkers get the "how do you know me so well!!!" while they don't feel the same way around. Many introverts and thinkers take many of those episodes to their alone time/area seeing how difficult it is to some people to get it.

At the end... intimacy, specially when it comes to the mind, intellect and emotions, just doesn't cut it if the other person thinks "listening" does the job, it's about confirming what's been said: true empathy.


is the occasional bout of feelings like I described normal in a relationship, for a thinker?
(I'm trying to understand your post/thread) honestly "described" just doesn't seem to narrow it clearly. Your post is quite short, leaves space to wonder and guess, my bet with all due respect if youll have to be more clear and direct, specific on what you mean. Perhaps this is what's happening on your situation, lack of clear communication. But then again I'm just guessing, don't quite understand what you mean, I see space for diff situations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
598 Posts
Well we're already talking

The one thing i noticed about intjs because I've been studying their psychological behavior you know.. I study your species.
Intjs are thinking too much and they always think they cannot do it. They lack confidence to just do it..

Remember, if you want something, there's always two results: failure or success

Open your mind to failure. Immune yourself. It's part of life. Better to fail than do nothing at all

With success, that's a product of trying something and not giving up.
Then message me your number. Or if you want; we can use a different platform. Your choice. You seem like a good fuck and a good talk.
 

·
Registered
ENTJ; 8w7; Persian C
Joined
·
9,469 Posts
I myself have never been... big on emotions. INTP after all... but Still whenever i'm in a committed relationship and so on I tend to get lonely and have the occasional bout of... feeling from well I suppose not having enough intimacy. I think ive read somewhere that we INTPs tend to not grant emotions... "ground" unless we find a certain... level of... IDK how to put it. but I still wonder. out of every thinking type of thinkers, from INTPs to ESTJs... is the occasional bout of feelings like I described normal in a relationship, for a thinker?
It seem(s) you are making the (common) mistake of conflating "emotions/feelings/empathy" with the (T/F) dichtonomy - and I put emphasis that the former(s) are distinct enough with differences to not be conflated; and that the "emotions" you feel in (X)-relationships is normal, rather than abrnormal for a "thinker", and such thinking is self-defeatism / incoherent / incompatible with typology to begin with: that normal levels of deep emotional expression; and logical feeling 'judgments' are mutually-exclusive to the thinking function in general, however nothing in typology claims any such thing: rather that there perhaps, may be an underlying disposition - rather than overall absence, or lack of:

Ex [common-biases via upset/disappointed optimism around 'typology' magical-thinking];

MY ISFJ IS NEVER NURTURING! MY INTJ IS SO SENSITIVE AND WHINY!


Which makes me wonder why such (biases) arise in the first place arise - and how much effect they are having on conscious attitudes (I never 'cared' about being a rare type, until I was typed/found out!); (&) that a "thinker" relationship would be dramatically/drastically different from a "feeler" relationship (re: when deepening in to more complex-human psychologies), than typology. The former puts emphasis on some transcendent essence that exceedings beyond the (T/F) dichonomy itself; that 'thinkers' are of a different origin, rather than distinct opposite of the (feeler); and even so, (thinking) can be applied [and often is], to what "feelers" prioritize: [the incoherent fixation on 'vast' differences] simply is not sufficiently supported via any 'source', (&) is often exaggerated via knowledge-gaps / misunderstanding of "typology" itself which is explained in my spoiler [abv; Ex 2].

Distinctions - not "differences"

The extraverted thinking type and the extraverted feeling type are
presented as examples of rational or judging types. This classification,
based on the conscious rather than the unconscious psychology of the
individual, reflects the emphasis this type places in the reasoning and
judging functions, to the exclusion of the irrational or accidental. The
functions of perception (sensation and intuition) are repressed. In the
extravert, the rationality of both the thinking and feeling types is object
oriented. Subjective reason is suppressed with the risk of too heavy a
repression leading to a disruption of the personality by the unconscious.


― C.G. Jung, Collected Works of C.G. Jung, Volume 6: Psychological Types
Ex;

The "overlap" via INTJ / INFJ / INTP - (inspite of 'supposedly' oppositing / polar-opposite functions): which makes me rather skepticial of specimen(s) that blame communication-errors / mistakes / laziness on (Fe/Fi) "clashing" in general - rather than some non-typology related issue being fueled via cognitive-bias.

As seen in the old INTJ-thread (about those with other non-typology related defects (re: social issues / psychological-problems / anxietities - and other pathologies/mental-malfunctions) conflating such with 'INTJ'ism" - which is doing typology all wrong.

http://personalitycafe.com/intj-forum-scientists/1100625-i-think-ive-started-develop-empathy.html

The thread above is simply absurd for a variety of reasons; however it is a notable example related to the former(s) are side-effects of said functions; not functions themselves - and said side-effects (range) among indivdual-specimen(s) via environmental / psychological / health-related / cultural / sociological (some sio-bio) - distinctions :: I have general skepticism via the "vast differences," in the (T/F) dictonomy that are greatly exaggerated, and that (feelers) are more dynamic and likely to fluctate between thinker/feeling - than vice versa (as I propose in (Post #10 on 'possible feeler dynamicism') in this thread - and the overconfident (VI-typers); that think they can 'type' humanoid(s) properly based off glances / appearances (re: "resting bitch-faces"), rather than more indepth evaluation/observations of said subjects:


It would be sufficient in understanding the (T/F)-distinctions: & "thinkers/feelers" usually confused via my post here (and tend to have difficulties via typology overall due to the 'errors' regarding (caring / emotional / feeling / whiny / romantic) in general - and what contributes to said confusions:


 


It could be said; "feelers," (while highly intuned with themselves) - have a 'distorted' sense of themselves: in the same way intuitives tend to, I will attempt to expound on my point.

Although; we can argue all the (internalized) function(s) seem to be as well: (Si/Ni/Ti/Fi) - due to the fixation on "internalized"-states: which has an overall-fixation on (self-disturbances + self-frequencies), as seen with (Ni):


And again with (Si) - with a disposition to be concerned with (internalized-discomforts / self-anatomic disturbances + high-functioning self-safety).

________


(Feeling) - as I understand it, deals with the anatomic-function / well-being of subjects - which is never said within typology itself, although, it becomes evident "Feelers," will be fixated on subjects (regardless of external / internal) stimuli, but differential anatomic "states" - thus, for the feeler, it is a subconscious reflex to be concerned with either the psyiological / psychological / anatomic states of subjects (including themselves), above all else, to which such logicla-judgments will be made with the following categories/fixations/focuses in mind.

And I suppose, when we here 'fixation on subjects,' a hueristical-reflex occurs that equates it to nurture, habital care, and "emotions,", which may be a side-effect, however, not what "feeling," actually is - or 'fixates' on, which is not emotions, caring for other specimens, rather it is a logical-function constantly making judgments on the high-functioning anatomic states / well-being of surrounding agents + subjects:



So what is "subject-fixation," concerned with (?)

Ex; (1)


In general: (A, B, C):


(A) -

 
Anatomy of other subjects (re: organ health / bone health / muscluar/tissue health) - health of body :




(B) -

 
Physiological well-being (re: chemical-make-up / hormonal level + homoestatis / stability) of subjects:





(C) -

 
Psychological states of subjects: (emotions / feelings / biases / cognition/mind)




::



(Fi)-users will be utilizing the anatomic-states of themselves to address the anatomic-states of other humanoids;

(Fe)-users will be utilizing the anatomic-states of others; to address the anatomic-states within themselves;


::

If you wish; I can demonstrate what "logical-judgments on anatomic," states looks like (re: the distinctions between F/T - and Fi/Fe), however, I wish to keep this post less lengthy.



If we will break these down in "degrees", rather than either/or black/white:

(Fi) will have more fixation on (A, B) in this order,

While (Fe) will have more fixation on (B, C) in this order:

_______________


(Thinking) - as I understand it, will be logical-judgments via with the ('anatomic function / structure / state-of-affairs') of all non-subjects which entails "objects," - but not always, some "thinking," function(s) can be utilized to break-down the anatomic-structures of subjects (re: "psychology of 'humans'), however, it differs from that of the feeler, in so far as it is not concerned with overall well-being, of said structures: which may by implication/disposition create a 'cooler' demeanor - but I do consider this a "strong" / sound distinction between the 'feeler/thinker' - in so far as there certainly are "emotionally cold" feelers (re: INFJ) - and "emotionally soft thinkers," (re: INTJ):

Reflecting back on the "thinking function," itself: it will fixated on (the following below in the opposition to the 'feeler' function):


Ex; (2)


It can entail things;

State-of-affairs; -----> (Do not confuse this with the 'perception' function(s))

Events; ------> (Do not confuse 'events' with the (Ni) dealing with time-lapse / essences) - rather than direct events themselves:



(D, E, F)


(D)

 
Structure: - All internalized (physical - properties / rules / attributes / substances') belonging to (X);





(E)

 
"Things":- All external intimate-objects consisting of (attribtes / properties / substances):





(F)

 
"Objects": - All external events, state-of-affairs, occurrences, et al - "existing," outside the subject/self






If we will break these down in "degrees", rather than either/or black/white:

Ex; (Te)-doms are less analytical than (Ti)-doms,

Thus the (Te)-doms fixation revolves around (F, E),

While the (Ti)-humanoid follow (D, E) - in this order:


[HR][/HR]

Based off the above: It appears to myself,


As to why "feelers," are more likely to type themselves as thinkers; it does not seem to be rooted within the (strong thinker/logic) bias, although, it may occur in less skilled-specimens within typology (&) be products of other personalized/psychological-malfunctions (e.g., insecurities), but this is not all it is.

"Feelers," may be more susceptible to high-functioning cognitive / psychological biases via the fixation on (congition / subject-fixation) in general, which is demonstrated to be 'unreliable' in scientific discourse, and other highly sound / reliable testing methods: (re: why 'ancedotal evidences / "experiences" / appealing to intuition over trial/error) and other subject-related abstractions are simply unreliable; which does not surprise me that 'feelers' may have more malfunctions typing themselves accurately than "thinkers" due to the the genetic / cognitive-disposition make-up to fixatue on less reliable "typing" methods when addressing themselves: - while 'thinkers' certainly have malfunctions typing themselves, and are susceptible to the same human-baises / hueristical reflexive thinking disregarding deeper analysis of the self:

Futher, a specimen may say in defense of this oppsition, "feelers have deeper understanding of themselves," (and who they are), which indeed, may be true on (surface-value psychology (re: "emotions") and/or other reflexive conscious-outputs, but this does not seem to be case when devolving deeper into the subconscious to which (cognition / and/or the 'inner workers') of humanoids has yet to be accurately described as "what is," (and how the 'self-subject' operates), in the subconscious degree: meaning, the deeper the "feeler" goes into understanding themselves via typology (re: appealing to the anatomic / psychological-states of themselves), the more unreliable, dogmatic / hueristic - it becomes. Which may certain explain why we have more "confused" feelers typing as thinkers; than vice versa. The thinker, due to less subject-fixation (will have a small, however significant) reduction in susceptibility to such internalized-psychological / cognitive-biases due to appealing to (structures / things / objects), outside of the self - or the subject. Creating a more 'stable' foundation in typing oneself; even if the foundation is 'unstable', the accuracy of such typing increases - due to the reduction of psychological-bias implementation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,142 Posts
True, those are some external indicators. A person's behavior affects another's internal and external state. I don't question that type of cause and effect :bwink: But it takes me a long time to arrive at that negative state (exceptions definitely exist).

Usually, my emotions have built up for months (often years) before I either completely shut down or explode indiscriminately. Typically, the build up comes from other people -
(1) using me as a dumping ground for their emotions/problems
(2) disregarding my personal boundaries
(3) throwing drama left and right into my life

Unfortunately, I don't notice that internal build up because I always tell myself "I can handle it. This is not a big deal. They need my strength + problem solving skills. I'm here to give it to them so that they can solve their problems and move on." But their problems inevitably turn out to be never ending. At that point (when it's too late), I feel incredibly used for my generosity of time, patience and willingness to help. That's when my lid pops off in multiple parts of my life.

I was hoping for something more focused on internal behavioral indicators or patterns. Then again, maybe the solution is to first create much thicker boundaries so that these problems can't happen in the first place. Later, if necessary, I can focus on the nuanced internal indicators.
What you describe in the bold siunds like Fi, but as an Fe user you are likely to not be aware of those internal nuances. And an INTPs Fi shadow function is said to be connected to their Ti, so perhaps after you've created your boundaries you can try and find the logic in your internal behaviors.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top