PDA

View Full Version : 'F' types more skilled with feelings? or just different decision criteria to 'T's?



Adze
04-22-2014, 11:23 AM
Do you think F types have developed certain skills with dealing with feelings which T types have not?

eg. Would you think an 'F' can perceive people's feelings more so(and more accurately) in general than a 'T' would be able to?
Or do you think it is simply that an 'F' type chooses to pay attention to peoples feelings when making a decision, where a 'T' may not pay attention to how someone feels(as much) with regards to a decision, even though they could perceive it just as well if they wanted to.

I'd say its probably different from type to type, and strength of the F and whether its Fi or Fe.

I believe if I wanted to, I could guess how someone feels about a decision, and might even take it into account if I liked them, however I suspect a good 'F' type is actually more skilled at things to do with people and feelings, than I, or other 'T' types might be. Although I don't know to what extent it is skills or just a decision basis

maybe some resident 'F's can chime in and comment / give some examples also.

(I don't mind if this turns into a what-are-Fs-good-at thread)

Resonance
04-22-2014, 11:50 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreeableness

My take is that MBTI's T/F dichotomy is indirectly measuring this^ trait. Above average, F. Below average, T. Most people not significantly above or below average, but MBTI splits it down the middle for no good reason. :P

Upsides in a nutshell: Better at resolving social dissonance
Downsides in a nutshell: More likely to 'compromise' on matters of objective fact

skip
04-22-2014, 03:15 PM
T and F have to do with the criteria you prefer to use when making decisions.

Polemarch
04-22-2014, 03:24 PM
T and F have to do with the criteria you prefer to use when making decisions.

Prefer implies a choice - my experience has been that it's more of a pronounced tendency. Feelers have a greater tendency to act in response to an emotion, where thinkers have a greater tendency to act in response to a thought. Everyone has thoughts and emotions, but we're both wired and conditioned to interpret that information uniquely.

I would say that F's are more attuned to the emotions of others, and as a result, more reactive to them. I wouldn't refer to that as a skill so much as an awareness.

skip
04-22-2014, 03:35 PM
I'm not at home so I don't have access to my own data but I'm pretty certain that MBTI results are termed "preferences." How could they not be choices?

Polemarch
04-22-2014, 03:39 PM
I'm not at home so I don't have access to my own data but I'm pretty certain that MBTI results are termed "preferences." How could they not be choices?

Yes, they are termed "preferences" - I just don't agree with the term, because choices implies conscious awareness of the options. My observation has been that most people don't carefully consider whether they should give greater weight to their feelings or their thoughts; they simply do one or the other. Also, if they did, the act of doing so would probably indicate a tendency towards thinking anyway.

Thevenin
04-22-2014, 03:46 PM
Maybe it's a preference because the "wiring" of a particular person's brain makes it easier/more pleasant/more efficient for a person to be a T or an F. So, even though a T can feel and an F can think, one way may be more comfortable and effective than the other.

skip
04-22-2014, 03:48 PM
Sometimes I wish they'd chosen different terms, those two are misused and misinterpreted more than any of the other preferences.

msg_v2
04-22-2014, 04:00 PM
Maybe it's a preference because the "wiring" of a particular person's brain makes it easier/more pleasant/more efficient for a person to be a T or an F. So, even though a T can feel and an F can think, one way may be more comfortable and effective than the other.

yes....


My take is that MBTI's T/F dichotomy is indirectly measuring this^ trait. Above average, F. Below average, T. Most people not significantly above or below average, but MBTI splits it down the middle for no good reason. :P


IIRC, the correlation with Agreeableness is the weakest out of all of them. J and Conscientiousness is also a bit fuzzy. I/E and NS have strong correlations to extraversion and openness, respectively.

Thoth
04-22-2014, 04:35 PM
Prefer implies a choice - my experience has been that it's more of a pronounced tendency. Feelers have a greater tendency to act in response to an emotion, where thinkers have a greater tendency to act in response to a thought. Everyone has thoughts and emotions, but we're both wired and conditioned to interpret that information uniquely.

I would say that F's are more attuned to the emotions of others, and as a result, more reactive to them. I wouldn't refer to that as a skill so much as an awareness.

As an "F" I approve of this concise observation.

Thevenin
04-22-2014, 04:49 PM
I've known strong "feelers" who are unskilled in dealing with their feelings. Sometimes they get a little hysterical because they're picking up all these emotional vibes and it gets overwhelming. OTOH, strong feelers who are good at dealing with their feelings, e.g., as a source of information, and clever in how they use these data, are among the most powerful people I've met.

Resonance
04-22-2014, 07:18 PM
IIRC, the correlation with Agreeableness is the weakest out of all of them.
Well yes. That's true. It's still 0.44 though. And E/I accounts for another 0.19, and negative conscientiousness for another 0.15. I forget if you can add them directly (for a total of 78% of variance accounted for) or have to add their squares or what, but that comes pretty close to covering the whole thing. (you definitely couldn't do that if the OCEAN factors weren't linearly independent, but they are, that's kinda the point of them)


I've known strong "feelers" who are unskilled in dealing with their feelings. Sometimes they get a little hysterical because they're picking up all these emotional vibes and it gets overwhelming. OTOH, strong feelers who are good at dealing with their feelings, e.g., as a source of information, and clever in how they use these data, are among the most powerful people I've met.
And that (neuroticism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroticism)) is a highly studied phenomenon which is hardly accounted for by MBTI at all ;)

Vison
04-22-2014, 07:39 PM
I'm going to second the idea that a preference for F style thinking doesnt automatically imply one being emotionally astute. I think it just indicates a tendency to highly value information received through emotions but isn't linked to a persons ability to intrepret that information or ability to judge what the emotions of others mean or how to handle them.

Adze
04-23-2014, 11:23 AM
I'm thinking if it was possible to look at it statistically, I'd expect strong F types to be found to know how to, and be able to, make people feel certain ways deliberately. That is, a statistically significant number of strong F types, not all of them, but many of them, having developed more emotional "ability" to control how other people feel - through saying certain things, in a certain way, through art, through whatever. Whether its making people feel good or bad or anything.

Like, they might know how to get a desired emotional response, or create some emotional effect in those emotional games some people play, that infact may or may not exist, since they are almost invisible to me anyway.

I'm mainly thinking of lead Fi types with this, but it may work similarly with Fe types I dunno.

INTP_Polly
06-18-2014, 10:57 PM
I feel things very deeply. I am very empathetic. How I react to it is differently than feelers. A lot of feelers will just stay in the moment or be so concerned with their own mood that they can be dismissive. I go into problem solving mode. How I personally feel is irrelevant. I am able to distance myself from my own feelings in most circumstances. I say most because sometimes I can't. In those situations I make a choice to deal with it or not to deal with it. I typically use logical rational when making those decisions.

El D.
06-20-2014, 06:00 AM
My best friend here is an F type and he's definitely a more disciplined musician than I am, but he's also a sensor according to this one test he took this one time.

I think it makes sense. He's way better with people than I am usually. He's really into being nice to people, which is cool to have as a musician buddy. Actually this dude sort of taught me a lot about how to be in general.


I'm thinking if it was possible to look at it statistically, I'd expect strong F types to be found to know how to, and be able to, make people feel certain ways deliberately. That is, a statistically significant number of strong F types, not all of them, but many of them, having developed more emotional "ability" to control how other people feel
Also this

Hephaestus
06-20-2014, 07:03 AM
I'm not at home so I don't have access to my own data but I'm pretty certain that MBTI results are termed "preferences." How could they not be choices?


Maybe it's a preference because the "wiring" of a particular person's brain makes it easier/more pleasant/more efficient for a person to be a T or an F. So, even though a T can feel and an F can think, one way may be more comfortable and effective than the other.

What Thevenin said. To put it a different way that makes the term preferences more palatable and unambiguous, I'm left-handed because I have a preference for using my left hand. But that isn't a matter of choice. Likewise a preference for strawberries to chestnuts isn't really a choice. But it is a preference.

Then there are the myriad of little biases that build up over time in any repeated activity. You develop a preference for doing things a particular way and do it without making any sort of conscious decision.

I think that most preferences assert themselves without there ever being a moment of choice.

jigglypuff
06-20-2014, 07:19 AM
intx types are emo pieces of shit & we all know this at least secretly.

i think skills can be developed consciously so it can be a choice in that regard.

Sappho
06-20-2014, 09:38 AM
I'm going to second the idea that a preference for F style thinking doesnt automatically imply one being emotionally astute. I think it just indicates a tendency to highly value information received through emotions but isn't linked to a persons ability to intrepret that information or ability to judge what the emotions of others mean or how to handle them.

Seconded. I find that F types get carried away by their own emotions more often than not, whereas the T types often have a better grasp on them. T types, on the other hand, tend to get carried away by their "logical" conclusions, particularly when a great many "objective" reasons speak in favour of or against a certain decision.


intx types are emo pieces of shit & we all know this at least secretly.


Do we? I detest the onesidedness of the F/T classification and the presumption that all F's must be emotionally deep people, while T's are supposedly stone-cold, heartless robots. Saying it's the other way round doesn't ameliorate that classification, either. It's just as silly as claiming that "all Feelers are stupid, all Thinkers are smart". I've known F-type people who went on to achieve a great many things in the sciences, and T-type people who've had a profoundly rich, and often turbulent, internal emotional life. On the other end of the spectrum, of course, are the "Thinkers" who have never made a single intelligent choice in their lives, and "Feelers" whose range of emotions runs no deeper than a puddle.

I'm sure MBTI has its value (otherwise I wouldn't be here), but it's futile to mercilessly apply a rigid set of categorisations to something as fickle as human nature.

C.J.Woolf
06-20-2014, 12:59 PM
Seconded. I find that F types get carried away by their own emotions more often than not, whereas the T types often have a better grasp on them. T types, on the other hand, tend to get carried away by their "logical" conclusions, particularly when a great many "objective" reasons speak in favour of or against a certain decision.

T types, when they get carried away by their own emotions (which isn't often, but watch out when they do), are good at rationalizing them. "I AM NOT BEING EMOTIONAL!" and all that.

jigglypuff
06-20-2014, 02:42 PM
T types, when they get carried away by their own emotions (which isn't often, but watch out when they do), are good at rationalizing them. "I AM NOT BEING EMOTIONAL!" and all that.
it's kinda funny to watch.

Sappho
that was a deliberately imprecise statement made by someone who's seen a lot of these cases.

when a intx is swept up and acting/thinking pretty irrationally, it kinda hurts but is funny cuz it's like they don't think they are a lot of the time. it's also confusing when that's you...

Sistamatic
06-21-2014, 04:34 AM
it's kinda funny to watch.

When a intx is swept up and acting/thinking pretty irrationally, it kinda hurts but is funny cuz it's like they don't think they are a lot of the time. it's also confusing when that's you...

Some F's find it so funny that they point it out and laugh when their normally stoic friend has reached emotional overload. Bad timing. You'd think an F would know that.

Thevenin
06-25-2014, 01:32 AM
There's a difference between being an F and a skilled F. Likewise for T's. I'm surrounded by skilled F's (four INFJ's in my family!) and they're downright dangerous--seriously. Thank goodness they love me (or, at least, so they say). I don't believe in ESP or parapsychology, but I swear that my INFJ wife reads my mind and has been doing so for 38 years. She knows what I'm feeling before I do (and sometimes I never do). I'm still not used to it.

Nerthuz
06-25-2014, 04:33 AM
I think that a person who is a strong F has a tendency to be more skilled with feelings. I also believe that human beings, in general, tend to do the things that come easy to them. In this way, I feel that the strong F will develop into a skilled F (assuming there are no atrocious abnormalities in the people they develop around) because it is more natural for them to deal with feelings so they gravitate that way. *shrug*

NK612
09-28-2014, 05:59 PM
I think that an F can have above or below average intelligence, just as any other type. F is not a matter of being better w/feelings & worse w/ thinking necessarily at all. Same applies, w/ regards to T and thinking. We all have biases when thinking from our own perspective and that's to be expected. Some of the most empathetic people I've known have been T. People IMO often confuse empathy and F. They're not synonymous at all.

F pays attention to feeling information. I'm always considering others feelings before my own (those I'm connected to) otherwise I can be dismissive because it's draining when utilizing Fe. It's a default though when interacting w/ people to consider the subjective(the context based on emotional information) over the objective. This can lead to poor choices. And over sensitivity when not understanding why others would choose ways of behavior that don't consider the information I see. However, likewise, I speculate (and have experience of consequential evidence that supports my thoughts) that T at times, makes poor choices ignoring emotional information which would be wise to consider depending on the context. This does not however negate the T's possible positive intentions. (That's why they say the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Both T and F need to grow up and consider perspectives outside their own to truly see the bigger picture. Being Ne doesn't equate being born with the golden spoon of bigger picture site stuck in their mouth. IMO, we are all born with our foot in our mouth. And it isn't until we age and learn by fumbling through what doesn't work, that we understand that intentions are nothing without integrity.)

Lastly - because this topic for whatever reason always hits a nerve. F types really upset me when they're completely unaware of their manipulative nature. Likewise for T. T types manipulate logic. F people are more apt to manipulate emotion. This isn't a bad thing though could be. People can infuse inspiration and guide another's logic to burgeon new worlds and ways of the future: positive change (as easily as bad). And likewise for F types. You have Martin Luther King on one hand and Hitler on another.

We all do the best we can with what we have in any given point in time. We don't have more (grow deeper understandings of what we know, more appropriately assimilating the information) by adhering to the dichotomies of T and F so rigidly. I think these concepts best utilized when given a bit more cerebral flexibility in their understandings.


*debates checking grammar. Opts to not* :p

Robcore
10-05-2014, 09:24 PM
I'm a T, but I think I am rather skilled at understanding and responding to feelings.

To me, the T/F dichotomy seems to relate a lot to whether someone is reactive/responsive (f) vs intentioned/inquisitive (t). Both can be emotional and intelligent...but the f reacts/responds to emotions AND thoughts, while the t reacts/responds in a delayed fashion which ultimately ends up being a response to what analysis has deemed significant about emotions or thoughts. Fs operate in the domain of the raw data, while Ts operate in a domain that is concerned with processing it.


Neither is more mature than the other by default...which seems to be the common bias among Ts.

Catoptric
10-05-2014, 11:08 PM
They definitely have a different locus of observation. Even if intelligent they have a biased criteria/value system, largely dependent on how they would prefer to view the world and identify (usually an extrovert trait) with it. This however is likely not exclusive to Feelers, so it really is just how someone approaches/prioritizes thinking and expression.

I've known all personality types to have characteristics that I simply don't identify with; I prefer to believe INTP are immune to "not doing stupid things," though it really is a "human element" (survival through conformity to identity, responding to externally based stimuli and being influenced by said stimuli as inherent to self-construct identity, differing with judgement for the sake of conformity to identity fulfillment; belonging through external-dependent observation and usual group-think tendencies by downplaying non-conformity as an aberration of society.

I tend to think the whole reward mechanism and impulse gratification is unique to one particular personality, but it likely is a universal element of mankind. The whole "free-love" thing I would likewise tend to exclude to sensor traits, but it likely isn't.

No one is immune to exploitation by social conformity and ego-identity fulfillment, and the vast majority do so even when they believe they are opposed to it. Because of the dynamics of many every-day interactions, ones personality may be less a construct of self, and more of every-day influences and interactions. One that builds up more barriers to external influence might be more of a "true-self" (being defined less by others) than otherwise, whereby introversion may define a predilection to building those barriers.