# To a Te person, Ti looks like gaslighting



## Fumetsu (Oct 7, 2015)

I want to elaborate on something I said; about not discussing serious things when my husband.

Really, he is far too old and too intelligent to suffer so much from his chronic case of "always right."

I have never been able to understand how someone can have an impossibly perfect perspective of the past. When he gets angry he will resort to telling me I did or said that are just absolutely untrue, e100% fiction. 
It's always completely asinine, things I never said, things that anyone who knows me knows I _would_ never say. 
Yet I have the self awareness to realize that when it comes to such arguments no one can be proven correct either way. Nope, not him " YESYESYES you did! YOU DID!" and I will ask him something like " Can you see how this maybe something that you cannot prove? that is a possibility you may be wrong?"

And then, shrieking at the top of his damned lungs he insists that he is right and is always right, beyond question, still, without evidence.

To me this is an absolutely unfathomable stance.

I mention this because I now wonder if it has something to do with unhealthy Ti. " This is what happened in MY reality and my reality is the ONLY one." Sort of thing.


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

Fumetsu said:


> I want to elaborate on something I said; about not discussing serious things when my husband.
> 
> Really, he is far too old and too intelligent to suffer so much from his chronic case of "always right."
> 
> ...


I feel you ... that sounds a lot like me and my last ex.

If it is unhealthy Ti, then..... I must have had the really, really, really bad luck of *only* being close to Ti users who have unhealthy Ti. And I find myself resisting that conclusion for some reason. It is definitely still on my list of possibilities ...but I feel myself resisting it. 

It's easy for me to believe your Ti husband is unhealthy because that's just one person, but in my case I'm thinking of every Ti person that I've ever been close to, and it seems statistically unlikely that I would encounter so many "unhealthy" Ti users in a row, enough that I don't even know yet what a relationship with a "healthy" one would feel like. Idk, maybe my brain feels like it's just too pat, too easy, to solve this mental conundrum by lumping multiple people into the huge, clear-cut, black-and-white category of "unhealthy." I feel like the number of people I'd be categorizing if I do that is large enough for that to feel like a potential red flag. I guess that's why I find myself resisting the "I've only encountered unhealthy Ti so far" explanation. And I also resist it because I've seen some people quickly lump me into an "unhealthy" category when I don't think I fit that. If it's easy for other people to lump me too quickly then it's probably easy for me to make the same mistake with them, we're all human.


----------



## Rouskyrie (Jul 20, 2016)

Fumetsu said:


> I want to elaborate on something I said; about not discussing serious things when my husband.
> 
> Really, he is far too old and too intelligent to suffer so much from his chronic case of "always right."
> 
> ...


I'm certainly not speaking for all Ti users when I say this, but: Ti generally defers to its user's self-collected experiences/knowledge as a base line, so it's not unheard of for a Ti user (Especially unhealthy) to speak in a way that may intentionally or unintentionally imply they are completely informed on a topic, when that may be far from the truth. It's a case of "Based on the information I have assembled, this is the answer" and if someone doubts that, an unhealthy Ti user would probably erupt into "How dare you doubt my knowledge?! I know for certain what happened, even if you don't agree, and you can't prove that what I'm saying is incorrect!" typically followed by criticizing the other person's perception of what happened, ("You don't know what you're talking about!", "That's wrong because __, __, __!" which definitely seems similar (And could be argued to be) gaslighting. 

Additionally, I might sum that up to say that when an unhealthy Ti user feels their perception is being criticized (When really the other person may merely be looking for where their conclusions came from, because it doesn't make any sense to blindly accept what someone tells you) they may feel the need to in turn criticize the other person's perception.


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

Rouskyrie said:


> I'm certainly not speaking for all Ti users when I say this, but: *Ti generally defers to its user's self-collected experiences/knowledge as a base line*, so it's not unheard of for a Ti user (Especially unhealthy) to speak in a way that may intentionally or unintentionally imply they are completely informed on a topic, when that may be far from the truth. It's a case of "Based on the information I have assembled, this is the answer" and if someone doubts that, an unhealthy Ti user would probably erupt into "How dare you doubt my knowledge?! I know for certain what happened, even if you don't agree, and you can't prove that what I'm saying is incorrect!" typically followed by criticizing the other person's perception of what happened, ("You don't know what you're talking about!", "That's wrong because __, __, __!" which definitely seems similar (And could be argued to be) gaslighting.
> 
> Additionally, I might sum that up to say that when an unhealthy Ti user feels their perception is being criticized (When really the other person may merely be looking for where their conclusions came from, because it doesn't make any sense to blindly accept what someone tells you) they may feel the need to in turn criticize the other person's perception.


Just thinking out loud here... my Te is reacting strongly to the bold part. That bold part feels like a red flag to me. My Te is reacting like "That's very likely to lead to inaccurate conclusions!" "Facts don't belong to the individual!" "Facts belong to the collective!" "Every individual is equally likely to collect important facts, for an event that involved multiple people!" "Every individual has a chance of coming to inaccurate conclusions if they ignore facts that were collected by other people!" "If one person gives their own perspective more weight than other perspectives, then they are likely to miss something important and likely to come to inaccurate conclusions!"

My brain is also resisting the "unhealthy" explanation (for reasons that I explained to fumetsu) so I'm trying to see it a different way... Is it possible that a normal and healthy Ti person, under some stress or frustration, might react the same way that you described for an unhealthy Ti person?

and is it possible that my (normal, healthy) Te reaction to the bold part could cause a Ti person stress?


----------



## Fumetsu (Oct 7, 2015)

Rouskyrie said:


> I'm certainly not speaking for all Ti users when I say this, but: Ti generally defers to its user's self-collected experiences/knowledge as a base line, so it's not unheard of for a Ti user (Especially unhealthy) to speak in a way that may intentionally or unintentionally imply they are completely informed on a topic, when that may be far from the truth. It's a case of "Based on the information I have assembled, this is the answer" and if someone doubts that, an unhealthy Ti user would probably erupt into "How dare you doubt my knowledge?! I know for certain what happened, even if you don't agree, and you can't prove that what I'm saying is incorrect!" typically followed by criticizing the other person's perception of what happened, ("You don't know what you're talking about!", "That's wrong because __, __, __!" which definitely seems similar (And could be argued to be) gaslighting.
> 
> Additionally, I might sum that up to say that when an unhealthy Ti user feels their perception is being criticized (When really the other person may merely be looking for where their conclusions came* from, because it doesn't make any sense to blindly accept what someone tells you)* they may feel the need to in turn criticize the other person's perception.


I feel like anyone with even a bit of self awareness should be able to see how the other person could make the very same argument. 

Criticizing is not an intelligent way to go about expressing a disagreement. This also drives me crazy because of the way he talks about being "Empathetic" and "kind." 

I guess what I am saying is that to me Ti to this extent seems like a complete lack of awareness.


----------



## Aluminum Frost (Oct 1, 2017)

Haven't come across this. The only thing that really annoys me about other Ti users is they seem to be more prone to mental gymnastics and being apologists in general.


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

Fumetsu said:


> I feel like anyone with even a bit of self awareness should be able to see how the other person could make the very same argument.
> 
> Criticizing is not an intelligent way to go about expressing a disagreement. This also drives me crazy because of the way he talks about being "Empathetic" and "kind."
> 
> I guess what I am saying ti s that to me *Ti to this extent seems like a complete lack of awareness*.


my brain thinks the same

In the same way that Fi could be described as a lack of awareness of the group's emotions...focusing more on the Fi user's own individual emotions...

my brain sees Ti as a lack of awareness of the group's collected facts...a focus on the Ti user's own individual collected facts.

and then my brain reacts like nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo, that's wrong, that's inaccurate! facts don't belong to the individual! Facts belong to the group! Individuals will come to inaccurate conclusions if they don't honor facts that were collected by other people in the group!

then my brain reacts to its own reaction, like noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo that's wrong, that's inaccurate! I can't truly believe that half of humanity has their head on backwards! That itself doesn't pass my own Te test of honoring facts collected by other people; it feels way too zoomed-in. 

Ugh lol!


----------



## Rouskyrie (Jul 20, 2016)

cuddle bun said:


> Just thinking out loud here... my Te is reacting strongly to the bold part. That bold part feels like a red flag to me. My Te is reacting like "That's very likely to lead to inaccurate conclusions!" "Facts don't belong to the individual!" "Facts belong to the collective!" "Every individual is equally likely to collect important facts, for an event that involved multiple people!" "Every individual has a chance of coming to inaccurate conclusions if they ignore facts that were collected by other people!" "If one person gives their own perspective more weight than other perspectives, then they are likely to miss something important and likely to come to inaccurate conclusions!"
> 
> My brain is also resisting the "unhealthy" explanation (for reasons that I explained to fumetsu) so I'm trying to see it a different way... Is it possible that a normal and healthy Ti person, under some stress or frustration, might react the same way that you described for an unhealthy Ti person?
> 
> and is it possible that my (normal, healthy) Te reaction to the bold part could cause a Ti person stress?


Likewise, I completely agree with the bolded part, (*"Every individual is equally likely to collect important facts, for an event that involved multiple people!" "Every individual has a chance of coming to inaccurate conclusions if they ignore facts that were collected by other people!" "If one person gives their own perspective more weight than other perspectives, then they are likely to miss something important and likely to come to inaccurate conclusions!"*) because it's essential to give equal attention to outside perspectives in order to avoid inaccurate conclusions. 

It's by no means behavior exclusive to unhealthy Ti users, I was merely suggesting that you might see it more in an unhealthy Ti user (Which I admit could be wrong). I think that since logic is more personal in nature to a Ti user, it makes sense that a reaction like the one I described could appear within even the healthiest Ti user because of the personal significance of their logic. 

Yes, that's also possible. Alike Fi users, Ti users take their personal experiences quite seriously, so I wouldn't be surprised to hear that if you said something like that to a Ti user they reacted negatively.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

ExTPs which have Fi PoLR have a very hard time discussing personal feelings and the relationship dynamic with a high Fi user. If unhealthy the result can be actual gaslighting tactics, at least according to anecdotes here.
IxTPs probably don't have this much issue because they can grow to understand Fi as a counterpart to their Ti more easily.


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

Red Panda said:


> ExTPs which have Fi PoLR have a very hard time discussing personal feelings and the relationship dynamic with a high Fi user. If unhealthy the result can be actual gaslighting tactics, at least according to anecdotes here.
> IxTPs probably don't have this much issue because they can grow to understand Fi as a counterpart to their Ti more easily.


You could be on to something because the relationships where I ran into this issue were mostly ExTPs. IxTPs I seem to get along with them easier because curiosity is by far the dominant vibe that I get from IxTPs. it's easy for me to see IxTPs as curious information-collectors rummaging around everywhere and trying to collect information to fill their insatiable curiosity about anyone and anything. I've only been friends with 1 or 2 IxTPs I think but they both had enough curiosity about other people's perspectives to balance whatever frustration I felt during a Te/Ti clash. If my ExTP exes felt the same curiosity it was a lot less visible. and without that crucial curiosity in the other person's perspective then it starts to feel like gaslighting more and more...I hope I can find a different way to see it though.


----------



## Falling Foxes (Oct 19, 2016)

Red Panda said:


> ExTPs which have Fi PoLR have a very hard time discussing personal feelings and the relationship dynamic with a high Fi user. If unhealthy the result can be actual gaslighting tactics, at least according to anecdotes here.
> IxTPs probably don't have this much issue because they can grow to understand Fi as a counterpart to their Ti more easily.


This explains why I've been struggling with how Ti-doms can relate more to me when they have inferior Fe, as if just any feeling function would be enough. Yeah, thanks for the revelation!


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

PiT said:


> I find that Ti-egos have a remarkable ability to dismiss emotional reactions that they do not care for or respect. *It is actually something I admire greatly about them*, in that emotional reactions are a little concerning to me. I don't know that it relates to group-checking emotions, though. I do find that it does lead to some spectacular meltdowns when Ti meets Fe/Fi and the feeling position just finds itself altogether dismissed, and I can see how someone would interpret this as de-legitimizing.


I meant to reply to this earlier but got sidetracked ... can I ask why do you admire this quality?



Northern Lights said:


> I'm not aware that my standard is a "group-thing". I just dismiss emotions as "invalid" -- or rather, irrelevant (to the matter at hand), since obviously, if you are (or for that matter, I am) feeling it, it exists i.e. is valid -- when I have analysed it and found no satisfying explanation or motivation in the given context. The standard is myself, and this happens for everyone equally.


and kind of the same question here ... why do you come to the conclusion that the emotion should be dismissed? Instead of (for example) coming to the conclusion that the other person experienced something that you didn't experience yet, that they might have interesting information that you haven't encountered yet? Doesn't it feel like you are sacrificing accuracy if you dismiss a potentially conflicting perspective instead of trying to understand where it came from?


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

Aluminum Frost said:


> Haven't come across this. The only thing that really annoys me about other Ti users is they seem to be more prone to mental gymnastics and being apologists in general.


my ex (who was ExTP, not sure which but definitely Ti-Fe) would often say something similar "I haven't encountered this" ...with the implication that the topic is therefore resolved.

like this....

"I haven't encountered this"..._therefore there is no need to talk about this_

"I haven't encountered this"..._therefore this conversation is over_

"I haven't encountered this"..._therefore your point is invalid_

"I haven't encountered this"..._therefore we have a resolution and the resolution does not need to account for this thing that I haven't encountered_

...and that frustrated the hell out of me I'll be honest. I don't know if you meant it the same way but the wording there does remind me a bit of my frustrations with him.

My Te brain wants to see and use those words more like this...

"I haven't encountered this"..._therefore this other human being has encountered something that I haven't encountered yet, something that might be of interest to me _


----------



## PiT (May 6, 2017)

cuddle bun said:


> I meant to reply to this earlier but got sidetracked ... can I ask why do you admire this quality?


Emotional matters generally occupy a specific domain of consideration and are appropriate to a specific time and place. When I am trying to speak to logical considerations, folks being emotional functions as little more than an irrelevant distraction and an irritant.


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

PiT said:


> Emotional matters generally occupy a specific domain of consideration and are appropriate to a specific time and place. When I am trying to speak to logical considerations, folks being emotional functions as little more than an irrelevant distraction and an irritant.


hmmm to me they seem intertwined; a strong emotional reaction that I don't understand in someone else is often prompted by factual experiences that they experienced. I am more likely to respond by digging for info about what they experienced and then trying to zoom out my perspective until I see their perspective next to mine, both in unison, both in context. instead of brushing it off (or admiring people who brush it off). Then again I always test close to the middle of the T/F spectrum and in me T & F coexist peacefully so it's hard for me to see T and F as competing things.


----------



## Aluminum Frost (Oct 1, 2017)

@cuddle bun That wasn't what I was trying to say. I'll take your word for it, I'm just saying its not something I've noticed. And are you sure that's what your ExTP meant by it?


----------



## Turi (May 9, 2017)

cuddle bun said:


> my ex (who was ExTP, not sure which but definitely Ti-Fe) would often say something similar "I haven't encountered this" ...with the implication that the topic is therefore resolved.
> 
> like this....
> 
> ...


This is an _extreme _form of Sensing, not related to Thinking, imo.
He hasn't witnessed something first-hand, therefore, it's not real, not something worth wasting time talking about.


----------



## TheDarknessInTheSnow (May 28, 2016)

cuddle bun said:


> my ex (who was ExTP, not sure which but definitely Ti-Fe) would often say something similar "I haven't encountered this" ...with the implication that the topic is therefore resolved.
> 
> like this....
> 
> ...


That sounds like Fi rather than Te, since it's related mostly to acknowledging individual differences. Makes sense for EXTP to do that considering Fi is PoLR. 

Either way, Fi-Te are obviously connected so your point still stands. As an ISFJ, Fi is my demonstrative function, so I am pretty good at considering how other people's experiences must be different and the mechanism of individuality. I can, however, impose what I would feel onto others due to extraverted feeling. That kind of makes sense since Ti can be more subjective in its logical framework and looking for consistent frameworks (fueled by Fe, which seeks patterns in understanding what drives people and how people feel) above the actuality of outcomes and reality.

As a Ti user, I find *some* strong Te users cold and harsh. And sometimes their lack of concern for consistency can come off as delivering a message without clarity. I also noticed sometimes they focus on things that I don't find important or necessary. I favor theoretical frameworks over efficiency. 

Yet we need each other for the world to go round!


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

Aluminum Frost said:


> @cuddle bun That wasn't what I was trying to say. I'll take your word for it, I'm just saying its not something I've noticed. And are you sure that's what your ExTP meant by it?


yes - he made deliberate attempts to end the conversation if I assumed we could keep going to look for a more unified solution that included both of us. If I pressed for info about whether or not he thought my perspective was valid then he would tell me honestly no. I am glad you didn't mean it like that though and I believe you


----------



## calicobts (Sep 12, 2017)

Gaslighting isn't conducive to Ti. Any of 16 types can use gas lighting. 

Ti wants _complete_ understanding and consistency of whatever it's concerned with.

On the other hand, Te is more interested in _results_. It focuses on the quickest fix to a problem rather than the components.

I don't think creating a correlation between gas lighting and Ti-usage makes all that much sense though. Since, gaslighting involves manipulating an individual's emotions (Fe/Fi) and distorting their sense of reality & memory (Se/Si). Ti and Te would just act as the investigative tools in order to get to the truth or debunk false narratives.


----------



## Ksara (Feb 13, 2014)

Hmm, I'm going to zoom out of functions here.
Generally Gaslighting is a coping mechanism to reinforce ones point of view and to convince the other person their point of view is incorrect or invalid.
It's abuse when it becomes a pattern of behaviour to control another person. This is a power dynamic built apon a persons insecurities.

This could be based on a beleif to feel secure and safe, they need to control their environment.
It could also be a result of an inflated ego to the point they see the world as a reflection of their own image. As they see themself conciously superior anything in the environment that conflicts with this belief and potentially brings their unconcious insecurity of being inferior to their concious mind causes a reaction to control/correct the environment to reflect their superiority is true. (Narcissism)
Or even the individual lacks any capability for empathy and finds it amusing to manipulate another human being. (Psychopathy/sociopathy)

Gas lighting can also occur with an immature individual because they have to 'be right.' To be wrong implies they as a person is wrong.

Even simply people being unaware that memories aren't as accurate as we believe them to be can lead to Gaslighting (this is perhaps more based on ignorance rather insecurity)

Now I don't think Gas lighting is necessarily function related. I think any type can fall into the above categories 

Coming back to typology, I can see a logical type dismissing the emotional veiwpoint. An example, say someone breaks a glass and gets very upset about it. A logical type may rationalise you clean up the broken glass and buy a now one, and dissmiss ther other person's view by saying no big deal. The focus is on solving the problem, not validating the emotional perspective.

It can also go the otherway. A strong feeling type insisting that their belief is important to them, more so than the other person's beleif.

In everyday conversation gaslighting can occur as naturally people can find it difficult to actively empathise/actively listen all the time. And sometimes we don't notice, shrug it off, take offense, etc. depending on the context.

Overall it's important to consider anecdotal evidence is not good evidence (a few bad experiences with certain individuals, and assuming the individuals typing is correct) and our brains naturally synthesize patterns of behaviour to understand and make predictions of our world. It's for survival, not accuracy/truthfulness.

I don't think most Ti users will engage in gas lightning behaviour to the point of abuse. I don't think Ti is the 'thing' that leads to such behaviour, rather insecurities or lack of empathy.

I'm not sure if anything of this helps.

Also side note. If you find this gaslighting pattern happening in your life and this is an issue for you ultimately it's you that can change this. I am not claiming this is right/yout fault/etc. Nor am I claiming the person Gaslighting should keep Gaslighting. What I am saying only you have the power to change your responses. Learning to set boundaries and enforce them is important. Keeping in mind boundaries serve to protect ourselves and to teach others how we wish to be respected, not to control others. It gives others a choice to accomodate you or for you to leave and bring other people in your life who wish to respect you.


----------



## PiT (May 6, 2017)

cuddle bun said:


> hmmm to me they seem intertwined; a strong emotional reaction that I don't understand in someone else is often prompted by factual experiences that they experienced. I am more likely to respond by digging for info about what they experienced and then trying to zoom out my perspective until I see their perspective next to mine, both in unison, both in context. instead of brushing it off (or admiring people who brush it off). Then again I always test close to the middle of the T/F spectrum and in me T & F coexist peacefully so it's hard for me to see T and F as competing things.


Emotional outbursts are often employed as a means of controlling narratives and silencing opposing opinions. I do want to understand other people's perspectives regardless, but strong emotions tend to be a problem in that such people demand a perfect deference to their emotional conclusion or else they are "being de-legitimized" and you are accused of "being a psychopath". My instinctive reaction is to walk away and avoid dealing with that issue altogether.



Aluminum Frost said:


> Haven't come across this. The only thing that really annoys me about other Ti users is they seem to be more prone to mental gymnastics and being apologists in general.


I've noticed this too. Arguing with Ti-egos can be really annoying in that many of them have a propensity to just ignore facts that are inconvenient to their position. I suspect this contributes to the perception of them as being trollish, as they have a tendency to plug along based on a certain internal logic, and oftentimes nothing anyone can say can really break through this. I refer to this as a perception because I am sure they mean well, but it has frustrated me many a time in the past.


----------



## Peter (Feb 27, 2010)

cuddle bun said:


> Note: I'm making this thread because I want to see Ti as good-intentioned people, and I'm trying, but I'm failing.
> So try to keep that in mind when you reply - try to reply with an open mind. This thread is probably going to sound offensive and I know that.
> 
> In order to accurately describe the mental block I'm running into, I have to accurately describe a train of thought that probably sounds offensive. Just try to keep in mind I'm not making this thread to offend people, I'm making it because _I don't want my train of thought to end here permanently_ and I need some help to see what I'm missing. I want a wider perspective that doesn't require me to think of Ti people as gaslighters.
> ...


I can recognize this. Having a discussion with Ti dominant or Ti in second position,... is tough. Their focus is completely different from ours. We want the big picture to be right and when they don't agree with it, they go deeper and deeper and deeper into detail until they find something you haven't thought about and then they´re right about that little detail....................... and then nothing.

totally lost track of the bigger picture and it doesn't seem relevant anymore.

I can see how that sort of feels like gaslighting, though gaslighting is more about making you feel confused about objective reality which makes you wonder about your own sanity.


But it's not emotional abuse. That's just how Ti does it's thing. At the same rate that we want to stay objective and focus on the bigger picture, Ti wants to stay subjective and get into the tiny details. These 2 clash all the time. It's just the way it is. As an INTJ, your Fi tries to read some kind of evil plan in what Ti does, but there is no plan. It's just Ti.


----------



## Senah (Oct 17, 2017)

Hmmm...this brings up a couple of things others have touched on and spoken eloquently about already.

I do think that it is important to operationalize gas lighting a little bit, which was started by @Ksara a few posts ago. The negative element of gas lighting really has to do with defaming and questioning the validity and accuracy of a person's opinions, memories, and almost rights to those thoughts. I don't feel that is what Ti users are doing, though I can see how that could be confusing as we do not generally value emotion-based arguments as they are so subjective. When we are looking at an idea or a concept (even by ourselves, sitting at home alone), we look at it from one direction, then another, then a third - in fact I was sitting in an audience listening to a lecture recently and had a question come up when the speaker said something I didn't agree with. Then I started arguing with myself about how it could be valid if I looked at it this other way. Then I looked at it a third way and thought I should just talk to him after because there was a completely different issue that wasn't brought up at all. 

If we were in a conversation it might seem like I was pushing him to question "everything", but that is just because that is how I do it. For example, as an ENTP, I assess, explore, and dissect relationships between people, ideas, and try to make them clearer and better. I am not saying anyone is right or wrong, I just want to understand and improve them. I have wanted to solve problems for friends in the past as opposed to just sympathizing with emotions (my INFP friends want this, my ENTP friends just want help/advice). 

As a person who sees the world as anything but static, where new ideas and concepts can flow in and out of my mind at almost anyone's suggestion, it can be hard for me to respond to someone who feels that their own personal experience (very subjective and often rooted in emotion - Fe) should be unable to be debated or unquestioned. Especially since I see people and experiences as so different and unique. I don't want to tell people they can't have opinions or ideas or memories or emotions, but to base life codes or arguments on them, it is difficult because I think it obstructs all the tangents and clear ways to examine motivations of others. 

For example, I don't think a lot of people at the beginning of this thread were acting "butthurt" (weird term) or dismissive but suggesting the real possibility that @cuddle bun was reacting to a singular personal experience that overly influenced her opinion of Ti users unduly. I'm not saying this post came from a bad place, but certainly from a place of easy stereotypes. Facebook is certainly rife with them. Even the graphics used were ironic as I think that any Ti user would recoil at the idea that you wouldn't be able to respond to anyone who is bringing up topics like that to you. Why? Seriously, it is like standing on the moral high ground and being like, "My opinions are _serious_ because I have _Fi_ so don't even." I know it was meant to illustrate the opposite, but that is what I took away from it.

I have had the experience which is hard for me to understand, of Fi people having a very personalized, black & white subjective moral decision making matrix that does not allow for personal deviation. It reminds me of this thread, TBH. A guy I dated claimed that his friend (a Ti user) was a "really disappointing person" because he didn't realize that the most important thing in the world is love and caring for people, and that when his friend said what he values in friends is "smart people [he] can learn from" the guy said, "Everyone knows that relationships and love is what is important. At least that is the world we are living in, most of us anyhow. Wanting intellectualism and learning from friends isn't important, and if he can't _evolve_ and realize that isn't what is valuable, then he just doesn't get it." I certainly don't judge every Fi user like this - my brother an INFP isn't like this at all - but I do think that personal experience and subjective personal moral hierarchies built over time in one's head isn't a good measure to apply to everyone else and society at large. 

At any rate, I think the important thing to remember about Ti users is that we certainly do have emotions and life experiences, and they filter into our thinking a bit. But, we don't believe when trying to understand ideas, or concepts at large that a subjective experience or emotion is appropriate for classifying and understanding an objective idea. We are looking for inconsistencies in patterns and relationships, and emotions lead to a lot of these. We want to understand _why_. To us, saying love or hate or hurt is the reason is like saying "because I said so". 

That's what I've got.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

Senah said:


> As a person who sees the world as anything but static, where new ideas and concepts can flow in and out of my mind at almost anyone's suggestion, it can be hard for me to respond to someone who feels that their own personal experience (very subjective and often rooted in emotion - Fe) should be unable to be debated or unquestioned. Especially since I see people and experiences as so different and unique. I don't want to tell people they can't have opinions or ideas or memories or emotions, but to base life codes or arguments on them, it is difficult because I think it obstructs all the tangents and clear ways to examine motivations of others.
> 
> For example, I don't think a lot of people at the beginning of this thread were acting "butthurt" (weird term) or dismissive but suggesting the real possibility that @cuddle bun was reacting to a singular personal experience that overly influenced her opinion of Ti users unduly. I'm not saying this post came from a bad place, but certainly from a place of easy stereotypes. Facebook is certainly rife with them. Even the graphics used were ironic as I think that any Ti user would recoil at the idea that you wouldn't be able to respond to anyone who is bringing up topics like that to you. Why? Seriously, it is like standing on the moral high ground and being like, "My opinions are serious because I have Fi so don't even." I know it was meant to illustrate the opposite, but that is what I took away from it.


I understand that this way of functioning doesn't necessarily come from a bad place nor that it's de facto toxic, but I've had a pretty bad experience with my unhealthy/egotistic, jealous & competitive ENTP sister growing up. 
She's older than me by 8 years, and she would question and invalidate everything I ever expressed. She would tell me how I "really" feel and she'd claim I am selfish and manipulative by telling me how I supposedly lie and twist my words to mean something else. In reality I hadn't even thought of doing the things she was telling me I do, I didn't know people even think this way. I became very insecure in my adolescence and up to early 20s because I'd learned to question myself the way she questioned me - with malice. She became my role model for everything and her opinion mattered more than anyone else's. Took a lot of therapy to break her "spell" and learn to oppose her and not care for what she says. She still projects her own way of thinking on to me and tries to manipulate me but it doesn't work anymore except to make me angry and upset that she doesn't realize her own unhealthy state and that she's completely oblivious of the damage she caused.

Aside from how toxic the above situation is, I think even between healthy people, an ENTP (or any type really) trying to question or debate someone's Fi can come across as completely inappropriate and rude, exactly because it's _personal_, meaning no one has any 'authority' over it but the person it belongs to. Of course it depends on the situation, but generally speaking, feelings are not _debatable_, de facto. 

Also I know Ti alone isn't like this, because I've been with an INTP partner for almost a decade now and he doesn't behave remotely like that. He understands me and my Fi very well, probably by observing me and my reactions because he never questioned me extensively about anything, certainly not beyond my point of comfort, yet ~90% of the time, his assessment of my emotional states and why I feel them are correct. The rest ~10% of time when I disagree with him he is immediately open to my input and never made me feel questioned or invalidated. That doesn't mean we never argue or anything, but emotionally, I've always felt safe with him even when he tells me I'm behaving negatively.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

Didn't read your whole post (will do so later). But I think it's not to Te that Ti seems like gaslighting. It's Fi vs Ti that is the problem.
E.g. it might seem to an Fi-type that Ti types often do the opposite of what they themselves (the Ti-ers) want and they also try to dictate that as the one and only way to be to Fi-ers. 

Is this about the ENTP ex? ENTPs do have a unique way of fucking things up with INTJs (and everybody else!). Their Ne makes them compare everyone to everybody else and their Fe is not as developed as they would like to think it is. They oscillate from "Hahahha, I don't care what anybody thinks!" to bending over backwards to please all the wrong people. They also don't do 1:1 combat very well, either. If they want to annoy you, they'll hide behind a herd of their supposed admirers, but when those admirers aren't good enough for them, they whine to you. At their worst, they basically set everyone up against everyone else because they lack the guts to deal with anything themselves. 

It took me a long time to realize that ENTPs are actually the worst robots in interpersonal relationships. Ti-Fe doesn't actually lend itself to establishing and maintaining close personal relationships at all, but this isn't obvious in ENTPs because they brag incessantly. 

Actually, INTPs are far easier to handle. They seem like robots at first and it's quite clear that they are not comfortable with friendships, relationships etc. That makes it easy to accommodate their needs by drawing them out gently, respecting their boundaries, being patient and appreciating it when they do something cute. 

ESTPs are also easier to handle than ENTPs. They are not socially awkward and are easy to chat to (that's not the same as a close relationship, but it means you don't need to worry about talking to them because they talk to everyone and don't overthink everything like ENTPs and INTPs do). They are also more aggressive and direct than ENTPs and can therefore handle a conflict 1:1 (unless they prefer to stonewall you). There's still a lot of problems with tert Fe vs tert Fi, but at least they have Ni and Se. On the whole, that works out way better than ENTP and INTJ in a practial sense. Personally, I always expect ENTPs to "get me" because they are "intellectual" (and in a way they do). I don't perceive ESTPs to be "intellectual", but they actually read me a lot better and make more of an effort that ENTPs when it comes to friendships and relationships. It's like I *want* ENTPs and see them as superior to ESTPs, but in reality it never materializes. Things don't go *forward* with ENTPs and often they don't even go sideways. I don't necessarily *want* ESTPs in my life, but when I do come across one, things move along nicely and there's always some development (usually a variation on a theme, so there's a good balance between the security of knowing their ways and surprises).


----------



## xraydav (Jan 3, 2013)

F
A
L
S
E

C
A
U
S
E


(Also, judging from what you just said, you’re more likely an Fi dom than INTJ - the Ti-Doms closest complementary partner lmao yeah right you are bloody hell not that)


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

xraydav said:


> F
> A
> L
> S
> ...


INTPs and INTJs are not complementary, in socionics they are "quasi-identical", a dynamic that often fails due to being rife with misunderstandings about each other's motivations and thought-process confusion Quasi-Identical relations between psychological ("personality") types
of course it can work, but it's probably rarer


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

xraydav said:


> F
> A
> L
> S
> ...


Lol what superficial nonsense. You're actually confirming what the Op said. INTJs apply personal feelings to situations that require it, like relationships etc. It's actually 'logical' to do that for INTJs if they aren't immature. Ti Fe tries to be impersonal even about things that seem inherently personal to anyone who has Fi. Just because someone applies Fi in an inherently personal situation doesn't make them an INFP. They may handle impersonal situations in a completely different way. 

Sent from my VTR-L09 using Tapatalk


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

cuddle bun said:


> * *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If I understand you correctly, this is not about the "function" at all - (nor it's operative capacities), but rather the (side-effect(s)) and how (Ti) "manifests," itself within the specimen, gives a (subjective/personalized) perception - to yourself, that mimick(s) - "gaslighting," to which, of couse, I can sympathize when one(s) personal-(feelings) on the matter. Most of this are symptom(s) the "cognitve-function," fetishizing which causes more problems than not: 

As I (briefly) talk about in my post here:

My above assumption is (informed) by patternized-post(s) of yours, and what is explained above, I will explain my reasoning behind your ("Ti = can seem like gaslighting") is not all incorrect, but rather it seems the (perception for (X)-biases to conflict with "ones experiences,") is a bias unique to feeling in general, thus, perhaps my reasoning will (at least) raise yourself to question that such discrepancies lies within the (T/F) distinctions, rather than the (Te/Ti) distinctions.

________

I will assume you get the "impression," that this a (Te - Ti) specific conflict [due to the fact of the Ti-functions] are "prone" to favor 'decoding' of internalized-structures - thus, you (take this) as a mean(s) to defying inner logic (the facts), as your (Te) priortizing above all else, and rejecting these "valuable" (Fi) - facts (Te), is simply an attempt to gaslight (your theory/insights) or "logic," to which you feel (logically-so), as coherent as they may be, are is consistent with these determined facts; in the same way ("Fi"), is perceived to be both "_personally invasive,_" and scrutinizing for the sufficient _optimizing_ of their (self-agency-based) well-being.


It is that (Ti) gives a perception of "gaslighting," by it's [we (view) Te/Ti on the (same street); that is viewing Te/Ti not as polar-opposites/other halves, but as (wholes)-functioninig on the same axis ::


[hr][/hr]

*Thinking *in general dealing with ::


_*Structure: -* All internalized (physical - properties / rules / attributes / substances) belonging to (X). 


*"Things":*- All external intimate-objects consisting of (attributes / properties / substances).


*"Objects"*: - All external events, state-of-affairs, occurrences, et al - "existing," outside the subject/self (factuals / actuality / physicality)._


_____________

I reckon (Post #1)'s misconception comes from the (T/F) dichtonomy ::

[hr][/hr]

*Feeling* in general :: dealing with the welfare (by implication) of elevated hyper-awareness of agencies (and anatomic)-function(s) of these agencies and subjects. ::
_

*Anatomy* of other subjects (re: organ health / bone health / muscluar/tissue health) - health/appearance of physical/external body.


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


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


::



Based off the above; it seems you may be experiences a (Thinking (vs) Feeling) clash. I reckon this is perhaps makes one feel as though they are (being "gaslighted"), when ones inner principles and/or 'logical'-makeup is being scruitizined for the "validity" of it's structure - which seems to be the operative-method of employed (Ti).

Perhaps consider the (Fi / Ti) clash.


----------



## Diavolo (Jul 30, 2015)

Mmmmh INTJs tend to get defensive when we call out the flaws in their logic


----------



## xraydav (Jan 3, 2013)

Red Panda said:


> INTPs and INTJs are not complementary, in socionics they are "quasi-identical", a dynamic that often fails due to being rife with misunderstandings about each other's motivations and thought-process confusion Quasi-Identical relations between psychological ("personality") types
> of course it can work, but it's probably rarer


I don’t care about Socionics . According to Jung and MBTI, we have logical complementary relationships with certain personalities in the course of our lives. It also fits in with psychoanalytic theory, by which Jung,MBTI and pretty much all psychiatric theories are based upon. 

If you have conflicts with a certain type who is theoretically known to be compatible (so far as INTP is pretty much the shadow of the XNTJ), you would have a lot of self development and lessons into self insight coming your way. And you are most likely, not that type you perceived yourself to be. 




FlaviaGemina said:


> Lol *what superficial nonsense*. You're actually confirming what the Op said. INTJs apply personal feelings to situations that require it, like relationships etc. It's actually 'logical' to do that for INTJs if they aren't immature. Ti Fe tries to be impersonal even about things that seem inherently personal to anyone who has Fi. Just because someone applies Fi in an inherently personal situation doesn't make them an INFP. They may handle impersonal situations in a completely different way.
> 
> Sent from my VTR-L09 using Tapatalk



Yeah right, many Te users would place a lot of emphasis on subjective Feeling values like “superficiality vs not superficiality” to determine the validity of conclusions, as you just did right? 

INTJs do that? Okay , let’s just say that’s okay , for now. 

How “impersonal” you are has zero to do with any of the cognitive functions and it’s a baseless conclusion, not based on any literature or criteria for determining type. Cognitive functions have to do with conscious orientation and Thinking to do with differences in inductive and deductive reasoning. The process by which one comes to conclusions - trusting formulas (Te) or hypotheses. (Ti)

OP shows an obvious and clear lack of reasoning when it comes to making a structured argument, (whether based on your “impersonal” criteria or based on a criteria of deductive reasoning). She doesn’t deduct any conclusions based on evidence in her statements, or based on any particular criteria other than some emotional or personal criteria, about what is more valuable and what is not. 

The evidence is as follows : (Classic Fi value systems - everything is filtered based on “good intention”/“bad intentioned”, “open mind, unopened mind”, “offensive/not offensive”



cuddle bun said:


> Note: I'm making this thread because I want to see *Ti as good-intentioned people*, and I'm trying, but I'm failing.
> So try to keep that in mind when you reply - *try to reply with an open mind*. This* thread is probably going to sound offensive *and I know that.
> 
> In order to accurately describe the mental block I'm running into, *I have to accurately describe a train of thought that probably sounds offensive*_. _Just try to keep in mind I'm not making this thread to offend people, I'm making it because _I don't want my train of thought to end here permanently_ and I need some help to see what I'm missing. *I want a wider perspective* that doesn't require me to think of Ti people as gaslighters.
> ...


----------



## xraydav (Jan 3, 2013)

@*cuddle bun*

i think your OP is grounds to say you are nothing even remotely close to an XNTJ. You have serious communication issues with your Shadow types, XNTPs. (Which you are theoretically supposed to be MOST compatible with - I know I am) 

Your typist rage fit, is more akin to some Fi-dom getting disgruntled as a result of their personal value system being offended by the calculating interior of a Ti-dom, rather than an Ni-Te user being frustrated with an INTP for lack of evidence behind their subjective logic and hypotheses generation. 

You also engaged your Ne, to make a completely “what if” version of an INTP/ISTP without any internal reasoning process or structured logical thinking or evidence, very uncharacteristic of an INTJ. 

I also want to note, that your typist rage fit is unwarranted and humorously as offensive as you pretend that ALL Ti doms are.

i think if you come to terms with your INFP personality type and accept that INTPs are just not compatible with your style of thinking , it will be less of a problem in the future and we can prevent future typist threads from being created.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

xraydav said:


> Yeah right, many Te users would place a lot of emphasis on subjective Feeling values like “superficiality vs not superficiality” to determine the validity of conclusions, as you just did right?


Yes, of course they would when it comes to *personal relationships* and it seems to me like personal relationships are the topic of this thread, as ex-es have been mentioned.

I don't actually care whether you want to mistype me as an INFP. There's nothing wrong with that type per se. At least my type isn't D-I-C-K unlike some other people's.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

xraydav said:


> @*cuddle bun*
> 
> i think your OP is grounds to say you are nothing even remotely close to an XNTJ. You have serious communication issues with your Shadow types, XNTPs. (Which you are theoretically supposed to be MOST compatible with - I know I am)


You're doing it again. Subjecting her personal experience to your theory. Besides, what theory is it that says XNTPs and INTJs are ideal partners anyway? Even if you don't like socionics, what particular version of MBTI is it that claims XNTPs and INTJs are ideal partners? If you can quote your source, I will accept that. It might just be that I haven't come across that particular version yet.
One hears a lot more about the supposed ideal match between ENFPs and INTJs. 
Personally, I couldn't care less. I do prefer socionics to MBTI, but I also think they massively overrate duality to the detriment of other intertype relations.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

xraydav said:


> I don’t care about Socionics . According to Jung and MBTI, we have logical complementary relationships with certain personalities in the course of our lives. It also fits in with psychoanalytic theory, by which Jung,MBTI and pretty much all psychiatric theories are based upon.
> 
> If you have conflicts with a certain type who is theoretically known to be compatible (so far as INTP is pretty much the shadow of the XNTJ), you would have a lot of self development and lessons into self insight coming your way. And you are most likely, not that type you perceived yourself to be.


That's a bummer, because Socionics is likely the most accurate. As far as I know, neither Jung nor MBTI have any theories about intertype dynamics, whereas Socionics does, and in my experience very accurate too. 

I have observed many INTP and INTJ arguing and usually goes just like described in socionics. They don't get each other's motivations, the INTP argues impersonally, wanting to expand his understanding of the system and analyze as much as possible, while the INTJ is very goal-oriented, focused and usually argues from a personal point of view. 

That doesn't mean they are entirely incompatible, but they are not automatically compatible either. It's a relationship that takes a specific kind of work, for people to be open enough to understand each other because as soon as they find themselves in conflict, the differences will show.


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

Sounds like the OP is describing disrespectful Thinkers in general. Extreme skepticism of anything that comes from you (they don't respect you) paired with a note that you're not matching their logical worldview.



PiT said:


> I've noticed this too. Arguing with Ti-egos can be really annoying in that many of them have a propensity to just ignore facts that are inconvenient to their position. I suspect this contributes to the perception of them as being trollish, as they have a tendency to plug along based on a certain internal logic, and oftentimes nothing anyone can say can really break through this. I refer to this as a perception because I am sure they mean well, but it has frustrated me many a time in the past.


I mean, it's true. The more unhealthy Ti gets, the more confirmation bias sets in. I really struggle with alpha SFs because of it.

When you flip the perspective, Ti-egos don't state raw facts very often, so Te-dom/aux come across finicky, unreasonable or closed minded.


----------



## xraydav (Jan 3, 2013)

@*Red Panda* @*FlaviaGemina*

you both need to do what you have told me to do: more research , more reading. (“Neither Jung nor MBTI has anything about intertype dynamics” by Red Panda, likewise, “if you can quote it..”. by FlaviaGemina)



Read up on p. 2 (from “the Glossary added to..”), it clearly states that the Shadow personality has both creative and dark capacities (dark in the sense that the individual concerned, does not have proper grasp of it - a Ti user has no proper grasp of Te, however, being with Te users, allows them to develop a creative capacity (this is complementarity) 

http://www.cgjung-vereniging.nl/home/files/jef_dehing.pdf


Read p.20 Jung states the Shadow is necessarily “consumed” by the patient in other words, realised in some form, in the course of psychotherapy. Additionally, the individual can realize his/her shadow given, that is the person they are in a most complementary relationship . 

(Here that would be INTP-INTJ or INTP-ENTJ)


Likewise, Beebe also states that the “Shadow” of each type is the contraversion of that type. (Introverted Thinking to Extroverted Thinking: Although the describes that it is “dark” or in the unconscious of the individual’s personality ). Please refer to Beebe’s eight factor model (Beebe is a psychiatrist who derived his concepts and presented them to other psychiatrists/psychologists, much like Carl Jung)


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

xraydav said:


> @*Red Panda* @*FlaviaGemina*
> 
> you both need to do what you have told me to do: more research , more reading. (“Neither Jung nor MBTI has anything about intertype dynamics” by Red Panda, likewise, “if you can quote it..”. by FlaviaGemina)
> 
> ...


OK, I get what you mean. You can take my post literally, by the way. When I said "direct me to a source", I meant that I'm not familiar with this theory, not that it doesn't exist.
But this type of relationship (INTJ - ENTP) sounds to me like a relationship the end goal of which it is to make the relationship unnecessary. It makes perfect sense in Jungian terms and I have gone through a lot of personal development myself through interacting with ENTPs. My conclusion is that ENTPs either need to be on their best behaviour around me or I don't need them at all because I _can be an ENTP troll myself_! In fact, I have always been able to be an ENTP troll myself, but ENTP trolls try to push me into being a caricature of an INTJ when they have an audience (not 1:1).

I do see the value of ENTPs in a Jungian sense (re-integrating your shadow into your psyche). But that's hardly the mission I or most people are on when looking for a friendship or romantic relationship. Plus, one should not use other people as a tool in one's own personal development unless they have also expressed a desire to make such a pact together. I would say the same about the glorification of duality (ESFP and INTJ) in socionics. If I want to be more spontaneous, I will be more spontaneous in myself. I don't want to be paired up with an ESFP so we can force Se-Fi/ Ni-Te on each other.


----------



## xraydav (Jan 3, 2013)

Red Panda said:


> That's a bummer, because Socionics is likely the most accurate. As far as I know, neither Jung nor MBTI have any theories about intertype dynamics, whereas Socionics does, and in my experience very accurate too.
> 
> I have observed many INTP and INTJ arguing and usually goes just like described in socionics. They don't get each other's motivations, the INTP argues impersonally, wanting to expand his understanding of the system and analyze as much as possible, while the INTJ is very goal-oriented, focused and usually argues from a personal point of view.
> 
> That doesn't mean they are entirely incompatible, but they are not automatically compatible either. It's a relationship that takes a specific kind of work, for people to be open enough to understand each other because as soon as they find themselves in conflict, the differences will show.



If you saw many INTJs and INTPs arguing, one or the other is mistyped. 

A Socionics INTJ has similiar functions to an MBTI INTP.

The INTP argues according to logic(T), so does the ENTJ or INTJ, they back up logic with associations (N) in some form, same with the ENTJ. They literally have the same function stack. They both struggle with F and understanding values (F) in either group settings or individual settings, they both have issues interpreting sensory or experiential events (S) 

T N S F . (They share the function order and only differentiate in extroversion or _contraversion as states by Beebe)_

The INTJ is similiar N T F S . 

*They both have the same weaknesses and find the same strengths in each other. That’s an ideal romantic partner. They both see the world in the same way but one is more extroverted in areas that the other finds difficult to communicate (introversion)*

There is a difference between a nice boyfriend and a soulmate (someone who with certain level of criticism allows you to grow and develop yourself - refer to the Notebook. It is obviously productive and helpful, although at first there are minor disagreements. )

What you said is exactly why I said, Socionics is probably incorrect on intertype dynamics. My experience with ENTJs and INTJs is consistent with Jung and MBTI all the way. Such relationships have been beneficial short term and long term.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

xraydav said:


> @*Red Panda* @*FlaviaGemina*
> 
> you both need to do what you have told me to do: more research , more reading. (“Neither Jung nor MBTI has anything about intertype dynamics” by Red Panda, likewise, “if you can quote it..”. by FlaviaGemina)
> 
> ...


Being a "complementary" type as described by this, doesn't necessarily equate to "compatible", as in they will have a good relationship dynamic. These don't conflict with that I said, if anything they confirm them because the nature of those relationships is difficult, exactly because of them being shadows. 

"The shadow personifies everything that the subject refuses to acknowledge about
himself and yet is always thrusting itself upon him directly or indirectly - for instance,
inferior traits of character and other incompatible tendencies"

so while there is capacity for growth, it doesn't mean two such people will automatically have the smoothest and most compatible relationship


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

xraydav said:


> There is a difference between a nice boyfriend and a soulmate (someone who with certain level of criticism allows you to grow and develop yourself - refer to the Notebook. It is obviously productive and helpful, although at first there are minor disagreements. )
> 
> .


Exactly. And that is why an INTP can be a platonic soulmate ('best friend') and not a boyfriend or husband. It's exactly this kind of philosophical arrogance that makes INTPs unattractive as a romantic partner (I. e. you dictate that only mental soulmatery counts and nice boyfriends have no value.)
When I'm in a relationship, I don't want to be castrated by someone's lack of Sensing. I can have all the INTP friends I want and they can be prissy in their own romantic life. There is nothing to be gained from turning an "ideal" platonic relationship into something that it isn't meant to be. 

Sent from my VTR-L09 using Tapatalk


----------



## Senah (Oct 17, 2017)

Red Panda said:


> I understand that this way of functioning doesn't necessarily come from a bad place nor that it's de facto toxic, but I've had a pretty bad experience with my unhealthy/egotistic, jealous & competitive ENTP sister growing up.


So, I won't re-post this entire part, but again I would say this is just another example of using a singular personal experience to define and entire cohort of people or justify a stereotype. What is important? You are justified to be angry, resentful and upset about the experience you had with your sister. However it doesn't behoove you to apply her actions to an entire group of people (Ti users, ENTPs). Guess what - I am an ENTP. I was married to a non-ENTP. We were in marriage counseling for 2 years before we divorced, and our psychiatrist specifically had my husband acknowledge that the constant thing he did to me was gas lighting. Why? Because he was a dick who needed control in our relationship. Not because he was a Ti user. I am not going to apply my experience to others or use it to justify an argument. It is my subjective experience. 

Another example? I was born with a rare, incurable disease. It is treatable, but not curable. Due to how rare it is, not much money or research goes into it. As a medical professional and researcher, if someone comes to me with millions of dollars and says that the money can go to juvenile diabetes or my disease, I will vote to have it go to the former. I believe it is important to not let emotion or personal experience influence decisions which affect the population or others' lives. That is the area I come from. In medicine, when you are deciding (in developing countries) which of the 3 out of 7 kids gets the medication and gets to live and you are sitting around a table making arguments, you don't dismiss the other 4's experiences, emotions of the families, or trauma. But you use objective things to decide. I think that when people are trying to look at decisions like these (remember the death panel ridiculousness?), you tend to be dismissive of people who have to use Ti to make decisions and think they are "robots". 



Red Panda said:


> It took me a long time to realize that ENTPs are actually the worst robots in interpersonal relationships. Ti-Fe doesn't actually lend itself to establishing and maintaining close personal relationships at all, but this isn't obvious in ENTPs because they brag incessantly....


Well, this is just the start of ENTP bashing. I don't understand how it is productive to the conversation at hand.



Hawkguy said:


> Mmmmh INTJs tend to get defensive when we call out the flaws in their logic


INTJ bashing - I also don't understand how it is useful, and it is also detrimental. If it were witty or a little funny it might be kind of useful.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

Senah said:


> So, I won't re-post this entire part, but again I would say this is just another example of using a singular personal experience to define and entire cohort of people or justify a stereotype. What is important? You are justified to be angry, resentful and upset about the experience you had with your sister. However it doesn't behoove you to apply her actions to an entire group of people (Ti users, ENTPs). Guess what - I am an ENTP. I was married to a non-ENTP. We were in marriage counseling for 2 years before we divorced, and our psychiatrist specifically had my husband acknowledge that the constant thing he did to me was gas lighting. Why? Because he was a dick who needed control in our relationship. Not because he was a Ti user. I am not going to apply my experience to others or use it to justify an argument. It is my subjective experience.
> 
> Another example? I was born with a rare, incurable disease. It is treatable, but not curable. Due to how rare it is, not much money or research goes into it. As a medical professional and researcher, if someone comes to me with millions of dollars and says that the money can go to juvenile diabetes or my disease, I will vote to have it go to the former. I believe it is important to not let emotion or personal experience influence decisions which affect the population or others' lives. That is the area I come from. In medicine, when you are deciding (in developing countries) which of the 3 out of 7 kids gets the medication and gets to live and you are sitting around a table making arguments, you don't dismiss the other 4's experiences, emotions of the families, or trauma. But you use objective things to decide. I think that when people are trying to look at decisions like these (remember the death panel ridiculousness?), you tend to be dismissive of people who have to use Ti to make decisions and think they are "robots".


I'm not sure you understood what I was saying because I don't see how these apply to my post much. I didn't say all ENTPs are like that. And I specifically mentioned my experience with my Ti-dom partner... so perhaps you should read it again.

As for the second paragraph, that's not what @cuddle bun or me are referring to, but _personal feelings_, i.e. _"I'm feeling angry because X"_. And it's why I mentioned that feeling vs fact based debating has its place depending on the situation.




> Well, this is just the start of ENTP bashing. I don't understand how it is productive to the conversation at hand.


This wasn't my post, you misquoted it.


----------



## Strelnikov (Jan 19, 2018)

Hawkguy said:


> Mmmmh INTJs tend to get defensive when we call out the flaws in their logic


 Yeah! The thing is we don't really care about logic. We may say we do, but really we don't. Ti users really care about being all logical, we care more about getting things done. We care about effectiveness. I don't care whether my ideas aren't fully arranged in a logical sequence. Through approximation they may be good enough and applied in the real world, I usually get very good results. So empirically, whether it's logical or not, it works and that's what we care about.

Example: Say you saw one day fresh dinosaur tracks. Ti users may be all like: it doesn't make any sense, they died 65 million years ago. But then what could it be? (starting to analyse the whole thing from a logical standpoint) I would be all like... Maybe it is a dinosaur, maybe it isn't... I don't care... How do I kill (or tame) it? What does it do? What use does it have? (I'm looking for the practical implications, not the logical consistency of the ideea of a modern day dinosaur)

Maybe it's a cartoonish example, but you get the point


----------



## Senah (Oct 17, 2017)

@Red Panda Sorry about the second quote. I acknowledge you did talk about your experience with your INTP partner at the end. I should have stated that I was trying to point out that I noticed again that personal examples and experiences with Ti users were forming the core of arguments for the conversation - experiences that were emotion heavy. It was not only you who I was referring to, and I should have made that clearer.

I suppose what I have an issue with is the idea that Ti users are all assumed to disregard feelings and emotions of others ad nauseam. I think wanting to have a discussion and gain understanding about an issue that is based in fact or look at it a lot of different ways so that it can be related to a lot of different people and explained objectively isn't cruel or insensitive. The way we look at it is that using a framework rooted in subjective emotional experience means that it will not translate well or apply to others you want to share it with. The understanding or solution won't hold. In interpersonal relationships, I think Ti users certainly do care about our friends and family and lovers. It is more about communication. 

For example, my brother is an INFP. We can talk about things in a logical manner and based on facts rather than emotion, though he is more sensitive than me by a mile. I am very emotionally tuned in to him. What is different is the communication styles. He helps me to understand how to validate and communicate with others who are feelers. Two examples would be when friends are upset me wanting to solve their problems vs being simply sympathetic. A second would be in a relationship telling someone the things they did that are negatively affecting the relationship and that need to be fixed vs. saying what happened and how it made me feel. 

So, I guess what I would say, which echoes what other Ti users who have commented have said, is that I think this is actually a "I get frustrated by those close to me with underdeveloped Fe" thread masquerading as a "Te/Ti gaslighting" thread. Most of the examples are where people were personally hurt in close relationships by Ti users who displayed an underdeveloped Fe (it seems to me). 

Sorry for anyone I have confused or lumped together. But I think we are talking about a lot of [different] things at once.


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

Catwalk said:


> I will assume you get the "impression," that this a (Te - Ti) specific conflict [due to the fact of the Ti-functions] are *"prone" to favor 'decoding' of internalized-structures *- thus, you (take this) as a mean(s) to defying inner logic (the facts), as your (Te) priortizing above all else, and rejecting these "valuable" (Fi) - facts (Te), is simply an attempt to gaslight (your theory/insights) or "logic," to which you feel (logically-so), as coherent as they may be, are is consistent with these determined facts; in the same way ("Fi"), is perceived to be both "_personally invasive,_" and scrutinizing for the sufficient _optimizing_ of their (self-agency-based) well-being.


close but not quite...it's actually something different that makes Ti seem similar to gaslighting.

Te sees fact collection as a group effort. We rely heavily on multiple perspectives from different people to find out more about objective truth - an objective view of reality that no single observer could arrive at in isolation. We think that fact-checking between people is important, for accuracy.

Ti sees fact collection as an individual effort. They trust their own fact collection efforts highly and they are skeptical of other perspectives that don't match their own. They think that internal fact-checking is important for accuracy.

So what you get is a Te person (me) who goes through an event with a Ti person (my ex for example) - maybe he collects X facts about this event and I collect Y facts about it. To me, the closest thing we have to the "truth" is X + Y because fact collection was a group effort. Maybe the _real_ truth is X+Y+Z, but still.... X+Y is the best understanding we have so far in that moment.

But to him, the truth is X. Because that's what he saw. He hears me talking about Y and automatically dismisses it. Because Y was not the facts that he personally collected, therefore Y is wrong.

And that's why it feels like gaslighting to me. The automatic dismissal of other perspectives even when the other perspective is factually part of the objective truth.

I am trying to see it a different way and still hopeful that someone can help with that.

"he's unhealthy" is on my list of possibilities but it's just a continuously mounting number of Ti people I've encountered who do the same thing; enough that it's starting to feel like "he's unhealthy" is the easy way out of explaining this. another thing on my list of possibilities is maybe they are 2 different moral systems that both work great with other members of the same moral system, but clash when combined.


----------



## Diavolo (Jul 30, 2015)

1nquisitor said:


> Yeah! The thing is we don't really care about logic. We may say we do, but really we don't. Ti users really care about being all logical, we care more about getting things done. We care about effectiveness. I don't care whether my ideas aren't fully arranged in a logical sequence. Through approximation they may be good enough and applied in the real world, I usually get very good results. So empirically, whether it's logical or not, it works and that's what we care about.
> 
> Example: Say you saw one day fresh dinosaur tracks. Ti users may be all like: it doesn't make any sense, they died 65 million years ago. But then what could it be? (starting to analyse the whole thing from a logical standpoint) I would be all like... Maybe it is a dinosaur, maybe it isn't... I don't care... How do I kill (or tame) it? What does it do? What use does it have? (I'm looking for the practical implications, not the logical consistency of the ideea of a modern day dinosaur)
> 
> Maybe it's a cartoonish example, but you get the point


I didn't mean to bash INTJs if anyone's wondering. It's something I noticed personally but I love INTJs and your point of view is always appreciated.


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

PiT said:


> So, I guess what I would say, which echoes what other Ti users who have commented have said, is that I think this is actually a "I get frustrated by those close to me with underdeveloped Fe" thread masquerading as a "Te/Ti gaslighting" thread. Most of the examples are where people were personally hurt in close relationships by Ti users who displayed an underdeveloped Fe (it seems to me).


I am keeping this in my pocket because it actually does sound like a legit attempt to unify understanding in a way that doesn't make either side sound like a jerk. And I appreciate that; when people try to make one side sound like a jerk then it raises the red flag of potential inaccuracy in my mind (which is exactly why I flagged my own "Ti looks similar to gaslighting" train of thought here to begin with).

And it makes me wonder, could Fe shut down if it's "starved of Fi input," so to speak? Because at the time I ran into this problem with my most recent ex, I was grieving the loss of a loved one, and my Fi broke for about 9 months. (By "broke" I mean: I was suddenly unaware of my own emotions, which is not typical for me, I test close to the middle of the T/F spectrum and I'm usually well aware of my own emotions just choosy about who I share them with. And even less body language and facial expressions than usual - not a lot of that to begin with because I'm definitely Fi and Fi isn't big on body language and facial expressions, it's like that even when I'm not grieving)


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

FlaviaGemina said:


> You're doing it again. Subjecting her personal experience to your theory. Besides, what theory is it that says XNTPs and INTJs are ideal partners anyway? Even if you don't like socionics, what particular version of MBTI is it that claims XNTPs and INTJs are ideal partners? If you can quote your source, I will accept that. It might just be that I haven't come across that particular version yet.
> One hears a lot more about the supposed ideal match between ENFPs and INTJs.
> Personally, I couldn't care less. I do prefer socionics to MBTI, but I also think they massively overrate duality to the detriment of other intertype relations.


I appreciate this 

And, just for anyone who is curious about my typing (really? we got to unsolicited typing already? lol)...

I test strongly introvert, close to 50/50 on S/N and T/F, and moderately strong J.
Because I'm close to 50/50 on 2 axes, I narrowed it down further according to functions. I relate very strongly to Te and Fi, but Ti and Fe feel like alien languages to me; for me those are learned behavior at best. INTJ and ISTJ are the only IXXJ that have Fi and Te in the stack, but I don't relate to the ISTJ description at all; too much automatic respect for authority and tradition in the ISTJ. And I imagine I don't fit the INTJ stereotype perfectly. That's partly because I'm close to 50/50 on 2 axes, and partly because INTJ stereotypes are flawed to begin with. For example lots of people assume INTJs are less in touch with their emotions than they actually are. A quick visit to the INTJ section reveals many of us are very articulate about our emotions.

I relate well to pieces (but not entire pages) of INTJ, ISFP, and INFP descriptions - those are the 3 introvert types that have Fi and Te in their stack. However INTJ is the one I believe is the closest match and that conclusion is based on 
1. Ps don't usually get insomnia when something is unresolved, and I often do.
2. Ps don't usually make to-do grids ... I'm not even talking about a to-do _list_, I'm talking about a to-do _grid_, with multiple columns for each similar step that each task needs, rows for other people whose tasks I am waiting on before I can continue... etc I could go on about how J I am but those are the 2 most inconvenient examples lol so I'll stop there.
3. The order of functions (if Te was my 4th function then it would not be anywhere near as prominent and reliable as it is in my work and personal relationships. If Se or Si was higher in my stack then it would not be the thing I revert to under extreme stress and make fun of the rest of the time. etc)


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

cuddle bun said:


> I appreciate this
> 
> And, just for anyone who is curious about my typing (really? we got to unsolicited typing already? lol)...
> 
> ...


Yeah.. those tests that only test for E/I, S/N, T/F, J/P aren't all that reliable and in my personal opinion, they are also theoretically flawed. There are others who will tell you that cognitive functions aren't real and that those 4-letter tests are correct. .... Who knows, it all depends on which way you look at it.

Anyway, people and different types can devalue each other's perspective in different ways (or even gaslight them). Sometimes they do it by accident because they just don't understand the other person's way of thinking. If that happens regularly, it's probably best to sit them down and explain that you don't feel valued and would like to have an exchange of perspectives rather than being told you are wrong. If they can't do that, then they probably are gaslighting or being very egocentric. It doesn't particularly matter about what their functions are, although understanding typology could definitely help you "translate" between their perspective and yours.


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

FlaviaGemina said:


> Yeah.. those tests that only test for E/I, S/N, T/F, J/P aren't all that reliable and in my personal opinion, they are also theoretically flawed. There are others who will tell you that cognitive functions aren't real and that those 4-letter tests are correct. .... Who knows, it all depends on which way you look at it.
> 
> Anyway, *people and different types can devalue each other's perspective in different ways* (or even gaslight them). Sometimes they do it by accident because they just don't understand the other person's way of thinking. If that happens regularly, it's probably best to sit them down and explain that you don't feel valued and would like to have an exchange of perspectives rather than being told you are wrong. If they can't do that, then they probably are gaslighting or being very egocentric. It doesn't particularly matter about what their functions are, although understanding typology could definitely help you "translate" between their perspective and yours.


I want to see this, and I have tried, but I'm having trouble picturing it. so do you mind if I dig into that bolded thought a little more?

So...

When I say something like this...
*Ti values its own fact-collection abilities and devalues other people's fact collection abilities*

Then someone invariably responds like this...
*Yeah that's true, but Fi is just as bad because Fi values its own emotions and devalues other people's emotions.*

And my thought is ... well no. Not really.

If I feel X and another person feels Y then my Fi thinks that's _totally normal and both are valid_. Because emotions are an individual thing and I don't expect them to match. And other Fi people I've met feel the same way. We Fi people seem totally unfazed by the thought of different individuals feeling different things. I don't see this "devaluing" of other people's emotions...maybe if I could see it then it would help me understand Ti better but I don't see it.

But Ti does seem to devalue other people's fact collection. If me and a Ti person go through the same exact event together, later we talk about the event and find that he collected X facts and I collected Y facts ... then _that should also be totally normal_ ... except to him it's not. In every relationship I've ever been in with Ti people, where we were close enough to actually care about what happened to us as a pair, the Ti person would conclude that the truth here is X alone. Not X+Y. Just X. Because he observed X and I observed Y therefore the truth is X. Or so it seems. It's very puzzling to me. and yes it does feel like gaslighting to have valid facts just dismissed, simply because they were observed by me and not by him.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

PS: @*cuddle bun*

This whole typological confusion also stems from the fact that people aren't particularly clear about what they mean when they use the word 'feelings' (see the list below). They have an unclear idea of what they mean in any given context and then they try to apply that to INTJs when even their own general concept of 'feelings' is vague. So any INTJ who shows any kind of vital signs is going to be suspected of not being INTJ.

- expressing enthusiasm 
- facial expressions
- having manners
- caring about another person's well-being
- feeling and verbalizing 'love'
- being irrational and unpredictable
- personal preference
- predicting outcomes
- personal opinion
- sexual attraction 
.....


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

cuddle bun said:


> Then someone invariably responds like this...
> *Yeah that's true, but Fi is just as bad because Fi values its own emotions and devalues other people's emotions.*
> 
> .


That's bullshit anyway. Fi cares about human feelings and people's individual needs (starting with one's own feelings and trying to understand the human feelings and individual needs of others, no matter how they present themselves... e.g. even if they act like they don't need anything because they are so tough etc.).

Extreme Fe cares about what is the norm in society and what behaviour is accepted by a majority, not necessarily whether that norm is right or wrong. Of course, this will materialize differently in different types and no Fe-er is a pure herd-Nazi. Fe does not want to attract the attention of a group, e.g. they don't want to complain about their problems in front of a group. They want to infect others with positive emotions and suppress their own needs so as not to be a burden to others.

In my dealings with EXTP I have always found that I value their personal needs more than they do themselves! However, when push comes to shove, ENTPs will value the opinion of a group/ society over mine, which would make me feel betrayed if I was in a romantic relationship with an ENTP. 

Can you give a concrete example of the fact-gathering process? I mean like a story that really happened with all its details? I'm not good deductive logic. To follow your point I would have to match up experiential data with the theories I know and my own exprience.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

@cuddle bun, FWIW, I don't think your post looks butthurt. And props to you for putting yourself out there and opening yourself up to many different perspectives.

What I hear you saying is you don't like that feeling when someone invalidates your feelings. I can sympathize with this. It's not a good experience at all. It feels like someone is shutting you down in a very real and hurtful way.

I will say I think you are attributing a behavior to Ti-users that could come from so many different types. If I could attribute it to type, it _might_ be Thinking types are more prone to this in general. But I do not think it's Ti _specific_. 

Let's talk about Ti for a second. Actually, let's talk about Thinking. Thinking is the function that sorts out what info we perceive by categorizing and defining it. It is the function that focuses on the attributes something has and categorizes those things based on attributes. Feeling is not opposed, but sorts things out differently: Feeling sorts stuff out based on its _worth_. How much is this worth. (Is it significant, important, beautiful, good.) 

The Ti-dom is one who likes to come up with an internal way of categorizing the world and understanding it. There is an unfortunate stereotype that Ti = dismissive of emotion and likes to critique what people say and can't stand incompetence. And honestly, this is an unfortunate stereotype of Thinking in general, not just Ti. I doubt Thinking-dominant types consider themselves _dismissive _or emotions or entirely unemotional (no one is). 

However, you can be utterly focused on the attributes of something and still be a moral, feeling person. Part of these stereotypes of Thinking also stem from stereotypes of Feeling being attention to emotions or validation of emotion when it is not. Feeling is as rational a process as Thinking. It is evaluation, not emotion. And Feeling types are just as capable of emotionally abusing someone and/or completely invalidating someone else's emotions. 

I will share my own experience. I've married an INTP and known him my whole life. Also my brother is an INTP. Two good friends of mine are ESTPs. I have not experienced the feared "Ti/Fi clash". Thinking and Feeling in my experience have two different realms of focus but are actually amazingly compatible. 

I feel defensive of my husband when I read a thread like this talking about Ti-users because I feel my husband is a really sensitive, caring guy who does none of this feeling invalidation described. Those who have grown up with him think of him as the brilliant mathematically minded philosophical guy who got into a good university, but he doesn't pride himself on that. He'd love to teach, actually share something with others - not to impress his own truth on them but to engage in conversation. 

But also, maybe he's just a particularly incredible Ti-dom... the thing is, my brother also doesn't invalidate my feelings... neither do other Ti-dom friends I know. But *shrugs* I don't know the whole world of Ti-doms. I have a very small sample size. I'm inferring a lot here.

All I can say definitively is that in my limited experience, I have noticed a pattern both in real life and on PerC where I tend to get along with Ti-users rather well. 

That said, sometimes my husband and I will be conversing about some issue or idea or something. There are times where I'll be making some point... I'll put out a truth claim and he'll examine it. He questions it or offers other possibilities or tries to sort it out via Thinking (categorizing it, analyzing) and I'm really forced to think about the validity of what I've said. 

The _only_ reason this his way of thinking ever frustrates me are times when I think I'm throwing out these truth claims backed by a conglomeration of externally derived facts (Te) and it might _seem _I'm trying to point out something's attributes... when in reality and at heart I feel like something is important and significant about something (Fi), and I'm struggling to articulate why. This method of backing what I feel is important by externally derived stuff never works out well for me. Usually I notice when I'm doing this pretty fast. The facts and evidence might be quite on point, but it means that I run the risk of feeling misunderstood when people respond to the facts and evidence I myself put out there and miss what I feel is important. 

That's not the fault of his way of thinking at all. I love how he thinks. It's because I'm trying out a way of thinking that I'm more clumsy at, not as practiced (freaking tertiary Thinking) - and I still can't help but focus on the worth and the significance first and foremost. My use of Thinking is always clouded by Feeling. It will always poke through. That doesn't mean I'm not a reasonable person or I'm not rational. I just have a different focus, and when I try to take on a more Thinking focus, it doesn't work out well. It's like if I tried writing with my non-dominant hand. It just won't look quite as pretty. @Northern Lights, @Aluminum Frost, @PiT I wonder if this is something you all have noticed in your interactions with Fi-users.  

Usually I'm not trying to do the above ^ and I'm just trying to articulate _why_ something feels so significant to me or important - what about it. That is the realm of Fi and where I feel most at home. That, my husband listens to and we think through together. Often he is skilled at helping me name just what it is about something (attributes!) that is weighing on me. 

I find we have very complementary ways of thinking. No clash. He admires how well I can communicate what I mean and he loves the way I always seem to focus on _worth_. He says, "You feel the significance of things." He doesn't see that as a negative, but as a strength. And I actually feel like many Thinkers on this forum similarly don't think badly of those who have a Feeling preference. 

Take that for what it's worth.


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

FlaviaGemina said:


> Can you give a concrete example of the fact-gathering process? I mean like a story that really happened with all it's details? I'm not good deductive logic. To follow your point I would have to match up experiential data with the theories I know and my own exprience.


I hesitate to give examples because I know someone's going to be like "don't draw conclusions based on just one example!" Lol.

They'll just have to take my word for it that this was one of many many examples. Maybe I have bad luck in my relationships but this was typical of multiple Ti people that I dated, in multiple different scenarios.


So here's an example of: going through an event together, he collects X facts, I collect Y facts, he concludes that the truth is X.

him: You don't love me any more!
me: Why do you think that? I do love you I'm just really depressed right now.
him: You're shutting me out! You don't smile or laugh anywhere near as much as you used to!
me: Because my cat died and I'm sad. That's how I grieve. Try to give it time and be patient.

At this point he has observed the following facts:
- I don't smile as much as I used to
- I don't laugh as much as I used to

And based on those limited facts collected from a single perspective, he came to this conclusion
- I don't love him any more

And in the same exact event I have collected the following mix of facts from his perspective and from mine:
- I don't smile as much as I used to (I'm taking his word for it)
- I don't laugh as much as I used to (I'm taking his word for it)
- My cat died (I observed this directly)
- I am very sad that my cat died (I observed this directly)
- I love my partner (I observed this directly)
- I am very sad that my partner thinks I don't love him (I observed this directly)
- My partner has a fear of abandonment triggered by reduced body language (I observed this directly)
- I am unable to change my body language because I'm grieving (I observed this directly)

and I can't rush along my grief so instead I come to this conclusion; my Te wants to fix everything and this is how it will be fixed:
- I should remind him of the real reasons why I shut down; death of cat, not a lack of love 
- he should give it time and be patient

At that point he totally dismissed my perspective and insisted that his original conclusion was still correct (his conclusion that I didn't love him). When pressed for info about why dismissed my perspective he said that he trusts what he sees.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

cuddle bun said:


> I hesitate to give examples because I know someone's going to be like "don't draw conclusions based on just one example!" Lol.
> 
> They'll just have to take my word for it that this was one of many many examples. Maybe I have bad luck in my relationships but this was typical of multiple Ti people that I dated, in multiple different scenarios.
> 
> ...


OK, that clearly sounds like Fe vs Fi and then he makes his viewpoint sound like it was "true" and rationalizes this in some way. So basically, his inability to read Fi makes him think that he is "right" in some way. It's not even Ti figuring anything out as such, but Fe failing to figure out Fi. Ti might play a part in it if he makes assumptions and attributes intentions to your behaviour without asking what has caused your behaviour.

Fe demands that you show your feelings for someone by smiling, saying things like "It's nice to see you!" or "I'm looking forward to seeing you!" etc. Even saying "I love you!" directly won't go down too well if it is stated like a fact or said gently and not accompanied by the expression of joyous rapture.

INTJs are perfectly capable of saying that (I mean "It's nice to see you" etc) when their inner ESFP is left to it's own devices. In this case it will be a spontaneous expression of Fi tempered by Te ('saying things in a way that makes sense to people'). But they don't like being pressured to express some feelings just because there is a 'social' expectation .... (Personally, I'd much rather say something idiosyncratic and silly like 'You're a sweet teddy/ puppy/ squirrel..' etc).


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

cuddle bun said:


> So what you get is a Te person (me) who goes through an event with a Ti person (my ex for example) - maybe he collects X facts about this event and I collect Y facts about it. To me, the closest thing we have to the "truth" is X + Y because fact collection was a group effort. Maybe the _real_ truth is X+Y+Z, but still.... X+Y is the best understanding we have so far in that moment.
> 
> 
> And that's why it feels like gaslighting to me. The automatic dismissal of other perspectives even when the other perspective is factually part of the objective truth.


What's confusing to me is what these other people have actually dismissed. Facts and perspectives are two very different things. Perspectives can be dismissed for good reason; facts cannot.


----------



## pwowq (Aug 7, 2016)

Interesting thread. To me the thread looks like a beautiful traditional Fi-Ti-conflict. The thread name should be "introverted judgers causes mayhem thru gaslighting each other".



cuddle bun said:


> I came across this on Facebook today
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Why say that's Ti? Both Fi and Ti does this.


----------



## Senah (Oct 17, 2017)

cuddle bun said:


> When I say something like this...
> *Ti values its own fact-collection abilities and devalues other people's fact collection abilities*
> 
> Then someone invariably responds like this...
> ...



I don't feel really like Ti devalue other people's fact collection abilities. If you look at a lot of the debates and conversations we have, we often change our approach or opinion as we integrate the opinions and facts of others into our argument as we go along. We seek out an integrate information into our worldview as we move forward in order to make our opinions more solid. I can see that this can seem confusing because it might seem like we are using someone else as a sounding board which could seem manipulative, but really we are almost asking for their help in order to inform our opinions. Now, if the opinions are based only on emotional experience that to us is not necessarily a strong enough foundational support to argue that we have changed our minds to another person, so we may disregard that information. For example, to say to person C that we have changed our view on a subject because person B had this singular experience and we are throwing away all the cumulative facts others have collected and shared with us up to that point...it doesn't sound convincing. There is a difference if we are disregarding someone's personal emotional point of view in a one-on-one romantic relationship issue. I don't know that is what we are talking about here.



FlaviaGemina said:


> That's bullshit anyway. Fi cares about human feelings and people's individual needs (starting with one's own feelings and trying to understand the human feelings and individual needs of others, no matter how they present themselves... e.g. even if they act like they don't need anything because they are so tough etc.).
> 
> Extreme Fe cares about what is the norm in society and what behaviour is accepted by a majority, *not necessarily whether that norm is right or wrong*. Of course, this will materialize differently in different types and no Fe-er is a pure herd-Nazi. Fe does not want to attract the attention of a group, e.g. they don't want to complain about their problems in front of a group. They want to infect others with positive emotions and suppress their own needs so as not to be a burden to others.
> 
> *In my dealings with EXTP I have always found that I value their personal needs more than they do themselves! However, when push comes to shove, ENTPs will value the opinion of a group/ society over mine, which would make me feel betrayed if I was in a romantic relationship with an ENTP.*


I have felt in my dealings with Fi that there is a bias that since the majority of society is emotion heavy in terms of communication style, political leanings, decision making, and how they rank what should be focused on, that Ti users are often at a disadvantage. Often, types that are Fi users do end up with a black and white view of morality and the relevance of emotional experience and the role it should play in communication, relationships, validation, and decision making. It is left up to us Ti users to "develop our Fe" and alter our communication capabilities to be more palatable to Fi and Te users in conversations, confrontations of a personal nature, and resolutions. I have worked hard to develop my Ti to be gentler in work situations, and to develop my Fe in terms of communication styles that validate emotions, however I have often felt that the Fi users I do this with have remained almost stoic in their belief that I am doing what is _necessary_ to interact correctly in these relationships, as opposed to meeting me halfway. I am _learning how to be a grown-up_ in a caring relationship almost. 

Ideally, I would say that there are different ways to communicate, and that in general people should validate others' feelings and points of view, however that also needs to be seen as subjective, and just because you feel a certain way, doesn't make it the truth. There can be a shades of grey situation, several truths, or both people can be wrong. Also, regardless of how someone is emotionally feeling, often a resolution and moving forward is more important in my opinion than staying in that emotional place. I think the 5 languages of love is an interesting thing - often I have found when talking with friends when the language of apology (an offshoot of that concept) is one way, my Ti friends who take the test learn that they prefer one method (accepting responsibility for example) and learn that their friend wants someone to request forgiveness, they will think that from then on they will get accepting responsibility and request forgiveness. My Te or Fi friends seem to have a harder time shifting out of both expecting and offering the same type of apology. It almost seems hard to de-identify from the personal emotional content when it is strong. I'm not saying we Ti users are great that we easily divorce emotional content in many situations, but perhaps you can see why we see the utility of it in some personal situations, and perhaps the bias that often can come with these circumstances. 



Jewl said:


> [MENTION=462802]I will say I think you are attributing a behavior to Ti-users that could come from so many different types. If I could attribute it to type, it _might_ be Thinking types are more prone to this in general. But I do not think it's Ti _specific_.
> 
> Let's talk about Ti for a second. Actually, let's talk about Thinking. Thinking is the function that sorts out what info we perceive by categorizing and defining it. It is the function that focuses on the attributes something has and categorizes those things based on attributes. Feeling is not opposed, but sorts things out differently: Feeling sorts stuff out based on its _worth_. How much is this worth. (Is it significant, important, beautiful, good.)
> 
> ...


For the sake of saving space, I'm not quoting everything you said, but I just thought this was such an insightful post. Thank you for your thoughts.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

Senah said:


> When you were talking about "herd mentality" and the Fi/Fe contrasts, it seemed to me you were more generalizing about social issues and group thinking than specific feelings in a relationship. I was responding to that, so if I didn't understand what you were saying that is my bad.
> 
> I don't totally agree with the Fi/Fe characterization because if anything many Ti/Fe users tend to reject herd mentality while they do use social constructs and objective ideas to help their concepts and opinions evolve. They are integrating more objective, normative data into their construct when reifying it for sure. I do think like I said previously that a lot of the miscommunication between these types does exist, and has to do with how each type emotionally respond to a situation and interpret it. More generally, often Ti users say, "this is what was said or how someone reacted with body language and tone (the latter of two which make up the majority of human communication), so this is what I took away from the conversation. Te person says, "This is how it made me feel". Both are valid, but if only the "this is how it made me feel" person gets to be "right" then there is a problem. I think that is what I was inferring with the shades of grey. I also think that if the person with the feelings stews until the other person says "I was wrong and I need to change to make sure your feeling never get hurt by the way I communicate again" then that isn't necessarily the best outcome for the situation. Perhaps both need to learn about each others' communication styles and adapt. Both need to address communication issues. I think type acknowledgement can help, but it is also just a human condition thing as well in terms of compatibility and respect.


Oops, yeah, I did bring up the herd issues. By the way, I don't think Fe-ers are the only emotional Nazis. There are lots of EXFPs in leadership positions who want everyone to feel the same, but the process is the other way round. I.e. The EXFP wants to force their feelings on others, vs. Fe-ers who adapt to what a group or 'society' deems acceptable. 

Let me give you some examples of how the Fe-problem can affect relationships, though:

1. My brother is an ENTP. When he was little he had hardly any Fe and was incredibly shy. He'd Ne and daydream most of the time and never even went out with friends. When I took him along to play with my friends, he'd stand in a corner and blush and everybody would laugh about him (hahaha, the glory of the troll as a young boy!). 

In his late teens, he had lots of Ti and was very dogmatic. For example, he didn't like it that kids drank on school trips (I didn't like it either) and wrote an essay about it for the student paper. He had a very strong conviction that the teachers shouldn't condone drinking and that drinking messes up your brain and makes you irrational. 
A while after that, he went straight edge and preached all about how substances make you irrational. 

Finally, he had a huge Fe growth spurt and discovered that he can drink when he socializes with his mates. Fair enough, he could have said "I have changed my mind. I used to be very dogmatic about this, but now I have discovered some aspects of drinking that I enjoy." But of course, little ENTP brother is always right even when he takes a U-Turn. So now drinking is the best thing in the world. 

Recently he's had a burn out and turned from a confident troll and leader of the world revolution into someone crippled by anxiety. He can't even travel on his own anymore. I told him I've had panic attacks for a while and the doctor gave me medication that works really well. He could go to a doctor and ask for that medication and give it a try. He says he is skeptical of doctors because they're not scientific (erhem), and besides he has a _better way_ of dealing with this: he'll just drink.

==> Summary: this whole drinking business was started by an Fe need to fit in with his mates and now it's been turned into yet another dogmatic ideology and he speaks to me in an arrogant tone as if his way was the only way. (Hahaha, of course, I am also convinced that my way is a bit more reasonable, but I don't generally preach to him the way he preaches to me.)

2. An ESTP colleague/ friend and me where at the bus stop. He saw an emo person with a 19th century walking cane and said "Hey, didn't you have something socially unacceptable like that?". I explained to him that I never had a cane but that I did have a trolley bag for my paperwork. I added I don't care whether it's socially unacceptable or not, it's practical and he accepted that.
==> What bugs me about this: Firstly, the phrase "socially unacceptable" is way too strong. That trolley bag was "unusual" at best and even that would be an unnecessary comment. Secondly, I'm his friend and the random people who walk in the street are not his friends, so why are they more important? 

(As a side note, I think EXTPs have a way of calling INTJs' behaviours "unusual" when they are actually fascinated and entertained, but they say it in such an 'accusatory' tone that it isn't perceived as a compliment.)


----------



## xraydav (Jan 3, 2013)

cuddle bun said:


> Lol...that actually does help me visualize a scenario where it would be ok to dismiss. Hmm.  thanks.
> 
> the guy who started unsolicited typing me was actually already on my ignore list because a while back he sent me a PM "Your real type: INTP 4w5" and based on that PM I decided ignore list was an appropriate spot for him. Do I really need a mail notification when a random stranger on the internet changes their opinion of me? Nope ....So I too am guilty of dismissing and there's a real life example of it. I actually only saw his unsolicited typing because people quoted it...otherwise would have missed it. Lol.




I never ever sent you such a PM. (Show me the evidence) I’m looking through my private messages now, and I can’t find it. So I will call this a baseless accusation till then. Also I have not posted on your wall. 




Spine Crusher said:


> You are being ridiculous. You don't have nearly enough information to legitimately question or determine cuddle bun's type. This thread is just one tiny facet of her life.



You are not the arbiter on how much “information” or expertise is necessary to make a typing. (That’s a logical fallacy - appeal to authority, btw)

If you actually have a counterargument, I’d like to hear it.


----------



## Northern Lights (Mar 25, 2016)

cuddle bun said:


> and kind of the same question here ... why do you come to the conclusion that the emotion should be dismissed? Instead of (for example) coming to the conclusion that the other person experienced something that you didn't experience yet, that they might have interesting information that you haven't encountered yet? Doesn't it feel like you are sacrificing accuracy if you dismiss a potentially conflicting perspective instead of trying to understand where it came from?


Because "it is irrelevant to the matter at hand" (see quote). And no, it then (by definition) doesn't.

However, I suspect you are generalising in a way I didn't intend. So have the general (and stereotypical) description, and then I'll tell you why all of that doesn't matter. To do that, I have to expand this a bit in scope, I hope you don't mind.

So -- how do you make decisions, for instance? And whose perspective matters, if the decision is about your life, and about your path through it? Do you take into account other people's ideas, believes, wishes, feelings?

I don't. It's my life, and the only person who has a say is me. I have to live with the consequences of my actions, so it's only fair that I should get the only say about the action, too. I don't care what others think, say, or feel -- every step I go is free of constraints, it's a step I wanted to take, and exactly the step I wanted to take. That is the only way I can assure I am fully responsible for the action -- because at all times, it was a conscious decision of my own free will.

You can argue that Ti is selfish in that way, and I wouldn't necessarily disagree -- except perhaps to wonder whether this truly is unique to IxTPs -- but I think the better expression is something like self-focused or self-reciprocal. From the baseline of the self and his collective experience decisions are made that once again affect the self. All this is why the stereotypes of Ti (and Fi, for that matter) as individualists exists. They pick their own way, guided by their own set of rules or morals. So one answer to your question is that when it comes down to it, I'm just not interested in your perspective. I have my own. (Which is two sides of a coin, really -- I'm not blindly following nonsense, but I just as well might run headlong into a wall that everyone told me was there. I experience both all of the time.)

A second angle deals with emotions in particular. For various reasons, ranging from the scientific (reason > limbic system, in terms of evolutionary upgrades) to the practical (keeping emotions distant is quite helpful it lots of everyday situations) to the necessary (I just fundamentally _lack_ that closeness to emotions -- I don't suppress or ignore, they just aren't anywhere remotely close to me in the first place) I consider them not as reliable as other ways of perceiving the world. In terms of evidence of a situation, they are worth less than what you saw or heard. So a second answer is that that when it comes down to it, my observation is better than your feelings. Therefore, I dismiss them.


And now: All of the above is entirely irrelevant to the problem you are having. Because normal human beings were given something like social competence, and if you're all emotional and upset about something, and I tell you "it's irrelevant" and "stop being so emotional", you're going to hit me over the head with whatever is closest to your hand, and rightly so. That's just idiotic. I'm objectively awkward when dealing with stuff like that, but I'm not mentally retarded.

In practice, when dealing with other people, and not just yourself, you work in compromises. Ti isn't different, _people_ are different. You always have to bridge different ways of how people work, and you do this by being understanding on one hand, and making an effort to accommodate on the other. If you at all must stick to types, e.g. my absurd levels of P drive my J family nuts. I'm more random than a pinball -- or I would be, because I really do try to be reliable when they are concerned, and in turn, they forgive me for being erratic and changing my mind every other minute. We meet halfways. Problem solved. And see my previous post for more examples of how this plays out IRL, and when I consider emotions "relevant" or "irrelevant".

To return all this to your OP: Can it look like "gaslighting"? Sure, I suppose. Yes, if you make an assertion that affects me, I require explanations to convince me. Yes, I will tell you my opinion (i.e. if I think you make too big a deal of it, or how I think the situation played out). And sure, I'll give you my perspective (i.e. what happened to me).

Which tells you two things: One, "gaslighting" generalised is a stupid concept because it's literally describing how communication works. To reverse it: Is anyone supposing everyone should accept everything everyone else says all day long, no questions asked? And two, because (hopefully) literally no one does that, it not only describes Ti, but people, and the entire 820 words of this post so far could've been summed up with TL;DR get in a relationship with a person that's not an asshole.

Personally, I feel like a lot of these concepts floating around the nets nowadays come straight from the Special castle in Snowflakeonia and people are becoming perpetually offended (whatever happened to having an opinion and standing your ground being _what normal people do_? re: "gaslighting" and that poster), but then again, that's just me, and no one is forced to agree.


@Jewl: I mentioned that, but my idea of the T/F meltdown is T tells F its feelings don't matter, and F responds by telling T what T is actually feeling and just too stupid to get. (I never tried to take apart the i/e aspects here.) I try not to do the former, and on the odd occasion experienced the latter, which is a moderately annoying experience.

I suspect "... when in reality and at heart I feel like something is important and significant about something (Fi), and I'm struggling to articulate why." gets to the heart of the matter. This will leave me blind (quite literally) to the value or importance of the issue and if I don't realise this is the problem you're having, I will keep poking and poking in order understand because I don't. Naturally that would be frustrating for both sides. But it just requires four words from you, and that problem is solved -- "it's important to me". As I said in my first post, if I care about you, that's okay. I don't have to understand, and you don't have to explain. And I really hope this is not a brilliant new insight, but how every sane relationship works.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

@Northern Lights, what you bring up in your post there feels a lot like an articulation of a philosophy. 



> I don't. It's my life, and the only person who has a say is me. I have to live with the consequences of my actions, so it's only fair that I should get the only say about the action, too. I don't care what others think, say, or feel -- every step I go is free of constraints, it's a step I wanted to take, and exactly the step I wanted to take. That is the only way I can assure I am fully responsible for the action -- because at all times, it was a conscious decision of my own free will.


I know way more than just Ti-doms who would say the same exact thing. Also I know Ti-doms who would not say this. I know Ti-doms who would not agree that they don't care about others' feelings. This draws me to the part where you say this:



> You can argue that Ti is selfish in that way, and I wouldn't necessarily disagree -- except perhaps to wonder whether this truly is unique to IxTPs


Yeah, I don't think it is unique to IxTPs, nor is defining of them. Haha I know Fi-users who'd say that. Heck, Te-doms even. Any type. That said you've mentioned things in this thread I feel the INTPs in my life would relate to. (Not liking it when people ascribe emotions to them that they are not feeling.) My husband would be very confused if I told him he didn't care for me or my feelings. (This conversation has never come up, but I'm just constructing the hypothetical situation.) He'd be suddenly quick to say, "But of course your feelings are valid. You're feeling them, so they exist. It wouldn't make _sense_ to say they're invalid." Haha.



> I mentioned that, but my idea of the T/F meltdown is T tells F its feelings don't matter, and F responds by telling T what T is actually feeling and just too stupid to get. (I never tried to take apart the i/e aspects here.) I try not to do the former, and on the odd occasion experienced the latter, which is a moderately annoying experience.
> 
> I suspect "... when in reality and at heart I feel like something is important and significant about something (Fi), and I'm struggling to articulate why." gets to the heart of the matter. This will leave me blind (quite literally) to the value or importance of the issue and if I don't realise this is the problem you're having, I will keep poking and poking in order understand because I don't. Naturally that would be frustrating for both sides. But it just requires four words from you, and that problem is solved -- "it's important to me". As I said in my first post, if I care about you, that's okay. I don't have to understand, and you don't have to explain. And I really hope this is not a brilliant new insight, but how every sane relationship works.


I don't know if T really tells F _feelings_ don't matter. It's not like Thinkers are thoughtless or careless at all, for reasons you yourself have brought up. Now we're back to emotion again, and thinking Feeling is emotion or its realm is one of emotion. No, Thinkers don't gloss over emotions. They will gloss over thinking about something's worth to think instead of its attributes, its essence, to get some understanding of it, what it is, categorize it. Also note this is also not the same as not _caring_ about what is important or not important, it is a difference of focus. Just like Feelers will gloss over something's attributes and go straight to determining its worth or value. 

And we can't make the assumption that people who prefer Thinking value emotion less than someone with a Feeling preference. Now we're making assumptions on the values that people hold based on type... 

To my husband, and to legitimately most normal Thinking types I know, emotion is not discounted truly. If I am experiencing some emotion, my husband doesn't shut me down or discount my experience as invalid because he knows very well emotion is a human experience. And he's my husband. He takes that role seriously. Sometimes he might not understand why I'm feeling something, but it's enough to know I'm sad or frustrated or worried. He's not comfortless. I draw comfort from him more than any other person in my life. 

*Emotion =/= Feeling.* This is so important. It's such a narrow, shallow way of understanding both Feeling and by extension Thinking. My Ti-dom husband experiences emotions. Every human does. Humans are emotional creatures. People with a Feeling preference are _evaluative_. Always drawing us back to, "Yeah, but this is _important_." 

This is different than the experience of emotion, though being emotional creatures having some emotion while processing something and evaluating it is pretty natural. I'm not just talking about relational problems or squabbles here, and my examples are not intended to be this picture of me just frustrated that my husband doesn't understand something is important to me (that's pretty universal) - emotion is not the only realm of Feeling. It's not even _the_ realm of Feeling per se. 

When I evaluate things, often I am evaluating the significance of an idea that is outside of myself, sometimes divorced from my emotion. But I feel it's significant in some way and it comes at me as this subjective feeling, and I ponder for a while why, what about it strikes me that way... That is Feeling. A process that always draws me to some truth concerning what I am thinking about. Feeling is a rational function. It is evaluation, not emotion, though emotion can be and often is part of the process. You know, the conclusions I come to often look like, ah. This is beautiful, this is meaningful - and this is what makes it so, to me. 

Sigh. I don't like it when people assume Ti-users are emotion-discounting robots. (Not that I think you were, @Northern Lights. That's what it felt like this thread was like.)


----------



## Northern Lights (Mar 25, 2016)

Jewl said:


> @Northern Lights, what you bring up in your post there feels a lot like an articulation of a philosophy. I know way more than just Ti-doms who would say the same exact thing. Also I know Ti-doms who would not say this. I know Ti-doms who would not agree that they don't care about others' feelings.


Which is the result (or cause, depending on what you prefer) of how types just describe a fraction of a person, and even that not individually. Going by typical descriptions, I would say what I wrote is true (and, you're right, also true for IxFP i.e. Fi, so I really should have written IxxP). By and large, introverted judgers are self-focused and about own rules (Ti) or own morals (Fi), which really is just another way of describing the words "introverted" and "judging".

That this is mostly irrelevant in everyday life, and subject to a million other factors that produce different or even completely contrary results was my point 



Jewl said:


> My husband would be very confused if I told him he didn't care for me or my feelings if I simply pointed to he just doesn't focus on significance like I do and say he's invalidating my feelings. (This conversation has never come up, but I'm just constructing the hypothetical situation.) He'd be suddenly quick to say, "But of course your feelings are valid. You're feeling them, so they exist. It wouldn't make _sense_ to say they're invalid." Haha.





Northern Lights said:


> I just dismiss emotions as "invalid" -- or rather, irrelevant (to the matter at hand), since obviously, if you are (or for that matter, I am) feeling it, it exists i.e. is valid ...


If it ever comes up, tell him I totally get him and there's nothing like keeping exact definitions to keep Ti purring.



Jewl said:


> I don't know if T really tells F feelings don't matter. Partially because of things you yourself have mentioned.


Heh. I was speaking quite practically. Have you never encountered a variant of this sketch,

She: Gets hysterical over some inane thing
He: Could you please be rational ...? 
She: I don't want to be rational!

etc.

The truth behind this is exactly that. Telling an upset Feeler not to feel upset must be the only surefire way in existence to get them even _more_ upset, and the reason is that you are pointing out this strong feeling that they are feeling is actually wrong/irrelevant/doesn't matter. By any reasonable measure, that assertion might be entirely true, but it will definitely _not_ help in calming them down, lol.

As for the distinction between "emotions" and "feelings", I know science sometimes keeps it separate, but I'm personally not too convinced. Certainly in the context of discussions such as this, everyone uses it interchangeably anyway, with a definition that combines both, and this works well enough to get the point of the discussion across, IMO.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

Northern Lights said:


> Which is the result (or cause, depending on what you prefer) of how types just describe a fraction of a person, and even that not individually. Going by typical descriptions, I would say what I wrote is true (and, you're right, also true for IxFP i.e. Fi, so I really should have written IxxP). By and large, introverted judgers are self-focused and about own rules (Ti) or own morals (Fi), which really is just another way of describing the words "introverted" and "judging".
> 
> That this is mostly irrelevant in everyday life, and subject to a million other factors that produce different or even completely contrary results was my point
> 
> ...


Yeah sorry, I edited my post about a bajillion times. Now I finally managed to articulate what I meant. I am trying to talk of Feeling like Jung did - he did not mean it to be emotion. I think when talking about Feeling, we should stop looking to emotions for clarity in this difference between T and F. 

Also, I am familiar with that example, but I don't like it. In that example, that's someone being supposedly irrational (though maybe they're not exactly? we don't really know) vs. someone trying to be rational. Or just someone being very emotional while someone else is perceived to be not. (Ugh I hate that emotional vs. rational dichotomy. People are both emotional and rational and the two are not opposed.) It could be a relationship squabble. I don't think telling anyone who is upset not to be upset is helpful. Haha, telling my ESTJ sister to not be upset and "be rational" when she's upset I'm sure would go down horribly. It's not because she's a Feeler. Because Feeling =/= emotion/"feelings" aka: emotion.

Besides, in that example you're not trying to tell them what they are _feeling_ is wrong/irrelevant/doesn't matter - presumably, it's whatever they're upset _about_.


----------



## Senah (Oct 17, 2017)

cuddle bun said:


> Just like the only way I can picture finding "The Truth" - the objective universal truth that exists outside observers - is through a group effort. So that's exactly what I think other people mean when I hear the words "the truth."


Hmmm...I think this is where I see a big division in how I see the world and think and how perhaps you and sometimes Te users think. I don't believe, for the most part, in "the truth". I don't believe in one objective universal truth that exists outside of observers. I think that often, everything is fluid, evolving, and in many ways subjective. Perhaps that sounds strange as a Ti user who relies on objective facts and data to come at these truths, but I also think that we acknowledge that individuals have so much subjective context through which "facts" filter, that we must constantly probe and test and assess these frameworks to see what holds water. I also think as a Perceiver, I am open to lots of random stuff being possible or probable, especially things that are contrary to the majority opinion. That said, it is often accepted even in medicine that what you learn now will be "wrong" in 10-20 years (if not sooner), so I even in my scientific pursuits and work with patients am always uneasy about 'finding objective truths'.

Now, I was thinking last night about Ti in general, and a lot of what I have been proposing in the thread I realized is very specific to XNTPs. A lot of the rigid black and white distinctions about morality and right/wrong I have attributed to Fi users, I have also encountered in my ENTJ friends. Almost the way that an ENTP might dismiss emotion as a way to support a hypothesis as the foundational element, I have found that ENTJs dismiss the idea that there isn't a right or wrong or that there aren't good or bad people (vast generalization, but used for a point). So, I don't know if some of what we are talking about, as others have said, is really Ti/Te. I certainly find it easy to communicate with Ti users and build and disassemble arguments, however the conclusions that we reach are disparate. 



FlaviaGemina said:


> Let me give you some examples of how the Fe-problem can affect relationships, though:
> 
> 1. My brother is an ENTP. When he was little he had hardly any Fe and was incredibly shy. He'd Ne and daydream most of the time and never even went out with friends. When I took him along to play with my friends, he'd stand in a corner and blush and everybody would laugh about him (hahaha, the glory of the troll as a young boy!)...
> 
> ...


This is interesting. As an ENTP, I think you do a good job of assessing the Fe growth spurt that happens with ENTPs. I certainly went through it, and actually had a very similar experience (all drugs are bad, I have to cross my t's and dot my i's to be "good", etc. to becoming very open-minded in my 20s and nonjudgmental about anyone's life choices, very anti-regulation in fact). 

It would seem that your brother's behavior mirrored that, and that of other ENTPs' experiences I know, but diverged in his 20s with the dependence on alcohol and his anxiety (well, the dependence on substances isn't anti-ENTP, especially 7w8 but the way he is contextualizing it seems very unlike ENTPs). Ironically, when I look at his behavior, it seems much more like an ENTJ than an ENTP to me. They in my experience tend to dogmatically assign good and bad roles to things or decide that something is useful or useless, and find it hard to deviate from that decision matrix, once established. In terms of the small studies and surveys I have read about ENTPs, those I know, and those I have interacted with online, unless you have a very weak P on your test, we tend to continue with the evolution and become open to ideas, concepts that are newly introduced to us, those living very different lives and experiences, and for the most part reject dogma. I would wonder how much the anxiety and other issues which are likely independent of type are creating a need for him to control something, which would perhaps be this world view and use drinking as a tool to manage things. In that case it would be a biological process vs. a type manifestation (in my opinion - forgive me if I overstep). 




Northern Lights said:


> *And now: All of the above is entirely irrelevant to the problem you are having. Because normal human beings were given something like social competence, and if you're all emotional and upset about something, and I tell you "it's irrelevant" and "stop being so emotional", you're going to hit me over the head with whatever is closest to your hand, and rightly so. That's just idiotic. I'm objectively awkward when dealing with stuff like that, but I'm not mentally retarded.*
> 
> In practice, when dealing with other people, and not just yourself, you work in compromises. Ti isn't different, _people_ are different. *You always have to bridge different ways of how people work, and you do this by being understanding on one hand, and making an effort to accommodate on the other.* If you at all must stick to types, e.g. my absurd levels of P drive my J family nuts. I'm more random than a pinball -- or I would be, because I really do try to be reliable when they are concerned, and in turn, they forgive me for being erratic and changing my mind every other minute. We meet halfways. Problem solved. And see my previous post for more examples of how this plays out IRL, and when I consider emotions "relevant" or "irrelevant".
> 
> ...


This really resonated with me. I think we can explain why we are the way we are, but then once you see us in interactions usually we are trying to be decent human beings and compromise. It often for me comes down to living in a world where my way of thinking and processing is the minority way, so I am constantly bridging that gap. 

I also think is it important to draw a distinction between manipulative, abusive _gaslighting_ as one concept, and encouraging people to question their points of view, even if they arrived at them via personal emotions or feelings, because I have certainly seen emotion and feeling lead people to wrong conclusions and bad actions (myself included). We aren't doing it only to people with emotion-heavy opinions, we just aren't exempting them from our search for truth and questioning processes.



Jewl said:


> To my husband, and to legitimately most normal Thinking types I know, emotion is not discounted truly. If I am experiencing some emotion, my husband doesn't shut me down or discount my experience as invalid because he knows very well emotion is a human experience. And he's my husband. He takes that role seriously. Sometimes he might not understand why I'm feeling something, but it's enough to know I'm sad or frustrated or worried. He's not comfortless. I draw comfort from him more than any other person in my life...
> 
> When I evaluate things, often I am evaluating the significance of an idea that is outside of myself, sometimes divorced from my emotion. But I feel it's significant in some way and it comes at me as this subjective feeling, and I ponder for a while why, what about it strikes me that way... That is Feeling. A process that always draws me to some truth concerning what I am thinking about. Feeling is a rational function. It is evaluation, not emotion, though emotion can be and often is part of the process. You know, the conclusions I come to often look like, ah. This is beautiful, this is meaningful - and this is what makes it so, to me.


This resonates a lot with me. I feel like there is a difference between acknowledging, validating, and integrating a partner's or family member's emotional response or feelings into a discussion or plan, and basing something like a business decision or framework for a social science concept on feelings and emotions. I think it is harder with two people to divorce emotion from a situation, and in my opinion, perhaps Ti and Fe users need to work a little harder to come more than halfway on that for the health of a relationship. This in my experience manifests in communication. Te and Fi users I feel need to do better at setting aside personal experience and subjective emotional content as the main justifications for decisions outside of their personal realm, especially when the outcomes encompass so many other unique people or entities, or even general concepts like the sociolegal for example. 

I am not saying that is what @Jewl was suggesting, that is just what the post made me think about. 

Lastly, thinking back on much of the thread, I do believe it is important to try and acknowledge that a lot of the interactions cited and examples brought up likely had elements, especially in the communication area, that sprang from type. However, I also think a lot of the stories and accounts I have read likely sprang out of nurture situations, personal experiences and mindsets, and things that are only tangentially related to type. Therefor we can only go so far using MBTI to explain and justify conclusions using them.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

Senah said:


> This is interesting. As an ENTP, I think you do a good job of assessing the Fe growth spurt that happens with ENTPs. I certainly went through it, and actually had a very similar experience (all drugs are bad, I have to cross my t's and dot my i's to be "good", etc. to becoming very open-minded in my 20s and nonjudgmental about anyone's life choices, very anti-regulation in fact).
> 
> It would seem that your brother's behavior mirrored that, and that of other ENTPs' experiences I know, but diverged in his 20s with the dependence on alcohol and his anxiety (well, the dependence on substances isn't anti-ENTP, especially 7w8 but the way he is contextualizing it seems very unlike ENTPs). Ironically, when I look at his behavior, it seems much more like an ENTJ than an ENTP to me. They in my experience tend to dogmatically assign good and bad roles to things or decide that something is useful or useless, and find it hard to deviate from that decision matrix, once established. In terms of the small studies and surveys I have read about ENTPs, those I know, and those I have interacted with online, unless you have a very weak P on your test, we tend to continue with the evolution and become open to ideas, concepts that are newly introduced to us, those living very different lives and experiences, and for the most part reject dogma. I would wonder how much the anxiety and other issues which are likely independent of type are creating a need for him to control something, which would perhaps be this world view and use drinking as a tool to manage things. In that case it would be a biological process vs. a type manifestation (in my opinion - forgive me if I overstep).


He's not entirely dogmatic like an ENTJ. He does incorporate new ideas and approaches rather readily, he just doesn't really give an account of how he changed his mind. When he's obsessing about one thing, he's right about it. When he's obsessing about a new thing he's also right and his previous dogmatism wasn't caused by his own stubbornness but because he was "influenced by an ideology". He's getting better at this though. At least he will admit that he has changed his mind when I wind him up about it.

The burnout was caused in a very ENTP way: he is the leader of his group of mates and charms them to take part in his revolution. While they are under his spell, they make the appropriate noises. But if he doesn't supervise them, they don't do what they said they would and he ends up doing all the work himself. In a way that is the fate of all leaders, but in his case there is also an assumption that his enthusiasm will infect people/ that they are tools in the revolution and have to live up to his standards. I don't think he's necessarily that good at telling people what's in it for them personally. So he knackered himself out pushing through a huge project over ten years and I guess he was just used to drinking already because that entered his life via Fe. Also, drinking is socially more acceptable than admitting that you have mental health issues and need medication. "Hahaha, I popped three propranolol yesterday!" just doesn't sound as cool as "I drank with my mates!"
Anyway, I'm rambling


----------



## Northern Lights (Mar 25, 2016)

Jewl said:


> Also, I am familiar with that example, but I don't like it. In that example, that's someone being supposedly irrational (though maybe they're not exactly? we don't really know) vs. someone trying to be rational. Or just someone being very emotional while someone else is perceived to be not. (Ugh I hate that emotional vs. rational dichotomy. People are both emotional and rational and the two are not opposed.) It could be a relationship squabble. I don't think telling anyone who is upset not to be upset is helpful. Haha, telling my ESTJ sister to not be upset and "be rational" when she's upset I'm sure would go down horribly. It's not because she's a Feeler. Because Feeling =/= emotion/"feelings" aka: emotion.


Mmh. I got this perspective from a Feeler's side (esp. perceiving types) before. Without wanting to discount what you say: I'm not sure if you can truly imagine how _far_ IxTPs actually are from their feelings, and how dominant and all-encompassing that introverted judging is. It's true that we aren't robots. But there is hell of a lot of distance to, say, IxFPs, and I truly don't know half of what I feel on the best of days. Most of the time, I don't feel anything at all -- or perhaps something you could describe as "contentment". So while it's true that Feeling hasn't necessarily to do with feeling (I loved writing that sentence), there is a _massive_ difference in how closely people are wired to their emotions, and it does (directly or indirectly) relate to a T/F split.

Additionally, the sketch exists because the situation exists. It could be immature-Me, there. It's the sort of mistake you make once, and then you know better. And the reason you make that mistake is that from extrapolating how you yourself (so, I) would react, you assume to know how the other should react, and what would be useful in convincing them to see it that way -- while being unaware that this exact extrapolation is invalid, because that other person =/= yourself.

To wit, if I was upset, and you told me to be more rational, and listed all the reasons why I'm being stupid ... you would get me to pause and reevaluate what I'm doing. I then might still feel upset, since I can't exactly control that, but I would have no problems agreeing that it was irrational and you are right. Typically (in former-me naïve-view), that is how persons should "work". Quite evidently, they don't. And that's entirely besides the fact that they might simply _value_ the same facts or experiences differently than I do, that's another issue. This fundamentally has got to do with how close or detached you are to whatever you are feeling, because it's easy to admit a relatively unimportant part of yourself (== feelings) was wrong; it becomes very hard if it is _an integral part of yourself_.

So your last sentence is exactly the misunderstanding taking place. Of course that's not my _intention_. But, unless (Fi)-Feeler learned to handle it, that is _how it is perceived_. I imagine telling Fi its feelings about a matter are "wrong" is like someone telling me my facts, my evidence, my reasoning about a matter is wrong. It will get me defensive immediately. The first instinctual reaction is to yank up a mile-high wall and ignore everything from here on out. I learned to force myself to listen, but I have a heck of a lot more to swallow if some tells me (or even worse, proves, using my own logic) that my reasoning is wrong, than I do if someone merely comes along and tells me to stop being upset already.


This, at least, is my experience (and the theory I constructed from it, hence also alerting @cuddle bun). If you have some handy (younger?) IxFPs around to test this on, feel free to try and report the results :wink-new:


----------



## Senah (Oct 17, 2017)

@FlaviaGemina That all makes sense. I often think we are pushed into positions of leadership, or we even go after them on impulse to see if we can get them, succeed, and then don't have the drive to see them through. Often that is internal, but also I think that we are tangential thinkers that are extroverts, so we get people excited, but have trouble communicating to other types "on the team" about how to keep things going towards fruition. I know for me I get bored having to manage others at this point and so things or ideas often fizzle out. 

Certainly self-medication is a huge thing in society at large, and with types that don't confront and process emotional content well, we use that as a lever we can pull when the pressure gets too high. Talking with a lot of other ENTPs it isn't just substances, we also use extreme sports, travel, social situations and sex - pretty much anything to "feel something" without having to _feel something_, especially if the latter could be debilitating.


----------



## FlaviaGemina (May 3, 2012)

Senah said:


> @*FlaviaGemina* That all makes sense. I often think we are pushed into positions of leadership, or we even go after them on impulse to see if we can get them, succeed, and then don't have the drive to see them through. Often that is internal, but also I think that we are tangential thinkers that are extroverts, so we get people excited, but have trouble communicating to other types "on the team" about how to keep things going towards fruition. I know for me I get bored having to manage others at this point and so things or ideas often fizzle out.
> 
> Certainly self-medication is a huge thing in society at large, and with types that don't confront and process emotional content well, we use that as a lever we can pull when the pressure gets too high. Talking with a lot of other ENTPs it isn't just substances, we also use extreme sports, travel, social situations and sex - pretty much anything to "feel something" without having to _feel something_, especially if the latter could be debilitating.


I wouldn't normally judge his self-medicating, as I'm a smoker myself. He only annoys me because he rubs it in my face that his self-medicating is 'better' way of dealing with his problems. But never mind, the little troll must find his own way


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

Senah said:


> Hmmm...I think this is where I see a big division in how I see the world and think and how perhaps you and sometimes Te users think. I don't believe, for the most part, in "the truth". I don't believe in one objective universal truth that exists outside of observers. I think that often, everything is fluid, evolving, and in many ways subjective. Perhaps that sounds strange as a Ti user who relies on objective facts and data to come at these truths, but I also think that we acknowledge that individuals have so much subjective context through which "facts" filter, that we must constantly probe and test and assess these frameworks to see what holds water. I also think as a Perceiver, I am open to lots of random stuff being possible or probable, especially things that are contrary to the majority opinion. That said, it is often accepted even in medicine that what you learn now will be "wrong" in 10-20 years (if not sooner), so I even in my scientific pursuits and work with patients am always uneasy about 'finding objective truths'.


yes ... I am hopeful maybe I am picturing it correctly if you agree with that part 
Because just like Ti/Fe doesn't believe in "The Truth" that exists outside observers, my Fi/Te does not believe that a group could experience the same emotion together. My brain thinks it is possible for _individuals_ in a group to feel individual emotions that might closely resemble other people's individual emotions, and I know it's possible for a group to take action because they all felt something similar... but my brain doesn't think it's possible for a group to have an emotional state.

And in your example above my brain wants to reword it as "objective truth still exists outside all observers; we are just still trying to learn it. We might be limited in multiple ways in our attempts to learn it (limited by human nature, by technology, or some other thing) but it still exists"

Does your brain also want to reword mine when you read something like "it's not possible for a group to experience an emotion"? If so how would you reword that?



Senah said:


> Now, I was thinking last night about Ti in general, and a lot of what I have been proposing in the thread I realized is very specific to XNTPs. A lot of the rigid black and white distinctions about morality and right/wrong I have attributed to Fi users, I have also encountered in my ENTJ friends. Almost the way that an ENTP might dismiss emotion as a way to support a hypothesis as the foundational element, I have found that ENTJs dismiss the idea that there isn't a right or wrong or that there aren't good or bad people (vast generalization, but used for a point). So, I don't know if some of what we are talking about, as others have said, is really Ti/Te. I certainly find it easy to communicate with Ti users and build and disassemble arguments, however the conclusions that we reach are disparate.


I am actually also thinking of ENTJs when I think of "Fi users" ...to me Te and Fi go together so if I say "Ti users" or "Fi users" or "Te users" or "Fe users" then I mean really anyone who has that function somewhere in their stack.
I can see why ENTJs would automatically dismiss generalizations because Te prioritizes multiple perspectives very highly when it's collecting facts, and generalizations always break down when they are examined from multiple perspectives. (Hahaha lol on purpose I wrote "always break down" instead of "often break down" in that sentence to see if anyone would catch the irony, and then I started laughing because my brain does the exact same, resisting generalizations sooooooo much lol....I realllllllllly wanted to type often instead of always there lol, even though I cannot think of a single case where a generalization did not break down when examined from a different angle).
And it does feel like a moral thing to me to resist generalizations. I feel like it is morally important to Te to see things from multiple angles because that values the perspectives of other people.

I think it is definitely Ti & Fe where I need to do some mental gymnastics to understand them personally... but I can see how someone else might need to do the same for all T doms or all F doms regardless of their functions.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

Northern Lights said:


> Mmh. I got this perspective from a Feeler's side (esp. perceiving types) before. Without wanting to discount what you say: *I'm not sure if you can truly imagine how far IxTPs actually are from their feelings, and how dominant and all-encompassing that introverted judging is.* It's true that we aren't robots. But there is hell of a lot of distance to, say, IxFPs, and I truly don't know half of what I feel on the best of days. Most of the time, I don't feel anything at all -- or perhaps something you could describe as "contentment". So while it's true that Feeling hasn't necessarily to do with feeling (I loved writing that sentence), there is a _massive_ difference in how closely people are wired to their emotions, and it does (directly or indirectly) relate to a T/F split.


So, because IxTPs are distanced from their emotions, if you discount their emotions or tell them not to be upset, they'll be more likely to perhaps say, "Oh? Maybe you're right," or at least not get _more_ upset. The discounting of emotion therefore wouldn't cause them to get upset. But Feelers... if you discount their emotions, because they're closer to their emotions, they are more likely to get upset (?). Or just feel more about most things in general? 

I want to take a moment to ponder the meaning of what you say when you describe being distanced from your emotions. You see, I think there's a difference between being distanced from your emotions and simply having a hard time identifying them. Also, I'm sure you feel contentment (like you said), interest, excitement, curiosity, haha maybe even something reading/replying to this, I don't know, whether that's chill or frustrated/really wanting me to get what you're saying... etc. Maybe you don't get angered or sad quite so easily or in the same way as others (and perhaps when you do it takes you longer to identify), but that's a lot different from being unfeeling - or even "distanced" or disconnected from your feelings. (No one is disconnected from their feelings - I think this is a mistake to say and does not hold truth.)

I think it'd be safe to say IxTPs might experience different emotions in situations where others might feel sad/angry/ [fill in the blank] or have different emotional expression - but to say they aren't as emotional, or are more "distanced" to me doesn't make sense. 

Secondly... it's possible to be in touch with your emotions and feel things deeply and do exactly what you said - listen to someone else's perspective, be rational. Hopefully if I'm upset and _acting out_ in such a way that is foolish (though I don't know what exactly that situation would look like), someone would call me out on it. But most of the time I'm upset... say I feel sad over something my husband did... generally we talk it out, there's no acting out... Basically, although we're both feeling things, we're being rational too. 



> Additionally, the sketch exists because the situation exists. It could be immature-Me, there. It's the sort of mistake you make once, and then you know better. And the reason you make that mistake is that from extrapolating how you yourself (so, I) would react, you assume to know how the other should react, and what would be useful in convincing them to see it that way -- while being unaware that this exact extrapolation is invalid, because that other person =/= yourself.
> 
> To wit, if I was upset, and you told me to be more rational, and listed all the reasons why I'm being stupid ... you would get me to pause and reevaluate what I'm doing. I then might still feel upset, since I can't exactly control that, but I would have no problems agreeing that it was irrational and you are right. Typically (in former-me naïve-view), that is how persons should "work". Quite evidently, they don't. And that's entirely besides the fact that they might simply _value_ the same facts or experiences differently than I do, that's another issue. This fundamentally has got to do with how close or detached you are to whatever you are feeling, because it's easy to admit a relatively unimportant part of yourself (== feelings) was wrong; it becomes very hard if it is _an integral part of yourself_


If someone told me I was being unreasonably upset over something, and I felt they were being _reasonable_, I think I'd stop and listen too. I think we all hope we'd react like that. I also think we all have that capability, "distanced" from our emotions or no. That said, like I said earlier, I do not think people are disconnected or distanced from their emotions. We differ in our expression and in exactly what emotions we feel. You might feel calm in a situation where I might feel sad or angry, for instance.



> So your last sentence is exactly the misunderstanding taking place. Of course that's not my _intention_. *But, unless (Fi)-Feeler learned to handle it, that is how it is perceived. I imagine telling Fi its feelings about a matter are "wrong" is like someone telling me my facts, my evidence, my reasoning about a matter is wrong. *It will get me defensive immediately. The first instinctual reaction is to yank up a mile-high wall and ignore everything from here on out. I learned to force myself to listen, but I have a heck of a lot more to swallow if some tells me (or even worse, proves, using my own logic) that my reasoning is wrong, than I do if someone merely comes along and tells me to stop being upset already.
> 
> This, at least, is my experience (and the theory I constructed from it, hence also alerting @cuddle bun). If you have some handy (younger?) IxFPs around to test this on, feel free to try and report the results :wink-new:


Not really. Not unless you're telling me my feelings are wrong about something they're not wrong about. A few reasonable examples can easily be thought of. Like feeling fear and sadness and shame after, say, getting raped. An example where I doubt anyone would ever really tell me my feelings are wrong.  

Actually, I rarely get people telling me my "feelings" or emotions are wrong. I mean, that's a funny thing to even say or perceive someone is saying. Unless they're, like you said, immature or foolish because emotions aren't things that can be wrong exactly. You can be wrong in your actions and you can be unreasonable. (Just like you said. You might still feel upset, but you can still be rational and examine yourself.) So maybe I just don't perceive people as telling my feelings are wrong in the situations you are thinking of... which makes me a weird Feeler? Or maybe your conception of Feeling is just too wrapped up with emotion. 

Basically, no, being a Feeler doesn't make me a more emotional person than my husband. Or "more connected" to my emotions. But emotions are something I experience, and are thus a part of all that I do. So it is for everyone.


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

Northern Lights said:


> I imagine telling Fi its feelings about a matter are "wrong" is like someone telling me my facts, my evidence, my reasoning about a matter is wrong. It will get me defensive immediately.


I want to add to what you said above, (and anyone who wants to correct me here is welcome to, not just Northern Lights)
because my brain is forming conclusions and I want to check them....

1. *Fi/Te* thinks it is *impossible for an individual's emotion to be "wrong"* (because emotions are a subjective personal experience. If someone says they feel X then we have absolutely no reason to doubt that X is indeed their real, subjective, personal experience. And no less real just because it was subjective and personal - that's what emotions are to us. To us emotions are real, subjective, personal mental states.)

2. *Ti/Fe* thinks it is *possible for an individual's emotion to be "wrong"* (I am fuzzy on why they think this; is it because they think that the individual's emotion is a non-standard reaction to that scenario compared to other people in the group? If anyone wants to fill this in or correct me please do...I have some curiosity here)

3. *Fi/Te* thinks it is *possible for an individual's collected facts to be "wrong"* (because brains are imperfect, senses are imperfect, memory is imperfect, attention regulation is imperfect) - but if enough humans together pool their collected facts then we can together get a pretty good sense of what actually happened - maybe not a perfect image of it but certainly much more accurate than the facts that 1 person could collect alone.

and I'm guessing on this last one but trying to continue my analogy to all 4 corners....????
4. *Ti/Fe* thinks it is *impossible for their own collected facts to be "wrong"* (am I even right about that at all? and if so why do they think that?)


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

cuddle bun said:


> I want to add to what you said above, (and anyone who wants to correct me here is welcome to, not just Northern Lights)
> because my brain is forming conclusions and I want to check them....
> 
> 1. *Fi/Te* thinks it is *impossible for an individual's emotion to be "wrong"* (because emotions are a subjective personal experience. If someone says they feel X then we have absolutely no reason to doubt that X is indeed their real, subjective, personal experience. And no less real just because it was subjective and personal - that's what emotions are to us. To us emotions are real, subjective, personal mental states.)
> ...


These are beliefs that people can come to hold for a variety of reasons. Worldviews. Truth claims about the nature of reality. Type is _how_ we think, not what we think... that is so important to understand, otherwise we get into the problem of saying ExFJs hold certain values/beliefs and IxFPs hold different ones. No. 

Probably legit all the Ti-users in my life think that emotions are not things that can be "wrong". I'm sure there are other Ti-users who might think they could be wrong. 

There's not a thing on this list that is function related.


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

Jewl said:


> These are beliefs that people can come to hold for a variety of reasons. Worldviews. Truth claims about the nature of reality. Type is _how_ we think, not what we think... that is so important to understand, otherwise we get into the problem of saying ExFJs hold certain values/beliefs and IxFPs hold different ones. No.
> 
> Probably legit all the Ti-users in my life think that emotions are not things that can be "wrong". I'm sure there are other Ti-users who might think they could be wrong.
> 
> There's not a thing on this list that is function related.


Or they could be mistyped lol  just kidding

I know it's not a perfect framework. I still find it useful anyway and I am still interesting in getting other people's feedback on what I wrote there if they also find it useful.


----------



## Jewl (Feb 28, 2012)

cuddle bun said:


> Or they could be mistyped lol  just kidding
> 
> I know it's not a perfect framework. I still find it useful anyway and I am still interesting in getting other people's feedback on what I wrote there if they also find it useful.


Perhaps questioning why you find it useful in terms of understanding the functions would be good. Otherwise you might end up with something that isn't descriptive of types or functions but something else. You are right - there are probably people who can fit into the categories you came up with. But you might find it's not a type related thing.


----------



## cuddle bun (Jun 2, 2017)

Jewl said:


> Perhaps questioning why you find it useful in terms of understanding the functions would be good. Otherwise you might end up with something that isn't descriptive of types or functions but something else. You are right - there are probably people who can fit into the categories you came up with. But you might find it's not a type related thing.


Well lol...I mean...everyone in this thread has found the topic of types and functions interesting and useful enough to sign up for a "personality type" forum and then click on a section called "Cognitive Functions"  in our free time no less when we could be doing something useful like watching Walking Dead instead  So ...yeah. lol.

And the opposite is true, it's possible to jump to a conclusion about something unrelated to personality types (mental illness perhaps)? something that could have been explained more accurately and less judgmentally by understanding other personality types better. 

There's a possibility of being wrong at literally every turn; that doesn't mean that people shouldn't choose a path and investigate it. I choose to learn more about cognitive functions and I am in the "Cognitive Functions" section of a personality forum so I'm definitely in the right spot for what I decided to do.

I see Fi/Te types and Ti/Fe types demonizing each other repeatedly in this forum. For every one person who awkwardly creates a thread like this, there are dozens more who _actually do believe_ that either Fi or Ti (whichever one they aren't) is morally wrong or selfish - but don't stop it to question it like I do. To me it would make more sense to worry that a lot of people have that belief without questioning it... instead of worrying when people question it. Anyway...I decided to question it and since the belief is directly related to cognitive functions then the questions are too. I decided to question it here.


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

Northern Lights said:


> She: Gets hysterical over some inane thing
> He: Could you please be rational ...?
> She: I don't want to be rational!
> 
> ...


Feeling upset and being hysterical are very different things. 

I'm definitely not a Feeler and being told to stop feeling something would upset me as well. That's because saying that to someone that is utterly pointless, so people who say it are either clueless about basic human nature or insensitively trying to impose their own value system on me. I don't know what _you_ think being rational means, but it's not something that is prevented by emotions, so telling someone to stop feeling something so that they can be rational makes no sense.

Where do you get these type-based generalizations you are making (here and in the thread about Thinkers dealing with emotions)?




> and the reason is that you are pointing out this strong feeling that they are feeling is actually wrong/irrelevant/doesn't matter. By any reasonable measure, that assertion might be entirely true, but it will definitely _not_ help in calming them down, lol.


What sort of "reasonable measure"? How can an emotion be "wrong"? Whether or not something matters is obviously subjective.


----------



## Senah (Oct 17, 2017)

I think one important distinction that I am not seeing addressed very much is _validity_ or _inherence_ of emotions, which both Ti/Te and Fi/Fe users have, vs. _utility_ or _application_ of these emotional states. Most of what I have read over the past few pages has a lot to do with justifying that someone's feelings or emotions can't be "wrong" or that an emotional response cannot be controlled (which I wouldn't disagree with, but then again I don't think most others are in fact disagreeing with). An example which was sort of given and which I think many of us have felt is someone saying "don't be upset/afraid/sad" or as an ex used to scream at me "stop crying right now!" [enormously effective, as you would imagine].

I think the important distinction lies in the potentiation of actions or interactions with others or concepts due to these emotions, which I do honestly think can be controlled. We teach this to children, adults, most people in society. We say, "You are upset/sad/angry, but you don't throw a block at Andy, you tell him it upset you." At work you are encouraged when you feel overwhelmed or anxious not to just stop showing up to work, but to ask for help or delegate. How you process emotions and apply them to situations when you receive information and communicate is huge, and whether this is done with the main focus being internal/subjectivel and rooted almost exclusively in the personal experience vs. segueing it into a more open and objective pathway once others are involved seems key.


----------

