# Why do feelers repress their thinking function?



## Brown bear (Jul 25, 2016)

Surely it must serve some purpose if enough people do it for there to be a cognitive function for it. But I just can't think of any other purpose it could serve besides short term comfort at the expense of being able to take responsibility for one's actions? What do you guys think?


----------



## Stellafera (Jan 19, 2015)

Why would the thinking function necessarily associate with taking responsibility for actions?


----------



## umop 3pisdn (Apr 4, 2014)

A feeling preference doesn't make someone an emotionally reactive narcissist. Feelers should, on a stereotypical basis, be better at taking responsibility for their actions w/r/t others (Fe) or their internal sense of congruence with their own values (Fi), because those areas are what they're concerned with, and even a cursory glance could yield their significance to ethics.


----------



## Igor (May 26, 2010)

Brown bear said:


> Surely it must serve some purpose if enough people do it for there to be a cognitive function for it. But I just can't think of any other purpose it could serve besides short term comfort at the expense of being able to take responsibility for one's actions? What do you guys think?


I can't help but think that you're taking the words "feeling" and "thinking" much too literal, on top of missing the point that everyone has a Thinking and a Feeling function that they access in their mental processes.


----------



## DOGSOUP (Jan 29, 2016)

Brown bear said:


> Surely it must serve some purpose if enough people do it for there to be a cognitive function for it. But I just can't think of any other purpose it could serve besides short term comfort at the expense of being able to take responsibility for one's actions? What do you guys think?


I think your idea of feeling/feelers is skewed.


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

Brown bear said:


> Surely it must serve some purpose if enough people do it for there to be a cognitive function for it. But I just can't think of any other purpose it could serve besides short term comfort at the expense of being able to take responsibility for one's actions? What do you guys think?


At this point I'm not sure if you are just trolling / joking / a banned member or whatever. 

Feelers do not repress their thinking function.


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

Aladdin Sane said:


> At this point I'm not sure if you are just trolling / joking / a banned member or whatever.
> 
> Feelers do not repress their thinking function.


The OP doesn't have a clue what feeling is; that's clear.

But did you seriously just say that "Feelers do not repress their thinking function." Why do you think F/T is a *dichotomy*? It's because they repress each other...

You don't even need to read a book on typology to realise that.


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

Fried Eggz said:


> The OP doesn't have a clue what feeling is; that's clear.
> 
> But did you seriously just say that "Feelers do not repress their thinking function." Why do you think F/T is a *dichotomy*? It's because they repress each other...
> 
> You don't even need to read a book on typology to realise that.


I did not say thinking and feeling don't repress each other, I said feelers do not repress their thinking function. OP keeps making weird threads and seems to have a grudge on feelers. Feelers do not consciously think 'I am going to go and repress my thinking function right now and use feeling now'.


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

Brown bear said:


> Surely it must serve some purpose if enough people do it for there to be a cognitive function for it. But I just can't think of any other purpose it could serve besides short term comfort at the expense of being able to take responsibility for one's actions? What do you guys think?


We're not repressing our thinking on purpose. I'm an ENFP and I developed that way. It would be nice if I could have better access to my Te but I don't. I don't mind though. I can get by with my Fi and 'repressed' (though I don't think it's all that repressed) Te.


----------



## 318138 (Oct 1, 2015)

After reading this thread and the other thread you made, it's perfectly clear to everyone on PerC that you're pretty much just a mentally, intellectually, and emotionally stunted troll.

Next time, actually try to gain some knowledge on whatever you're about to make a thread on before trolling. Thank you very much.

Sincerely,
The rest of the members on PerC.


----------



## Brown bear (Jul 25, 2016)

Stellafera said:


> Why would the thinking function necessarily associate with taking responsibility for actions?


because if you are just making decisions off of your moment to moment feelings then there is no incentive to take responsibility, cause who actually FEELS like taking responsibility for wrongful actions? You have to use a thinking function to look objectively at your actions and be able to detach from how you may FEEL in order to take true responsibility. When you are introspective and use your thinking function to analyze your own behaviors (good or bad) you are in a far better position to take responsibility.


----------



## Brown bear (Jul 25, 2016)

Igor said:


> I can't help but think that you're taking the words "feeling" and "thinking" much too literal, on top of missing the point that everyone has a Thinking and a Feeling function that they access in their mental processes.


You are entitled to your opinion, I have no problem with you possessing/expressing a different opinion than I do/have.


----------



## umop 3pisdn (Apr 4, 2014)

Brown bear said:


> because if you are just living off your moment to moment feelings then there is no incentive to take responsibility. When you are introspective and use your thinking function to analyze your own behaviors (good or bad) you are in a far better position to take responsibility.


...that's not what the difference is between thinking and feeling. Do you live off your moment to moment thoughts? Because feeling isn't _emotion_, feeling is also thinking, just going under a different name.

Both thinking and feeling are equally rational processes that involve the refinement of judgement through time. To use a more intensive example, both Ti and Fi form congruent and internally consistent logical systems of thought and judgement that can be kind of totalizing. For example a Ti dom is often the kind of person that wants to form a "theory of everything". Fi doms are like this, too, but instead of being concerned with the world as full of objects, they're concerned with the world as full of subjects (ie: people). Both Ti and Fi are essentially the same thing, they only differ in the kinds of information they use. The problem isn't one of 'rationality vs emotion', it's more like function vs value.


----------



## Brown bear (Jul 25, 2016)

Aladdin Sane said:


> At this point I'm not sure if you are just trolling / joking / a banned member or whatever.
> 
> Feelers do not repress their thinking function.


Actually according to Myers briggs they do. If you look at the functional stacks of thinkers, their feeling functions are mostly repressed (that's why they are below their first two functions) and in turn they are more comfortable expressing their thinkinig function, while feelers are the reverse of that.


----------



## Brown bear (Jul 25, 2016)

Aladdin Sane said:


> I did not say thinking and feeling don't repress each other, I said feelers do not repress their thinking function. OP keeps making weird threads and seems to have a grudge on feelers. Feelers do not consciously think 'I am going to go and repress my thinking function right now and use feeling now'.


Also, sensors repress their intuition function while intuitives repress their sensing function.


----------



## Stellafera (Jan 19, 2015)

Brown bear said:


> because if you are just making decisions off of your moment to moment feelings then there is no incentive to take responsibility, *cause who actually FEELS like taking responsibility for wrongful actions?* You have to use a thinking function to look objectively at your actions and be able to detach from how you may FEEL in order to take true responsibility. When you are introspective and use your thinking function to analyze your own behaviors (good or bad) you are in a far better position to take responsibility.


Uh, me? That's how my conscience manifests; I feel extremely negative about a decision I've made and try to take action to alleviate that guilty self-assessment by making amends or helping someone out or whatever's bothering me.

I apologize if my reply comes across as flippant. It's just that an understanding of guilt divorced from feeling is something I don't relate to at all.


----------



## umop 3pisdn (Apr 4, 2014)

OP, what you're describing is basically Kantian ethics, which has some inadequacies that are worth at least mentioning. In its favour I do think it's possible to arrive at 'the good' through purely rational means, for example I think the categorical imperative makes perfect logical sense and has lots of appeal on that basis alone (but as someone with tertiary Ti I'm probably likely to see the good in an ethical system that is extremely Ti-based.)

But okay, so now we can say that we can see the good itself on an entirely rational basis, has that changed much in our ethics? History would say that it hasn't, if you look at the problems that have plagued the early modern period after Kant's ideas became vogue. It just didn't _solve_ the problem, and I could think of one big reason why: the problem of human nature is often such that we already know what the good is, and we disregard it because we prefer that things would be otherwise. Everyone does this, and it is arguably the fundamental moral problem. How do we bring our preferences in line with our knowledge of how things must be? Being a thinker or a feeler doesn't change the presence of this problem one bit.

So no matter who you are, you have to deal with your temperament and reactions to things as an ethical agent in order to bring the good to bear. Feeling types are adept at understanding the human aspect of the ethical problem. That's essentially the main difference, thinkers deal in things drained of their blood, while feelers do not. So for us, temperament, habits, tendencies, values, motivations, etc, are all the matter on which we develop our preferred rationality. And this is exactly the kind of gunk you have to clear out and get in order before the ideal of the good can be realized.

If you wanted to be overly simplistic about it, you could call it the difference between deontological ethics (thinking) and virtue ethics (feeling), at least as a sort of analogy. And in that analogy you essentially need both, with the aim of them meeting in the middle. It's really our only hope against those elements in our human nature that would stand in the way, because they're powerful, and we have to approach the problem from both ends.

For a feeler, it really isn't that hard, all you have to do is notice that virtue yields more satisfaction than vice, _which it does_. Vice brings with it problems (dissatisfaction, disquietude, a lack of harmony) and virtue brings with it the eradication of problems! There you go, a perfectly sensible ethics based on feeling: I want to thrive or have eudaimonia, so I develop virtue.


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

Brown bear said:


> because if you are just making decisions off of your moment to moment feelings then there is no incentive to take responsibility, cause who actually FEELS like taking responsibility for wrongful actions? You have to use a thinking function to look objectively at your actions and be able to detach from how you may FEEL in order to take true responsibility. When you are introspective and use your thinking function to analyze your own behaviors (good or bad) you are in a far better position to take responsibility.


Okay, who ever told you that feeling functions are associated with 'feelings?' They're not. Feeling has more to do with values and ethics. It has nothing to do with emotions. I can do things I don't feel like doing if it's the right thing to do. As an Fi aux, I'm honest, diligent and hard working. Those are all responsible characteristics.

And do you suppose all thinkers take responsibility for their actions? Do you think thinking types are not influenced by emtion? Do you really believe that they don't do whatever they feel like doing? These characteristic are applicable to both thinkers and feelers. Calling all feelers in the world irresponsible is a terrible thing to do.


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

Brown bear said:


> Also, sensors repress their intuition function while intuitives repress their sensing function.


If you already know this, why are you asking this question? It seems to me that you're simply biased against feeling types. But then again, according to your logic, I'm repressing my thinking and can't be expected to understand logic or, god forbid, come to my own logical conclusions. Pfft... a feeler who also thinks? Those things don't exist.


----------



## Black Bear (Oct 10, 2016)

I can not consider you a fellow bear friend, Brown bear ):

Frankly, some of the most diligent, smartest people I've met are feeling types. And some of the laziest, most irresponsible people I've met are thinking types. Using feeling over thinking doesn't automatically make you an overly emotional fool, nor does using thinking over feeling make you the next Einstein.

If MBTI was that simple, I would've never bothered studying it tbh.


----------



## Brown bear (Jul 25, 2016)

LibertyPrime said:


> o.o ya that's true.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I couldn't have said it better, this is essentially what I've been trying to get at. This moral relativism stuff actually hurts people, and yet it's considered a valid way of existing in the world today. Rather disturbing actually


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

Brown bear said:


> I couldn't have said it better, this is essentially what I've been trying to get at. This moral relativism stuff actually hurts people, and yet it's considered a valid way of existing in the world today. Rather disturbing actually


*I agree.* I do consider feelings to be "fuel", as they are required to sustain certain actions, however it is as Plato put it: Reason needs to rule over the spirit and the appetite. In fact Plato's tripartite soul describes a thinker's outlook on this entire thing.

Kant agreed with this assertion and I quote: "All our knowledge begins with the senses, proceeds then to the understanding, and ends with reason. There is nothing higher than reason." - Immanuel Kant


----------



## yet another intj (Feb 10, 2013)

I don't think they are "repressing" it. According to my observations and personal experiences, it's nothing different than "what thinkers are doing with their feeling functions". Definitely nothing I could superficially call repressing. As an INTJ, I can easily relate with INFJs Ni-Ti loop as how they are experiencing different functions in similar ways under stress. INTJs are capable of torturing themselves with ridiculously personal memories from the past as INFJs are capable of confusing themselves with cyclical thoughts about an unpredictable future. We are mostly distracted by our thinking function as thinkers or our feeling function as feelers enough to avoid that potential but we are still vulnerable by subconsciously willing to ride those loops when something goes wrong beyond the capacity of our ideas and emotions.


----------



## Brown bear (Jul 25, 2016)

LibertyPrime said:


> *I agree.* I do consider feelings to be "fuel", as they are required to sustain certain actions, however it is as Plato put it: Reason needs to rule over the spirit and the appetite. In fact Plato's tripartite soul describes a thinker's outlook on this entire thing.
> 
> Kant agreed with this assertion and I quote: "All our knowledge begins with the senses, proceeds then to the understanding, and ends with reason. There is nothing higher than reason." - Immanuel Kant


This.


----------



## DOGSOUP (Jan 29, 2016)

Brown bear said:


> True


I am kind of expecting to hear the reasoning behind your statement that some functions are more introspective than others.


----------



## Brown bear (Jul 25, 2016)

DOGSOUP said:


> I am kind of expecting to hear the reasoning behind your statement that some functions are more introspective than others.


Idk, acting on your feelings in the moment requires less introspection than thinking/reflecting before you act about potential outcomes/consequences.


----------



## DOGSOUP (Jan 29, 2016)

Brown bear said:


> Idk, acting on your feelings in the moment requires less introspection than thinking/reflecting before you act about potential outcomes/consequences.


I'd argue reflecting before acting is just plain judging... or perhaps introversion.

But how is N more introspective than S, if we discard all obvious stereotypes about the two? I'd perhaps understand the claim of Si/Ni being more introspective than Se/Ne because the attitude is already different, but you seemed to think this applies to dichtomies as well.


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

Brown bear said:


> Idk, acting on your feelings in the moment requires less introspection than thinking/reflecting before you act about potential outcomes/consequences.


You're wrong about that. Fi is a lot more than 'acting on your feelings.' Just like how Ti builds internal systems, Fi is constantly relating the outer world to the individual. An Fi user knows exactly what value he has attached to things. He knows what's the right thing to do because he knows how he's going to feel when he does things. Fi users have a lot of depth to them. We know how to relate to others. 

I'm not too familiar with Fe but it works in similar ways to Te. Feeling is just a different way of looking at the world. The F/T dichotomy has nothing to do with 'thinking' and 'feeling' in the traditional sense of the world. For feeling, consider looking at things through a different colored lens. Instead of seeing things and systems, you're now seeing people and relationships. There's equal depth to both. 

And yes, feelers can reflect on outcomes too. It's just what kind of outcomes is different. As a feeling type, my priority is to make sure my actions don't contradict my thoughts, that I don't harm others with the things I do or say, that I'm able to be helpful to others. Thinkers generally don't focus on that unless their feeling side is fully developed. Feelers can care about the material outcomes of their actions too. The proof is that you'll find a lot of hard working feelers in the top of their fields, doing meaningful things to contribute to society. Hopefully this clears things up.


----------



## Brown bear (Jul 25, 2016)

Witch of Certainty said:


> You're wrong about that. Fi is a lot more than 'acting on your feelings.' Just like how Ti builds internal systems, Fi is constantly relating the outer world to the individual. An Fi user knows exactly what value he has attached to things. He knows what's the right thing to do because he knows how he's going to feel when he does things. Fi users have a lot of depth to them. We know how to relate to others.
> 
> I'm not too familiar with Fe but it works in similar ways to Te. Feeling is just a different way of looking at the world. The F/T dichotomy has nothing to do with 'thinking' and 'feeling' in the traditional sense of the world. For feeling, consider looking at things through a different colored lens. Instead of seeing things and systems, you're now seeing people and relationships. There's equal depth to both.
> 
> And yes, feelers can reflect on outcomes too. It's just what kind of outcomes is different. As a feeling type, my priority is to make sure my actions don't contradict my thoughts, that I don't harm others with the things I do or say, that I'm able to be helpful to others. Thinkers generally don't focus on that unless their feeling side is fully developed. Feelers can care about the material outcomes of their actions too. The proof is that you'll find a lot of hard working feelers in the top of their fields, doing meaningful things to contribute to society. Hopefully this clears things up.


Yeah I guess you're right. The only reason I attack feelers is because I'm overcoming a phobia I've had of them since childhood. I don't know why they just make me scared sometimes. It's a personal weakness that I'm so scared of them, for whatever reason it's mostly extroverted feelers that do it to me, not necessarily those that use the extroverted feeling function, although I'm sure that plays into it since they're just so different from me, but any extroverts who also happen to be feelers.


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

Brown bear said:


> Yeah I guess you're right. The only reason I attack feelers is because I'm overcoming a phobia I've had of them since childhood. I don't know why they just make me scared sometimes. It's a personal weakness that I'm so scared of them, for whatever reason it's mostly extroverted feelers that do it to me, not necessarily those that use the extroverted feeling function, although I'm sure that plays into it since they're just so different from me, but any extroverts who also happen to be feelers.


Aww well, most of us are very nice people. I'm sorry for that. I hope you can overcome it someday.


----------



## Brown bear (Jul 25, 2016)

Witch of Certainty said:


> Aww well, most of us are very nice people. I'm sorry for that. I hope you can overcome it someday.


Like I said, I'm working on overcoming it. Usually it doesn't even effect me but it's just on some exceedingly rare occasions that it does


----------



## Brown bear (Jul 25, 2016)

DOGSOUP said:


> I'd argue reflecting before acting is just plain judging... or perhaps introversion.
> 
> But how is N more introspective than S, if we discard all obvious stereotypes about the two? I'd perhaps understand the claim of Si/Ni being more introspective than Se/Ne because the attitude is already different, but you seemed to think this applies to dichtomies as well.


N's are more introspective than S's because they are willing to look beyond the superficial, beyond all that is plain to the naked eye to come to conclusions. This type of speculation in my opinion, requires a level of introspection, or at least ability for introspection.


----------



## Guajiro (Nov 16, 2017)

Because as Jung observed, we can't do both at the same time. To use one we have to shut off the other. If I am evaluating if what makes sense, it has to make sense, I have to repress my liking/disliking about whatever I am evaluating.

On the other hand... If I am evaluating what is more important and how much something is worth or not worth, I can't think about if it makes sense or not to me nor to others.
Thinking and Feeling disturb each other: If I am talking about the things I find important and I start thinking about the logic of it, it will disturb me because when you like something it is not because it "makes sense", it is because you determined "I like this and I don't like that, because this is better then that"
And if I am using cold logic and I start thinking about my like/dislike about what I am saying I will not be abble to be impartial.

It's just how it is. It's not possible to use both at the same time. It's not like Jung invented this 'cause he thought it was cute.
They are opposites and they are compensatory because one does what the other can't do. One is cold and the other is warm

The *Thinker* spends his day thinking, studying etc. and formulating what makes sense. But then you ask him "Why are you studying this? Why is it important? What is it about this that makes you think it is worth your time? What is the value in this subject?" And the thinker will become stuck 'cause *Feeling* is inferior.
The *Feeler* spends his day thinking about what are the important things and why, what things are not worth, what is important to him or to others. And when you hear him saying expressing a thought "Teachers are people too" (ok, that is obvious!) it is a thought in service of the Feeling function... it is not a really developed thought, it is his inferior function.

Does that mean one is smart and the other dumb? NO.
Does that mean one is a psychopath and the other a saint? NO.

*Both are serving different kinds of responsability.* The Thinker is commiting to what makes sense regardless of what his/others liking or disliking. The Feeler is commiting to what is more important in terms of worth compared to things that are not worth it.


----------



## Wisteria (Apr 2, 2015)

They don't repress it, the Thinking functions are simply weaker.


----------



## Guajiro (Nov 16, 2017)

Wisteria said:


> They don't repress it, the Thinking functions are simply weaker.


Are weaker because the more you engage in one, the less you engage in the other. When you "use" one, the other is not being used.
Just like when someone is engaging in an introverted intuition, you clap your hands and the person doesn't react because the awareness of the extroverted sensation is turned off. So, when someone engages fully in Extroverted Thinking, the person turns off his personal Feeling evaluation because it would disturb the objectivity of the Thinking thought

It is "weaker" because, in a period of 4 hours (for example), the person spends 3hours engaging in Extroverted Thinking and only 1 hour in Introverted Feeling. One becomes more mature and confident then the other.

It is not exactly "repressed" because the person always engages in both functions, even if the person spends more time immersed in one and less in the other. But it is never at the same time. If one is on, the other is off*

*I mean "on" and "off" in consciousness. It is *in* your awareness or it is *out* of your awareness. Whatever is falling in your unconscious, it is unconscious because you are not conscious of it. Extroverted Thinking puts Introverted Feeling in an unconscious territory* (in real time)*


----------



## SeagullStanley (Aug 7, 2018)

Guajiro said:


> Are weaker because the more you engage in one, the less you engage in the other. When you "use" one, the other is not being used.
> Just like when someone is engaging in an introverted intuition, you clap your hands and the person doesn't react because the awareness of the extroverted sensation is turned off. So, when someone engages fully in Extroverted Thinking, the person turns off his personal Feeling evaluation because it would disturb the objectivity of the Thinking thought
> 
> It is "weaker" because, in a period of 4 hours (for example), the person spends 3hours engaging in Extroverted Thinking and only 1 hour in Introverted Feeling. One becomes more mature and confident then the other.
> ...


I just want to say thanks for finding and resurrecting this, and for sharing your insights/explanations about it.

A puzzle isn't much of a puzzle once it ceases to puzzle the puzzled. 
Or: you can't wonder where the puzzle pieces go if you already know where the puzzle pieces go. 
(am I in the ballpark?)


----------



## catharsiis (Mar 27, 2017)

For me, personally, it isn't repressed. It's just a weak function that is difficult for me to practice.

It's kind of like Te is a parent, and my other functions are three bratty kids. Te is trying to get the kids to do what it wants; not to be bossy, but for their own benefit. But the other three functions have a hard time grasping Te's guidelines and following the rules. These kids are so bratty that sometimes Te becomes tired and impatient with the kids, and will "burn out", resulting in the kids going wild without Te's watching eye.

This manifests in me setting very high standards for myself. I try and strive to meet the goals I set for myself, but am not always good at it. I want to be really neat & tidy but I am not often in the mood to do deep cleaning, and do the bare minimum. I want to work & go to school, but it might end up being too overwhelming, resulting in me quitting one of the two & then hating myself for it, because I didn't live up to my own expectations. I want to be more in shape, but I hate exercising. Sometimes I will start projects or new habits, and end up dropping them because I forgot about them, or simply didn't like them/got bored of them.

I want to make my life more successful and organized, but my values & the way I feel about things often makes it difficult to work towards this, because they feel so powerful & important that they are very hard to ignore. As I grow older, this is starting to slowly be less of a problem, and my goals are becoming easier to accomplish, but this still has always been a constant theme in my life.


----------



## L P (May 30, 2017)

The guy that started this thread is brothers with the INTJ that started all those "WHy do INFPs_____" "INTJs deserve more credit for___" threads lol.


----------



## Pastelle (Dec 12, 2016)

I wouldn't say repression as that somewhat denotes you're consciously suppressing a functional viewpoint. I would say that leaning toward one function makes you oblivious toward another. Say an INFP. Just because they have dominant Fi doesn't mean they repress their Te. They just naturally focus on that facet of information.


----------



## Stevester (Feb 28, 2016)

I've read this MBTI statistic that 60% of the population are Fs. And that freaked me right the fuck out. I immediately thought that the majority of the world doesn't think logically/rationally and that this is why we have extremist Islam and SJW essentially tearing our society apart. 

But upon further contemplation I thought _''Would a majority of T types in the world be any better?''_ It would essentially be people who are convinced they are (logically) right vs. the rest of the world which would boomerang back to the excat the state of the world we live in.


----------



## SeagullStanley (Aug 7, 2018)

Stevester said:


> I've read this MBTI statistic that 60% of the population are Fs. And that freaked me right the fuck out. I immediately thought that the majority of the world doesn't think logically/rationally and that this is why we have extremist Islam and SJW essentially tearing our society apart.
> 
> But upon further contemplation I thought _''Would a majority of T types in the world be any better?''_ It would essentially be people who are convinced they are (logically) right vs. the rest of the world which would boomerang back to the excat the state of the world we live in.


Well, as I like to say whenever the opportunity arises: where 3 or 4 or more are gathered together under a common cause/banner/interest/purpose (anything from pond scum rights to passions for bagpipes), and I happen to be among those 3 or 4 or more, I personally start to pay closer attention to exit strategies, because sooner or later someone will decide to take it upon himself/herself or others will take it upon themselves, to have this someone installed as Leader. Before long there will be an attitude of entitlement in invading the privacy of the members; slowly dictate more and more behaviors and habits; then they have to go find recruits, figure out ways to lure them to their ranks. Before long codes are printed in leaflets, then colorful pamphlets, and finally bound in books. Give it a few decades and someone will decide everybody must belong and so bow and swear allegiance oaths. Yet even against such potential threats of darkness, I choose the way of optimism, because if nothing else, we'll not see anytime soon a global swell of passions for bagpipes.


----------



## Notus Asphodelus (Jan 20, 2015)

catharsiis said:


> For me, personally, it isn't repressed. It's just a weak function that is difficult for me to practice.
> 
> It's kind of like Te is a parent, and my other functions are three bratty kids. Te is trying to get the kids to do what it wants; not to be bossy, but for their own benefit. But the other three functions have a hard time grasping Te's guidelines and following the rules. These kids are so bratty that sometimes Te becomes tired and impatient with the kids, and will "burn out", resulting in the kids going wild without Te's watching eye.
> 
> ...



They say Te will in Fi doms will reach its full maturity by mid-life.


----------



## Wisteria (Apr 2, 2015)

Guajiro said:


> Are weaker because the more you engage in one, the less you engage in the other. When you "use" one, the other is not being used.
> Just like when someone is engaging in an introverted intuition, you clap your hands and the person doesn't react because the awareness of the extroverted sensation is turned off. So, when someone engages fully in Extroverted Thinking, the person turns off his personal Feeling evaluation because it would disturb the objectivity of the Thinking thought
> 
> It is "weaker" because, in a period of 4 hours (for example), the person spends 3hours engaging in Extroverted Thinking and only 1 hour in Introverted Feeling. One becomes more mature and confident then the other.
> ...


Ok I understand it a little differently, but overall I don't disagree. 

The idea is that you cannot use both Fi and Te at the same time, and as a result one of them is repressed. This makes sense, and I don't disagree. You can't suddenly start using Fe when your currently doing something that requires the use of Ti, or when you happen to be using Ti more. 

The inferior function still has a naturally weaker ability. It's the reason why the stronger function is used more. It's the function they have the greater ability to use. 

However, the weaker functions can be developed, it simply takes more time to develop them, than someone who has say Dominant/Strong Te, because they are already good at using the function naturally. The idea is that if you are good at Te, then it's biologically impossible to also be good at Fi.

The functions aren't completely "turned off". We have to use all of them. Many tasks require a person to switch between the functions.


----------



## Wisteria (Apr 2, 2015)

Notus Asphodelus said:


> They say Te will in Fi doms will reach its full maturity by mid-life.


This is true, according to the functional stack theory;



> It is generally believed that the dominant generally develops up to age 7, the auxiliary up to age 20, the tertiary in the 30s and 40s and the inferior or fourth function at midlife or later...
> 
> As you develop your tertiary and least-preferred functions later in life, the range of behaviors available to you opens up even further. But the dominant and auxiliary functions will always be the core functions of your conscious personality.


https://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/understanding-mbti-type-dynamics/lifelong-type-development.htm?bhcp=1


----------



## Guajiro (Nov 16, 2017)

Wisteria said:


> Ok I understand it a little differently, but overall I don't disagree.
> 
> The idea is that you cannot use both Fi and Te at the same time, and as a result one of them is repressed. This makes sense, and I don't disagree. You can't suddenly start using Fe when your currently doing something that requires the use of Ti, or when you happen to be using Ti more.
> 
> ...


Of course. I also wouldn't use the word Repression because it sounds like you can't access that function because you are intentionally "hidding it" from yourself. Because we use all. But I think Feeling is turned off from your conscious awareness when you engage in Thinking.... it always impacts you unconsciously, but the unconscious is not in your awareness. Yesterday I was on the street and talking about an idea, the person who was talking to me told me I was shaking with cold. I really was shaking so I was sensing the cold temperature. But it was unconscious while I was exploring the intuition. When I noticed the cold, I couldn't think about that idea anymore (Si&Ne).
What I mean is really that on a conscious level both can't be on your radar at the same time.


----------



## Guajiro (Nov 16, 2017)

It can also be considered weaker in the sense that we are more inclined to one side then the other and all the functions serve the dominant. Feeling dominant types will apply their Thinking to situations that serve their Feeling judgement.
Sensation types are guided by the strongest sensation, while intuitives select the most interesting sensation with their intuition.


----------

