# Can Fi's be psychopathic?



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Souled In said:


> They experience some sort of pleasure or satisfaction though, which is emotion.
> 
> How bout this one too: Japanese culture.
> 
> ...


I can't speak for japanese culture as a whole, but anime at least is extremely Fi. usually the main character will be some sort of IXFX type and even the NTJ characters will show a lot of Fi (an extreme example of this is Lelouch from Code Geass who looks borderline INFP sometimes)


----------



## Pillow (Apr 17, 2011)

LeonardoLestat said:


> Could the person you are describing possibly be like the Devil? (I'm serious, I'm curious what the views on this are)


Interesting point, made me laugh to think of the psychopath I know as being the devil. I can certainly see the similarities.


----------



## LeonardoLestat (Aug 5, 2009)

Pillow said:


> Yeah, I think that could be the case. I'm not sure if it would be possible for anyone to know what type a psychopath was though, as for one thing they keep their 'true' personality so well hidden. Secondly they don't have much of a 'true' personality anyway, compared to other people. Maybe if MBTI theory develops further and becomes more 'scientific' - for example if physical/neurochemical differences between the types are identified - then we could type psychopaths in the future, but I don't know how much use that would be. Their psychopathy traits seem to far outweigh their type traits.


A psychopath is an FP/TJ where one of those 2 functions has become so dominant, that the shadow function takes over, en emotional numbness occurs. Comparable to the way ISTJs deal with emotions, only less conscious.
The psychopath is a mentally ill type, constantly unhealthy, and has learnt to cope with being unhealthy, and learns to function on a healthy level (as much as this is possible) while always being mentally ill (unhealthy).


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

LeonardoLestat said:


> A psychopath is an FP/TJ where one of those 2 functions has become so dominant, that the shadow function takes over, en emotional numbness occurs. Comparable to the way ISTJs deal with emotions, only less conscious.
> The psychopath is a mentally ill type, constantly unhealthy, and has learnt to cope with being unhealthy, and learns to function on a healthy level (as much as this is possible) while always being mentally ill (unhealthy).


actually, a psychopath is an individual with a disfunctional amygdala ie, they don't feel any kind of emotions


----------



## Pillow (Apr 17, 2011)

LeonardoLestat said:


> A psychopath is an FP/TJ where one of those 2 functions has become so dominant, that the shadow function takes over, en emotional numbness occurs. Comparable to the way ISTJs deal with emotions, only less conscious.
> The psychopath is a mentally ill type, constantly unhealthy, and has learnt to cope with being unhealthy, and learns to function on a healthy level (as much as this is possible) while always being mentally ill (unhealthy).


The only problem I have with this is that we don't know what 'causes' people to be a certain type. Psychopathy has been linked to imbalances in brain chemistry, problems with uptake of certain hormones or other chemicals produced in the body and differences in brain structure. There is hope that psychopathy could be treated by hormone therapy, in combination with other things, so I think we could never know for sure if psychopaths have a correlation with any type until we know more about the problem itself, and maybe until we know more about MBTI. Some psychopaths show psychopathic traits from the age of 1 or 2, maybe even younger, so they probably wouldn't have 'chosen' a personality type before their psychopathic traits set in. I'm not too well-versed in MBTI though, so feel free to point out where I'm going wrong.


----------



## ProfessorLiver (Mar 19, 2011)

Feelers, rather than actually "feeling" are more oriented on their morals. Whether those morals include compassion or not isn't the issue. And "psychopath" is tad offensive.


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

MisterLiver said:


> Feelers, rather than actually "feeling" are more oriented on their morals. Whether those morals include compassion or not isn't the issue. And "psychopath" is tad offensive.


Labels always are.


----------



## echidna1000 (Apr 20, 2009)

An overwhelming number of psychopaths (by Hare's definition) have been found to test xxTP with ENTP being most common and no F types. It would make sense that a Psychopath, being someone who acts without a sense of ethics, empathy or any value for laws or duties is someone who is Ti dominant or auxiliary, doing what satisfies the personal logic regardless of established logical norms, with that Ti severely engulfing any intrinsic use of Fe, using it only to manipulate others.

People would like to say that it happens regardless of a personality type, but some functions just are not compatible with the very specific psychopathic model. While it has been proposed (questionably) that certain personality disorders can arise due to Dom Tertiary looping, I'd say that the more chronic varieties, can arise from the extremes of the dominant and auxiliary functions with no intrinsic development of the tertiary and quaternary. For example, Psychopathy being due to any Pe function and Ti at the rejection of the Pi function and Fe.

I wonder if Autists would score overwhelmingly ISTJ.


----------



## Pillow (Apr 17, 2011)

HarryJPotter said:


> An overwhelming number of psychopaths (by Hare's definition) have been found to test xxTP with ENTP being most common and no F types. It would make sense that a Psychopath, being someone who acts without a sense of ethics, empathy or any value for laws or duties is someone who is Ti dominant or auxiliary, doing what satisfies the personal logic regardless of established logical norms, with that Ti severely engulfing any intrinsic use of Fe, using it only to manipulate others.
> 
> People would like to say that it happens regardless of a personality type, but some functions just are not compatible with the very specific psychopathic model. While it has been proposed (questionably) that certain personality disorders can arise due to Dom Tertiary looping, I'd say that the more chronic varieties, can arise from the extremes of the dominant and auxiliary functions with no intrinsic development of the tertiary and quaternary. For example, Psychopathy being due to any Pe function and Ti at the rejection of the Pi function and Fe.
> 
> I wonder if Autists would score overwhelmingly ISTJ.


How were they tested? It's difficult to get under the skin of a psychopath and they very rarely reveal their true selves to anyone. They don't seem to fit the idea of a normal Ti dom, from my limited knowledge. Psychopaths have physical (brain and neurotransmitter) deficiencies, and unless it can be shown that certain parts of the brain are linked to personality type I don't really see how we could say what type they are with any accuracy.


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

@_HarryJPotter_ "being someone who acts without a sense of ethics, empathy or any value for laws or duties is someone "

IF their sense of ethics is, "only kill at night" because of a "matter of taste" then yes they have ethics.

If they care and concern about people because it "serves their purpose" they still care and concern.

As far as duty, they migth have a duty to themselves, and a sense of narcissism at that.

Saying psychopaths can't be F, is like saying they can't have "tastes."

Or, it is like saying, cognitive functions are only measured by behaviors.

In that case, that lowers the validity of cognitive functioning tests.

They just experience less feelings associated with their tastes, but sometimes, they experience even more impulses.

We are assigning "our sense of right and wrong" to them, and ending up calling them T's, which is improper I believe.

If you like rocks more than humans, then your F scale becomes about rocks, not humans.


----------



## Pillow (Apr 17, 2011)

Souled In said:


> @_HarryJPotter_ "being someone who acts without a sense of ethics, empathy or any value for laws or duties is someone "
> 
> IF their sense of ethics is, "only kill at night" because of a "matter of taste" then yes they have ethics.
> 
> ...


Good point, but I have a few objections. When psychopaths have care/concern for others it isn't care and concern, it's faked. Given the opportunity (ie. when they know they will suffer no consequences) they will boast about how they manipulated people by appearing concerned, and they will also screw over the person they apparently cared for at the drop of a hat if it suits them, or even if they're just finished with the person. They may have a sense of duty to themselves, but often they don't care about themselves - they only care about winning. It could be argued that their ethical code _is_ winning, in which case I can see how a psychopath could be an F-dom.

The main problem I have with typing psychopaths is that they lie so much that it would be very difficult for anyone to type them accurately. If they took the test themselves they would manipulate the results so that they appeared how they wanted others to see them (if they didn't know about MBTI) or so that they came out as the type they wanted to be seen as in that particular circumstance (if they did know about MBTI). It takes at least half a day of intensive questioning, reading their life history and maybe even talking to their family and friends for a trained expert to even be sure that they are psychopathic.


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

@_Pillow_ I went to study in the T v F sticky, and brought in a quote that helped me, and I respond my new thoughts below it.



chaeriean said:


> facts are objective in that they are considered pure truths. interpretations of fact are subjective.
> 
> every person interprets a fact differently. these interpretations are commonly referred to as conclusions. logic by nature is the process of determining the correct conclusion by way of utilizing purely truthful facts. and yet, logic is not infalliable. the straw vulcan trope proves this. (a quick example: i could say "cars have engines," which is a fact. but then i could draw the conclusion, "that means all cars are capable of driving". which is a conclusion, based on the fact, that is false. the reason it is false is provided in another fact, which states, "cars sometimes break down. machinery is not indestructable." by continuing on the course of projected facts, one gets as _close_ to the objective, logical truth as possible).
> 
> ...


Feelers spend more time with subjective thought than objective thought, simply because they might slow the objective process down to experience feelings more often than T's.

One one end of the graph, feelers experience more of their time "in between" objective thoughts, feeling. Thinkers spend less of their time between objective thoughts. So, it isn't a question of F or T, except that they measure how much time is spent between objective thoughts.

Feeler---------------------------------------------------------------Thinker
More of their time-----------------------------------Less of their time

When we are just perceiving the world, through vegging out, meditating, or brainstorming, the J function isn't even relevant, except to push towards a decision of say, picking another dorito out of the bag.

Also, if T accomplishes a goal, they might utilize F a whole lot more, and if a F doesn't accomplish a goal, they might utilize T a lot more.

Because of habit, in a way T is the goal to a T, partially, and F is a goal to an F, and this is why they say trauma is needed to change personality, simply because of this habit, trauma is needed to change habits.

Not necessarily though, if a great enough goal is achieved, the T might not feel the need to use T anymore, or if F feels enough pressure to perform, they might eventually get rid of most of their F.

We might call this pressure trauma for an F, but how can we call a T say, curing cancer and therefore not feeling the need to continue being objective as if "their life work is valid now" trauma based, for starting to utilize more F?

We cant!


----------



## Pillow (Apr 17, 2011)

@Souled In - very interesting post. Based on what you said, do you think it would be difficult to tell if a psychopath was F or T as the F/T would manifest in a rather different way to normal? What I mean by that is that the main difference between an F-dom and a T-dom psychopath would be that the F-dom would spend more time in subjective thought than a T-dom psychopath. If this was the only (or main) way to tell them apart then they could appear very similar in their actions. F-dom in a psychopathic person probably wouldn't manifest in their behaviour in the same way as it would in a healthy F-dom, as the psychopath's idea of what is morally and ethically correct would be skewed by their inability to experience emotions and to put themselves in other people's shoes. I guess their inherent subjectiveness may be evident in their speech patterns.


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

Pillow said:


> @Souled In - very interesting post. Based on what you said, do you think it would be difficult to tell if a psychopath was F or T as the F/T would manifest in a rather different way to normal? What I mean by that is that the main difference between an F-dom and a T-dom psychopath would be that the F-dom would spend more time in subjective thought than a T-dom psychopath. If this was the only (or main) way to tell them apart then they could appear very similar in their actions. F-dom in a psychopathic person probably wouldn't manifest in their behaviour in the same way as it would in a healthy F-dom, as the psychopath's idea of what is morally and ethically correct would be skewed by their inability to experience emotions and to put themselves in other people's shoes. I guess their inherent subjectiveness may be evident in their speech patterns.


I see what you mean by not being able to put themselves in other people's shoes.

For example, if we have never seen the color red before, we can't even imagine it. It is impossible..

And therefore if we have never experienced red, but all of culture has, we might either become bitter towards it, or mystical treating it as if it is extra special.

A psychopath could feel a sense of inferiority after understanding sense of self and death etc..

Why are they different? Is it a God that made them different for a purpose? Are they scum, are they not human, do they value humans or not?

It really depends on them.

However, if I objectively value humans, vs. more subjectively experience humans, I am more to the T side.

The confusion between T and F comes when we say, well what if someone's value and ethical tastes is to "subjectively experience the emotions associated with being objective as much as possible."

Now we have an F with T behaviorisms. For example, an F that wants to be in the "flow" that is produced from a meditative type technique of crunching numbers all day, however, politics acts like those numbers. In order to be objective, they may become masters at making people like them, in order to "minimize distraction" from their objective purpose.

The question is, what is a person's preference for what they like to experience? What feelings are they after?

Then, what actions give them those feelings?

Ethics= what actions produce what feelings

We can have a F actions with T feelings, or vice versa based on our usual understandings it seems.

It is not the act of being subjective in between objective thoughts, because they both occur in a way, simultaneously.

It is more what is being "experienced" in between objective thoughts, and what experience is the preference and therefore goal of those objective thoughts.

T's basically, haven't found their goal yet, and F's have, partially. T's are more sacrificial of what makes them less efficient for their end goal.

Everyone has an end goal though. It is only natural personality based so much as it is "habit of finding a goal."

But once that goal is achieved, how much will it take to break that habit?

But, like I said, T's and F's can be after the same feeling.

T's and F's can both have the goal of "being loved," or, "being in the flow," or, "being in a state of wonder."

It is more a question of what feels genuine for them, how much of it they want, and what combination of feelings they want.

It doesn't mean it is "ecstacy" people seek, but there is always a "validation of their humanness as a human," or something like, fulfilling the beginning with an end, etc.. placing the piece in the puzzle, etc..

Granted, some live just to die, and therefore might veg out, commit suicide, or simply remain objective as a way of "maintaining" the goal they have already achieved, perhaps remaining in the "flow" that comes with crunching numbers or being objective.

A psychopath or anyone could really end up with the same or opposite traits.

However, I'm sure there are many correlations.

But when those correlations show psychopaths being more T, well, it is because we are analyzing their actions, not their feelings.

It doesnt matter if they relate to humans or care about this or that. They can care about whatever they want. Rocks, fetishes, humans, tastes, pizzas, money, etc..

They can't care about love like many of us experience though, but thats not the point here, the point is:

Psychopaths can "dwell" in between the consciously directed objective thoughts just as much as anyone.

The fact that they aren't experiencing as much emotion as us, doesn't matter.

Or does it?

I offer a graph, which shows the possibilities of what our minds might be doing when we arent being directly consciously objective with our awareness.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------>
veg out meditative brainstorming intense emotion

The energy builds as it goes to the right, but if you notice, meditation can cause very intense emotions.

They just might be Lucidity, rather than, Anger, Joy, etc...

Are we to say psychopaths can't be F's because Lucidity and "Flow" is not a valid enough emotion?

No way. We should label them as such that they can't experience the emotions they can't experience,

but that doens't mean psychopaths cant experience emotion, just not certain feeling emotions.

Everyone has an unconscious goal that is partially influencing their habits.

That unconscious goal is definitely something about satisfaction, no matter how intense or unique.

Pyschopaths dont have to be objective, they might just get bored with lack of emotion, and want to:

A) set fires that are large and big and bright and feel hot
B) kill

Etc...

They are just bored.

And, they probably have to be very objective to get away with crimes if they are creating crime.

Or, to take over the world, if that is what they are doing.

If they in fact want to manipulate others in a what we call bad way, they most likely don't have time to dwell in between objectivity. (still looking for a better way to say that)

However, if we say that psychopaths tend to not get enough stimulation from what we call normal means, then I think we can assume they might consider being deviant.

However, if is deviance that creates an excessive "need" to be objective, not the lack of ability to experience certain emotions, per se.

A) Lack of ability to experience certain emotions

B) Boredom, lack of stimulation

C) Seek other means, consider deviance

D) If deviance is chosen, a great need of objectivity required for survival

E) T type

Now, if they start "enjoying the fire" more than they think of "how to get away with this and start one"

They are no being an F type.


----------



## Cogdecree (Mar 27, 2009)

Psychopaths are characterized by emotional affect, in that they don't have the same emotional response regular people do. Everything is perceived as objects and there is no value beyond what gives a personal thrill. They operate purely on a hedonistic calculator, and are at least average or above average intelligence than the general population.


----------



## Pillow (Apr 17, 2011)

Souled In said:


> But when those correlations show psychopaths being more T, well, it is because we are analyzing their actions, not their feelings.


I think this is pretty much what I was trying to say. Partly because we don't know what any given F-dom psychopath's 'moral cause' is (as is isn't a normal one like that of non-psychopaths), we may find it hard to know their type - or at least it would take a lot more effort to type them than it would to type a non-psychopath.



> Pyschopaths dont have to be objective, they might just get bored with lack of emotion, and want to:
> 
> A) set fires that are large and big and bright and feel hot
> B) kill
> ...


This is basically the theory on why psychopaths are so good at being psychopaths. For non-psychopaths, emotional relationships take up a large amount of our time - we spend a lot of time thinking about them and trying to improve them or to work out what went wrong. Psychopaths don't have an emotional bond with anyone, so they have a lot of time on their hands and become bored very often. This is also one of the reasons why many psychopaths turn to drugs - it is one of the few ways they can 'feel' something that isn't just numbness.



> And, they probably have to be very objective to get away with crimes if they are creating crime.
> 
> Or, to take over the world, if that is what they are doing.
> 
> ...


That's true, although many of them don't seem to care about getting caught and some even hand themselves in. Prison isn't really a bad thing for some psychopaths as they can still do pretty much everything they can do on the outside. For most people, the hardest part of prison is being away from their friends and family - psychopaths don't have this problem. More successful psychopaths tend to try to avoid committing crimes (or avoid getting caught) as they value their freedom, but even some very intelligent psychopaths don't seem to grasp the idea that prison is bad in the same way most non-psychopaths do. I think this comes from their not being able to fully understand and fear the consequences of their actions.

I do find it slightly weird that this thread on psychopaths is helping me to understand F-doms a lot more.


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

double post


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

Pillow said:


> I think this is pretty much what I was trying to say. Partly because we don't know what any given F-dom psychopath's 'moral cause' is (as is isn't a normal one like that of non-psychopaths), we may find it hard to know their type - or at least it would take a lot more effort to type them than it would to type a non-psychopath.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Its cool that we ended up at the same place, and I learned a lot here too, so thanks for all the responses, .



Cogdecree said:


> Psychopaths are characterized by emotional afflect, in that they don't have the same emotional respones regular people do. *Everything is perceived as objects and there is no value beyond what gives a personal thrill.* They operate purely on a hedonistic calculator, and are at least average or above average intelligence than the general population.


Therefore, thrill is where they stop objectifying. If they experience this thrill more than they go through the process of "being objective" as in the thought process, then they are F dom psychopaths, at least, that is what I'm arguing.


----------



## Cogdecree (Mar 27, 2009)

Souled In said:


> They perceive their thrill as an object?


In a hedonistic calculator yes. Psychopaths biologically experience little or no emotion, have reduced gray matter in the frontal lobe and are more impulsive. This has been measured through various brain imaging..

Edit

I should probably add that I was originally responding to the OP and that I did not fully read your posts yet.


----------



## Cogdecree (Mar 27, 2009)

Souled In said:


> Its cool that we ended up at the same place, and I learned a lot here too, so thanks for all the responses, .
> 
> 
> 
> Therefore, thrill is where they stop objectifying. If they experience this thrill more than they go through the process of "being objective" as in the thought process, then they are F dom psychopaths, at least, that is what I'm arguing.


If Fi is to be interpreted as self worth, then I would "image", a psychopath can technically have some sort of self value/love.

Edit:

I've studied psychopathy via my criminology major, and have studied the mbti in my informal education, but I have not mixed the two before, so I'm not placing a solid foot down on any stance per se. The difficulty is that psychopathy is physically measurable, the mbti, not quite as much.


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

Cogdecree said:


> If Fi is to be interpreted as self worth, then I would "image", a psychopath can technically have some sort of self value/love.


Got ya



Cogdecree said:


> In a hedonistic calculator yes. Psychopaths biologically experience little or no emotion, have reduced gray matter in the frontal lobe and are more impulsive. This has been measured through various brain imaging..


Impulsiveness is still an emotion though. So ya I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just saying that despite there not being certain emotions available to a psychopath, there are other emotions that can still determine differences between F and T. I'm not discounting what you are saying though. Thank you for the info.

"*Emotion* is the complex psychophysiological experience of an individual's state of mind as interacting with biochemical (internal) and environmental (external) influences. In humans, emotion fundamentally involves "physiological arousal, expressive behaviors, and conscious experience."[1] Emotion is associated with mood, temperament, personality and disposition, and motivation. Motivations direct and energize behavior, while emotions provide the affective component to motivation, positive or negative.[2]"


----------



## Cogdecree (Mar 27, 2009)

Souled In said:


> Got ya
> 
> 
> 
> ...


At least from my neurobio background, impulsiveness or inhibition deals witht he ability to restrain thought/action, as measured with no go tests. And the test takes out the negative/positive affective comonets as well as removing motivational componets as well. It is also tied with the ability to plan, which is measured by the tower of london puzzle. In short I don't see impulsiveness as something that is emotion based, but this is from a neurobiological stance, which is what I'm biased towards at any rate.

Psychopaths also tend to be execellent liars, able to bypass advance lie detection methods, as there is no guilt based physical respones. It might even be possible that psychopaths are not apart of the mbti because they are not balanced with same division of feeling and thinking (fi/te, ti/fe) as others.


----------



## Pillow (Apr 17, 2011)

Cogdecree said:


> I've studied psychopathy via my criminology major, and have studied the mbti in my informal education, but I have not mixed the two before, so I'm not placing a solid foot down on any stance per se. The difficulty is that psychopathy is physically measurable, the mbti, not quite as much.


This is basically my problem - I know a lot more about psychopathy than MBTI simply because I have been able to read more scientific papers/articles on psychopathy that tell you exactly how psychopaths are different from non-psychopaths, but with MBTI there is no neurological information on what makes the types different. I think I said something similar in a previous post (on this thread I think, but maybe on another psychopath thread... I can't remember). Also I don't put much faith in MBTI testers to be able to get under the skin of a psychopath and accurately type them.


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

I want to modify my position as well.

Based on these different factors:

Type of emotion
Time of emotional experience
Intensity of emotion

I could offer that any one of those is the difference between T or F, but that doensn't seem to be the case.

Because it might very well even out.

The total energy an F might expend having a very intense emotional experience, might = the total amount of energy spent by a T that is consistently in the "flow of solving a puzzle."

That means the only real way to make a difference between, T, and F, is there activity.

There really isn't a dimensional way to put T and F on opposite sides of a line graph.

It seems to simply be categorical, in a way that is not mutually exclusive,

which helps, because of statistical reliability based on multiple cases in the population; 

however, there are exceptions to the rule, therefore, it is just a "grouping of characteristics" shown by people:

Such as, Feelers express certain types of emotions more, and Thinkers express other types of emotion more

Instead of getting confused saying objectivity and subjectivity, how about this:

Feelers express things like love sadness, perhaps even highs and lows 

Where as Thinkers are more stabilized, in the middle, experiencing the emotional feeling of "flow"

as defined by: 
*Flow* is the mental state of operation in which a person in an activity is fully immersed in a feeling of energized focus, full involvement, and success in the process of the activity. 


This however would mean that people that meditate are undergoing a T type activity.

Whatever the average preference for our activity is, puts us more on the T or F side.

Flow vs. intense emotions.

Endurance-----------------anaerobic/lactait threshold--------------------------power/sprint/ATP

T would be the endurance side, like a runner with runners high

F would be the, "fuck running for a long time, I'm just going to sprint and get a quick high, then get out of here"

Then the F (me) might leave and say, damn, I feel good, I think one day I want to try running distance! 

I might then go do it, to prove to myself I can.

But eventually I might end up back where I started.

Who knows.

This suggests we can evently be between T and F.

Which brings up the topic of how E and I works with functions.

@Cogdecree @_Pillow_ 


Let me know if I need to cut my posts down in size and make them more efficiently clear.


----------



## Moss Icon (Mar 29, 2011)

Souled In said:


> They experience some sort of pleasure or satisfaction though, which is emotion.
> 
> How bout this one too: Japanese culture.
> 
> ...


Thought I'd address this since I live in Japan.

The thing with Japan is they're taught that everything has a time and a place and you're not supposed to inconvenience others or step over the socially conceived boundaries of 'correct behaviour,' thus overt emotionality is indeed frowned upon, as is overt anything in many ways. But most Japanese in my experience are not necessarily T. I teach in elementary and junior high and so many of my kids are clearly Feelers. Japanese can actually be extremely sensitive... but you're right in that they're not encouraged to express themselves and thus they often don't know how to deal with overwhelming feelings and emotions. Japanese society also has a predisposition to 'sweep under the rug' problems, never talk about them or address them, and you're not encouraged to think critically or debate concepts either, so I'd say Thinking traits are not especially encouraged either. On the whole Fe and Te are both frowned upon. People are expected to keep their thoughts/feelings to themselves for the benefit of an harmonious society (or rather 'harmonious-*looking *society.) 

Japanese are definitely not T types, by and large. I think the divide is no different to anywhere else. They're just expected to be 'emotional' in very set, culturally permitted ways. That sums up Japanese social norms, really: an unwritten rule for everything. It is indeed what we would call repression and, at its worst, results in truly horrific and inexplicably brutal crimes! People often just 'snap,' unable to deal with what's going on inside them, and you get men walking into police precincts carrying their mother's head or a guy going axe-happy in a local park cos "the weather was too hot!" Or a guy stabbing his childhood female-friend 20 times because she started "ignoring him." Japan does not have a healthy approach to psychological and emotional well-being. It's getting better but, again, the national character is one of avoidance and repression. 

In response to the OP, I think (as many have said) that any type can be psychotic, that it is not type-based. An Fi psycho would not be unusual, I think. One who's inner emotions begin to consume them; rage, hate, misery, envy, despair.... so often Fi types suffer in silence, we become far too introverted and self-contained and can revel in our bleakness. I think that could naturally lead to psychosis, in a worst-case scenario


----------



## Moss Icon (Mar 29, 2011)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> I can't speak for japanese culture as a whole, but anime at least is extremely Fi. usually the main character will be some sort of IXFX type and even the NTJ characters will show a lot of Fi (an extreme example of this is Lelouch from Code Geass who looks borderline INFP sometimes)


I have a theory here.... Because Japan is such an overtly conformist society certain elements of personal 'escapism' are allowed, even encouraged. Like I said in my previous post "everything has its place." In Japan manga and anime serve as the largest form of escapism and thus are able to reflect a person's secret wishes, fantasies and desires without inhibiting on their social expectations. Japanese society is geared towards a strongly E**J-based system of behaviour, thus Ne and Se are always the desirably dominant functions, Fi and Ti coming next. It's ironic because Japanese seem very Introverted to most. This, I see, is a result of the highly sectionalised nature of their society. They are not taught to be open and expressive, as such, just "outward-focused" (seriously, the idea of 'quiet time' or 'alone time' is practically sinful in Japan. My poor kids get scheduled round the clock!) 

The reality, of course, is that Japanese are just as different as anywhere else. There exists a concept in Japanese psychology; _'honne' _and_ 'tatamae.'_ The former represents one's true feelings and thoughts. The latter one's social obligations and how you are expected to behave. Japanese have a time and place for each and these are rigidly set, they must observe _tatamae_ for the majority of their interactions with _honne_ being expressed only with your most intimate. But even then rules dictate how much you are permitted to express and when you can express it. The problem is everything is so regulated and confined there's no room for adjustment or growth. People don't know how. Thus manga and anime are the perfect escapism. Often it features what many Japanese feel about themselves deep-down; a sensitive, noble character, the unexpressed heart of Japanese society so often forced into this structured ESTJ-style social system


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

Our Ego preference personality is a mix of:

Id and Superego

Ego is just the mid point average of the Id and Superego.

In a way, the ego doesn't even exist, and neither does our personality.

In a way, we actually are two personalities, and our behavior is simply the average of that inevitable conflict.

Therefore, there are many variations of T's and F's.

To summarize my thoughts from the entire thread:

T=

1) Use/ Trust/ Understand emotions as source of decision making information less than F
2) Prefer less intense emotions, and more of a continuous lucidity and "flow" or milder feelings.

In short: T's are stable, and reach not high or low, F's are unstable, and reach very high and very low.

I will go into more of the Id and Superego as it comes to me.

Don't mind me though, continue on about the other topics about culture seperately if you want.

Let me now add the superego and Id into the conversation:

*I think the difference of T and F is emotional stability.*

The thing is though, under that definition, a bipolar person= F.

That might not be true.

A bipolar person's ego might= F because they can't control it.

That means, they might actually be a T preference in the supergo and some in the Id as well.

If they looked like this:
Id= T + Chemical Imbalances that cause certain behavior= F type behaviors.
Ego= Mixture of Id and Superego might end up being F despite being otherwise a T
Superego= T

Do we say they are a T at heart? Perhaps... it depends how you split up the percentages between 

Put them on medication and they will probably automatically turn a T, or vice versa, in that case.

Superego Goals and dreams
Id impulsing goals that conflict with our dreams
and Ego mixture of all those goals, and impulses

Goals and dreams come from genetics as well as the environment, and sometimes its hard to go into childhood and see someone's real preference, and what if habit is so strong, that after you stabilize the emotions, are they still going to have the same behavior type, or maybe they will then seek novelty in a new type?

When they say type doesn't change except after trauma, that isn't true, if you started your life with trauma and some chemical imbalance, that you fixed later, and now it was the stabilization that allowed for a change, or more of a blank slate, if the habit's don't hold on strong though.

But sometimes the sense of new possibilities and novelty can override those habits.

Who is to say mental disorders are bad though? The person. Its up to them, whether they call it less essential to their self.

If they dont like it, maybe they are a different type, and we can't tell really until they stabilize, though maybe we can guess if there was a later onset of symptoms.

If they do like it though, hey, its all good!


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

Thinkers don't think about their own self growth as much as feelers.

Therefore they don't understand themselves as much.

Therefore they don't trust as much of intense feelings as feelers do.

Therefore T/s experience more emotional stability with a constant "flow" emotion often created from objective puzzling, 

where as F's experience more highs and lows, which actually can be sustained through objectivity.

The T's are more external I suppose.

It is not about valueing relationships or truth or justice as you say in point 1.

It is that thinkers don't trust intense emotions for a source of information, and consider it a distraction, where as feelers don't.

Since feelers therefore end up feeling intense emotions more, and if those emotions happen to be love, etc... then they will tend to be better with empathy, and therefore might focus on relationships with people more than T's. But that isn't always the case.


----------



## echidna1000 (Apr 20, 2009)

Pillow said:


> How were they tested? It's difficult to get under the skin of a psychopath and they very rarely reveal their true selves to anyone. They don't seem to fit the idea of a normal Ti dom, from my limited knowledge. Psychopaths have physical (brain and neurotransmitter) deficiencies, and unless it can be shown that certain parts of the brain are linked to personality type I don't really see how we could say what type they are with any accuracy.


By the same MBTI tests that are available to everyone else. Psychopaths without a reason not to be themselves will be themselves, usually under the cover of anonymity. The deficiencies in the brain are found to be centred around the neo-frontal cortex and the amygdala, the latter of which is responsible for emotions and empathic connections. Certainly anyone with an amygdala impairment will not be an Fe dominant. If you think about it, we all have different brains with different numbers of connections in different areas. It would make sense that most IxTPs would have fewer connections in their amygdala than ExFJs.


----------



## Pillow (Apr 17, 2011)

HarryJPotter said:


> By the same MBTI tests that are available to everyone else. Psychopaths without a reason not to be themselves will be themselves, usually under the cover of anonymity. The deficiencies in the brain are found to be centred around the neo-frontal cortex and the amygdala, the latter of which is responsible for emotions and empathic connections. Certainly anyone with an amygdala impairment will not be an Fe dominant. If you think about it, we all have different brains with different numbers of connections in different areas. It would make sense that most IxTPs would have fewer connections in their amygdala than ExFJs.


The psychopath I know took an online MBTI test and came out as an ESFJ first time - I think he was trying to answer how he thought he should to appear normal. The result didn't fit him at all, but he went with it and said he agreed with it. A few months later he took it again and came out an ENTJ. I think he had read up on the theory behind it in the mean time and decided he like that type the best, as it does fit well with how a psychopath likes to see himself. I know that psychopaths are themselves if they have no reason not to be, but a personality test in itself is a reason to lie - they want to be seen as normal, and they want to get the 'right' answer to the questions, even under the cover of anonymity.

I see your point about, say, Ts having fewer connections in their amygdala, but I'm not sure that I agree. Until we know more about whether differing brain connections correspond to different MBTI types I don't think we can comment on this with any certainty.


----------



## echidna1000 (Apr 20, 2009)

Liking a certain type the best (excluding prejudice from peers) is a good way to find out which type a person is.


----------



## Pillow (Apr 17, 2011)

HarryJPotter said:


> Liking a certain type the best (excluding prejudice from peers) is a good way to find out which type a person is.


I assume you're talking about the psychopath I know? Well I don't agree - ENTJ didn't fit him at all, the only reason he liked it the best was because it describes how he sees himself in his own head, but he isn't actually like that. I can see how ENTJ could seem like the most psychopathic type and therefore be the most favoured by psychopaths, but I have known a number of ENTJs in my lifetime and I would struggle to say this guy was even an NT at all, let alone an ENTJ. I know I'm not qualified to type him, but to be honest the first result he got actually fit him more than the ENTJ one. Plus you can't really say that everyone likes their own type best - I have had at least two friends who, after reading both their type's description and mine, have said they'd rather be mine.


----------



## echidna1000 (Apr 20, 2009)

Pillow said:


> I assume you're talking about the psychopath I know? Well I don't agree - ENTJ didn't fit him at all, the only reason he liked it the best was because it describes how he sees himself in his own head, but he isn't actually like that. I can see how ENTJ could seem like the most psychopathic type and therefore be the most favoured by psychopaths, but I have known a number of ENTJs in my lifetime and I would struggle to say this guy was even an NT at all, let alone an ENTJ. I know I'm not qualified to type him, but to be honest the first result he got actually fit him more than the ENTJ one. Plus you can't really say that everyone likes their own type best - I have had at least two friends who, after reading both their type's description and mine, have said they'd rather be mine.


So you think he's more ESFJ than ENTJ? Not something like an ESTP?


----------



## Pillow (Apr 17, 2011)

HarryJPotter said:


> So you think he's more ESFJ than ENTJ? Not something like an ESTP?


I was just comparing the results he got - ESFJ doesn't fit him particularly well, just better than ENTJ. I honestly couldn't tell you what personality type he is, even after being friends with him for 4 years or so, and it's not like I haven't tried to type him. That's why I think it's very difficult to type a psychopath, if it's possible at all with our current knowledge of MBTI.


----------



## echidna1000 (Apr 20, 2009)

The problem is where their pathological lying becomes compulsive.


----------



## SkyWalker007 (May 22, 2011)

You guys here are naive people that seem to think the feeling function is only about positive empathy (love). but there is also negative empathy (hate) in the feeling function (the other side of the same coin)!

psychopaths have lots of empathy, but its all negative. its called hate.

both fi and fe have a hate and a love side

didnt figure out yet if its the ti/fe combo or the te/fi combo for psychopaths, any opinion?


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

SkyWalker007 said:


> You guys here are naive people that seem to think the feeling function is only about positive empathy (love). but there is also negative empathy (hate) in the feeling function (the other side of the same coin)!
> 
> psychopaths have lots of empathy, but its all negative. its called hate.
> 
> ...


That's a good question, somewhat dealing with introverted vs. extroverted, or J/P. Hmm.

Have you read up on the function areas of the brain?

Oh and no one thinks the feeling function is love. Unless you only include 2 emotions on a bar scale, such as the one with love and fear being opposite. That being said, there are many emotions of satisfaction when we "value" something. This raises a good question, actually, thank you.


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

I don't know about theory, I'm an Artisan ESTP, though some tests have me as a ISTP Artisan Crafter. As an Artisan I wanted to be a presidential historian,cause I love history, however I do not know about theory and did not know the cards were stacked against me getting a Ph. D, which I vainly tried to pursue. What I'm getting here, is this thread is ruled by IJs, and they're saying us Artisan's are psychopaths, because feeling is not a strong component in our lives. And I'll be frank, I use logic and the brain,my left brain, more than feeling,heart and the right brain. That said, President Kennedy was the first president to declare Civil Rights as a moral issue. JFK he's an ESTP, very rational, logical. He started slow, but he came around, he also was the first president to have a groundbreaking commission, the Presidential Commission on the Status of Women, and he appointed Eleanor Roosevelt,with whom he had lukewarm relations with, to chair that Commission. His sister was disabled, and he got advances in disability rights, underway. Not a lot of presidents go on the line to risk political capital to advance disenfranchised groups rights,because it's all about winning elections and not alienating voters. President Nixon, by contrast, was a Guardian Supervisor. An ESTJ, everything about his life says psychopath, he stalked his wife that he wanted to marry not considering her feelings, he couldn't accept being blackballed at college , the Franklins, so he started his own club the Orthogonians.As president he gave the world the Christmas Bombing,bombing just for the sake of looking tough with the North Vietnamese, in which aides resigned in protest, Hospitals in North Vietnam were blown apart, he bugs his enemies through wiretapes then sets up payment methods for burglars. This guy has some screws loose. He's always thinking what his legacy will be,self absorbed egotistic, and he even once said about his opponent, Jerry Voorhis,"I knew Jerry Voorhis wasn't a communist, but the important thing is I had to win, that's what you don't understand, I had to win." 



Also, Charles Manson, versus Ted Bundy and Ted Kaczynski. Kaczynski, graduated from Harvard and had a degree in mathematics and was a professor at Berkley,Bundy was a college graduate, while Manson's education is the classic career criminal at an early age,before they went on their infamous crime sprees. I don't know what this proves,cause I'm not great in theory,except that it should establish everything is a mixed bag,and the only qualification one might need is being in an advantageous environment. It could be argued that a Feeler might want others to feel what they're feeling if its for a good cause. I have no doubt ELF and ALF are set up in a perverted way that people do things,wrongly, for what otherwise might be a good cause under normal circumstances. Who doesn't want to save the environment or animals? Anyways, those are my thoughts.


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

Emotion and logic are two tools to get the job done.

Emotion is tasting the fruit to see if it is good, logic inspects the shine, the firmness, the color, and checks with other people to see how it tastes.

So as far as civil rights being a moral issue, Kennedy might have felt it necessary to do so, perhaps to combat his culture pushing towards Russian socialism, by creating a more humane culture to match the growing norm.

My history isn't good though. Anyway, since psychopaths are less in touch with emotions, they are therefore defined by T.

However, 99% of T's use a shit load more emotion than a psychopath. 

That is only if we define T and F by the brain centers, however. If we truly define it by "value," then you I guess could sum up a psychopaths ID addictions as F?

Hmm


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

Sounds good.


----------

