# The difference between MBTI Feeling and Emotion



## Psilo (Apr 29, 2009)

Here is an excerpt from Van Der Hoop's *Conscious Orientation:
*


> Later, I shall try to explain the distinction between emotion and feeling as revealed in their external manifestations. For the moment, let us see wherein lies the distinction between the internal experience of feeling and emotion, and what constitutes the distinguishing marks of feeling. If we compare sexual excitement with being in love, or anger with indignation, we note that in the two latter cases there is a much more definite structure. Sexual excitement and anger may be expressed in very various forms, while love and indignation aim much more at a definite form of expression. Thus feeling is more plastic than emotion.
> 
> In the second place, feeling possesses a much closer association with its object. It is possible to vent one’s wrath on another person or on an animal, but indignation cannot so easily be displaced; it is also much easier to express sexual excitement in regard to a different person from the one who originally aroused it, than would be the case with love. Feeling seeks a certain plastic relationship with a certain object. Here I whole-heartedly agree with Shand and McDougall, who regard feeling (“sentiment”) as “an organized system of emotional tendencies, centred round some object”. McDougall seeks to define certain feelings as combinations of emotions, for example, reproach as a fusion of anger and tender emotion. A feeling may thus be expressed in many kinds of emotion. “When a man has acquired the sentiment of love for a person or other object, he is apt to experience tender emotion in its presence, fear or anxiety when it is in danger, anger when it is threatened, sorrow when it is lost, joy when the object prospers or is restored to him, gratitude towards him who does good to it, and so on.” In this connection I may mention a situation in which this plastic attachment of feeling to a person may be dearly seen. Freud has shown how feelings, developed in early childhood towards the parents, may in later life still be of special significance, owing to the fact that in certain circumstances they may be transferred to other persons. In the study of the transference we are struck by the unity and definite structure of feelings of this kind. Anyone who is undergoing analysis will from time to time become forcibly aware of the existence of such fixated forms of feeling.
> 
> ...


 ...



> We may enquire if it is possible to distinguish certain forms of behaviour as determined by feeling. There is a tendency in all of us in this direction, because most feeling-forms are taught to us as something of universal validity, as we saw was the case with thought-forms. We expect to find, in others those modes of expression or behaviour which according to generally accepted opinion belong to certain situations. This might lead us to the assumption that feeling provides the inner motive-power in situations where emotional expression is regulated by certain norms. Caution is, however, indicated, for appearances may be deceptive here: behaviour of this kind may be conceived intuitively and made use of, without being related to the whole of the feeling-life. In such cases, the distinction between the intuition of a feeling and the feeling itself is of great importance. In certain situations we may behave according to prevailing conceptions, while our feelings are impelling us to something quite other. Anyone skilled in the use of modes of expression can suggest a wealth of feeling, which is merely borrowed from the picture-book of human relationships; these pictures or images dwell side by side in the intuitive sphere of the person concerned, with no mutual contact, and feeling has had little to do with them. In contrast to this example, there are other people the depth of whose feelings may paralyse any capacity to express them. Is it possible to find external signs by which to judge whether a person is playing a part corresponding to some inner image, or whether he is seeking a living contact of feeling? it is often very difficult to decide; but in outstanding cases it can usually be done, and when this is the case, two factors tend to be particularly helpful. in the first place, the form of contact experienced with the person concerned is essential: where intuition is at work, the aim is the form, and through that form to influence others for some purpose; while for feeling it is not the form, but a satisfactory contact, which is the main thing, and this latter requires a reciprocal expression of feeling from others. A second characteristic is found in the circumstance that feelings imply more or less permanent modes of behaviour, representing a part of an organized whole. By this they are immediately distinguishable from spontaneous, personal modes of expression, and it is this characteristic which finds outward expression in a wider connection with other emotional manifestations, in a certain harmony of form and in a greater stability. Just as we saw introspectively that the transition from intuitive manifestations to feeling was a gradual one, so also, from the external point of view, it is impossible to draw a sharp line of demarcation.
> 
> A further difficulty in recognizing feeling as the basis of external behaviour arises when we try to distinguish between a manifestation of feeling and one that is entirely emotional. Someone may be friendly to us, for instance, because the fine weather has put him into a good temper. Were we to take his behaviour as representing a feeling-attitude towards us, implying a certain relationship with us, we might be greatly disappointed the very next day by a complete change in his bearing. His friendliness was nothing more than an emotional manifestation. In the case of many people, whose eyes fill with tears when hearing of the sufferings of other people, there is no question of deep feeling; it is simply emotion. Others, incapable of expressing anything outwardly, may sometimes be deeply sympathetic, this sympathy coming later to expression in a readiness to help. Here, also, it is not easy to make a distinction, owing to the existence of a gradual transition, although there is a wide difference between the extremes. The search for a contact is, for instance, not necessarily the mark of feeling, because emotion may also seek contact with others, but the other characteristics of feeling which have been mentioned hold good here, viz. more widespread connection with other manifestations, more harmony in form and greater stability; and this the more so, in that emotional expression has essentially a simpler structure and is more impersonal. A nuance of expression in a few words or in the tone of voice may often express more feeling than a violent emotion


I'm looking for personal insights as well. How do you experience emotions in comparison to feelings? 

It's a hard distinction to make. I've known emotions as overwhelming mental states. From elation to depression, there is a pronounced change in lucidity. Feelings are much more calm in the mind. Feelings don't take over as emotions do, they direct and suggest. 

The difference between
"I'm really angry and I'm going to break things rawr!" and
"I felt that what was done was hurtful."

The first is a clouded response. Anger takes over, heartbeat rises, a person can become blinded with rage. The second is an internal assessment of ethics. Strong feelings lead to emotions, and feelings can be deduced analyzing emotions. 

Thoughts?


----------



## Fanille (Sep 3, 2009)

The best example of this that I can think of is former Indianapolis Colts head coach Tony Dungy (whom Niednagel types as an INFP - definitely atypical for an NFL coach as most coaches are Thinking types, like ESTJ Tom Coughlin of the Giants). Dungy is often described as far less "emotional" than other coaches, who are more likely to yell at their players for making mistakes or argue with officials over bad calls. But Dungy does express strong values, often talking about his faith or serving as a "mentor" to others (like he is with Michael Vick, a man recently released from prison). The Thinking coaches are much more animated and emotionally expressive, but in Tony Dungy there's more of a "human" element.


----------



## snail (Oct 13, 2008)

Thanks for posting this. I found it useful and interesting.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## PeacePassion (Jun 9, 2009)

Thanks for starting this thread Psilo!



Psilo said:


> The second is an internal assessment of ethics. Strong feelings lead to emotions, and feelings can be deduced analyzing emotions.


That is an important point I think, that strong feelings lead to emotions, and feelings can be deduced analyzing emotions. 

Also, feeling as an internal assessment of ethics. It always seems to be implied that, especially with us Fi dominated folks, we have this sort of happy happy joy joy internal value structure, which i suppose is true to some extent, but i think negative feelings or negative values are just as important, like, the things i feel really strongly AGAINST. maybe ethics is a better way to put it, than 'values'. it definitely helps to think of it that way. most descriptions of Fi haven't really made much intellectual sense to me. though it's starting to. i think these things are hard to really intellectualize. 

also: 



> “an organized system of emotional tendencies, centred round some object”.


i liked what he was saying there, but it seems better to me to think of it more as an idea/ideal than an object. and less plastic and more elastic maybe. idk. i always have a hard time with psychobabble, not that that's what this is, but with the ideas of object-and objectifying and all that. maybe it'd help me if i got that stuff down a little better. but it's starting to make more sense to me. THANKS!!!! roud:

I'll have to let it all sink in, I'll be back I'm sure!!!


----------

