# Why I Believe Thinkers are nicer and more considerate than Feelers.



## candycanebones (Jan 21, 2013)

I wasn`t being completely serious. I was only trying to show you the very same contradiction.


----------



## swagaddict (Sep 6, 2013)

@candycanebones aha. what contradiction of mine were trying to point out again?


----------



## Orchidion (Jan 3, 2013)

swagaddict said:


> I have yet to prove myself? this is.not avout me.provimg anything its about others who I have judgements against.have yet to prive my biases wrong. Nkt sure.how that got past you.
> 
> The last part flew over my head. I think your reading too much into my post. I honestly was just stating sn observation, nkthing more nothing less.
> 
> C


That is not how it works. When someone states a theory, he has to back it up in a way. Elsewise, why should it even be considered for a fraction of a second?

But, lets look at your "evidence". A few of your friends and family members appeared to behave in a cold, incosiderate manner. In your opinon they are " feelers". Hence your conclusion

These people are cold
These people are feelers
→All Feelers are cold

Still you haven´t responded to my main problem with your theory, the poor inductive reasoning. It is just unjustified to generalize in this case. You propose a principle, yet you can only say that this pertains to a handful of people.

And, I have to add, when a theory is vaguely formulated it becomes hard, to verify and/or falsify it. Perhaps rephrase your concept, particularly as the term feeler is a tad non-sensical (reasons mentioned in several other posts here).

But if you want to be disprove the statement "all thinkers are nicer than feelers", than a single case of a feeler, being more emphatic than a thinker, suffices. In this case, we can discard your idea, as there are plenty of examples.


----------



## Bluefireluv (Jun 17, 2013)

Oh, the pain :/
Well, your opinion's your opinion, I guess! *Goes off in hopes of finding a good quality in my character* :laughing:
I've always thought being a thinker means you tend to use logic more often when making a decision, while feelers tend to use their feelings more often. It's only part of it, I know, but that's the first thing I think of when I consider both. But going with our feelings doesn't mean we do what's best for ourselves, it just means doing what feels good. Manipulating people doesn't feel good at all D:


----------



## swagaddict (Sep 6, 2013)

@Orchidion Not.once did I say 'all feelers are cold'. Actually the word cold, would be the last way id describe a feeler. 

Don't put.words.in my mouth.

My theory was that feelers are too clouded by their own emotion to be genuinely and objectivity caring. My proof was real life observations.

When a theory is disproved it becomes an opinion. My opinion has not yet changed. My theory however has flaws and no substantial.evidence other than.how I.feel about feelers,which is simplg my own perspective. Thjs thread should be retitled 'feelers annoy me at times'. I ha e many feeler friends and the things that cause them to get in a tizzy completely baffle me. Yet no matter what I.am.ways there calmjng them.down and being their for them.because Iknow.thats what they need. Thinkers I know di the same thing. We cant necessarily relate but were always there. For a feeler to be there, and say the right thing, frkm my observationsis rare.


My main point, bottom line, when Thinkers care, its more selfless (me and my father are just two of the people in my life who show this. When feelers care, they are too.cluded by there own insecurities and feelings to.rely understand and help the person in question. Things get complicated, there are strings attached, etc etc. kts a whole different ballgame


----------



## swagaddict (Sep 6, 2013)

Bluefireluv said:


> Oh, the pain :/
> Well, your opinion's your opinion, I guess! *Goes off in hopes of finding a good quality in my character* :laughing:
> I've always thought being a thinker means you tend to use logic more often when making a decision, while feelers tend to use their feelings more often. It's only part of it, I know, but that's the first thing I think of when I consider both. But going with our feelings doesn't mean we do what's best for ourselves, it just means doing what feels good. Manipulating people doesn't feel good at all D:


huh?


----------



## Bluefireluv (Jun 17, 2013)

swagaddict said:


> huh?


Nevermind! xD *Pat pat*
This happens often anyways xD


----------



## swagaddict (Sep 6, 2013)

Bluefireluv said:


> Nevermind! xD *Pat pat*
> This happens often anyways xD


lol. Its like your having a one way convo. Does that really happen often? cute.


----------



## Bluefireluv (Jun 17, 2013)

swagaddict said:


> lol. Its like your having a one way convo. Does that really happen often? cute.


Wait, how's that cute? xD It's embarassing :blushed: And yeah, it happens wayyyyyy too often :frustrating:


----------



## StElmosDream (May 26, 2012)

EQ, compassion and empathy can still be universal though... for example how my INTJ dad can be socially emotion aware while remaining hopeless at anything relating to conveying or conceptualising feelings in an emotionally refined verbal way.

At times thinkers can be worse at 'seeing the writing on the wall' in terms of being more blunt and unaware of underlying emotional motivations, in effect hurting those around them with their 'I know what I can see only or solve' communication style.


----------



## swagaddict (Sep 6, 2013)

Bluefireluv said:


> Wait, how's that cute? xD It's embarassing :blushed: And yeah, it happens wayyyyyy too often :frustrating:


Did I say cute? I meant adorable.

My boyfriend's is one of your kind. 

Wait, did I say boyfriend? I meant a fascinating enigma from another realm that I try to anyalyze but never fully understand.

:happy:


----------



## Bluefireluv (Jun 17, 2013)

swagaddict said:


> Did I say cute? I meant adorable.
> 
> My boyfriend's is one of your kind.
> 
> ...


Well, it IS true that I'm from another realm  I'm an alien, see :crazy: 
Still, it can be quite embarrassing whenever I start doing that :blushed:Annoying too, occasionally. Sigh!


----------



## swagaddict (Sep 6, 2013)

Bluefireluv said:


> Well, it IS true that I'm from another realm  I'm an alien, see :crazy:
> Still, it can be quite embarrassing whenever I start doing that :blushed:Annoying too, occasionally. Sigh!



Its what make you unique! 

Hm, I think my Fe may be starting to develope 

lol


----------



## swagaddict (Sep 6, 2013)

StElmosDream said:


> EQ, compassion and empathy can still be universal though... for example how my INTJ dad can be socially emotion aware while remaining hopeless at anything relating to conveying or conceptualising feelings in an emotionally refined verbal way.
> 
> At times thinkers can be worse at 'seeing the writing on the wall' in terms of being more blunt and unaware of underlying emotional motivations, in effect hurting those around them with their 'I know what I can see only or solve' communication style.


our dads have to meet. pleeeeeease I need some entertainment:laughing:


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

PaladinX said:


> So if his reasoning is poor, why would that make him a Feeling dom? Wouldn't a Feeling dom have a rather strong reasoning ability?
> 
> Furthermore, I believe the reason that Jung called them Thinking and Feeling rather than Logic and Ethics is because one is based in thought and the other in feeling; as where Feeling can be logical, as you've stated, and I believe that ethics can be based on thinking principles rather than feelings.


Because in this case, the OP is trying to create a categorical system. Also, I don't suggest the OP might be a feeling dominant, but I do think feeling is higher up in the stack than inferior. And yes, that is what Jung called them as, and I am simply pointing out that the terminology is somewhat problematic because people understand thinking and feeling wrongly based on the terminology he chose. 

Do you see the difference in the discussion you and I are having and the differences in the OP in terms of reasoning? Do you see how it seems to be weak in ability to logically categorize and define the impersonal? 



swagaddict said:


> bla bla bla. anyone who says one can draw logical conclusions based on 'ethical evaluation' is seriously deluding himself. Usually that statement comes from a feeler in denial, in this case it seems to be a self proclaimed INTJ stating such absurdity. Hmmmm.Feelings in essense are illogical. I don't need Jung to tell me that. And why a
> do you keep equating feelings and ethics? they are not the same thing.
> 
> Again, feelings are not rational. They dont make sense, and are certainly not logical. Talking like a know it all professor doesnt make you right.
> ...


You see, the reason why I make this claim about you is exactly a post like this. Where is your attempt to logically categorize within the system of typology that you are not a feeling type? You even right-out deny Jung as an important figure within Jungian typology even though it is after all, _his_ system. No, what you instead fall back to as a retort is to try to make me seem like an unreasonable person for not considering your personal experiences and so on. You essentially try to paint me into a bad person. That's making some kind of feeling evaluation about my character and your reasoning thus hinges on this perception of me. You aren't dealing with the realms of thinking here, but the realm of feeling.

And for your information, I for a long time thought I was an INFP because I was rather unhealthy and became hyper-aware of my Fi evaluation process, over-estimating its importance in my psyche. 

I recommend you go read Jung instead of staying uneducated. Feelings aren't illogical. Feeling simply deal with a different kind of logic and your failure to separate feelings from feeling is indicative of this. Feeling doesn't mean the feelings that you feel. Feeling is Feeling, the judgement function whose perspective we apply when trying to make sense of the world in the realms of ethics. 

And yes, feeling as a function does pertain to ethics, pretty much. It's a very good way of understanding it.


----------



## swagaddict (Sep 6, 2013)

ephemereality said:


> Because in this case, the OP is trying to create a categorical system. Also, I don't suggest the OP might be a feeling dominant, but I do think feeling is higher up in the stack than inferior. And yes, that is what Jung called them as, and I am simply pointing out that the terminology is somewhat problematic because people understand thinking and feeling wrongly based on the terminology he chose.
> 
> Do you see the difference in the discussion you and I are having and the differences in the OP in terms of reasoning? Do you see how it seems to be weak in ability to logically categorize and define the impersonal?
> 
> ...


a post like what? you're talking nonsense. youre the one picking up and .being overly sensitive to perceived emotional vibes. Youre insulted by my wording and instead of admittimg it, youre covering up by placing the feelrr card on me. what are you trying to.prove? I knkw who I am. Im not the one switching from INFP to INTJ (two very different personalities). My opinion is that you shouldve stayed INFP. Playinv INTJ makes you look a.fool.

Nothing you said has impressed me so far. youre simply an emotional INTJ or a detached INFP. Which one is it sir


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

swagaddict said:


> a post like what? you're talking nonsense. youre the one picking up and .being overly sensitive to perceived emotional vibes. Youre insulted by my wording and instead of admittimg it, youre covering up by placing the feelrr card on me. what are you trying to.prove? I knkw who I am. Im not the one switching from INFP to INTJ (two very different personalities). My opinion is that you shouldve stayed INFP. Playinv INTJ makes you look a.fool.


Yet you are the one who appears to react emotionally when I simply make a mere suggestion about your person that you could easily dismiss as entirely irrelevant and a poor reading of your personality, would you bother to make a logical argument for it. You could, if you desired to.

I am not insulted at all but you clearly appear to be, and again, you try to stain my person instead of showing how I am logically incorrect in my assertions about you. 

And I won't change to INFP because INFP is clearly not my type, INTJ is, whether you like it or not. I am not playing or trying to come across as anything. I am simply being myself. Also, while INFP and INTJ are different they are also quite similar. They are both introverted types and they both share Fi and Te as preferred functions. They are also both intuitive types. It is therefore not at all difficult to mistake one type for another if one does not yet have a complete grasp of both types and the functions.


----------



## Faballion (Apr 6, 2013)

Hahaha, this thread is quite the laugh!

I'm half conviced swagaddict is a troll with that username, grammar and logical reasoning.

And poor ephemereality is trying so hard to prove his point(which is mostly right) :laughing:. Although 'feelings' should not be covered with the same blanket that 'ethics' is covered with. Because while the two are similar, they are not the same. Especially with regards to Fe.

Keep it coming guys XD


----------

