# NF's Pespective on Sensitivity?



## decided (May 17, 2009)

Kevinaswell said:


> There is a lot wrong in this thread.


Kevin, the only thing wrong with this thread is your post.

intpfemme explained her perspective, but she did not try to justify it or say that it was better than NF perspective. I found this approach useful; it helped me to understand her point of view even if I don’t share it with her, and it encouraged me to share my own.

She also asked for NF perspective, so that is what we have been giving.

If you want to understand the ways that NF see themselves, read the posts carefully and try to understand a perspective you do not share, do not simply judge them as ‘wrong’.


----- 

All of my closest friends are too emotionally draining for me at one time or another, Thinkers and Feelers. But that's because I empathise with them quite strongly, and sometimes carry their pain. I have to be careful not to give too much of myself, especially to those who are not processing their emotions in a healthy way.

My initial reactions to things are often emotionally charged, because I haven't processed them fully yet. I often use music and writing to help me process, and my thoughts/feelings are a lot clearer afterwards. Other times I turn to friends and family for support. If I do not process my emotions they get stuck, and for me this can lead to depression. It's about finding a balance that allows me to access and use my emotions without becoming lost in my own perspective.

I know somebody who is used to being emotionally vulnerable, and I cannot spend much time with her. She has suffered from depression for nearly 20 years. Some of her best and worst traits stem from this. Her creative talents are seemingly endless, and she has a wonderful cheeky personality and is very caring, but she cannot work to deadlines, and she has a terrible time seeing things from other people’s perspectives. She lives in somewhat of a world of her own making, which I find sad to see.

I would like this person to learn how to process her emotions and become stronger through them, but I cannot force her. I do not agree with everything that she has done with her life, but I admire the strength she finds to get through. I have learned to accept her for the person she is, and to disengage from her when she tries to pull me into her perspective.

I think cases like this are the worst-case-scenario for Feelers. Feelers who have difficult lives that get on top of them can become lodged within their emotions, and have a difficult time learning how to take responsibility for them.

I also think that the worst-case-scenario for Thinkers would have a horrible result. Imagine a Thinker who never took responsibility for their emotions because they never acknowledged they were there at all?! The ways these emotions would emerge could be terribly damaging to themselves and those around them.


----------



## Femme (Jul 12, 2009)

OrangeAppled said:


> I think your understanding of sensitivity is flawed. It can be a great strength, and from it stems compassion and empathy.
> 
> The primary meaning of sensitivity for NFs is:
> _having acute mental or emotional sensibility; aware of and responsive to the feelings of others_


I agree with you; sensitivity can be a great strength. When I use the term 'sensitivity,' however, I am referring to those who take (otherwise unoffensive) comments personally, who get easily hurt or upset, etc.



OrangeAppled said:


> Another false view. Feelers are NOT controlled by their emotions. Instead of compartmentalizing our emotions, we process them fully because we value them and know that ignoring them can bring about greater pain. I would argue that in this way, we have a greater control of our emotions, because we understand them and use them instead of detaching. Please remember that Feeling IS a rational function. It's a value based - NOT an emotional based - thought process. Feeling in the MBTI sense does NOT equal emotion. If a feeler's values are in conflict with their emotion, then they are very capable and very likely to go with their value, and put aside their emotion.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thank you for clarifying this for me. I beg to differ with one point you make: although you provide an example of Feelers who utilize their awareness of emotions in a productive and helpful manner, not all Feelers are like this (unfortunately).



OrangeAppled said:


> Is this about idealism or sensitivity? As for ideals being unachievable....well, tell that to the many great revolutionary artists and minds in history. If the bar is set low, then that's all people will achieve. Idealists set the bar high, and that encourages and inspires themselves & others to meet it.
> 
> If you're referring to the defensiveness that comes out of sensitivity and idealism, then I'd say it is necessary to a point. Idealists must keep a hope for fulfilling our vision, and that requires protecting their ideals from naysayers. These ideals are our motivating factor in life. If they die, we die, and that is much more unpleasant. I would recommend going on suicide watch with an NF who has lost all their hope and dreams. It's really a good thing we don't give up every time someone tells us we're being unrealistic. How dull the world would be if people caved to that mentality.


I believe you are misunderstanding my OP (it's quite vague). 

I have no problem with idealism. To clarify upon my statements: I have witnessed Feelers strive for an ideal (whether it be a relationship, concept, etc.). Occasionally, their expectations lead to disappointment. During each phase of disappointment, they experience much pain and anguish. Despite this, they continue to valiantly grasp onto this specific ideal. Instead of reevaluating their expectations (for lack of a better word), they refuse to accept the fact that they will never realistically achieve the ideal. Of course, not all Feelers are like this.

And may I ask: Why, exactly, should I go on a suicide watch with an NF?



OrangeAppled said:


> Don't think that an idealist always really believes their ideal can/will be fulfilled though. It's just a perfection to work towards. Without it, there's nothing to strive for.
> 
> Oh, and I'll tell you right now that most people don't see NTs as exactly "realistic" either :tongue:


I never stated that NT's are realistic. They merely attempt to be.


----------



## Mutatio NOmenis (Jun 22, 2009)

I typically associate being sensitive with being a pathetic weakling. I used to be sensitive, but an overdose of ST's changed that forever. Now, to survive, I have to incapacitate everyone I come across.


----------



## decided (May 17, 2009)

Mutatio NOmenis said:


> I typically associate being sensitive with being a pathetic weakling. I used to be sensitive, but an overdose of ST's changed that forever. Now, to survive, I have to incapacitate everyone I come across.


LOL. I'm never quite sure if you're going for humour, but I thought I'd let you know you crack me up.
*cuddles*

---

Thanks for the clarification Femme (huh, new name?). I think I understand the sort of people / behaviour that you are talking about now.


----------



## JennaRae (Sep 18, 2009)

Femme said:


> I seem to associate sensitivity with low-self confidence.
> 
> I believe one reason many Thinkers are frustrated with a Feeler's 'sensitivity' (for lack of a better word) is because, as already stated, we feel emotions as well. Powerful, raging ones. However, our desire to remain rational tends to keep us grounded--and often, detached. We feel pain, but deal with it differently. We attempt to control these emotions, whereas Feelers tend to be controlled by them.
> 
> We struggle with our emotions, and harden ourselves through the process. We understand the benefits of remaining realistic. We are preventing ourselves from future pain. It's like a shield. A defense mechanism.


Thinkers should be able to rationalize other peoples necessity for feelings, as well as feelers empathize with thinkers need to rationalize. 

Everyone is different, everyone processes emotions in a different way, some people embrace feelings and emotions, while others try to understand why they're feeling a certain way. Its similar to reading a book- you can read a book and actually place yourself in the story creating vivid mental images based upon the text, or you can read just for the sake of gaining knowledge, detaching yourself from the story. 

In reference to rationalizing being like a shield- being a feeler, I have "shields" of sorts as well. I don't put myself in situations that I know will lead to extreme emotions. I know that under certain circumstances I will feel a specific way- if I dont want to feel that way, I dont put myself in that situation.

hope that helped :happy:


----------



## Trope (Oct 18, 2008)

JennaRae said:


> Thinkers should be able to rationalize other peoples necessity for feelings, as well as feelers empathize with thinkers need to rationalize.


Quoted for truth.


----------



## JennaRae (Sep 18, 2009)

Trope said:


> Quoted for truth.


haha. I just feel like everyone would get along a lot better if we all tried to understand one another. It would make true motives more clear.


----------



## Sidewalk Balloonatic (Mar 10, 2009)

Detaching from your emotions does not make them go away. All that happens is you become oblivious to them. This is not a form of control, it is a form of _willful ignorance_. Ignorance is not rational. To be truly rational you need to be realistic about yourself, your emotions, your desires and your biases. You can not control your emotions much more than you can control your heartbeat. Living your life trying to control your emotions is just another way in which they are actually in control of you. Emotions are a fundamental part of human existence and they exist for a reason.


----------



## Mutatio NOmenis (Jun 22, 2009)

I'm going to kill the guy who said that emotions make better decisions.


----------



## Sidewalk Balloonatic (Mar 10, 2009)

Mutatio NOmenis said:


> I'm going to kill the guy who said that emotions make better decisions.


Emotions don't make better decisions. Emotions make imperfect decisions, that's why we have the Thinking Brain (aka Prefrontal Cortex) to perfect it. The point made in the video is that the Thinking Brain is directionless without the Feeling Brain as a basis.


----------



## whisperycat (Aug 9, 2009)

Have you ever had to deal with an NT who is having their intellectual capacities questioned (i.e in a work situation)? Talk about flying off the handle, talk about demonstrating every 'over sensitive' trait which, I sometimes think, a lot of NTs seem determined to nail exclusively to people with a preference for F, subjective judgement.

MBTI is about cognitive functions, not emotions. NTs can and do demonstrare 'over sensitive' behaviours, all that differs is the triggers.


----------



## thegirlcandance (Jul 29, 2009)

While reading through all of these responses they are just a couple points that I'd like to make...

Being a Feeler vs. lacking self-confidence are two completely different things, as other people have stated. Being a feeler type (or sensitive) is inevitable in itself. A person can develop their T function (as I have more so upon a few visits so a psychologist to kind of initiate that), which will help them make them understand and accept their emotions more. The big difference between a feeler vs. lacking self-confidence is really the way the person handles it. If the person feels rather insecure about themselves then they will tend to be harder on themselves and put themselves down more (or so I've noticed). This can be true regardless of type.

With that thought in mind, I'll also comment that I've noticed that one difference between SFs and NFs is that NFs tend to have a better view of the perspectives of others and are able to put themselves in another person's shoes more readily. SF's can tend to get really upset over something and then be crying about how they can't understand why they have to adjust to someone else, why someone else isn't like them, etc. While NFs get upset about stuff like not feeling that someone important to them cares about them, for example.

The second main point I wanted to make is that NFs certainly have the great POTENTIAL of really being empathetic and helping others. They have a natural talent to be empathetic (and not to be confused with sympathy... very different). However, regardless of type I think people and our society in general has a bad habit of not wanting to nurture their own feelings and the feelings of others. Someone could be really going through a rough time, but whether they are an F or T, people seem to get annoyed to a point with other people's problems. I've noticed this especially true at younger ages. Of course when people get older, people are married and have kids so they have to learn how to adjust and nurture the feelings of others.
With that in mind, I actually believe that F types are more likely to be bitter people rather than T types. Why? Because they are more sensitive to others and the world. They have probably just felt like their feelings are never nurtured and accepted by others and therefore have that problem in accepting them and nurturing their feelings themselves. Hence, they end up being bitter about the world.
Just my own little theory based on observations and personal experience.


----------



## Inner Cosmos (Oct 22, 2008)

decided said:


> *My thoughts:*
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I think that this point is right on (in bold). Emotions are an undeniable factor, yet a lot of people get away with not acknowledging them. It's an inconvenience to them and the world. I denied my Fi for a long time, instead focusing on using my Ne just to fit in. When I started feeling that pull towards authenticity and to acknowledge my partial suppressed/hidden dominant trait I went on a 7 year soul search and said "fuck off" to the world of suppose to's. Now I feel good about myself, and true.

As has been said, feeling is a rational function, yet its focus is generally on people and it is easy to see the emotions in people. Since thinkers orientation is more on "things", generally, emotions don't naturally come up as obviously important because circuit boards don't get hungry or horny. Feelers focus gives them natural alertness to emotions as a function of mental health and are the ones to first be aware of discrepancies.

I think this whole "sensitivity" thing comes in when feelers get pissed at the lack of recognition of emotions that is damaging the well being of society, for all types. And it makes us look unstable because Thinkers (especially ST's and maybe even more, Males) can't see the functional importance that lies past the embarrassing "your a sissy" vibe that threatens to impale anyone who needs an emotional break, or to vent. It's honestly almost like trying to convince people of the existence of aliens when you try to get them to be aware of their emotions and work "with" them. Or to stop denigrating them. Emotions get a bad rap cause you only really see them when they come out in the worst way. I call it poor emotional hygiene. When emotions are healthy, in good shape, they function almost invisibly like the transmission in your car and they bring a brilliance and vitality to all your actions. Like going from 480i to 1080p, or 16 bit color to 32. Our "sensitivity" is simply the equivalent of the mechanic who can hear that somethings wrong with a car by it's outwardly projected sound when no one else notices. His sensitivity is then a great asset to maintain all the things we love to take for granted.


----------

