# Feeling types have an advantage in society?



## MasterDood (Oct 23, 2008)

Now, stay with me here... I'm speculating, but I am beginning to think that types with strong feeling functions are at an advantage in society because once we go through school, we are forced as well to become a thinker as well. As feelers to begin with, we also get in touch with the thinking function. Unfortunately there is no "feeling school" for strong thinking types and I see that as a disadvantage to them because being out of touch with their feeling function means they are less likely to account for how their actions affect others and will be less successful at coming to compromises and ending conflicts. As Feelers who have gone through school we have at our disposal, two rational thought processes that will give us a quantifiable and emotional answer. Many people don't experience both a feeling and thinking conclusion to every problem they come across, and I think the advantage is to those who do.


----------



## snail (Oct 13, 2008)

That's an optimistic way of looking at it. I would have rather had experiences that nurtured my Feeling preference and enhanced its effectiveness rather than working counter to it, trying to shut it down or replace it. Even so, I do use some pseudo-objective judgement to balance my primary rational process, weighing the Ti against the Fi in order to achieve greater clarity. It allows for more carefully refined values. It does come at a cost, though. There is constant internal conflict and turmoil, and there is the sense of having lost the full intensity of what the feeling process could have been if it had remained untainted.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## MasterDood (Oct 23, 2008)

I know what you mean. Whenever I see some of my friends make completely "cold" decisions completely lacking any thought given to the outcome, I feel like they are alien to me. As far as "losing" feeling and gaining thinking, I think that it doesn't work like it visually does in the cute charts we all put in our signatures. We could be in touch with both, just make more decisions based on the other. When i took the test the other day in my psych class I got a 95 on feeling-but I do know I consider logical processes in nearly every decision. I don't think that it is something that has "tainted" my feeling ability but rather expanded my ability to look at problems with two entirely different rational processes.
I do think the conflict of knowing two opposite solutions to a problem and struggling to pick one is one of the toughest dilemmas, but I would rather have the dilemmas than not be fair and conscious to other people's feelings.


----------



## Inner Cosmos (Oct 22, 2008)

MasterDood said:


> Now, stay with me here... strong feeling functions are at an advantage in society because once we go through school, we are forced as well to become a thinker as well.





snail said:


> I would have rather had experiences that nurtured my Feeling preference and enhanced its effectiveness rather than working counter to it, trying to shut it down or replace it.


I agree with both of these statements. I wish schools would seek to balance out there formats to accommodate both. I like that my Ti and even Te is more experienced, but I'm still kinda pissed that my primary function Fi is ignored and even seen as the bane of scientific truth. That's why I LOVED theater, creative writing classes and the like because I actually got to be unique and free emotionally. In fact I love it when science and art get together where the art uses new scientific concepts without going off the deep end of their "artistic license" angle.


----------



## Harley (Jul 5, 2009)

Life experience will help strong thinkers develop a balanced feeling side. Going through periods of extreme grief, happiness, excitement, anxiety, rejection, acceptance etc. that defy rational explanation helps strong thinkers realize that you cannot always just think your way out of a situation, and that sometimes it is OK to allow your emotions to get the better of you. Some strong thinkers may not be able to sympathize with an individual but they can empathize if life experience has taught them anything of the value of emotions.

Of course there are always exceptions to everything, just as the strong thinker might shun valuable emotional experiences in life because they do not perceive them to be rational, a strong feeler can also shun the rational processes encouraged in school because it does not fit with their personal value system. But I find these cases tend to be extreme ends of the spectrum, and everybody can find something of value in the lessons they receive from life and academic institutions, regardless of which traits they emphasize.


----------



## Selden (May 24, 2009)

Harley said:


> Life experience will help strong thinkers develop a balanced feeling side. Going through periods of extreme grief, happiness, excitement, anxiety, rejection, acceptance etc. that defy rational explanation helps strong thinkers realize that you cannot always just think your way out of a situation, and that sometimes it is OK to allow your emotions to get the better of you. Some strong thinkers may not be able to sympathize with an individual but they can empathize if life experience has taught them anything of the value of emotions.
> 
> Of course there are always exceptions to everything, just as the strong thinker might shun valuable emotional experiences in life because they do not perceive them to be rational, a strong feeler can also shun the rational processes encouraged in school because it does not fit with their personal value system. But I find these cases tend to be extreme ends of the spectrum, and everybody can find something of value in the lessons they receive from life and academic institutions, regardless of which traits they emphasize.


Agreed.

My brother is an ISTP and although he fits most of the definition (especially the mechanic/into vehicles part), he is not unemotional. It's true that he suppresses feelings sometimes and doesn't understand the value of negative (depression/guilt) feelings. However, he isn't completely objective (with people) or doesn't know how to deal with people. Both myself (INFP) and my parents (ENFJ, INFJ) probably influenced him to be more charming/empathetic. Especially since my parents valued kindness over achievement when raising us.

Likewise, my brother helped make me more Ti and also got me interested in how things mechanically work. Although I'm emotional, I don't think I'm illogical, especially compared to other Fs I know in life. It's like you said, life experiences will usually balance us (or not).

Who's in that avatar of yours BTW?


----------



## Selden (May 24, 2009)

If there's one thing I disagree with though, is that Ts are unemotional. Ts are very emotional but instead of getting upset with disharmony, they're more emotional about logic and rules. It's not the lack of emotions that become a problem with Ts. I think it's the fact that they don't understand *other* people's emotions or see the value in it, that becomes a problem.


----------



## Harley (Jul 5, 2009)

Selden said:


> Who's in that avatar of yours BTW?


Greta Garbo.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

I honestly doubt that 'Feelers', as it's been put, have any advantage over the 'Thinkers' in society. There are areas where both excel -- stereotypically, the 'thinker' types would do better in school because of their preference for rationality, but the 'feeler' types would excel in other areas, such as mediums of art. It's an excellent question, but it seems like this topic has a 'bias' towards the xxFx types in the posts so far. So maybe feelers have an advantage in one area; thinkers have an advantage in another.

Thinkers can be emotional, and feelers can be rational; and certainly, no 'T' or 'F' type is better than the other. I wonder how this thought, however, coincides with other topics on the matter, such as feelers being bullied in school and feeling out of place in society. Could this arise from the classic 'putting others better than you down so they can't threaten you', or is it more of a perceived thing?


----------



## Selden (May 24, 2009)

Grey said:


> It's an excellent question, but it seems like this topic has a 'bias' towards the xxFx types in the posts so far. So maybe feelers have an advantage in one area; thinkers have an advantage in another.


Yes there is an obvious bias but there's a reason. Since thinkers are often praised in society of being intellectuals, realists, and the only ones who contribute a good degree to society (mainly career and academically), we're just trying to counter by saying that F is just as important. I think that doesn't just translate into Myers-Briggs but also in real life. If someone was to meet someone who was F and emotional (although not eccentric/over emotional) and a T who appeared analytical and straight talking, they'd automatically think the T was the smarter and more reliable one.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

That's more of a product of our society today. Great thinkers have always been praised, but in our era, there has been an emphasis on rational thinking and secularism. Several hundred years ago, especially during times like the Romantic Era, great poets and artists were praised, and even philosophers -- which, I would argue, are all stereotypically 'F' careers or qualities.

'Feelers' and 'feeling' preferences are obviously equal to 'thinking' and 'thinkers' -- it's just the air of our society today that praises the 'thinking' qualities over the 'feeling'. Eighty years ago, however, I believe the 'feeling' qualities would be placed over the 'thinking' qualities, especially for men. Given fifty years, I believe, it might cycle again.


----------



## decided (May 17, 2009)

That's true. The type of society we are in does make a difference to which type is preferred.

For example, the online forums that I have seen definitely seem to be geared toward Feelers in a lot of ways. There's a lot of good vibes, sharing and support, and not too much in the way of aggressive debate or ribbing that some of my T-type friends enjoy in RL. (That's not a judgment, just an observation.)

I think both have their advantages / disadvantages, and it's good to have both around to provide balance.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

Exactly. One thing mentioned by a previous poster would be how beneficial it would be for the 'feelers' if schools today weren't so focused on 'thinker' qualities, and provided means to expand both the 'F' of a person as well as the 'T'. I think that's a good plan, but how it could become practical and an actual vision is somewhat beyond me. The lesson plans and standards would have to be changed, and all of this would be subject to the teachers' knowledge and opinions as well as the students. Likewise, any attempt made might be called upon and opposed, because for the 'cold' processes to be changed, it might be mistaken for religion or introducing a new bias to students.

Either way, I think the 'thinker' bias, although it does give difficulty to some xxFx types and feed the bias of other xxTx types, also provides an opportunity for the 'Feelers' to develop their Introverted Thinking and Extroverted Thinking functions, if the bias is true enough to allow for that.


----------



## MasterDood (Oct 23, 2008)

Thank you for you thoughtful input so far!

This is turning out to be much more interesting that I originally thought. 

I still think of it as an advantage to have the ability to successfully see the world through both Thinking and Feeling perspectives. Although I am very much a Feeler, I am glad I can see with a logical perspective when I need to-and it has come in handy at hard parts of my life where I would have made unfortunate decisions if I didn't see my problem with a Thinking perspective as well. 

As previous posters have pointed out, the society we live in at this point in history is very aimed towards sciences and isn't very interested in art and philosophy. 

It seems like people don't think the feeling function is rational. It most certainly is. The decision making process of a Feeler is one where the Feeler determines a solution based on how people will feel/react. In economics there is a similar process of determining what part of the demand curve enjoys the most "Utils", or "Utility" (the quantifiable unit of satisfaction a person derives from purchasing something at a given price). Looking at it that way, Feeling can be very rational and more appealing to thinkers.

I think when we can make decisions and observations at both a feeling level and a thinking level we put ourselves at a huge advantage in our society. Because we can communicate between thinkers and feelers better and provide a bridge between the two extremes. My uncle does something that reminds me of this: his job is to communicate between engineers and development groups and advertisers in his business. Very different groups of people and a tough job.

That being said, and knowing what you know, would you really still want to give up all that you've learned with logical thinking and in turn, sacrifice your connection to much of the world? And lets be honest, there are hundreds of decisions we make each day that are purely or mostly done on a thinking level vs a feeling level, and I think that you would prefer the decisions you make be done that way. I know I do.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

You make some valid points; however, you seem to believe that 'feeling' types only have the ability to decide on both a 'thinking' and 'feeling' basis. You may not have truly meant it this way, but that is what advantage implies; an upper hand over another side, and the supposed opposite of any xxFx type is a xxTx type.

Healthy Thinkers decide just as you do, weighing the objective consequences (i.e. rules, obligations, the 'rational' things) as well as the subjective consequences (people, emotions, the 'emotional' things). This is the same for Feelers; the difference is, Feelers would have a preference to consider the subjective before the objective, and Thinkers would consider the objective before the subjective. Feelers, on the base level, do not have this so-called advantage over anyone. This is just the result of a very balanced and intelligent person, and it doesn't matter if their preferences are for thinking or feeling. You may feel or think it to be so, but I see evidence to the contrary.


----------



## MasterDood (Oct 23, 2008)

You are right, it's not the upper hand Im talking about, by advantage I really meant that there was clearer decision making that was agreeable to both sides T and F.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

So you believe that 'healthy' Feeler types would be able to decide better, as well as interact with both Thinking and Feeling types better than 'healthy' Thinking types?


----------



## Selden (May 24, 2009)

Grey said:


> So you believe that 'healthy' Feeler types would be able to decide better, as well as interact with both Thinking and Feeling types better than 'healthy' Thinking types?


Perhaps, perhaps not. On a pure scientific level (science and mathmatics type jobs/work), I'd say no but on other ones I say yes. Of course, it's all relative.


----------



## Grey (Oct 10, 2009)

Well, that's obvious, and it's nice to see recognition that 'feeling' types aren't, overall, better than 'thinking' types. I would like to know the original poster's thoughts, though. This is his topic, after all.


----------



## Blue Butterfly (Sep 19, 2009)

I am an INFP with both strong feelings and strong ability for objective thinking. And I think in a lot of cases I do have the advantage. I can also feel other peoples feelings so I can use that to my advantage too.


----------



## yesiknowbut (Oct 25, 2009)

I think that it's hard to generalise. Some school environments differ, it depends on your peer group, you don't define what "success" is.....

Sorry. Obviously this is a TP's response. FWIW I think that if you define success as a highly paid job you are more likely to see the rationals leading the field. If you define it as secure longstanding relationship and happiness, maybe you will see more SFJs.....but I have no evidence for that.


----------

