Emotional Integration

[Colette]

This topic arises from an e-mail correspondence I've recently been having with a friend; someone who, I think, is a strong Rational, and struggles to see the role or place of emotions in action and decision-making in any arena.

This was my initial 'salvo' in the argument (and much to my surprise and delight, my correspondent ended up agreeing with the way I'd defined and explained these terms and processes).

Your views are sought, on the 'desirable state' for an INTx type:

Emotionalism, I believe (and as I’d define or describe it), is a state of being where your whole being, actions, and decision-making, or a substantial part thereof, are ruled or governed by your emotional state; regardless of reason, intuition, instinct, or other such helpful ‘tools’ we have for navigating our way safely and successfully through the ‘minefield of life’.

Emotions surface and become out of control, are acted out on in inappropriate ways in contexts, a person mired in this state may become overblown, dramatic, or engage in cloying histrionics, in order to achieve what they want, or feel better about themselves.

Emotional integration is entirely different. It’s a cognitive state where a fundamentally rational being is capable and mature enough to firstly acknowledge the vital role their emotions play in the dual areas of:

(a) Mental health (the need to ‘feel and cathart’, if you like, in order to remain mentally whole and healthy);

(b) The armory of dealing with their life, secondly, to integrate this role, and the functions of emotions, into that life ‘toolkit’ in a way which does not suspend rationality, but rather enhances it, and gives it an appropriate degree of power and influence (balanced against emotion, intuition, instinct, memory, and so on)

The emotionally integrated Rational feels happier, and more holistic and ‘complete’, than the Rational who tries to deny or diminish the value or role of emotion, and by weaving it into the fabric or texture of their life, they can approach others, and problems and issues they may face, with confidence, personal fulfillment, and a sense of balance and proportion in all things. They do not tend to anger easily, overreact, or allow themselves to be flooded by unhelpful emotions at the most inappropriate times (or indeed at any time).

The latter state is what I personally aspire to; despite being at my core a strongly rational being, and at the moment, I’m feeling more and more sanguine about how far down the road I am toward achieving it.

[Richard0612]

This makes a good deal of sense, I have always sort of seen the difference between using your emotions to help you with decision making and being ruled by them, but this has made it clearer.
I am not a naturally emotional person, and rarely show any emotion at all. However, I do try to solve problems and approach things taking feelings into account as much as I can [although I don't even pretend to be good at it!], which ultimately, will lead to a better, more complete resolution for all parties involved. You can't get much more rational than that!

[Nausved]

I think emotional integration is vital. If your logical views and your emotional views are not working in conjunction, it can create a world of problems—or at least it does so in my experience.

Besides, feelings can be powerful tools. If you manage it just right, your logic will provide the plan and your emotion will provide the follow-through.

To give an example, a few years ago I was in a relationship that was not working out. I knew that it was a bad idea to remain together, but I just didn't have the motivation to end it since my boyfriend was just so bent on hanging on, despite how miserable it was making him. So I purposely cultivated a sense of anger (an emotion that does not come easily to me), and funneled it toward breaking up with him for once and for all.

It was a good thing to do. It permitted him to move on and focus on girls he's more compatible with, and we're closer now as friends than we ever were as lovers. He's much happier, and that makes me happy, too.

[Colette]

I think emotional integration is vital. If your logical views and your emotional views are not working in conjunction, it can create a world of problems—or at least it does so in my experience

Yes. This person I referred to in the OP has been experiencing some problems in everyday life (especially in a work context, I think), because they are perceived as 'cold' and 'distant' (not interested in others) and somewhat 'robotic'. I don't believe a rational person needs to be perceived as a robot - if they have achieved emotional integration, they simply won't come across to others in this way; although probably they will always come across as more 'detached' than a Feeling type would.

Besides, feelings can be powerful tools. If you manage it just right, your logic will provide the plan and your emotion will provide the follow-through.

To give an example, a few years ago I was in a relationship that was not working out. I knew that it was a bad idea to remain together, but I just didn't have the motivation to end it since my boyfriend was just so bent on hanging on, despite how miserable it was making him. So I purposely cultivated a sense of anger (an emotion that does not come easily to me), and funneled it toward breaking up with him for once and for all.


Interesting idea I guess, but I'm not sure I agree with it on a moral/ethical level, in terms of using emotions as an artificial tool to manipulate or achieve a particular outcome that may not otherwise occur. Wouldn't the 'emotionally integrated' response in your situation, have been to form a rational plan to leave the relationship, and then to be honest about your lack of feelings for the person (or, perhaps, change in feelings) which necessitated your decision? In your situation did you consider that he wouldn't basically let you go graciously, unless you acted out some sort of 'bad cop' role, and gave yourself a handy pretext to leave?

[Nausved]

Interesting idea I guess, but I'm not sure I agree with it on a moral/ethical level, in terms of using emotions as an artificial tool to manipulate or achieve a particular outcome that may not otherwise occur. Wouldn't the 'emotionally integrated' response in your situation, have been to form a rational plan to leave the relationship, and then to be honest about your lack of feelings for the person (or, perhaps, change in feelings) which necessitated your decision? In your situation did you consider that he wouldn't basically let you go graciously, unless you acted out some sort of 'bad cop' role, and gave yourself a handy pretext to leave?

It was a strange sort of situation. We were very much in love, but his personality changed abruptly (through no fault of his own) and we found that we couldn't get along anymore. He dumped me repeatedly, and he begged me to take him back repeatedly. Every time he left me, I tried to get us to stay that way and I would explain to him precisely why we should stay that way, but his will was stronger than mine, and my feelings of love only further weakened my resolve.

My anger wasn't false. It was merely amplified and focused toward a single goal. I would make lists of everything he did that I didn't like and that he would/could not amend, and then I would read over these to cultivate that anger and funnel it toward permanently ending the relationship. (It sounds awful and passive agressive, doesn't it? But I was so desperate; it was killing me to watch us hurt each other, and we were both beginning to feel suicidal.)

[Colette]

It was a strange sort of situation. We were very much in love, but his personality changed abruptly (through no fault of his own) and we found that we couldn't get along anymore. He dumped me repeatedly, and he begged me to take him back repeatedly. Every time he left me, I tried to get us to stay that way and I would explain to him precisely why we should stay that way, but his will was stronger than mine, and my feelings of love only further weakened my resolve.

My anger wasn't false. It was merely amplified and focused toward a single goal. I would make lists of everything he did that I didn't like and that he would/could not amend, and then I would read over these to cultivate that anger and funnel it toward permanently ending the relationship. (It sounds awful and passive agressive, doesn't it? But I was so desperate; it was killing me to watch us hurt each other, and we were both beginning to feel suicidal.)

No. What you say makes a lot of sense now, thanks, and sorry you had such an awful time of it. Good that you got out, by the sounds of it..

[sriv]

This question matches the topic presented...

How does the emotions of anger, jealousy, and other vice emotions/desires I have repressed over time help a person become emotionally integrated?

I believe emotions like these not worth showing. I repress anger because I have a strong moral code of non-violence and jeolousy in order to maintain humility. Other emotions I repress are scorn, hatred, and sadness because they inevitably lead to unproductivity and frustration which I feel very often.

I understand that emotions help people to connect to each other and form successful relationships, but is it good for anything not relationship orientated?

Those are two separate questions.

[Colette]

This question matches the topic presented...

How does the emotions of anger, jealousy, and other vice emotions/desires I have repressed over time help a person become emotionally integrated?

I believe emotions like these not worth showing. I repress anger because I have a strong moral code of non-violence and jeolousy in order to maintain humility. Other emotions I repress are scorn, hatred, and sadness because they inevitably lead to unproductivity and frustration which I feel very often

I think the problem with repressing emotions such as anger, is that you still feel them 'inside', but there is no outlet for the emotion, other than mental agony/torture, as you try to 'sweep it under the carpet'. It may affect other mood states or cognitive functioning (diminishing your ability to remember, concentrate, and so on). Thus I do believe some kind of constructive outlet is the best way of dealing with these negative emotional states - something like whacking a punching bag, playing a hard-out sport, going to the gym, or whatever, as well as processing the anger through to determine how it arose, and what you can do about it.

I understand that emotions help people to connect to each other and form successful relationships, but is it good for anything not relationship orientated?


In my mind emotions aren't necessarily connected to relationships (or even people other than yourself), although frequently they are. They may arise merely as a result of a state of mind, or circumstances which are happening to you, independent of another person. I'm not sure there's a "good" or "bad" about experiencing them; they just are. It's how we deal with them that determines whether we are robotic, overly-emotional, or emotionally integrated.

[Homini Lupus]

Sorting out our emotions from ourselves would be good but I think it's impossible. I can't demonstrate that since I haven't got the means, but nevertheless I think it's a senseful starting point.

Since I can't completely sort them out, I have to put them to good use. This often means repressing them; but repressing sometimes means that they will come back again, stronger and stronger, so sooner or later I'll have to deal with them.

The best way to use them is controlling them with rationality. Rage by example is required in some situations. It can have phisical or mental outcome. So if I need to express rage, I can look for those situations.

This can be said for most of them.

About interpersonal ones, many people will keep thinking we are hypocrites because we express in a rational manner and often we are able to make subtle distinctions; well, amen to that. If you don't want me you don't deserve me, there are many reasonable people around.