[JasonM]

Different MBTI preferences amongst people can be a source of frustration, but I think no difference in preference causes more frustration and upset feelings than the difference along the thinker/feeler axis. Feelers usually feel put off by someone who they perceive as being cold and unfeeling, and thinkers often feel misunderstood by feelers who think that they are being cold, when they are just being objective.

My personal feeling is that each preference has its place, and we have to use our wisdom and will power to understand when to use each preference. For example, suppose your friend plays guitar for you and asks how they did. In reality, they're pretty bad. Some thinkers might not mince words, and will be honest that this individual has no skill. This is an unproductive use of thinking. By not being tactful, you could end up hurting your friend's feelings. This might upset them and cause them to treat you badly in return. If something like this becomes a habit, then it can cause a lot of strain in your personal life. The point is that you should be tactful because you have nothing to gain by being brutally honest. You only end up hurting your relationships with others.

Now, suppose you're a feeler who runs a business and you have an employee that just doesn't treat you with respect. They show up late for work, and when they're at work, they're usually surfing the Internet. A feeler might be afraid to fire such an employee, because they'll hurt their feelings (this might sound unrealistic, but I've actually seen it happen in real life). The fact is, such an employee doesn't respect you. Therefore, it makes no sense to be nice to them and keep them on. There's no advantage to it. Now, if you are a feeler, you might be able to handle the situation by giving them a warning and telling them politely that they aren't respecting you, and if they continue on their path, you're going to have to let them go. But for some feelers, even this is difficult.

The bottom line is that there is no "better" preference. Each preference has its advantages and disadvantages in different situations. Also, a wise individual will learn to go against their natural tendencies and act in such a way as to create the best outcome in any given situation.

[sriv]

It depends on the percentage of situations where T is needed and the percentage of situations where F is needed. In a social society, F is needed much more. In an elitist or isolationist society, T is needed much more.

[BlackHawk]

My question for you is:
Is it easier for Thinkers to feel, or Feelers to think?
A T can always drop the armor, but an F is going to have a tough time with objective rational thought.

[JasonM]

BlackHawk,

In general, I think it would be equally hard for either thinkers or feelers to act out of preference. Feelers aren't less rational than thinkers. It's only when something affects their feelings that they have a hard time dealing with it rationally. I don't believe that 50% of the population doesn't generally use any logic in their thinking. It doesn't make sense.

[sriv]

It would be extremely hard for me to drop my armor. My phobia is loss of control, and I consider dropping my armor a loss of control. It scares me shitless. I would have to disagree with blackhawk and agree with you jason.

[Dystopia]

	Originally Posted by JasonM To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I think no difference in preference causes more frustration and upset feelings than the difference along the thinker/feeler axis.

The type that most offend me are not the F types, but xSTJs. ESTJs seem to hate the fact that I don't blindly accept all of their silly social rituals, and dare to think for myself. They think I am an anti-social weirdo, and because they can't understand me, treat everything I say as a lie. As for ISTJs in the workplace, I get very infuriated. A typical conversation goes like this:

Me - "Do you think things might work better if we did things this way?"
ISTJ - "But that's not the way we do things."
Me - "But why do we do things this way? Who decided on this procedure?
ISTJ - "That's the way things we've done things for as long as I've been here."
Me - "Procedures are put in place for a reason. If they are not working, then I will find out who would need to authorise things to be changed."
ISTJ - *Terrified look that his/her working practices might be slightly different the next day."
Me - *Bangs head against a filing cabinet.*

Millions of pounds are thrown away in my country by xSTJs using inefficient working practices, simply because that's the way they've always been done, and not daring to think of change.

I think perhaps people get more frustrated when people go against their strongest preference, so an INTJ with a strong N preference would be most frustrated by Ss, and those with a strong T preference would be most frustrated by Fs.

I've also been very annoyed by Ps who always want to "see how things will pan out" at a time when decisive action needs to be taken. "A bad decision is better than no decision" is one of my favourite philosophies.

I'm never particularly offended by the E quality in itself, except when it causes the S or F functions to be extraverted towards me in an offensive way.

[sriv]

I think we can safely say that N is preferable to S. Everything else seems very balanced to me.

[Dystopia]

	Originally Posted by sriv To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I think we can safely say that N is preferable to S. Everything else seems very balanced to me.

I agree. I hate the S's inability to look at the big picture. However, I am sometimes impressed by their attention to detail, which I often miss. Perhaps it should be that the Ns are in charge, and have the more robot-like Ss to do the dirty work and look after the details.

[Claptonian]

	Originally Posted by JasonM To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	My personal feeling is that each preference has its place, and we have to use our wisdom and will power to understand when to use each preference. For example, suppose your friend plays guitar for you and asks how they did. In reality, they're pretty bad. Some thinkers might not mince words, and will be honest that this individual has no skill. This is an unproductive use of thinking.

I disagree. By being honest and telling them it didn't sound good, it should (assuming the individual in question is rational) cause them to A) give up the guitar and devote their time to something they're better at or B) work harder at learning the guitar so they will improve. Both of those outcomes are productive.

And yes, I know, that was just a hypothetical example, but I'm an INTJ and reserve the right to tear hypothetical examples apart.

[Dystopia]

That is absolutely correct. You might think that you're saving their feelings, but in the long run, they will end up getting hurt even more. If everyone tells him he's good at guitar, one day he'll get up on stage and play in front of a crowd of people, and get booed and laughed at. It would save a lot more hurt being told the truth by a friend.

It reminds me of women who say "I didn't want to tell him there's no point in our relationship going on, because I don't want to hurt his feelings," building up all his hopes so that he gets even more hurt in future.

In reality, Fs are just being selfish and cowardly. They don't want it to look like they are the bad guy, and secretly hope that someone else will do it.

[JasonM]

Originally Posted by Claptonian To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I disagree. By being honest and telling them it didn't sound good, it should (assuming the individual in question is rational) cause them to A) give up the guitar and devote their time to something they're better at or B) work harder at learning the guitar so they will improve. Both of those outcomes are productive. And yes, I know, that was just a hypothetical example, but I'm an INTJ and reserve the right to tear hypothetical examples apart.

This isn't cut and dry, but I don't think that's how people usually react. I think most people would resent being bluntly told that they suck and not change their ways. If you're tactful and say something along the lines of them sounding not bad, but they have a long way to go before becoming Jimi Hendrix, then they might get the picture without being offended.

[Dystopia]

Yes, there is absoultely no harm in putting the truth politely, or giving constructive criticism. However, an F type would be prone to lying under such circumstances and actually telling the guitarist he is good, just to seem "nice" in that moment.

[JasonM]

Originally Posted by Dystopia To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

That is absolutely correct. You might think that you're saving their feelings, but in the long run, they will end up getting hurt even more. If everyone tells him he's good at guitar, one day he'll get up on stage and play in front of a crowd of people, and get booed and laughed at. It would save a lot more hurt being told the truth by a friend. It reminds me of women who say "I didn't want to tell him there's no point in our relationship going on, because I don't want to hurt his feelings," building up all his hopes so that he gets even more hurt in future. In reality, Fs are just being selfish and cowardly. They don't want it to look like they are the bad guy, and secretly hope that someone else will do it.

As I said, there are good ways and bad ways of telling someone that they need improvement. If you're tactful, then you're probably not going to hurt their feelings. However, some thinkers are very blunt, and it leaves the impression that they have a nasty disposition. Such people are not helping themselves. Also, I would suspect that most people are aware of how good they are at playing the guitar (you know when you hit the right notes or not), so I doubt that most people who are bad at it would ever get into a situation where they'd play in front of others on stage. Finally, Fs usually don't want anyone to put someone else down, because it hurts the individual's feelings, and Fs are emotionally affected by that. I know of an ISTP who is always blunt with people, and he really ticks me off. In my eyes, he looks like a frontal lobe patient who has lost their inhibitions.

[Dystopia]

	Originally Posted by JasonM To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Also, I would suspect that most people are aware of how good they are at playing the guitar (you know when you hit the right notes or not), so I doubt that most people who are bad at it would ever get into a situation where they'd play in front of others on stage.

You would like to think so. However, there are a lot of people who get into music, especially a "cool" instrument like guitar, just for an image thing. Often they aren't musical. They won't know that they sound terrible, or what their weaknesses are, and will rely on others for feedback. I have actually been in this exact situation several times, as a musician, with potential band members. Sometimes they really don't take the hint and you just have to be blunt. As music is something very important to me, I take offense at people who pick up an instrument, hoping to use it to look cool, as it is an insult to music as an institution.

[sriv]

Originally Posted by JasonM To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

As I said, there are good ways and bad ways of telling someone that they need improvement. If you're tactful, then you're probably not going to hurt their feelings. However, some thinkers are very blunt, and it leaves the impression that they have a nasty disposition. Such people are not helping themselves. Also, I would suspect that most people are aware of how good they are at playing the guitar (you know when you hit the right notes or not), so I doubt that most people who are bad at it would ever get into a situation where they'd play in front of others on stage. Finally, Fs usually don't want anyone to put someone else down, because it hurts the individual's feelings, and Fs are emotionally affected by that. I know of an ISTP who is always blunt with people, and he really ticks me off. In my eyes, he looks like a frontal lobe patient who has lost their inhibitions. Jason

In that case the F should stop jumping to conclusions so fast. The wise person would take all criticism as constructive and try harder. Fs have a hard time in life learning this. I would want someone else to be just as blunt with me as I am with him/her. It reveals the truth for what it is instead of euphemising it. Tactful? Is that a way to say "deceptive" or "good at telling half-truths"?

[Uytuun]

	Also, a wise individual will learn to go against their natural tendencies and act in such a way as to create the best outcome in any given situation.

True, true...

[JasonM]

	Originally Posted by sriv To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	In that case the F should stop jumping to conclusions so fast. The wise person would take all criticism as constructive and try harder. Fs have a hard time in life learning this. I would want someone else to be just as blunt with me as I am with him/her. It reveals the truth for what it is instead of euphemising it. Tactful? Is that a way to say "deceptive" or "good at telling half-truths"?

The problem is that most people don't like to be bluntly told the truth (including some thinkers). It tends to hurt people's feelings. You can talk about what you want for yourself, but it's what other people want that will make your social life run smoothly. But if you want to cause problems and end up making yourself a target in the name of being blunt, then, by all means, go ahead.

[sriv]

Why hate the truth?

[JasonM]

	Originally Posted by sriv To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Why hate the truth?

I don't know why. It' s just the way people are. You also have to be careful. Sometimes what seems to be "truth" is merely opinion. Should you force your opinion on someone when it may not even be true?

[sriv]

1. If you expect the person to be smart enough to recognize it is an opinion.
2. If the opinion is commonly shared by many.
3. If F specifically asks for *your opinion*.

My conditions for truth-telling.

[JasonM]

	Originally Posted by sriv To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	1. If you expect the person to be smart enough to recognize it is an opinion. 2. If the opinion is commonly shared by many. 3. If F specifically asks for *your opinion*. My conditions for truth-telling.

Like I said, I don't see a problem with telling the truth as long as it's tactful. You believe in being blunt. I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree, and leave it at that. And by the way, I just thought of why feelers have a problem with the truth. The problem that they have is that feelers don't look at being blunt as just being honest. To them, it seems that the person being blunt has an angry disposition or that they don't treat people with respect because they ignore others' feelings. That's just the way they're wired. I highly doubt that one function is superior to another. They are just different ways of looking at the world, and, as I said, each has its advantages and disadvantages.

[sriv]

Cool, I am good with agreeing to disagree.

[Dystopia]

I believe that Fs have a natural tendency for dishonesty and are completely lacking in principles, in my experience. I will exaggerate and stereotype slightly in the next few statements to demonstrate, so please don't take the following completely literally.

1. Fs can steal from people, so long as they don't notice it's gone, because what matters is how people feel, so if they don't notice, no harm has been done.

2. Fs can cheat in a relationship, on the grounds of "What [he/she] doesn't know won't hurt [him/her]."

3. They can pretend to be something they are not if it creates a sense of general harmony.

4. Fs, and especially SFs, will only ever look at the short-term sense of social harmony. NTs, when they decide that harmony is important can look at the big picture, and aim for long term harmony by finding systems that will reduce conflict in the long run, even if short-term bluntness is one step towards achieving this goal.

I have come to the conclusion that INTJs are, by nature, the most principled and moral personality type. Some people seem to miss that, because they think being moral is the same as always being "nice."

[JasonM]

	Originally Posted by Dystopia To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	1. Fs can steal from people, so long as they don't notice it's gone, because what matters is how people feel, so if they don't notice, no harm has been done.

Principled Fs won't steal, because they know being stolen from will hurt the other person's feelings.

	2. Fs can cheat in a relationship, on the grounds of "What [he/she] doesn't know won't hurt [him/her]."

Some Fs might be this way, but I think having morals supersedes type - in reality, any type can be moral/immoral. If I was in a relationship, I wouldn't cheat.

	3. They can pretend to be something they are not if it creates a sense of general harmony.

A lot of Fs are guilty of this, but how is that an ethical issue? For example, if I pretend to like bowling just to please you, then how am I acting unethically? No one is being harmed by it. Would anyone take offense if they found out that they were pretending only to please?

	4. Fs, and especially SFs, will only ever look at the short-term sense of social harmony. NTs, when they decide that harmony is important can look at the big picture, and aim for long term harmony by finding systems that will reduce conflict in the long run, even if short-term bluntness is one step towards achieving this goal.

I'm not really sure how you can set up a long-term moral system, in which acts aren't taken into account individually. (I'm not saying it's impossible, I've just never seen a moral system like this.)

	I have come to the conclusion that INTJs are, by nature, the most principled and moral personality type. Some people seem to miss that, because they think being moral is the same as always being "nice."

Some people think that way, but the two most common philosophical systems of morals are utilitarianism - acting in such a way as to promote happiness, and Kantianism - acting on principle; acting in such a way that how you ideally should act would apply to everyone. These systems involve more than simply being nice.

[sriv]

I find that most F's are moral simply because they turn to religion (which greatly encourages feeling) as an excuse.