Academia, debates and criticism - does T or F really make a difference? | INFJ Forum

Academia, debates and criticism - does T or F really make a difference?

J

justeccentricnotinsane

Community Member
Oct 7, 2008
367
88
0
MBTI
INFJ
I've only just found out I had an account here. What d'ya know.

On another forum I was told I had a strong Ti and this seemed to me to be because I used logic a lot and I'm not sensitive to criticism about work etc, only about my actual character. I worry a lot if people criticise my moral fabric but someone criticising my work is helpful. How else are you to improve?!

But anyway, sometimes I got the idea that they were saying I had a strong Ti because I am very academic and would say that given the chance to go to uni and do something very academic and theoretical (cultural theory to be specific) or go help someone in some way (I don't know, charity or something), I would definitely choose uni. Also, I love debates. Not arguing, I don't see how arguing has any place in debating. Other INFJs back away from debates "in case anyone gets hurt", while I consider my opinions to be impersonal. I'm not upset if someone disagrees with me and I am able to politely disagree with other people in order to move a debate forward. To me, debating is about learning and improving. Without debate, we cannot go forward and we become stuck in our ways. I might believe that so and so political policy is better but if someone on the opposition convinces me otherwise, then that's fine. I'll change my view and I'll consider myself better for it.

They're right that I have a strong Ti, but surely a leaning towards academia and academic debate isn't anything to do with this?

It seems like T has a reputation for being intelligent, articulate and into academia and debate, while F has a reputation for all the softer things - emotions, sensitivity, helping people, forgiving people.

I can empathise with people (know instantly where they're coming from/what's going on inside) but I don't forgive them or give them chances. If I don't like what I see, I don't want to know them. I will never be unfriendly (although I'm sharp if some arsehole is being a nuisance around me and my friends - offending someone maybe - and needs to be told to f*** off!) and am basically always extremely polite. I don't see any use at all in not being polite and am very offended by others not conforming to politeness - I mean, it's really not that hard! But if I meet someone and I know they're a waste of my time (like maybe they're going to be self-dramatic and end up using other people or manipulating other people for their own ends) they don't deserve any of it.

Oh yeah, also "deepness" or profundity. There's often talk of mysticism, lots of expression of feelings, lots of poetry and talk of spirituality on INFJ forums. I would describe myself as a 100 per cent non-spiritual person. Logic wins out here. I logically don't believe in anything mystical and feel intuitively (rather than actually knowing the facts!) that ESP etc is simply impossible - I couldn't entertain it because I really don't understand how anyone can get to such a conclusion, it just feels far fetched. But I don't mind anyone else liking it. My Mam is REALLY spiritual about EVERYTHING! I don't mind, it makes her happy. So I'm not about to impose logic, I don't see why it matters. Is this a T/F difference?

The reason I identify as an F is because I prioritise people and their feelings above strict logic and I am never irritated by "illogical" beliefs so long as no one gets hurt (I'll fight against homophobia for instance, because not only is it illogical but it is hurting others). So surely, Ts and Fs are just as likely to be academics, just as likely to enjoy POLITE debate and just as likely to write people off (albeit for different reasons)? Surely cognitive functions have more to do with your priorities than your interests?

Or am I wrong? Does a strong Ti make you more likely to enjoy academia, debates etc? Is it more likely to make you write people off or be cynical (I'm very cynical but in 99 per cent of cases I wouldn't actually bother do anything) How much of this is also Ni?

Cheers
 
Last edited:
It's a common misconception that utilizing Ti and Te well
means that a person is logical. This is not the case.
Ti and Te don't really deal with logic as much as they
deal with the ability to reason.


Also empathizing is not just recognizing the emotions of
others but also experiencing them yourself to some extent.


Just because one is an F does not mean that their functions
are not well balanced. Any F can love debate as can any T.
I think this is a matter of personal preference.

I don't like to debate because I get frustrated when people
are closed-minded.
 
Any type, T or F, can be an "academic", but it's more a matter of personal choice to do so.

In matters of debate, an ideal debator would be one that can use a variety of rhetorical appeals, not just logic. They should also be one that thinks before they speak, and not immediately outright dismiss a point someone is making. I like debating until the other person starts overusing logical fallacies and ad hominem because they know they are losing.

I don't think being a T/F determines how spiritual one is. I think it's more a a matter of a life-style choice, kind of like T/F doesn't determine if you're going to be a smoker or not. In fact, some of the most spiritual people I know are T's and some of the least I know are F's.
 
justeccentricnotinsane said:
Or am I wrong? Does a strong Ti make you more likely to enjoy academia, debates etc? Is it more likely to make you write people off or be cynical (I'm very cynical but in 99 per cent of cases I wouldn't actually bother do anything)
Click to expand...

You're not wrong, but this is also not necessarily Ti. A well-developed T function might help you in forming a more coherent logical framework without the inclusion of personal sentiments, but you may also make an appeal to our individual humanity through debate, or you may make an appeal to our emotions through debate - the latter of which is the diametric opposite of T.

T ≠ intelligence.

J = (F,T) = reasoning

T = reasoning via creating/following/understanding categories, hierarchies, logical consistency
F = reasoning via creating/following/understanding instinct, holism, emotional states

Ji = J through internally verifiable mediums
Je = J through externally verifiable mediums

The reason I identify as an F is because I prioritise people and their feelings above strict logic and I am never irritated by "illogical" beliefs so long as no one gets hurt (I'll fight against homophobia for instance, because not only is it illogical but it is hurting others). So surely, Ts and Fs are just as likely to be academics, just as likely to enjoy POLITE debate and just as likely to write people off (albeit for different reasons)? Surely cognitive functions have more to do with your priorities than your interests?
Click to expand...
Yep.
 
I was on a debate team in Middle and High School. I found that some of the best debaters were feelers. I remember an ENFJ (we were required to take a MBTI test; I scored as XNTJ at that time) was our best debater. Aside from being eloquent she could hold her temper very well. Our resident INTP would keep his cool most of the time, but seldom, and almost out of nowhere, he would become vitriolic and demeaning to the other speaker and thereby break the rules of proper speech/debate.

As for academics- I think there are many different types of reasoning that can be employed. After going through college and graduate school I found many types and all the JCF at work. As for the largest constituency- it seemed fairly equal between NF and NT- even in the philosophy dept where I worked as a research assistant.
 
Cool thanks. I'm definitely an Ni/Ti user, although I find it hard to work out Fe/Fi and am constantly changing my mind on my type! All tests say INFJ but I don't really trust online tests that much :) It's interesting, because before I learned about MBTI, if anyone asked me if I was a thinker or a feeler, I would have said thinker because I value MY thoughts over MY feelings and can get annoyed because often I find my emotions to be irrational or I just don't really know what I'm feeling! If I'm stressed or depressed I end up sitting around analysing, trying to work out what I'm feeling, trying to work out what I want - inside is chaos. However, I value other people's feeling over their thinking. I think I use Ti and Fe, which is what makes me this way. I value other people's feelings over my own, but not because I'm selfless, I don't think. It's just that a) I don't particularly value my own emotions that much and b) I'll be unhappy anyway if someone else is unhappy so there really isn't much of a distinction there!

Anyway, I'm rambling, sorry about that!

Thanks for the confirmation here. I wanted to make sure I was grasping everything firmly. There's so many stereotypes over everything that I end up getting confused!

Can I ask another question? When people say I have a very strong Ti - what does that mean in the context of an INFJ. Someone has explained this to me before but I've lost grasp of it again! Is it kind of about having certainty on things? So the "I just don't like them" and not questioning that - is that Ti working with Fe?

Thanks
 
A valid technical or logical point is valid regardless of the originator.
 
InvisibleJim said:
A valid technical or logical point is valid regardless of the originator.
Click to expand...
That doesn't mean anyone will listen :/ 99.9999999% of arguments take place outside a formal debate forum.
justeccentricnotinsane said:
Can I ask another question? When people say I have a very strong Ti - what does that mean in the context of an INFJ. Someone has explained this to me before but I've lost grasp of it again! Is it kind of about having certainty on things? So the "I just don't like them" and not questioning that - is that Ti working with Fe?

Thanks
Click to expand...
Naw, it's more about analyzing things and breaking them down so that you can explain to someone else in detail why each part is the way it is.

"I just don't like them" is Ni-Fe. Looking back at all your previous interactions with them and picking out one or two things that set you off, so that you can explain to someone else why you had that hunch: that's Ti.
 
InvisibleJim said:
A valid technical or logical point is valid regardless of the originator.
Click to expand...

Well, not always. There are always exceptions, though few and far between (like really far). The best example that comes to mind is in Philosophy of Religion, many academics argue the existence of God. Even if he/she could be logically proven/disprove, it doesn't matter because either God does or does not exist and there's no logic in that.

I guess this doesn't even address what I had in quotes but it's true that it doesn't matter who says it.
 
no, it does not matter, but people will respect and value a T's opinion more
 
aerosol said:
no, it does not matter, but people will respect and value a T's opinion more
Click to expand...

In an academic setting, oh yes. I also kind of find it funny that many of the academic sensors are intuitive wannabes but paradoxically at the same time, are super annoyed by us. Maybe that was just my English ta. Nothing against sensors in general but she was very broadly disliked.

But I would say that the NT is the ideal "academic" considering all the connotations of both.
 
It takes a T to write academic papers, but it takes an F to present them to the layperson. Fortunately, the same person can be both.
 
AUM said:
Let's face it, yeah, they are boring. That's why we have art.
Click to expand...

Who says Ts can't make art? Everyone is capable of whatever they want to do, regardless of type.
 
Elowen said:
Who says Ts can't make art? Everyone is capable of whatever they want to do, regardless of type.
Click to expand...

Who said Ts can't make art in the first place? When I said "they are boring" I meant the academic papers, not Ts.

Next time please clarify a point before jumping to conclusions.
 
AUM said:
Who said Ts can't make art in the first place? When I said "they are boring" I meant the academic papers, not Ts.

Next time please clarify a point before jumping to conclusions.
Click to expand...

Who said I was jumping to conclusions?

I didn't think you meant Ts were boring, otherwise I would have said so in my post. There's no need to be quite so defensive. I was just saying. Ts are capable of art. Fs can be capable of great debating skills. Type isn't the be all and end all. No need to let it define what you're capable of.
 
Elowen said:
Who said I was jumping to conclusions?

I didn't think you meant Ts were boring, otherwise I would have said so in my post. There's no need to be quite so defensive. I was just saying. Ts are capable of art. Fs can be capable of great debating skills. Type isn't the be all and end all. No need to let it define what you're capable of.
Click to expand...

OK, I apologize for the misunderstanding.

However, I still don't see how you assumed that I implied that Ts are not capable of art, and feelers are not capable in debate? If you noticed on my first post, I said that a person is capable of doing both.
 
AUM said:
OK, I apologize for the misunderstanding.

However, I still don't see how you assumed that I implied that Ts are not capable of art, and feelers are not capable in debate? If you noticed on my first post, I said that a person is capable of doing both.
Click to expand...

My response wasn't really directed at you. I did quote you, but I sort of just used your mention of art as a jumping-off point for what I wanted to say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back