Feelers: how would you describe feeling?
- Thread starter Gaze
- Start date
I'm a really empathetic person, such that it's become an integral part of my reasoning with anything I do that involves other people. I'm always looking at it from their side and giving them the benefit of the doubt. It makes it a bit hard to write to convince sometimes.
I'm not aware of any big myths myself, so I can't help you there.
I'm not aware of any big myths myself, so I can't help you there.
- Nov 12, 2008
- 14,153
- 1,334
- 0
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/so/sp
For me it is placing high importance on the emotional, social, and unspoken nuances of the world and others around me. People are important, and I want them to be the best they can be at all times. It also means that emotions have a strong impact on me and they must be taken into strong consideration.
A) I would describe feelinhg, as a sense off like... Going with the flow, that your body gives off, as it smoothes into the groves that the world produces.
B) It displays... As it displays. I can't answer this one.
c) It just flows out. I almost don't choose what I express, I just either allow, or don't allow access to the mushy grooves of emotions.
The biggest myths? That we have no backbone, and can't make descisions.
Values based reasoning.
Probably in the sense that I'm always asking myself "Does this fit with my values?", and equally when dealing with other people's actions "Does their behaviour fit with their values?".
That "Feeling" = "Emotions".
"It was a stupid, naive, idealistic and childish decision. But I wouldn't want to live in a world where we didn't try the stupid, naive, idealistic and childish thing sometimes." - Jake, from The Animorphs.
In a nutshell.
In a nutshell.
Thing about feeling is that it's easy to fall into stereotypes. I was a very emotionally sensitive child, and most would often respond to me sensitively. They saw it only as a negative or a weakness and rarely as a positive. They either were too harsh, rough or walked on egg shells around me. This colored my perception of who i was or how negatively I saw my characteristics. I was treated as someone who needed to be caudled or handled delicately. As a result, I always felt compelled to act or behave as others expected, acting out "feeler" stereotypes rather than feeling as I had a self outside of how I was treated or what was expected.
Now that i am older, I realize that some of what i displayed was really a reflection of what others expected of someone who was considered emotionally expressive. Since there was limited understanding or appreciation of this level of sensitivity, especially treated as a sign of weakness, I learned to resent everyone for treating me as this overly sensitive person whose qualities were a defect rather than a personality quirk.
In most cases, people pitied who and how i was because of the level of emotionality or sensitivity. Some still do this today, which amazes me. They treat a quieter, less assertive personality as a sign of inability to speak up for oneself or as a sign that you don't know who you are, and what you're capable of. They see it as a childlike quality rather than realize and accept that I really don't feel the need interact with people in a dominant, assertive way.
I don't have a need to rebel or prove my value to someone nor do I need to exert a controlling influence over what others think, feel, or do. So, if this is interpreted as meekness or weakness, then by all means this is fine. But, just a warning, don't mistake my "feeling" for weakening. It's a choice.
So, how something is interpreted has a strong effect on how we see ourselves. If a quality or trait is treated as a flaw or defect, than we may see and feel less, devalued, or inadequate because of these characteristics. If we are socialized to think it's always positive, then that's another extreme. But if we learn the pros and cons or strengths and potential weaknesses of this quality, without feeling that we are less because of these qualities, then we're more likely to have positive experiences of being "feelers" and will be much better able to manage our feelings and handle our emotions more efficiently and effectively.
Over the years, I came to realize that in many cases, all I ever really wanted or needed was a fair amount of understanding, and when someone gave this without pitying me, it did a lot to build my self esteem.
Understanding goes a long way . . .
Now that i am older, I realize that some of what i displayed was really a reflection of what others expected of someone who was considered emotionally expressive. Since there was limited understanding or appreciation of this level of sensitivity, especially treated as a sign of weakness, I learned to resent everyone for treating me as this overly sensitive person whose qualities were a defect rather than a personality quirk.
In most cases, people pitied who and how i was because of the level of emotionality or sensitivity. Some still do this today, which amazes me. They treat a quieter, less assertive personality as a sign of inability to speak up for oneself or as a sign that you don't know who you are, and what you're capable of. They see it as a childlike quality rather than realize and accept that I really don't feel the need interact with people in a dominant, assertive way.
I don't have a need to rebel or prove my value to someone nor do I need to exert a controlling influence over what others think, feel, or do. So, if this is interpreted as meekness or weakness, then by all means this is fine. But, just a warning, don't mistake my "feeling" for weakening. It's a choice.
So, how something is interpreted has a strong effect on how we see ourselves. If a quality or trait is treated as a flaw or defect, than we may see and feel less, devalued, or inadequate because of these characteristics. If we are socialized to think it's always positive, then that's another extreme. But if we learn the pros and cons or strengths and potential weaknesses of this quality, without feeling that we are less because of these qualities, then we're more likely to have positive experiences of being "feelers" and will be much better able to manage our feelings and handle our emotions more efficiently and effectively.
Over the years, I came to realize that in many cases, all I ever really wanted or needed was a fair amount of understanding, and when someone gave this without pitying me, it did a lot to build my self esteem.
Understanding goes a long way . . .
Last edited:
I routinely test as an INFJ, but sometimes as an INTJ on the online MBTI. That said, a Jungian Analyst recently told me that in her view the online tests were not the full montey. ( I believe she specifically referred to the Humanmetrics test) I am not sure I agree as most of the Jungians are Ludites. (I.M.O.)
That said I go along with the notion that I am a feeling type but one who was "encouraged" not to show or have feelings, and to present as a thinking type, even to myself. The result is my decisions, in the moment, are ruled by feelings which bubble out of my unconscious based on stimulation from the outside. Without actively engaging part of my consciousness as a witness to these reactions, I will babel to myself that my actions are all based on reason. While a part of me can observe these feelings in action I still find it difficult to identify and categorize them.
I feel the same way, though I'm no feeler. People are important; their feelings are worth taking into consideration in most cases.