D
Which Feeler type is the least feel-y
- Thread starter ClevelandINTP
- Start date
I was thinking ISFJ and INFJ, because both have the potential to have pretty developed Ti-tertiary, and Si-Ti / Ni-Ti can lead to very logical beings I think.
The thing is, I realize now that a type can very well be both logical and feely. INFJs and ISFJs are pretty well-balanced in this respect, and those with repressed Fe among them are exceptions rather than the rule (and not very healthy ones at that).
If we count breath and depth as two different dimensions of feeling, then I would agree that INFP would be the 'most feely'. As for the 'least feely', I'd probably go with a feeling type that is both sensing (more down to earth) and extroverted (more likely to bounce back quickly from emotional stimuli): ESFJ / ESFP.
The thing is, I realize now that a type can very well be both logical and feely. INFJs and ISFJs are pretty well-balanced in this respect, and those with repressed Fe among them are exceptions rather than the rule (and not very healthy ones at that).
If we count breath and depth as two different dimensions of feeling, then I would agree that INFP would be the 'most feely'. As for the 'least feely', I'd probably go with a feeling type that is both sensing (more down to earth) and extroverted (more likely to bounce back quickly from emotional stimuli): ESFJ / ESFP.
D
Deleted member 16771
@Ren @Deleted member 16771 that’s good from a neutral standpoint but what @ClevelandINTP seems to be seeking is actually the least chaotic feeling judger from a Dom T perspective. I think that leads to a different outcome.
Impact Character
folding paper cranes ⭐
So, your friend wanted to know if there were less irrational-subjective feelers to deal with? 
Ti doesn't necessarily need to be head start. It's just most people accept things under the (a) does it work and (b) do I like it criteria
INTPs get a real bad rap on the EQ front--almost to a point where it's exaggerated or a sort of MBTI folklore. I understand and recognize your statement hits these notes, and this is not a personal attack--it's more to hear it from the horse's mouth
Most of the feedback I have gotten on the Emotional Intelligence front is not that I am not emotionally intelligent. It's actually a subtle opposite. INTPs usually are very emotional intelligent in regards to awareness of what is going on and what is right and wrong in social settings. The perception of being emotionally unintelligent is often due to execution of our mannerisms and inability to express emotion in near real time compounded by expectations of society of what those should be. Then further compounded with our stubbornness to conform or accept them as truth at face-value. It's possible we come to resent it to which would further complicate things
Fair warning: controversial statements ahead
Ni, from my experience, is mostly bullshit, especially from Ni Dom/Aux, and it has a higher probability to be compounded when using ordering functions of Te or Fe
Ni will come up with a possible future. Ok, fair enough. Except that possible future is usually incomplete (how can it not be), and relies on wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too many assumptions that are 50-50 at best. I take a lot pleasure in proving Ni at worst false, in the middle unreliable, and at best unreproducible
So then take some bullshit proposition from Ni and then have it willed it into existence via some ordering function either Te or Fe, and you end up with a large, if not the vast majority of our world's systems and social structures being half-baked, compounded and looped over time using the same process
It has virtually nothing to do with being pinned down logically nor is it a requirement that everything fits a box when the majority of the box is bullshit. The issue is not that things need to be 100% accurate or logical; the issue is when people believe and follow them as if they are, and even worse promote and push the same to others. And then it’s further compounded when continued to drive forward obstinately
That is the core disconnect
As a critical thinker, I accept and greatly appreciate Ni insights or any insights. Ni is good at that; however, again it is highly susceptible to converging on incomplete or un-backtested assumptions. This does not mean that society should not move forward with imperfect information; what it means is most of what is thought to be truth is subjective. It really pushes an INTPs button, and is what actually drives us to push things that make a difference in the world that are unconventional and authentic
And we do it not for the sake of "order" or "power" or "control" and the abuse that is a high probability outcome of each
Last edited:
Marxism in a nutshell
I think your account is a little too black and white, but there is definitely a dimension of truth to it. Ni-doms can cling all their lives to a heavily subjective vision that they keep rationalizing over time and in spite of contradiction.
ESFPs can be pretty cold, but I literally clash with them. Not always, though. It’s like one of those things you see right away, and you’re just like, yeah, we won’t get along
Last edited:
Not entirely surprising if Jung was an INTP
So many ways to humor that it’s true, though. Suppose there is a 50-50 possible Ni future. One path is willed into existence or attempted to be willed. Whether or not the outcome of that execution is successful does not mean the other path was incorrect or inferior. It just didn’t happen is the only truth that can hold without any other information
Another analogy to this is the whole the victors write history. Anyone can contort how something that already happened, happened
On the whole I agree with what you are saying - any function used without balance is subject to an analogous criticism. Just to play with some ideas ....
Mother Nature is intrinsically an intuitive in both orientations. Just look at the way the world works, with its multitude of possibilities actualised and explored in overwhelming variety. But she is balanced because the possibilities are weeded our according to which of them actually work in practice in an unsentimental evaluation and judgement - but one that manifests in exquisite beauty as well as cold selection. This Darwinian process perhaps characterises the essential balance of a healthy relationship between the future and the present, what might be, what is actually possible and what actually is.
No one human type embodies all of this - we each have natural orientations that readily give us part of the truth but inhibit us from grasping other parts easily. We need each other’s perspectives. I don’t make value judgements myself on the relative worth of individual functions - they all give valid but different windows into the world, past, present and future, and the sum is greater than its parts. Each of us may find some types easier company than others though. My own challenge is on the E/I boundary, rather than the F/T.
I agree with most of that, at least on the mother nature front. What you said can literally be somewhat mind-blowing
Darwinism applied to social constructs can be heavily manipulated though to ensure survival of those that took perceived initiative and leverage to sustain power, and to some degree, survival
And again, all of that is highly subjective
It would imply that humans are somewhat cannibalistic with their decisioning as to who has a higher chance of survival and who does not
Sort of playing god to a degree, and who gods the gods
Darwinism applied to social constructs can be heavily manipulated though to ensure survival of those that took perceived initiative and leverage to sustain power, and to some degree, survival
And again, all of that is highly subjective
It would imply that humans are somewhat cannibalistic with their decisioning as to who has a higher chance of survival and who does not
Sort of playing god to a degree, and who gods the gods
Cons and hackers find loopholes in this every single day
And corruption exists, too
And corruption exists, too
Still not quite sure who is the least feel-y as we got a three-way tie at the moment, but whittling this down to INFJ, ISFJ and ESFP. All three are status quo types.
--ESFP are driven by highly transactional, real-time interactions (Se) which are backed by highly subjective personal values (Fi)--sounds like a hot mess
--INFJ definitely has a more a cold interior (not a bad thing), but more willing to imagine different futures to raise the status quo. Feelings expressed though can be turbulent and outright cold if pushed to a limit
--ISFJ seems the most stable of the three deferring to successful implementation of things in the past. From my experience, whether or not ISFJ is the most feely or not, they do not make a spectacle of it as much as the other two
Would probably lean towards ISFJ as a personal opinion. To further back it up with Enneagram, ESFPs are like the stereotype of type 4. And I personally know a few INFJs who are type 4s. I have never once encountered an ISFJ who is a type 4
--ESFP are driven by highly transactional, real-time interactions (Se) which are backed by highly subjective personal values (Fi)--sounds like a hot mess
--INFJ definitely has a more a cold interior (not a bad thing), but more willing to imagine different futures to raise the status quo. Feelings expressed though can be turbulent and outright cold if pushed to a limit
--ISFJ seems the most stable of the three deferring to successful implementation of things in the past. From my experience, whether or not ISFJ is the most feely or not, they do not make a spectacle of it as much as the other two
Would probably lean towards ISFJ as a personal opinion. To further back it up with Enneagram, ESFPs are like the stereotype of type 4. And I personally know a few INFJs who are type 4s. I have never once encountered an ISFJ who is a type 4
Sorry to hear that. Yes, I agree with the above statement ENxJs to a degree