This thread is great
In this context, INFJs want to be the most feel-y when talking about their sensitivity
In other contexts, it's "we're not overly sensitive"
Comedy
Which Feeler type is the least feel-y
- Thread starter ClevelandINTP
- Start date
This thread is great
In this context, INFJs want to be the most feel-y when talking about their sensitivity
In other contexts, it's "we're not overly sensitive"
Comedy
I get it. To the person being door slammed: That INFJ is so cold. Do they even feel? They must not, because they don't care.
To the INFJ: I feel this so much and I don't like it. I don't want to feel this way anymore: Door slam.
I'm super sensitive about so many things: senses, criticism, my environment, those around me, etc.
I wish I could turn my high sensitivity down, a lot.
Some INFJs find ways to do so, but I struggle.
You'll never hear this INFJ say that she's not sensitive though. Actually, I'm probably going to go cry in my pillow now because I think an INFJ broke your heart or something. Lol.
I would say INFJ. But the thing is, most think-y doesn’t necessarily mean least feel-y.
When you think about it, what are the types other than INFJ where both enneagram 2 and enneagram 5 can be found? None that I can think of. From this perspective it’s quite a flexible type. Type 2 INFJs will be a lot more feel-y than Type 5.
There is quite a wide spectrum of thinking/feeling within the INFJ type itself.
D
Deleted member 16771
D
Deleted member 16771
Yes, in terms of the amygdala.
The amygdala is responsible for emotional regulation in reaction to stimulus. An excitable amygdala (in addition to other factors such as number of dopamine receptors, &c.) makes one 'sensitive'. Introverts tend to have 'excitable amygdalas', extroverts much less so.
This is typically the kind of thing that a feeler would never say
But I'm sure my amygdala are full of feels.
D
Deleted member 16771
What I find interesting about the neurobiology of introversion vs extroversion is that it doesn't seem possible to have an introvert that isn't sensitive (or indeed 'feely').This is typically the kind of thing that a feeler would never say
But I'm sure my amygdala are full of feels.
Introversion is the behavioural symptom of sensitivity, not a cause.
Introverted Intuitives are by definition sensitive, and more feely than extroverted sensors, simply with how their brains are wired.
(Again, there seems only a bipolar a spectrum between ES and IN when the neurochemistry and neurobiology are taken into account.)
What about INT versus ENF?
Could it be that sensitive is here meant to be different from feely? Otherwise, we'd end up with funny things like ENFJs being on average less feely than INTPs.
I could easily imagine introversion being a symptom of sensitivity of a certain kind, though.
D
Deleted member 16771
Yes, but we have to note that 'feely' is only just a subset of 'emotional' anyway, and especially if we're adopting the definition of 'emotional regulation' as what happens in the amygdala.
So yes, I would say that INTPs are more emotional (sensitive) than ES types, and probably ENFJs, too. If you've ever witnessed an INTP rage meltdown, you'll agree, lol. They only appear less emotional because the response to stimulus is typically a logical/rational one.*
*Remember that an INTP getting agitated/upset/aggressive/incredulous/whatever about 'bullshit' is too an emotional response.
D
Deleted member 16771
So by this measure, we could rank the types like so:
Most Feely
1. INFP
2. INTP
3. INFJ
4. INTJ
5. ENFP
6. ENTP
7. ENFJ
8. ENTJ
9. ISFP
10. ISTP
11. ISFJ
12. ISTJ
13. ESFP
14. ESTP
15. ESFJ
16. ESTJ
Least Feely
Not sure about this, though - especially the position of ESFJ. ESFJs are weird, in that they are undoubtedly Sensors, but have a lot of intuitive responses and behaviours.
Most Feely
1. INFP
2. INTP
3. INFJ
4. INTJ
5. ENFP
6. ENTP
7. ENFJ
8. ENTJ
9. ISFP
10. ISTP
11. ISFJ
12. ISTJ
13. ESFP
14. ESTP
15. ESFJ
16. ESTJ
Least Feely
Not sure about this, though - especially the position of ESFJ. ESFJs are weird, in that they are undoubtedly Sensors, but have a lot of intuitive responses and behaviours.
D
Deleted member 16771
In fact, I would say that INTPs are so misunderstood when it comes to emotionality. They're so sensitive that they just do not know how to deal with it all and need to actively avoid emotional stimuli in order to avoid becoming overwhelmed. The INTPs biggest problem is an extremely high sensitivity level coupled with an extremely low emotional coping, which is probably why they're the most dissatisfied with their jobs and most likely to get into drugs and alcohol in tertiary education - a top spot shared with INFPs.
To me, INFPs and INTPs are very alike in terms of how they mirror each other: one is the literature nerd, the other the science nerd - the same level of sensitivity coped with by opposite means.
To me, INFPs and INTPs are very alike in terms of how they mirror each other: one is the literature nerd, the other the science nerd - the same level of sensitivity coped with by opposite means.
This feels true!
I grew up with an INTP brother, and now watching his INTP daughter grow up. Very feely and sensitive beings, huge consciousness, constantly facing dilemmas. His wife and mother of his daughter is ESFJ, who is sensitive, but in a neurotic way, not 'feely' as they are.
Oh! And my dad (ISTP) who's the toughest gun in the neighborhood, is so easily moved that he himself calls it a social handicap.
D
Deleted member 16771
Yup, sounds about right, though is does add to the enigma of the ESFJ...This feels true!
Lol.Oh! And my dad (ISTP) who's the toughest gun in the neighborhood, is so easily moved that he himself calls it a social handicap.
Suppose the personality types are determined by the sensitivity level of a child and then their preferred coping mechanisms (e.g. INxPs have the same sensitivity level, but it's coped with in different ways).
Mhm. Do you think my brother was born INxP or INxx, and chose T or TP to cope/survive? It would be cruel of nature to let an INFP grow up with an Ti-dom parent ...
- Aug 21, 2015
- 9,446
- 89,067
- 2,590
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 5w4
While I am enjoying the discussion and I enjoyed @Ren's video about the topic, I don't necessarily agree. The concept of depth and breadth is interesting and likable. The proposal that Sensors are less sensitive than Intuitives is what I don't agree with, but my basis for this is purely through interactions with other humans. I don't think personal experiences offer reliable data unless those personal experiences are collected from a pool of the population.
I think Sensors with Feeling at or near the top of their stacks are more sensitive than most Intuitives, who have Ni or Ne at or near the top of their stacks. Ni/Ne block the sensitivity. It is a mind function, while feeling is a "heart" function. Those with feeling first on their stacks have nothing to block the feeling, whether that feeling is breadth or depth, and those who interact with the world as Sensors are more likely to be bigger feelers.
I also notice that Thinkers with undeveloped feeling tend to hang onto feelings and hold grudges longer (depth) and be more emotionally volatile (breadth) when something does make them emotional than Feelers are, even if Feelers approach the world with more feeling in general.
I think Sensors with Feeling at or near the top of their stacks are more sensitive than most Intuitives, who have Ni or Ne at or near the top of their stacks. Ni/Ne block the sensitivity. It is a mind function, while feeling is a "heart" function. Those with feeling first on their stacks have nothing to block the feeling, whether that feeling is breadth or depth, and those who interact with the world as Sensors are more likely to be bigger feelers.
I also notice that Thinkers with undeveloped feeling tend to hang onto feelings and hold grudges longer (depth) and be more emotionally volatile (breadth) when something does make them emotional than Feelers are, even if Feelers approach the world with more feeling in general.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 16771
Possibly, though I wouldn't say 'chose'.
If we imagine that the higher brain functions take the longest to develop (though I don't know exactly), and they develop in response to the excitability of the amygdala and other lower brain functions, then him developing TP to cope with this should be in response to feedback - in other words, it 'worked for him', and so that was the direction of development. Parental feedback would have been major. All hypothetical, of course.
The dominant function is thus what works most effectively for them and their sensitivity level - we found Ni to be the best coping strategy, him Ti.