| Socionics Personals |  | Female
Straight
16-25
Oceania
Libra
ENFj |
|  | Male
Straight
16-25
Middle East
Sagittarius
INTj |
|  | Male
Straight
26-35
North America
Pisces
INXj |
| | Join now! |
Who is who?Learn how to convert between different systems
V.I.An introduction into the widely used Socionics Visual Identification technique
TestsA collection of Socionics related tests and quizes
Q & AsAsk a Socionics related question or provide an answer to an existing one
ArticlesVarious articles on the subject of Socionics and Types in general
ForumsWant to discuss Type? Head to Socionics Forums!
|
| Questions & Answers |
| Question #1103062993 | Tuesday, 14-Dec-2004 |
|
|
| What is the real connection between the Feeling function and emotions, altruism and compassion? People tend to assume that being a Feeling type is the same thing as being an emotional, altruistic, and compassionate type. But as far as I can tell, the Feeling function (defined by Jung) is just a function that evaluates things according to 'good' or 'bad', or 'acceptable', 'unacceptable', etc, and so, a Feeling type is not necessarily compassionate, emotional, etc. It seems to me that a compassionate, altruistic person can be any type, not just Feeling. Am I mistaken and missing something? -- Anonymous |
|
|
Your Answers: 1+ |
| A1 That's right, any type can be emotional, compassionate and altruistic. However, the Feeling types are able to deliver more powerful and sincere emotions and compassion in comparison with the Thinking types. But let's not forget, although ENFp and ENFj, for example, are both considered as Feeling types, technically, ENFp is the semi-Feeling type, as ENFp's Feeling is not the main function, but ENFj's or ESFj's Feeling is. Any Thinking type with the Thinking as the main function (i.e. ESTj, ENTj etc.,) would have a notably weak emotion and compassion compared to Feeling-Feeling type, which is probably why it looks like there is a connection. The semi-Feeling types like ESFp and ENFp have their Feeling as the second strongest function, which means it is on and off all the time, and when it's on it could be as strong (if not stronger) as Feeling when it is the main function. Then there are types that have their Feeling as their hidden agendas, like ENTp and ESTp for example. The specifics of the hidden agenda often pushes people to acquire qualities which are not supported by their strong functions. So some ENTps and ESTps can come across as very emotional and compassionate, making others and themselves believe they are the Feeling types. Same is true for the introvert types as well. The altruism has probably the least connection with the Feeling function than the emotion and compassion. -- Admin |
| A2 Extraverted feeling may result in some altruism, but appearingly the extraverted thinker may give the impression of being altruistic it depends on the principles he is applying. If he sees that you are deviating from certain "formulas" which must be applied according to him, he will help you apply it. In certain cases, it may be of your good to get something that the extraverted thinker considers as applying this formula. Let me give you an example: if you're a student and you are having difficulties in math and the extraverted thinker considers that acquiring certain skills in logical reasonning important for the human-being he will help you studying the subject. You may think that he is altruistic but in fact he help you for the sake of the formula or in other words the principle. To summarize what I'm trying to say: altruism is a vague word and you have to look through egotic motivations to know whether this altruism is due to the usage of the feeling-function or not. -- Anonymous |
| A3 "Feeling" in Jung's terms is not concerned with emotional expression necessarily. It is a 'rational' function after all. Feeling as a psychological function is perhaps better described as holistic reasoning; whereas, thinking is analytic reasoning. A thinker will have a list of objective reasons, statements that are either true or false, why altruism is the best strategy to achieve a particular goal. By contrast, a feeler suggests altruism because he knows it to be good. When questioned as to how he knows altruism is good, he won't be able to tell you (at least while functioning from his feeling function). Hence to a feeler something is good when it "feels" good. To a thinker something is good when it meets the criteria describing a good thing. -- metroGnome, the ostensible INTj |
| *Please note that the opinions expressed are not necessarily those of socionics.com* |
Page 1 |
| Would you like to add anything? |
(When posting, we ask you to make the effort to qualify your opinions.)
|
|
