Is the ability to feel empathy type related

[Azeroffs]

Oh, so Fi is deep and Fe is shallow. Yeah, I agree with that.

In general, extroverted elements could be considered more shallow than introverted ones. Besides you could argue that empathy is worthless without sympathy. A murderer might relate to his victim's feelings, but it doesn't change anything.

Don't get all butt-hurt because you think your feeling element is shallow. According to that way of thinking, Te is more shallow than Ti anyway.

I find it really irritating when people get offended because people say Ni>Ne or Fi>Fe. First off, neither is really better than the other, and secondly there is very superficial similarities between them anyway. The only similarity between Fe/Fi as an example is that they are both internal judgment elements. The core of an element is in internal/dynamic/fields. Fe/Fi only share internal, and so comparing them is mostly fruitless past a certain point.

[Blaze]

I think Se should be at the bottom of that list, lol.

i kinda don't. Se types know what people want, need, are about. they may not express empathy directly, but they make moves that take into account how people feel and in this way show empathy.

[07490]

i kinda don't. Se types know what people want, need, are about. they may not express empathy directly, but they make moves that take into account how people feel and in this way show empathy.

Don't you think that if you relate information element like that, that anything can be related to any information element.

[Blaze]

Don't you think that if you relate information element like that, that anything can be related to any information element.

yeah it's one of the weaknesses of this theory lol.

but Se is as empathetic as any other element. to me, it's logic that's the fail for empathy, not sensing.

[07490]

it's logic that's the fail for empathy, not sensing.

But then I can easily just say that being Logical can be the best kindness of all thought process a mankind can have, For example, Being logical helps one think rationally, can help a person be more structure and even avoid empathy problems as well. My point is that is too vague to say is related to empathy becuase of what you said,

i kinda don't. Se types know what people want, need, are about. they may not express empathy directly, but they make moves that take into account how people feel and in this way show empathy.

It sounds like in your quote that this ego individuals has good intentions, but by no mean can you say that Se is directly related to empathy because of his intentions.

Claiming that is related to empathy because you have seen an ego be kind hearted to other doesn't really prove the direct thought process of this information element. if anything it will cause a lot of mixed up to people who just recently learn socionics. I think it is better to just leave Sensing for sensing, intuition, logic and feeling as their name suggest. but surely you can always make a claim directly opposite as the name suggested, sure, like my Logical example above how that can relate to feeling information element.

[Blaze]

actually i completely disagree with you. Se catches on to peoples motivations, needs, power, and purpose. it's good at knowing what people want, what motivates them, and why. to me, this is as empathic. a person is defined by more than just their feelings. so, consequently, i am unconvinced by your position. further, i trust that most people can eventually make their own sense out of socionics. i highly doubt that anyone will be influenced one way or another by what i post.

[07490]

actually i completely disagree with you. Se catches on to peoples motivations, needs, power, and purpose. it's good at knowing what people want, what motivates them, and why. to me, this is as empathic.

But my point is that you can make claims that empathic is relating to all 8 information elements like that.

[Blaze]

But my point is that you can make claims that empathic is relating to all 8 information elements like that.

precisely.

[Joy]

Oh, so Fi is deep and Fe is shallow. Yeah, I agree with that.

Just like Ti is deep and Te is shallow.

[AQ]

Though each human being can understand and does require empathy in various forms, there are some who I see make do with a minimal amount of it.

My personal experience has been that the Business Logic lot generally show less empathy than the rest.

Also, I am reading Organisational Behaviour these days and I think there is a correlation between larger principles that have been documented by research and some Socionics theories.

x----------------------------xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-------------------------xx----------------------------xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx--x


For example (from an OB book):

Research on Negotiation showed that negotiators who feigned anger had an advantage over their opponents. Because, when anger is displayed, the opponents conclude that the negotiator has conceded all they had and so the opponent gives in.
(My observation: Shows the single-minded goal approach of negotiator, where people may become resources for a larger end...)

Further, research found that "people who suffered damage to the emotional centres of their brains may be the best negotiators because they are not likely to overcorrect (overcompensate??/harbour guilt??) when faced with negative outcomes."

The above seems to show lack of Fi, especially when contrasted with another example given in the text--

Gandhi's view of customers is discussed. It is suggested the employees think that the customer be seen as the most important visitor and that s/he is not dependent on the store. Rather, the organisation is dependent on them. SO, the customer is doing the organisation a favour (yes, that is the word used) by giving a chance to serve them.

(This is the other extreme of coasting on only Fi, which also involves a blatant disregard for creative Ti. And as Polikujm put it, the creative Ti-s make do fairly well with their logical assimilation of situations... but that is called "managing" the situation, not that it is feeling for another)

Also, the example of Phineas Gage is discussed, who became unable to process deeper emotions after a serious head injury. He turned highly aggressive and died soon. His example provides a clear correlation between biology and personality.

x----------------------------xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-------------------------xx----------------------------xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx--x


Coming back to the original question, my experience has been that some can't easily extend themselves to others, and this does include some F, T and N types, too (they are at various stages in the continuum of narcissism or self-aggrandisement).

So apart from wondering about the Business Logic types, I am not sure if this is type related. If it shows itself to be, my vote would be for the Fi-leading ones (though sometimes this does make them take sides).


zzz/

[Marie84]

actually i completely disagree with you. Se catches on to peoples motivations, needs, power, and purpose. it's good at knowing what people want, what motivates them, and why. to me, this is as empathic. a person is defined by more than just their feelings. so, consequently, i am unconvinced by your position. further, i trust that most people can eventually make their own sense out of socionics. i highly doubt that anyone will be influenced one way or another by what i post.

Those with strong Se don't have a particularly good understanding of peoples motives due to weak Intuitive IE's, they mainly make assumptions based on external factors, that can be misleading

[Blaze]

Those with strong Se don't have a particularly good understanding of peoples motives due to weak Intuitive IE's, they mainly make assumptions based on external factors, that can be misleading

infj would see if this way being the conflictor of estp.

motivations can be easily deduced from obvious behavior. intuition can be wrong just as easily as sensing.

[Marie84]

infj would see if this way being the conflictor of estp.

I was referring to all sensors, not just SLE's.

There's a bit about this under Ne in SLE's and SEE's on the wiki, for example

"The individual is uncertain of other people's motives, intentions, and abilities and prefers to give them clear commands and assignments and judge their intentions and potential by whether or not they fulfill these demands.

He tends to openly express mistrust and skepticism towards all unexpected or novel behavior and developments, as well as towards information about things that he or she has not experienced directly. This mistrustful attitude usually goes away after the person has the chance to deal with the new thing, event, or behavior directly for a period of time and get used to it."

motivations can be easily deduced from obvious behavior. intuition can be wrong just as easily as sensing.

Indeed

[UDP]

feeling empathy is also related to survival mechamism, somewhat...

ST types aren't exactly going to get by on being super "People-People", not in any great depth. So trying to be overly empathetic isn't really fruitful for them.

Where as, obviously, an EII isn't going to make a lot of headway in life by trying to be a blunt and aggressive, domineering type. So it pays for them to be empathetic and sensitive, because that's what they deal with best; that is an area of skill and strength for them. Furthermore, such is an aspect of reality they feel comfortable dealing with - it's something they have skill in, where as "heavy Se" stuff is something they prefer to stay away form psychologically.


I'm being somewhat general and simplistic here, but hopefully you see what i'm getting at.

[Blaze]

I was referring to all sensors, not just SLE's.

There's a bit about this under Ne in SLE's and SEE's on the wiki, for example

"The individual is uncertain of other people's motives, intentions, and abilities and prefers to give them clear commands and assignments and judge their intentions and potential by whether or not they fulfill these demands.

He tends to openly express mistrust and skepticism towards all unexpected or novel behavior and developments, as well as towards information about things that he or she has not experienced directly. This mistrustful attitude usually goes away after the person has the chance to deal with the new thing, event, or behavior directly for a period of time and get used to it."



Indeed

i don't trust everything on the wiki. i do see your point, and the other side of the point is that SLE in particular judges people's motivations based on their actual behavior. if you have ever worked for an SLE you might know what i mean. they are great to work for...seem to know exactly what staff want and need. they're good to live with in a way, too. they know what you want them to do without even being asked, then, they just do it.

i like Ryu's conception a little better. rather than thinking about empathy, it's easier for me to think about whether the person is people oriented or not.

[thePirate]

infj would see if this way being the conflictor of estp.

motivations can be easily deduced from obvious behavior. intuition can be wrong just as easily as sensing.

Thats like saying you would see the particular statement above as true because your an entp and have a limited understanding of people.

Come on man.

Saying intuition can be just as easily wrong as sensing is a gotdamn cop-out. It can be wrong, yes. Just as easily as Se? No, intuitive types generally have far greater depth and accuracy because their criteria for measuring this & focus (vs those with Se) are different. Motivations, Needs, And Purpose all fall into this category, maybe even power depending on your definition. Se determines motivation through a shallow, external point of view. It sure as hell doesn't know what other people need on any level where depth is required. All Se is concerned about is what THAT person needs.


Read the functions buddy. Or observe people in real life.

[Blaze]

Thats like saying you would see the particular statement above as true because your an entp and have a limited understanding of people.

no, it is not. it's like saying that each type values it's own quadra values and judge things according to them. if you had read what i was saying carefully you would see that.

Come on man.

Saying intuition can be just as easily wrong as sensing is a gotdamn cop-out. It can be wrong, yes. Just as easily as Se? No, intuitive types generally have far greater depth and accuracy because their criteria for measuring this & focus (vs those with Se) are different. Motivations, Needs, And Purpose all fall into this category, maybe even power depending on your definition. Se determines motivation through a shallow, external point of view. It sure as hell doesn't know what other people need on any level where depth is required. All Se is concerned about is what THAT person needs.

i don't agree that intuition outweighs sensing. your evaluation of Se as shallow reflects your Ne bias.

Read the functions buddy. Or observe people in real life.

well that's interesting. and you are how old exactly? and have been coming here for how long?

[thePirate]

If you were saying ANYTHING AT ALL, maybe I would have got that. Its obvious we all judge things through our quadra values, saying it as a way to devalidate her point is absurd. Because she in particular doesn't value Se, she can't make any claims regarding it? They must be dismissed? A little arrogant dont you think?

This isnt Ne bias. READ Se/Ne, first off.

ITS IN THE FUNCTION DESCRIPTIONS THEMSELVES

Honestly, how dense can you get? Do you even have evidence to back your claims? I base what Ive said based off the theory itself and IRL examples that match up, sensors are not great at that sort of thing, self-admittedly, if you ever got close to one, you would know that.

what does my age OR time on this forum have anything to do with this discussion?

Stick to the gotdamn topic.

[Marie84]

i don't trust everything on the wiki.

Fair enough, but the IE descriptions are fairly consistent with the average Model A definitions.
Example from Augusta's description of Ne:

Perceives information about objects' potential energy — for example, information about the physical and mental abilities and potential of a person. This perception implies the ability to understand the structure of objects and phenomena and grasp their inner substance.
This element determines a person's ability or inability to see the real potential energy of one's surroundings. -link

Pretty much the same thing the Wiki stated, seeing hidden potential in others.

i do see your point, and the other side of the point is that SLE in particular judges people's motivations based on their actual behavior. if you have ever worked for an SLE you might know what i mean. they are great to work for...seem to know exactly what staff want and need. they're good to live with in a way, too. they know what you want them to do without even being asked, then, they just do it.

I agree with you, and that's one of the talents of sensors.They can pick-up on things within their environment that intuitive types, in my case an Se PoLR, would easily miss.
There is no such thing as a perfect or "best" type, everyone has their flaws and talents.

i like Ryu's conception a little better. rather than thinking about empathy, it's easier for me to think about whether the person is people oriented or not.

I think, in this case, it's more a matter of quadra values, as the things you'll probably focus on are external factors in people (Fe related) rather than internal qualities (Fi). Neither is right or wrong though, it's just a matter of perspective

[Marie84]

If you were saying ANYTHING AT ALL, maybe I would have got that. Its obvious we all judge things through our quadra values, saying it as a way to devalidate her point is absurd. Because she in particular doesn't value Se, she can't make any claims regarding it? They must be dismissed? A little arrogant dont you think?

This isnt Ne bias. READ Se/Ne, first off.

ITS IN THE FUNCTION DESCRIPTIONS THEMSELVES

Honestly, how dense can you get? Do you even have evidence to back your claims? I base what Ive said based off the theory itself and IRL examples that match up, sensors are not great at that sort of thing, self-admittedly, if you ever got close to one, you would know that.

what does my age OR time on this forum have anything to do with this discussion?

Stick to the gotdamn topic.

Thanks for this.
I'm really trying to stay objective about this as it wasn't, at all, my intention to slam any types or IE's; just pointing out what doesn't make sense

[1981slater]

There is no such thing as a perfect or "best" type, everyone has their flaws and talents.

Have you ever heard of the ILE ego?

Ti-ENTp examples

Albert Einstein



Bill Gates



Nikola Tesla



etc,etc

[Blaze]

Fair enough, but the IE descriptions are fairly consistent with the average Model A definitions.
Example from Augusta's description of Ne:

Perceives information about objects' potential energy — for example, information about the physical and mental abilities and potential of a person. This perception implies the ability to understand the structure of objects and phenomena and grasp their inner substance.
This element determines a person's ability or inability to see the real potential energy of one's surroundings. -link

Pretty much the same thing the Wiki stated, seeing hidden potential in others.



I agree with you, and that's one of the talents of sensors.They can pick-up on things within their environment that intuitive types, in my case an Se PoLR, would easily miss.
There is no such thing as a perfect or "best" type, everyone has their flaws and talents.



I think, in this case, it's more a matter of quadra values, as the things you'll probably focus on are external factors in people (Fe related) rather than internal qualities (Fi). Neither is right or wrong though, it's just a matter of perspective

yes we are on an agreement. and, fwiw i wasn't trying to slam you, just pointing out what i see as fairly obvious: that no one can be completely objective, that we all see things through our dominant IE's and quadra values. i'm not sure why you were offended, because i didn't intend any offense, and the meaning that thePirate is giving to what i said is not accurate. (guess your understanding of motives isn't really all that fine tuned after all, is it, Pirate?)

em·pa·thy (ěm'pə-thē)

n.

1. Identification with and understanding of another's situation, feelings, and motives.
2. The attribution of one's own feelings to an object.

as we can see, there are multiple avenues on the road to empathy. a person's situation is external and contextual, therefore perception through extraverted elements apply. feelings and motives are internal, but manifested externally as well. so it's really the whole ball of wax, the ability to see an entire situation.

further, just for the sake of clarity and not to re-state the obvious, the object of empathy also has a type. what that person experiences as an empathic response from another is likely to be filtered through quadra values. so, what feels empathic to an istj is likely to be experienced differently by another type. istj would likely respond better to an Fe oriented empathic response. for myself, an Si response feels empathic to me....someone who points out the practical details of the situation and helps me to understand my body reaction.

i don't know that we can necessarily separate IE's from one another in practical application. the giver of empathy will execute their entire ego...so it's going to be FiNe, TiSe etc etc. an empathic response is going to come from the entire person, driven by their woefully incomplete comprehension of the person and their situation. not one aspect of their type. so IE's can only be separated theoretically not practically, thus rendering our entire effort here useless. ultimately, the receiver of the empathic response will be the one to actually define whether the response is experienced as empathic.

finally, 1) i am not trying to make an argument that Se leads the way in empathy. what i am saying is that sensing whether Se or Si, captures the details of the situation in context in ways that may be superior to intuition. 2) this entire discussion on which IE is more empathic is theoretical to the point of uselessness.

[xkj220]

Bill Gates

I'm pretty sure Bill Gates is LIE.

[717495]

I've always related to tesla, compared to more ILE stereotypes. Probably an ILI. He definitely exhibits an Ni mindset.

But crap, now I'm just being kind of selfish saying that this genius is my type, when I'm sure everybody wants him. I just don't see his highly intuitive and inventive "mindset" (as you might call it) as Ne, or definitely not Ti.