T vs F

[Joy]

I'm writing test questions. For this thread, I want to focus on ethics vs. logic without getting into introverted vs. extroverted functions. Please offer your opions and suggestions.

Are you more concerned about:
-correct vs. incorrect (facts and logic)
-right vs. wrong (ethics and morals)

Are you better at:
-understanding the feelings and states of other people in a situation
-understanding the factual, technical, and logical aspects of the situation

If you are making a decision, are you more confident in your evaluation of
-the people involved (their feelings and/or predicament)
-the factual, technical, and logical aspects of the situation

[Mastermind]

Sounds pretty accurate to me.

[anndelise]

Are you more concerned about:
-correct vs. incorrect (facts and logic)
-right vs. wrong (ethics and morals)

I'm curious, how many people use "right" meaning "correct" and vice versa?
Also, how many people use "wrong" meaning "incorrect" and vice versa?

[Joy]

I often say "correct" because it's less confusing, such as when giving some one directions. If somthing is incorrect, there's a lot of different things I might say, such as "not right" or whatever. In the test questions I asked it that way to differentiate between the two.

[anndelise]

I often say "correct" because it's less confusing, such as when giving some one directions. If somthing is incorrect, there's a lot of different things I might say, such as "not right" or whatever. In the test questions I asked it that way to differentiate between the two.

But that's my point...is it really differentiating between the two?

You can say "right/wrong = ethics" and "correct/incorrect = logic" but what about T types who refer to someone's logic being right or wrong/not right? Does this mean that they are all actually F types? Because of semantics?

I guess i'm just trying to point out, that using those terms leaves them open to a number of interpretations and potential confusion of the one taking the test. You're attempting to refer to a dichotomy by using interchangeable words without a context of how they are actually separated.

[Joy]

that's why I put the statements in parenthesis behind them

[anndelise]

that's why I put the statements in parenthesis behind them

*looks around for the homer simpson smilie that slaps it's forhead and says "doh!"*

Perhaps it'd be best to leave out the correct/incorrect right/wrong aspect of the question....and just leave the parenthesis?

[Joy]

lol maybe... it doesn't look as cool though. and I think some ethical types might be turned off by merely saying "ethics and morals" *shrugs*

[anndelise]

lol maybe... it doesn't look as cool though. and I think some ethical types might be turned off by merely saying "ethics and morals" *shrugs*

Even more will be turned off by including the right/wrong aspects.

Perhaps, there is a reason that Fs would be turned off by "right/wrong, ethics/morals"....as if somehow that excludes "correct/incorrect facts/logic". After all, there IS a logic behind ethics/morals....which are generally based on "abstract facts"/theory.

[Mastermind]

Are you more concerned about:
-correct vs. incorrect (facts and logic)
-right vs. wrong (ethics and morals)

I'm curious, how many people use "right" meaning "correct" and vice versa?
Also, how many people use "wrong" meaning "incorrect" and vice versa?

Well, when people use the terms interchangebly, they're incorrect. Thus, it makes sense.

[anndelise]

Are you more concerned about:
-correct vs. incorrect (facts and logic)
-right vs. wrong (ethics and morals)

I'm curious, how many people use "right" meaning "correct" and vice versa?
Also, how many people use "wrong" meaning "incorrect" and vice versa?

Well, when people use the terms interchangebly, they're incorrect. Thus, it makes sense.

hehe, ya might wanna inform the entjs, intps, and entps of that...oh, wait..and the istjs..and estps, estjs...and i havent paid much attention to if istp does that or not.