Would the Fs agree that "influence" = minimal control for purpose of improving a state while "control" = attempt to completely dominate another's emotional expression, motivations, values, etc.?
The latter is something that I think a T type would try for, but only in an indirect way.
Ts, feel free to disagree.
I think I agree with the "Influence/Control" descriptions you've got above, but I'd tag some directionality on the end of 'em.
Influence: ...For someone else's benefit
Control: ...For one's own benefit
i don't really think of other peoples' emotional states as something that can be "controlled." i guess they can be with the use of drugs or manipulative techniques or something, heh, but i just don't really think of them in that context. they belong to someone else and i don't think i have the right to be so coercive, i guess?Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
when it comes to influencing emotions, my focus is on my own emotional state, and controlling that, in order to have my own emotional energy be conducive toward a certain atmosphere that the other will be responsive to. i usually don't direct my focus at their emotions in a directly prodding kind of way. my emotions can "influence" another person's emotions and so i'd rather direct myself while maintaining a sort of visceral awareness of the emotional state of the other.
From my perspective, my emotions should be "free". I should not have to check them, should not have to control them. Now maybe they might get violent, and that can lead to me doing things I would later regret, but in that case I can just defer to the rules; analyze the rules; reflect on the reasons for which they are there; and then the emotion pretty much just goes away.
I can't recall the last time I lost myself in rage. Sometimes I have threatened people, sure, but those are calculated expressions of beta Se.
Put it this way: my emotions are mine, nobody else's, and I have no responsibility to check them except to myself.
I feel probably no inhibitions about controlling others' emotions, particularly if it is for their benefit. But I only with grave reservations will consider inhibiting my own emotional expression. I have come to appreciate in recent years, however, the power of "signal", the sense of ambiguity over what is said, and what isn't. Limited, restrained meanings, implied meanings... powerful devices that can wrack the psyche of a person trying to gauge whether or not another is submitting to their control. And, to a more limited degree, learning to treat temperamental people as "pressure cookers" in that I put time in between provocative criticisms... time enough for them to "cool down". But only in as much as I feel the person actually in control. Even this doesn't last forever, because at the moment I feel I can do without whatever they have control of, I let 'em have it.
Last edited by tcaudilllg; 10-27-2010 at 12:50 AM.
You know, I just today had a conversation about this with a fairly typical SEI (should I prove his type? Nay, I shall assume you'll assume he is SEI).
Yeah, we discussed its relationship to genetics, hormonal inclination (i.e. difference in use of logic/feeling between gender emphasis), physical conditioning etc and came to the conclusion that we don't really have a choice to 'choose' to concentrate on T or F unless we reformat ourselves, something I don't think we have the tech or knowledge to do at this point. We gotta roll with what nature forces upon us (go with what we naturally know best and what is natural, meaning the ego socionics-wise). From what we discussed, it would appear that this SEI at least is actually interested in more T focus but can't provide it himself.
Here's the thing: when's the last time an F explained "how" it was more difficult to use T? From my standpoint it's not that F is difficult... I just refuse to use it with the intent to make other people receive me better.
And I absolutely would never, ever choose my heart over my head, particularly with respect to another person. I don't usually bother to weigh my emotions (instead choosing the emotion which seems most justified according to T), so it's not impossible that I could be easily manipulated by an F.
Yeah that's exactly what i was going to say. It's how i was made.
and btw, tcaud, that is a very MBTI-rooted question. FYI, my HA is Te and it receives a LARGE amount of my focus, probably just as much as Fi.
Sorry, had to be said.
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
No, it is a Jung rooted question and a Reinin-rooted question.Yeah that's exactly what i was going to say. It's how i was made.
and btw, tcaud, that is a very MBTI-rooted question. FYI, my HA is Te and it receives a LARGE amount of my focus, probably just as much as Fi.
Sorry, had to be said.
How come it doesn't make sense socionically then? Fi and Te receive the same amt of focus as far as i'm concerned.
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
I'm in the camp who said it really isn't a choice
Type seems to stem from the subconscious, which is not an area that can easily be subjugated by will, even if you're keenly aware of your strengths and weaknesses.
I'd also think it's probably common for people to take their strengths for granted and focus on their weaknesses; so for me, it isn't so much about focusing on feelings since I do it without generally realizing that I am; it's more about those moments in between where I realize that I'm neglecting my weak points.
In other words, the Ego-block is something that people have their entire life (at least I believe so), so I find it difficult to look at it from an objective point of view, in this way I can't really answer your question
EII INFj
Forum status: retired
Something's beginning to become apparent here. Although everything said in this thread so far suggests the validity of Model-A, it does, ironically, suggest that Jung's "function competition" model of differentiation is wrong. In fact, I'm getting the impression that not only the functions, but also their positions reflect certain motivations and, especially, attitudes. It is that the attitudes are true for that person, that their Model A is what it is. I have certain attitudes towards the calibration of Fe states that aren't shared by either Fe ego people nor even Fe id people, therefore I am a strong T type and moreover, a Ti dominant.
In other words, where a function is in model A has an affect on how it's manifested in the psyche? Nothing new there. Hmmmmm.
Fs, by what means do you feel you MOST EFFECTIVELY influence your own emotions?
Eh? O.o Change them, you mean? Prayer. Otherwise, they might fade, they might not. If I attempt to change them, it's through reasoning that the emotion is inappropriate (ie wrong) given the situation. I don't think it really works, though. It just invalidates my right to feel that way. The other thing I might do is analyze why I feel that way, in an attempt to discover the underlying attitude. If I can find the irrational belief at work, I can work from there. After that, prayer. ^.^ I don't get very far trying to change them on my own.
Johari/Nohari
"Tell someone you love them today, because life is short; shout it at them in German, because life is also terrifying."
Fruit, the fluffy kitty.
You're asking why making F judgments over T judgments?
F judgments are the root of our existence, and whether you're T or F, you are motivated primarily by your emotional roots. T types are odd in that they don't consciously recognize it, at least in the degree that F types do. F types are just more consistent with their internal human values, etc because they're more apparent to them than T-based factors, so when it comes down to it you just go with what you're confident in which isn't something you can choose in most cases.
just my thoughts anyway.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
.
