Emotionality

[Gilly]

...has nothing to do with type.

I am by far one of the more emotional, accepting, and genuinely empathetic people I know , and I'm an ENTp, complete with PoLR. The most emotionally reactive person I know is an INTj. My psychologist, who is the best one I've ever found, is an INTp. And to top it off, the most emotionally uncompromising person I know is an INFj.

Anyone who tells you that empathy is or emotionality is is completely full of shit. These are not in any way related, nor can a distinct correlation between the them be drawn by any logical means. If I hear one more person try to type their friends by saying "Well, he/she is extremely emotional and reactive; he/she is probably an ethical type," I am just gonna crack.

Here's Gilligan's 3 (and growing) step guide on how to distinguish between Ethicals and Logicals:


1. Ask the person to describe him/herself. An ethical will describe himself in terms of how he relates to people, while a logical will describe himself in terms of his abilities and interests.

2. Determine WHY the person holds his or her interests. This is key.
Ethicals are attracted to something because it affords them the opportunity to work with people, allows them to have a direct impact on the way others think or feel, or allows them to express themselves in some way. Logicals are attracted to something because it answers questions that they have, allows them to work with numbers or facts, or promotes progress in something they hold particular interest in.

Environmentalism provides a great example, one that I am currently observing in action. An ethical gets involved in environmentalism to change the opinions of others and spread knowledge of worsening environmental conditions, while a logical gets involved to affect changes in policy or make new discoveries.

3. Observe tolerance for social activity. Even the most extraverted of thinkers is worn out by contuinual social activity, while plenty of the more shy feelers can remain in a social situation for hours without being worn out.

[Joy]

well, according to your analysis, I am a logical type. It is correct, for I am ISTj.

[Scrummy]

1. Ask the person to describe him/herself. An ethical will describe himself in terms of how he relates to people, while a logical will describe himself in terms of his abilities and interests.

I'm willing to bet that if you asked a random sample of people to describe themselves, most of them would describe themselves in terms of their abilities and interests. What's the first thing you ask someone after introductions these days? "So, what do you do [for a living]?" It's actually quite difficult to get people these days to describe themselves out of the context of their professions. People's master status is quite likely occupation, or another reflection of their interests and abilities as opposed to "empath."

When I first came to this forum on the "What's My Type" forum before the V.I. onslaught, people would write those long intricate descriptions of themselves. They more or less consisted of the same criteria for both thinking and feeling types in terms of what was being discussed. I think ethical types may tend to talk about other people more often than logical types, though, in just regular conversation.

2. Determine WHY the person holds his or her interests. This is key.
Ethicals are attracted to something because it affords them the opportunity to work with people, allows them to have a direct impact on the way others think or feel, or allows them to express themselves in some way. Logicals are attracted to something because it answers questions that they have, allows them to work with numbers or facts, or promotes progress in something they hold particular interest in.

What it looks like you're describing is Fe v. Te, which in itself, is not a bad place to start. Fe usually results in the desire to affect other's emotional states. Te usually a desire to affect objective change. However, the other side of the equation is Ti and Fi which are more or less self-satisfied functions, and don't necessarily manifest themselves in the way you are suggesting. Ti and Fi activism is more than likely going to be a reflection of whatever the extroverted ego function is - Ne or Se.

In this case, I think the hidden agenda blurbs might be useful... Ti - "to understand" and Te - "to know" v. Fe - "to be loved" and Fi "to love"... the extroverted functions are definitely going to be more of a motivation for anyone to become an activist than the introverted ones. Ti and Fi tends to just stay latent within the individual's value system. Fe and Te are usually much more easily associated with proactive tendencies.

3. Observe tolerance for social activity. Even the most extraverted of thinkers is worn out by contuinual social activity, while plenty of the more shy feelers can remain in a social situation for hours without being worn out.

Actually, I think this might be more of an intuition v. sensory indicator.

[implied]

3. Observe tolerance for social activity. Even the most extraverted of thinkers is worn out by contuinual social activity, while plenty of the more shy feelers can remain in a social situation for hours without being worn out.

Actually, I think this might be more of an intuition v. sensory indicator.

interesting. why would you say that?

[Scrummy]

Well, stereotypically, this is the introversion/extroversion deal from MBTI... I don't really think there's too big a correlation between type and social stamina, but I do think intuitives tend to get more easily drained when forced into the sensor-dominated social world. I mean, compare the average ESTp with an ENTp, or the average INFp with an ISFp...

[Rocky]

Well, stereotypically, this is the introversion/extroversion deal from MBTI... I don't really think there's too big a correlation between type and social stamina, but I do think intuitives tend to get more easily drained when forced into the sensor-dominated social world. I mean, compare the average ESTp with an ENTp, or the average INFp with an ISFp...

Well, I totally disagree then...

Besides, ENTPs can be some of the most social creatures.

[Scrummy]

Well, I totally disagree then...

Besides, ENTPs can be some of the most social creatures.

Fair enough. I still don't think there's very much correlation between type and social stamina.

[Rocky]

Well, yeah, only that Extraverts seem to have more energy for longer periods of time, and also it seems to me that Feeling types are more likely to be shy because they are more intune with people criticizing them, or maybe they just don't want to offend anyone.

[FDG]

From what I have gathered, the set of abilties commonly referred to as "socializiation" are prominently a feature of and :Se.

[Expat]

From what I have gathered, the set of abilties commonly referred to as "socializiation" are prominently a feature of and :Se.

That is precisely my conclusion.

[Gilly]

From what I have gathered, the set of abilties commonly referred to as "socializiation" are prominently a feature of and :Se.

That is precisely my conclusion.

I would disagree with . I think has more to do with it. The majority of the more sociable people I know are those I have typed as Delta NF and Alpha SF, leading me to believe that it has more to do with F in general. I also know some rather reclusive Beta STs.

However, I would not disagree that may appear to be a social function simply because it is valued highly by our society.

[Kim]

From what I have gathered, the set of abilties commonly referred to as "socializiation" are prominently a feature of and :Se.

That is precisely my conclusion.

I would disagree with . I think has more to do with it. The majority of the more sociable people I know are those I have typed as Delta NF and Alpha SF, leading me to believe that it has more to do with F in general. I also know some rather reclusive Beta STs.

However, I would not disagree that may appear to be a social function simply because it is valued highly by our society.

Absolutely not. I'm not a super-social person and neither are the INFjs I know. Some social situations can be outright draining, unless I'm with people I'm comfortable with. I also think socializing is much more desirable and enjoyable for those with strong and .

[Gilly]

From what I have gathered, the set of abilties commonly referred to as "socializiation" are prominently a feature of and :Se.

That is precisely my conclusion.

I would disagree with . I think has more to do with it. The majority of the more sociable people I know are those I have typed as Delta NF and Alpha SF, leading me to believe that it has more to do with F in general. I also know some rather reclusive Beta STs.

However, I would not disagree that may appear to be a social function simply because it is valued highly by our society.

Absolutely not. I'm not a super-social person and neither are the INFjs I know. Some social situations can be outright draining, unless I'm with people I'm comfortable with. I also think socializing is much more desirable and enjoyable for those with strong and .

Well obviously it's going to vary from person to person, but, for example, my INFj father is one of the most persistently social people I've ever met. At a party or gathering, even at which it's apparent that superfluous social contact is not necessarily encouraged, he'll wander around and talk to as many people as is humanly possible.

Perhaps there is no correlation at all.

[Kim]

I would say he has strong then.

[Gilly]

I would say he has strong then.

I would disagree; he often has extreme difficulty expressing his true emotions, and says inadvertently offensive or mean things when he is unsure of how he feels. His moral code and standards to which he holds himself and others, however, are unwavering, as his continual empathy for anyone or anything that he comes across.