Which is meaner?

[Rocky]

Which do you think is worse?

I personally don't know, but for some reason the absence of judgment so seems worse. But I'd guess most people say 'Thinking'.

[Expat]

If by "mean" you mean (ugh) saying insensitive things and the like, I'd have to say that the absence of judgement is worse - - it makes you say or do things on the spur of the moment that you regret later. However, some feeler types might say thinking is worse if they automatically discount things said in the absence of judgement - - an NeFi friend of mine is like that.

[Joy]

I don't know... When "mean" things come out of my mouth, it is never an accident (although I may allow people to think that it was an accident or that I didn't mean it the way it came out).

But I'm neither an ethical type nor an irrational type, so my response is irrelavant to the poll.

[Park]

Thinking, of course. Absence of judgement doesn't bother me at all. Infact I like it that way...

[pesto]

I'd say functions have nothing to do with meanness. Not even in a toungue-in-cheek kind of way.

[Kristiina]

I voted for perception. The reason is that people don't really plan to do mean things and mean things seem spur of the moment to me. (thinking is not mean, although thinkers can be mean).

And I do think being mean has got something to do with functions because some types are more likely mean than others, IMO. It is important to point out that different types see different kinds of behavior as mean, so objectively speaking, all types are equally mean. And we could also consider the fact that there is a different amount of people of different types, so actually some types are more likely to be considered mean. (on the Internet gamma SF's are the meanest people, because there are the most alpha NT's present. And IRL gamma NT's are the most mean, because ESFj tends to be listed as the most common type IRL).

[Rocky]

It is important to point out that different types see different kinds of behavior as mean, so objectively speaking, all types are equally mean.

Well, you're not trying to be mean here at all... .

And we could also consider the fact that there is a different amount of people of different types, so actually some types are more likely to be considered mean. (on the Internet gamma SF's are the meanest people, because there are the most alpha NT's present. And IRL gamma NT's are the most mean, because ESFj tends to be listed as the most common type IRL).

... because we all believe those type distribution stats.

[pesto]

And I do think being mean has got something to do with functions because some types are more likely mean than others, IMO. It is important to point out that different types see different kinds of behavior as mean, so objectively speaking, all types are equally mean.

So are you refering to two different definitions of meanness or are you just being self-contradicting?

[consentingadult]

So this woman invites me over for dinner at her place because her computer needs to be fixed (in fact, a lot of computers suddenly broke down just after I broke up with my girl friend late 2004). When I get there, the computer problems are already fixed.

Over dinner, we discuss our previous romantic experiences, and she, 42 years old, does not seem like she's ever lived with a man. So out of warm curiosity, I ask her: "You're really not all that experienced with men, are you?" Oops... No wonder I didn't get into her pants that same evening.

This is how insensitive an FP type can be!

[FDG]

(on the Internet gamma SF's are the meanest people, because there are the most alpha NT's present. And IRL gamma NT's are the most mean, because ESFj tends to be listed as the most common type IRL).

wtfff

[FDG]

Impossible to decide anyway.

Perception can be meaner for impulsivity, but more tolerant and less anal/fastidious, which would make it less mean.

Thinking can be meaner by not considering feeling, though if carried out with finesse, it needs to include feelings reaction in order to reach its goals.