MBTI: Thinkers vs. Feelers

I have a soft spot for those internet psycho-tests that aren't actually psychological tests at all—specifically the personality ones. 🙂 Don't get me wrong, I don't give them much scientific credibility, but they are just plain fun. Most of these quizzes rely on a specific cluster of traits, and usually, that includes the distinction between being a Thinker or a Feeler—you know, the logic-driven type versus the emotion-driven type...
The thing is—and this is one reason why I think most of these tests are poorly designed—the way they force you to choose between being a Thinker or a Feeler when answering a question just doesn't hold water.
Take me, for instance—I honestly never know how I’d answer. I am incredibly emotional. My feelings impact my life deeply, and I’d even say they take a toll on my health. I’m not overly introverted, nor am I an extreme extrovert; I wouldn't say I'm a stoic who accepts everything without a word, but I'm certainly not someone who creates drama out of nothing. But I am definitely emotional.
At the same time—I rarely make major life decisions based purely on emotion, no matter how intense those feelings might be. In the last year alone, I made two very significant decisions that went directly against my gut feelings because I rationally assessed that they were better for me. So, by that logic, that was a total Thinker move.
Yet, the fact that it hurt so much—and that I went through such intense emotional stress during the process—would technically classify me as a Feeler, wouldn't it?

My question is this: if we decide, just for the sake of the game, 😉 to follow this Thinker/Feeler divide, is a Thinker/Feeler defined by whether their *actions* are rooted in logic or emotion, or are they defined by how much things *affect* them personally? To put it another way—are you a Feeler if you simply feel more intensely than a Thinker, or are you a Feeler if you act more in accordance with your feelings than a Thinker, who acts according to reason?

I’ve always found myself wondering about that too 😁.

I think it's really about what's actually driving those actions.

Plus, if we're being honest—if we're big Feelers—maybe our emotions are pulling the strings way more than we care to admit? Like, maybe we just get really good at rationalizing things after the fact to make them look logical... 🤷

Austin Murphy5 said:I have a soft spot for those internet psycho-tests that aren't actually psychological tests at all—specifically the personality ones. 🙂 Don't get me wrong, I don't give them much scientific credibility, but they are just plain fun. Most of these quizzes rely on a specific cluster of traits, and usually, that includes the distinction between being a Thinker or a Feeler—you know, the logic-driven type versus the emotion-driven type...
The thing is—and this is one reason why I think most of these tests are poorly designed—the way they force you to choose between being a Thinker or a Feeler when answering a question just doesn't hold water.
Take me, for instance—I honestly never know how I’d answer. I am incredibly emotional. My feelings impact my life deeply, and I’d even say they take a toll on my health. I’m not overly introverted, nor am I an extreme extrovert; I wouldn't say I'm a stoic who accepts everything without a word, but I'm certainly not someone who creates drama out of nothing. But I am definitely emotional.
At the same time—I rarely make major life decisions based purely on emotion, no matter how intense those feelings might be. In the last year alone, I made two very significant decisions that went directly against my gut feelings because I rationally assessed that they were better for me. So, by that logic, that was a total Thinker move.
Yet, the fact that it hurt so much—and that I went through such intense emotional stress during the process—would technically classify me as a Feeler, wouldn't it?

My question is this: if we decide, just for the sake of the game, 😉 to follow this Thinker/Feeler divide, is a Thinker/Feeler defined by whether their *actions* are rooted in logic or emotion, or are they defined by how much things *affect* them personally? To put it another way—are you a Feeler if you simply feel more intensely than a Thinker, or are you a Feeler if you act more in accordance with your feelings than a Thinker, who acts according to reason?

Personally, I don't see a direct link between being a Thinker (someone who might feel less intensely) and being a Feeler (someone who feels more).
Whether someone leans toward being a Thinker or a Feeler doesn't necessarily tell you anything about their actual emotional sensitivity.
You definitely have people who are hardcore rationalists but can still feel the weight of their decisions incredibly deeply; they just prioritize logic regardless of those emotions.
It works the same way for the so-called Feelers, too—some of them might react very emotionally or spontaneously to a situation out of habit, even if there isn't actually a huge amount of deep-seated emotion driving it at that moment.

Scott Rodriguez7 said:Personally, I don't see a direct link between being a Thinker (someone who might feel less intensely) and being a Feeler (someone who feels more).
Whether someone leans toward being a Thinker or a Feeler doesn't necessarily tell you anything about their actual emotional sensitivity.
You definitely have people who are hardcore rationalists but can still feel the weight of their decisions incredibly deeply; they just prioritize logic regardless of those emotions.
It works the same way for the so-called Feelers, too—some of them might react very emotionally or spontaneously to a situation out of habit, even if there isn't actually a huge amount of deep-seated emotion driving it at that moment.

But what about the flip side? That's a different beast entirely. How do you even interpret that shift from a phase of intense, heavy emotions—the kind of sensitivity that simultaneously fuels you and drains you dry—into this state of total numbness? It's like you're just lost, confused by your own feelings, your logic, your identity, and everything around you.

Personally, I'm at my best when I'm in that first stage...

Mark Nelson said:But what about the flip side? That's a different beast entirely. How do you even interpret that shift from a phase of intense, heavy emotions—the kind of sensitivity that simultaneously fuels you and drains you dry—into this state of total numbness? It's like you're just lost, confused by your own feelings, your logic, your identity, and everything around you.

Personally, I'm at my best when I'm in that first stage...

Could you expand on that a little?🤷

I'm not quite following what you mean by "how do you interpret." What exactly are you getting at there?

Scott Rodriguez7 said:Could you expand on that a little?🤷

I'm not quite following what you mean by "how do you interpret." What exactly are you getting at there?

I mean, how do you even explain behavior like that given the circumstances.
If it's possible, 😁

The vast expanse of the Mississippi River Basin—an area that truly defines the heart of our continent—is nothing short of a geographical marvel. When you consider the sheer scale of the drainage system and the way it shapes the landscape of the United States, it’s hard not to feel a sense of awe at the complexity of such a massive ecosystem. kaže:
I’ve found myself asking that exact same question more than a few times—it’s one of those deep, lingering thoughts that just stays with you. 😁.

I suspect they’re actually referring to the underlying fundamentals that drive the stock's performance.

That being said—if we happen to be highly emotional people—it’s entirely possible that our feelings influence our decisions far more deeply than we care to admit. We might just be getting better at rationalizing our choices after the fact to make them look more logical than they actually were. 🤷

Sure, I know there’s always going to be that "what if" factor hanging in the air—it's inevitable, really—but let me be perfectly clear: I can point to at least two specific instances over this past year where I made decisions based purely on cold, hard logic. In both cases, I consciously chose to override my gut feelings, knowing full well that my primary emotions had absolutely zero bearing on the final call. It wasn't exactly a recipe for happiness, mind you, but it was what needed to be done.

Scott Rodriguez7 said:Could you expand on that a little?🤷

I'm not quite following what you mean by "how do you interpret." What exactly are you getting at there?

To be perfectly honest—and I have to admit this—I didn't quite wrap my head around it either...

Emotions versus logic... if you want to get all poetic and philosophical about it, it’s basically like two internal currents constantly clashing inside us, swirling together and shaping who we are and how we live our lives. By nature, one of these forces is always going to pull a bit harder than the other—even if it's just by a tiny margin—and end up steering the ship more. Now, trying to pin down exactly which one is winning is pretty tough because you’re diving deep into the messy layers of someone's consciousness. I’ve always felt that logic is a person's greatest asset—the engine that keeps things moving—while emotions are what give us an actual identity and the capacity to truly feel life happening. As for the original question being asked here, man, it really comes down to the individual. It's different for everyone. Take, for example, someone who does good deeds. You might have a person who thinks being "good" is kind of naive, and honestly, that thought bugs them, yet they keep doing good anyway. They're acting out of pure logic and awareness—though maybe not as much as someone who doesn't do good at all—but they just can't stop themselves because their emotions are so incredibly strong. On the flip side, you could have someone who isn't particularly emotional at all, but they do good simply because they think it's the logical thing to do or because they want to focus on their spiritual life. They’re a good person, sure, but maybe they lack that certain spark compared to someone driven by raw feeling. Then there’s a third or fourth category: people who are genuinely good because they believe being good is the only rational way to live, and then, of course, there are those who are straight-up malicious and actually believe being bad serves their own interests. Personally, I try to hang out somewhere in the middle. Like, say I see a guy begging on a street corner in Chicago; I know he can't make enough money to buy a loaf of bread, so I’ll give him some spare change from the heart, but I also believe it's the logical thing to do. But then, imagine another situation where a guy is asking for help, but I can tell he's perfectly capable of working and probably just wants the cash for a bottle of bourbon. Even though I feel for him, I won't give him anything based on my principles. There are endless cases like that, and it really opens up a massive rabbit hole regarding how we mix emotion with reason. I think the goal should be finding that "Golden Mean"—you don't want to be a total fireball of emotion, but you don't want to be cold-blooded either. You want to aim for a sort of surface-level emotionality that you can channel through the filter of your logic. Of course, at the end of the day, it all depends on the person and how much weight they give to one side over the other.

Austin Murphy5 said:I have a soft spot for those internet psycho-tests that aren't actually psychological tests at all—specifically the personality ones. 🙂 Don't get me wrong, I don't give them much scientific credibility, but they are just plain fun. Most of these quizzes rely on a specific cluster of traits, and usually, that includes the distinction between being a Thinker or a Feeler—you know, the logic-driven type versus the emotion-driven type...
The thing is—and this is one reason why I think most of these tests are poorly designed—the way they force you to choose between being a Thinker or a Feeler when answering a question just doesn't hold water.
Take me, for instance—I honestly never know how I’d answer. I am incredibly emotional. My feelings impact my life deeply, and I’d even say they take a toll on my health. I’m not overly introverted, nor am I an extreme extrovert; I wouldn't say I'm a stoic who accepts everything without a word, but I'm certainly not someone who creates drama out of nothing. But I am definitely emotional.
At the same time—I rarely make major life decisions based purely on emotion, no matter how intense those feelings might be. In the last year alone, I made two very significant decisions that went directly against my gut feelings because I rationally assessed that they were better for me. So, by that logic, that was a total Thinker move.
Yet, the fact that it hurt so much—and that I went through such intense emotional stress during the process—would technically classify me as a Feeler, wouldn't it?

My question is this: if we decide, just for the sake of the game, 😉 to follow this Thinker/Feeler divide, is a Thinker/Feeler defined by whether their *actions* are rooted in logic or emotion, or are they defined by how much things *affect* them personally? To put it another way—are you a Feeler if you simply feel more intensely than a Thinker, or are you a Feeler if you act more in accordance with your feelings than a Thinker, who acts according to reason?

Since I make about 99% of my decisions based on vibes alone, I guess as a "purebred feeler"😁 I can't even tell the two apart.
I mean, I can't exactly make a purely rational choice and then just sit there silently suffering through the consequences—because, hello, I'm a feeler.🤣
But hey, I'm an extreme case.

Man, why do you guys have to make everything so damn complicated? It’s simple math—you can't have a left without a right, and there’s no up without a down. It works the exact same way with our heads; thoughts and emotions are totally intertwined, constantly feeding into one another. We all carry both, and honestly, the whole point of this life is just trying to find that sweet spot of perfect balance between the two. The only real difference is that some people are hyper-aware of how they feel, while others are more tuned into the logic of their own thinking. But it's a loop—if you're stuck in a negative headspace, those bad vibes are going to follow you everywhere. If you lean into a positive mindset, the good feelings show up too. They're just two sides of the same coin, coming from the exact same source.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_opposition

😉

It’s kind of like the whole introvert versus extrovert debate—nobody is ever just one or the other. There's always a bit of the opposite side lurking inside you. Even though I mostly identify as a Thinker, I wouldn't bet my life savings that I'm 100% one. Still, even if I'm not totally extreme, I definitely lean too hard into it. I overanalyze everything until I miss out on half of life just because I convince myself it isn't "financially viable" or that it wouldn't be "smart" 😁 to go for it.