Myers-Briggs Type

(This post is the fifth in the series:  Right, Left and Center: through a different lens.  I invite you to review the first four in order to put this one into context.)

Congress continues to squabble, citizens seek solace in their own pre-judged perspectives, and the country polarizes itself more each day.  The continental divide separating us widens by the week. We simply MUST find our way back to a more civil union if we are to live up to the great potential that is ours as a nation.

Paul Tillich, a Protestant theologian, says that the first duty of love is to listen. Listening for understanding requires that we temporarily suspend our familiar frames of reference and respectfully consider the perspective of those on the opposite side of the isle. This is far easier said than done. It requires that we become bi-lingual. Differing personality types speak different languages, and appraise life according to their particular point of view. Understanding each other is, therefore, difficult. The Myers-Briggs Personality Indicator can be like a Rosetta Stone language lab. Through it we can catch a glimpse into those strange others who think and speak in ways that seem indecipherable to us.

Having looked at the dichotomies of extraversion/introversion and sensing/intuition, (see the previous two Through a Different Lens posts) we now turn our attention to what Jung called “the rational functions” of thinking and feeling. These rather unfortunate terms actually refer to the process by which we process the information that we have taken in either through the sensing or intuitive modes discussed in the previous post. Both thinking and feeling are cognitive processes by which we evaluate and make judgments. In other words, they are two differing modes of thought. One,thinking, is analytical, logical, and impersonal. The other, feeling, is holistic and synthesizes the subjective information of feelings, values, and social impact. It is, therefore, personal.

The thinking function orders information sequentially. It seeks order and logic and is reasoned, predictable, and objective.  Objective analysis is the hallmark of this process. The principle governing the decision is paramount to the thinker. This adherence to the organizing principle insures that their decisions are consistent and reliably predictable.  The thinker must first accomplish order and logic to feel psychologically comfortable. That done, he may then judge the information’s acceptability.

Picture a Supreme Court justice judiciously studying established constitutional law and applying it with precision to the case at hand. The justice may hold a different personal preference than the decision he/she renders. Yet, strict adherence to the governing principle requires an impersonal decision based on law, not subjective feeling.

The gift of the thinking function is its clarity, decisiveness, and consistency. The orderly sequencing of information can bring order to chaos and decisiveness to muddled thinking. A thinker can be a God-send in situations begging for clear vision and direction.

Unfortunately, people who excel in the use of this thinking function can be misperceived by those of the feeling preference as cold, critical, and uncaring. Most often, nothing could be farther from the truth. The straightforward presentation of the perceived facts is simply the thinking process at work in a person who is motivated by love or concern for the other. The culinary adage that “presentation is everything” may inform the unfortunate misunderstandings that occur between types.

One of the great pleasures that I have as a therapist working with couples is helping the feeling spouse to understand the heart of the thinker, and to interpret the language as indicative of the process of his head and not necessarily the content of his heart.

The feeling function, on the other hand, is more subjective. It evaluates information according to what seems consistent with an internal set of values. Appropriateness and the impact on self and others are essential considerations in the process.  It is, therefore, less consistent and predictable.

Whereas the thinker first considers the guiding principle, the feeler seeks direction from the heart. “What will the relative impact of the decision be? How will it land with others and feel to me?” Factoring these subjective pieces of information to the evaluation of information and the decision making process is circular and holistic. While it may seem slower and laborious to the thinker, this subjective valuing can effectively render judgments that integrate heart and soul with the important objective facts of the matter.

The gift of the feeling function is empathy. This capacity to “crawl in another’s shoes” is the hallmark of the feeler and their decisions will reflect these more personal issues.

Thinkers can unfortunately misperceive the feeler’s process as murky, devoid of linear logic and, therefore, invalid. You can imagine the joy in my clinician’s heart when I can help to clarify this misperception and identify the merits of the feeler’s process!

In America, 2/3 of the people who prefer feeling are women and 1/3 men. The exact opposite is true of the thinking function. This is the only continuum in Myers-Briggs typology in which there is a gender difference.  Yes, Virginia, there is a difference. It is not a difference in intelligence; IQ tests are equally high in people of each function. It is a valuable, cognitive difference that, when honored and blended well, can create a synergy more powerful than either process acting alone.

Once I offered a weekend workshop to the board of directors of a nonprofit organization. Excitedly, the women learned the strengths and challenges of each of the types. A productive year ensued…until mid-year. The board came to a contentious stalemate and was unable to move forward on an important project. Stymied and frustrated, someone recalled their Myers-Briggs training. Each person re-read their personality profile.

Not surprisingly, the conflict divided almost perfectly along the thinking-feeling continuum. I learned of the situation and its resolution after the fact, so I do not know exactly how it played out. I could imagine a scenario something like this. The thinkers adroitly assessed the organization’s financial situation and structural needs. Motivated by their deep fidelity to the organization and taking seriously their role as its guardian, the thinkers held rather strictly to their guns about expenditure of funds. Authoritatively, they declared their recommendations regarding a proposed project.

The feelers, on the other hand, were deeply motivated to adopt a partnership with a newly formed agency who served a vulnerable, under served population. The agency matched the mission of the non-profit organization and had become personally important to some of these board members.  They proposed the project in emotionally compelling, though less dogmatic ways.

The power imbalance and differing opinions created an almost intractable situation.  Wisely, the board reviewed the gifts and pitfalls of each type which enabled them to blend their differing gifts and work collaboratively.  Lending a more respectful ear, the thinkers listened for the wisdom and value in the feelers’ proposals. They heard it. The feelers, recognizing that the thinkers were not dispassionate, acknowledged the fiscal restraints and sough innovative ways to fund their ideas.

Both the project and the relationships were the winners. So, therefore, was the organization.

It can be done.

In her book, Gifts Differing, Isabel Myers offers the following characteristics of Thinking and Feeling:

THINKERS

• Value logic above sentiment
• Are able to organize facts & ideas into logical sequence that states the subject; makes the point; comes to conclusion; rarely repeats
• Suppress, undervalue, and ignore feeling that is incompatible with the thinking judgments
• Contribute to  welfare of society by:  intellectual criticisms of its habits, customs, and beliefs; the exposure of wrongs; offering solutions to problems; support of science and research for the enlargement of knowledge and understanding
• Are brief and businesslike
• Are strong in executive ability 

FEELERS

• Value sentiment above impersonal logic
• Are strong in social arts
• Include much detail in their storytelling style
• Suppress, undervalue, and ignore thinking that is offensive to the feeling judgments
• Contributes to society by loyal support of good works and those movements, generally regarded as good by the community
• Are naturally friendly and find it difficult to be brief and businesslike

THINKING TYPES NEED FEELING TYPES TO:

• Persuade
• Conciliate
• Forecast how others will feel
• Arouse enthusiasm
• Teach
• Sell
• Advertise
• Appreciate the thinker

FEELING TYPES NEED THINKING TYPES TO:

• Analyze
• Organize
• Find the flaws in advance
• Reform what needs reforming
• Hold consistently to a policy
• Weigh the law and the policy
• Fire people when necessary
• Stand firm against the opposition

People often disparage the plea for harmony as a naïve notion from a Kumbaya chorus. I personally love to bond with my buddies in the singing of Kumbaya.  But, this plea far surpasses the emotion of that moment. My plea is that we harness our considerable ability to listen beyond our comfort zones to those who are wired differently than we. And, in this flexing, we do the hard work of searching for ways to blend our differences into a whole that is greater than our parts. One that may find creative solutions to the issues that currently divide us. Knowing that, with our gifts differing, we just might create a better tomorrow.Our forefathers did it. Why can’t we?