Activity

@ericawordsmith:

@sarah-inkdragon:

Oh man guys and I thought I wrote long posts XD

Ok well, *takes a deep breath* lets do this: (I’m starting with erica ; D)

1. Ok cool, and don’t feel like you need to tone yourself down ; D Good to know your not upset and thinking clearly : D

2. “Well, imagine if I accused you of being a different MBTI type” uh, so? The fact is I belive people, especially those who dont know me, have a RIGHT to question my MBTI type. I don’t think shes justified but eh, seeing as I’ll never meet her, I guess it doesnt matter XD

3. Ok cool! Don’t worry, I wasnt offended ; D

5 “I agree that they are better suited, not superior. That’s like saying what is more important, food or water? You need both. Without water you would probably die faster, but in the end, you would die without food. ” Ok, your analogy is close but it needs to be modified a bit: we are not the nessisitys itself but rather BEARERS of nessisitys. so the correct analogy would be “That’s like saying who is more important, someone who has food or someone who has water?” and the awnser is the person who brings water is generally suppeiror. You need water far more often then you need food. I’m not saying ceritan funtions are useless or even unnessisary ( I may argue that in the future but I’m not right now ; D) but they are generaly inferior…

6. I can ‘define what I mean’ I just recognize I dont have a compleat enough knolage to make a compleatly accurate judgement call. Moreover, to do so whould lead to a whole new brach of this debate that would require defininf ‘better’ which I think we would find quite difficult to do ; D So I would rather jsut support my pressent statment: certain funtions are generally superior to others.

7. You might be right *shrugs* again, a side topic I don’t want to dive into ; D Once I get a better grasp of emotion I may argue this with you ; D

9. No, I do not NEED a feeler. Perhaps, in that hypoteical situation I might want one but i do not need on ; D

10. *raises an eye brow* I disagree, and think your analogy is flawed. As we discussed these funtiosn arent the things themsels they are BEARERS of the things. Once that is recognised your analogy falls apart. Besides, I’m not claiming (at the moment) thinkers don’t need feelers jsut that they are generaly superior as they are ‘usefull’ more often in life ; D

11. Ok cool XD thanks for keeping on track!

12. *shrugs*

Ok, now for Sarah:

1. “So can logic or feelings ever take precedent over the other? Logically, no. Emotionally, no.” You simply argured for sepific superiority. You said “emotions are bad in this circumstance and good in this circumstance and vise versa for logic” yet I’m not claiming sepifi superiority I’m claiming general supperiority. Ceritan funtions are far more useful and needed in the overall scope of life then others; thats clear.

2. “just because someone is a thinker or a feeler doesn’t mean they can’t use logic or emotion if it’s their opposite type.” I dont dissagree ; D

3. “Hope I’m not making anyone angry… but like I said, this is something I’ve thought about a lot and I couldn’t help but say something, as an INTJ and as a person who just really likes psychology. ” Thanks for jumping it! : D Glad to hear from you ; D

Ok, theres more you guys said but I didn’t comment on all of it ; D If theres something sespific you would like me to adress just tell me!