MBTI Thinking/Feeling

[bbennett320178]

<I see both of them as acting from emotion more than pure thought in 
this incident. Everyone has agreed that Ron was being emotional, so 
I'll just deal with Hermione. It doesn't seem like impersonal logic 
that she would be offended because of what Ron thought about the way 
she dealt with her cat, especially if he's essentially right..>

Let me try again.

Both were angry and upset, and yes, those are emotions. But, I see 
that each responded to the situation differently. 

Ron was angry because he had repeatedly asked Hermione not to let 
Crookshanks around Scabbers. Logically, he found it reasonable to 
think that Crookshanks would try to go after Scabbers, not 
necessarily because cats go after rats (impersonal logic, or a 
conclusion that can be reached outside of the particulars of the 
situation) but because he had witnesses that Crookshanks had tried to 
go after Scabbers before (personal logic, or logic derived from 
personal association to the situation at hand).  

Hermione was equally angry, but I think her anger her is more because 
she sees that Ron doubts her belief that Crookshanks didn't kill 
Scabbers. If anything, she seems to go out of her way to avoid the 
personal logic of this situation, of which there is good evidence 
(that Crookshanks obviously wants to kick Scabber's ass :). Actually, 
she kind of avoids impersonal logic here as as well (that cats go 
after rats), so maybe this is a better example of Ron demonstrating 
Feeler logic than of Hermione demonstrating Thinker logic. But, even 
though both get angry, their reactions seem different: it's my 
understanding that when a Feeler feels slighted, it's usually because 
he or she thinks the other person has little regard for his or her 
feelings, and when a Thinker feels slighted, it's because he or she 
thinks the other person has little regard for his or her rational 
thoughts on the subject. Both are angry and upset, but to me, Ron 
seems to be more angry because his feelings are hurt, and Hermione 
seems more angry because she's offended.

Am I making any sense? Maybe a better example of HP Thinking/Feeling 
logic would be in GoF, when Ron thinks Snape might have put Harry's 
name into the Goblet, but Hermione disagrees. Hermione probably 
believed Snape couldn't be guilty because: 

A. he'd saved Harry once already (the Quidditch tournament in PP/PS)
B. he was a teacher at Hogwarts and
C. Dumbledore wouldn't keep him around if he didn't trust him

But from Ron's POV:

A. Snape saved Harry due to a "payback" he felt he owed his father, 
yet he'd continued to treat Harry in a heartless, mean manner ever 
since; and Snape had further reason to be angry because they'd 
tricked him out of Sirius Black the year before 
B. being a teacher didn't mean make him trustworthy (look at 
Lockhart, Quirrell, etc) and 
C. Dumbledore had made mistakes before. 

Ron was completely wrong in the matter, but that doesn't mean he was 
being foolish or irrational in his logic. A Feeler's logic involves 
personal knowledge of the people involved, and may not make sense 
unless you understand that knowledge or know that person. Thinker 
logic usually has the hard, indisputable facts of the situation down 
cold, facts that can be observed by anyone inside or outside the 
situation, but may neglect other facts derived from the 
relationships/people of the situation.

So, Thinker logic may seem more reasonable to someone outside the 
situation, but that doesn't mean it's more so than Feeler logic. 
Also, I think the HP situation is interesting, because boys are 
usually Thinkers, and girls are usually Feelers. I like that JKR has 
done this.

Another example of this is in the story After the End, a post 
Hogwarts fanfiction. In this story, Hermione is involved with Ron. 
She is considering going off for several months for an 
apprenticeship, and asks everyone for an opinion, except Ron. She 
wants everyone to agree with her impersonal reasoning of why she 
should go (that it's a very good opportunity, that the chance won't 
come up again), and puts off discussing the matter with Ron, because 
she knows he'll counter her impersonal reasoning with personal 
reasoning (yes, but we love each other and you'll be away for too 
long) that will weaken her resolve.

Does that make any more sense? :b Keep in mind that personality 
typing isn't saying you always react one way or another in a 
situation, it's saying that you have a preferred way of reacting. 
Some people have a better grasp on the "opposing" function.

<It was a little easier for me to understand your other example, but 
even that didn't help me much, because (tell me if I've got this 
wrong) Spock's not supposed to even have emotions, is he? So how 
does that work with regular people? How do they function from a 
thought level without emotions getting at least a half-say?>

I'm not a Trekky, but I don't know if Spock wasn't supposed to have 
any emotions at all, or rather that pure, impersonal logic was so
highly valued in his culture that emotional logic had almost been 
weeded out, and was considered illogical. Yes, this is an extreme 
example, but it's also a good one. 

<Maybe I should just pick up one of the books you recommended and see 
how they explain it, but if anyone's got any ideas to help me 
understand, I'd appreciate it!>

The books do a MUCH better job of explaining this than I 
have. :*) But Keirsey's Please Understand Me II; it's very good.

B