What does empathy have to do with judgment? A look at the engine of judgment.

                                            What does empathy have to do with judgment? 

                                       A look at the engine of judgment: Thinking and Feeling.

For many years I’ve had participants in psychological type workshops say to me, “How can Feeling be a rational judgment?”  “What does Feeling have to do with making decisions?”  “How is empathy related to making a choice or in judging something?”  When I’ve been with experienced long time consultant or facilitator users of psychological type assessments, I’ve asked the following and usually get silence in response:  “If Thinking is a rational judging process, how is Feeling rational?”  I’m willing to bet there are a number of readers of this blog who have had the same thoughts or questions, and have simply defaulted to, “that’s the model Jung put forth.”  Our perspective on this has a significant impact on how we present type to others and how we learn to use type processes productively.

All of these questions reveal a couple of important conditions: our Western culture has such a strong positive association with the word and act of thinking, that it is hard to step back and see thinking for what it is—to metathink thinking is required to really understand what it is and is not. (We will not do a deep dive into the argument of what is objective and subjective judgments.  There is abundant scientific evidence that in human affairs, there is no such thing as objective judgment.) A second condition is that Feeling as a judgment process has been so blended with feeling as either a tactile or emotional condition, it is virtually impossible to really get at what Jung intended in a practical way.  And if you look at the popular literature, you are quickly mired in the heart of the problem with Thinking typically associated with objective and logical, and Feeling associated with values and subjective perspectives.

In the most popular personality type publications, you will see the following on Thinking and Feeling:

• Thinking: weighs pros and cons; wants a logical outcome, seeks truth by objective reasoning; skeptical and impartial; discovers flaws.  

• Feeling: weighs personal values; wants a harmonious outcome; empathetic; seeks to find what is important from others’ perspective; tends toward acceptance and sympathy; prefers to be appreciative of others.

There are a number of issues that are problematic about these declarations.  The writers are describing behavioral outcomes of what the mental processes may do and the writers fail to differentiate between the four forms defined by Jung.  For example, Introverted Feeling types may have very little concern of others’ perspective or worry about acceptance of others’ views, though much of that can be said as outcomes of Extraverted Feeling.  Extraverted Thinking may weigh pros and cons in pursuit of a logical outcome but Introverted Thinkers are more attuned to evidence and analysis that leads to a reasonable hypothesis or theory of what is going on in a situation.

There are times I ponder these matters and conclude, “what a mess we’ve made of judgment from the perspective of psychological type.”  The richness of the four kinds of judgment are unclear and the language very subtly plays into stereo types about Feeling and various misconceptions about Feeling as a decision making process.

So let’s start with a few key observations from Jung, with all references from his work, Psychological Types, paragraph and page numbers provided:

“…judgment is chiefly concerned with the conscious motivation of the psychic process, while perception registers the process itself” (pp:376, page 341). Jung seems to be suggesting that judgment is quite distinct from perception and that judgment serves conscious choice.  This is useful as we begin to reflect on the role of judgment in the way we operate.  Perception feeds the judgment we make.

Jung elaborates on the role of judgment, which he articulates repeatedly as a rational process: “Rational judgment is a force that coerces the untidiness and fortuitousness of life into a definite pattern, or at least tries to” (pp:602, page 360).  Jung’s comment gives me a bit of a tickle in that his notion that judgment attempts to bring some kind of order to life and he accepts that while attempting to do so, may not be successful.

Jung presents a rather stellar analysis of the nature of reason and how we come to have a perspective about it as a by-product of history, intellectual movements, and the nature of knowing something.  He suggests: “Thinking and feeling are rational judgements in so far as they are decisively influenced by reflection.  They function most perfectly when they are in the fullest possible accord with the laws of reason” (pp:787, page 459).  To get the full impact of the meaning of his observation, I encourage you to unpack his “laws” of reason.  For my purpose in this blog, I want to point out that Jung associates both Thinking and Feeling with laws of reason that can be articulated, appreciated, and utilized.

For Jung’s statements intended to outline the core of Thinking and Feeling, consider these two references: 

• “Thinking is the psychological function which, following its own laws, brings the contents of ideation into conceptual connection with one another.”  (pp:830, page 481)

• “Feeling is primarily a process that takes place between the ego and a given content, a process, moreover, that imparts to the content a definite value in the sense of acceptance or rejection….Feeling, like thinking, is a rational function, since values in general are assigned according to the laws of reason, just as concepts in general are formed according to these laws.” ( pp:724; 727, pages 434, 435)

Carefully reread the quotes and see if you agree that he puts a great deal of attention on the “laws of reason” for both Thinking and Feeling and that the engine that drives them is quite different.  Thinking is driven to bring order through connecting ideas and Feeling is driven to to bring order through determining the values in a situation.  In everyday terms, many writers about psychological type attempt to operationalize this and say, “Thinking logically determines results and Feeling subjectively applies values in making decisions,” which is only vaguely reflective of Jung’s intention.  

Much of the popular descriptions of Thinking and Feeling are using likely behavioral products of these mental functions, but are not the primary nature of the function itself.  

Thinking is driven by a principle—or its internal law—of ordering information through a logic that produces a predictable result.  Thinking is inclined to find what is wrong in a situation so that it can be corrected and put in its proper order.  Feeling is driven by a principle—or its internal law—to do no harm and find an integrity—a rightness—among the elements or people in a situation.  Neither is more “objective” or “subjective” than the other; what makes people associate Thinking with objective is that Thinking seeks to have consensual and collective agreement which means others have found the evidence and reasoning acceptable.  Feeling is associated with “subjective” because there is no desire to get consensual or collective agreement so the reasoning is not reliant on independent consideration.

Jung makes the understanding of these forms of judgment more complex by identifying four distinctive ways of decision making:  

• While Extraverted Thinking and Introverted Thinking share the same underlying decision principles there are qualitative differences in how those principles are utilized.  Extraverted Thinking engages in debate with others to explore more information, assumptions, and possible logical paths through a situation.  
• Introverted Thinking is driven to precision in analysis and a methodological approach to situations to identify an underlying theory or concept that explains what is going on.  
• Extraverted Feeling engages in finding a common ground among people in a situation to identify an “order” or “structure” that enables people to work productively together which is often achieved through the use of empathy, which assumes understanding the deep experience and point of view of others will allow finding the “right” answer.  
• Introverted Feeling looks for harmony among ideals, choices, and perspectives in a situation.  The “order” Introverted Feeling uses in a situation is in aligning the elements in a situation to promote well-being, whether or not it appears logical.  Notice that the association with commitment to“relationships” is a secondary outcome of the Extraverted Feelers pursuit of harmony and the Introverted Feelers energy for alignment of ideals.  

You might well ask, why does all this matter.  Jung provided one answer when he wrote, “A judgment that is truly rational will appeal to the objective and the subjective factor equally and do justice to both.  But that would be an ideal case and would presuppose an equal development….” (pp:644, page 392).  It is desirable to work to understand our four judgment strategies so we can approximate a more complete form of judgment and a more profound understanding of what is right in our choices, all things considered.

In the next blog, I’m going to explore the four judgments and their practical importance.  I’ve sought to create material in the Pearman Personality Integrator that is true to the core of how Thinking and Feeling are used in everyday life.

Look at the Pearman material at the Pearman Personality Integrator.