I generally seem to rely on Thinking, even if my brainscan says my right haemisphere of the brain is bigger, so that would suggest emotions. I’m an intuitive thinker and I naturally lean towards conceptual thinking (systems, ideas, theories etc), so it’s not clean left-brain thinking, but I guess still thinking rather than feeling.
Can’t say what’s more important without clear definitions. Compassion is very important, emotions aren’t negligible, either. There must be reason in everything, but one can’t exclude everything else.
Before original sin, man’s will was guided by intellect not his passions. When man sinned, we lost this and now intellect does not guide our will (most of the time). Just look at the secular culture around you.
After studying Genesis, it’s been my thought that emotions can be the worst decision makers because emotions come and go. So my answer to your question… thinking is best. I would actually translate it as ‘discerning’. Sometimes, things that ‘feel’ good are not necessarily the best thing for us. But don’t get me wrong, emotions/feelings have a place. They were created by God after all.
Well, I’d say feelings can be positive or negative, but right & wrong is a bit tricky given that it always takes a choice to sin.
The Myers-Briggs system divides human personalities into 16 categories. First is Extrovert/Introvert, then Sensing/Intuitive, then Thinking/Feeling, then Judging/Perceiving. Personality types are rendered as INTJ, ENFP etc. In that system, Thinking/Feeling seems to correspond to head/heart in normal life. Then there are dominant functions, supporting functions and so on. Some traits are common to combinations based on two traits, for instance, and a common example is IN’s or NT’s. There’s a whole table for how people form relationships with others of different types and those relationships are categorised as e.g. companion, cohort, pedagogue, tribesman… etc etc, on the basis of the affinity the people share with each other.
There’s another system, developed by Miller, Brain Styles (yeah, a commercial site, basically, so it’s business). It classifies people on the basis of how they think. Men are more likely to be in the left-brained divisions (Deliberators and Knowers), while Conciliators tend to be a more female group. They’re primarily right-brained, they value emotions much and they’re more home among people than among ideas, concepts, numbers. They operate through social networks. Feelings are very important to them. There’s also a right-brained style dominated by males (2 to 1), the Conceptor, and it tends to be considered different, annoying etc by many people of other styles, but it doesn’t rely on emotions so heavily. It’s more about weaving ideas. People of different brain styles think in very different ways. They won’t always understand each other or follow each other’s train of thought. They will have different natural skills and affinities. The key is cooperating. What we don’t have, other people can give us. For example, in a company, you’d want the Deliberators in the engineering dept. or as analysts, the Knowers would sit in the accountancy dept. or the law dept., Conceptors would brainstorm ideas that would be refined and executed by a whole different set of people, Conciliators would handle people work and communication between the previous three types. Some people can do much, but no person can do all and people generally don’t feel good when they have to keep working in an area not fitting their brain style, which is supposed to be a natural way of thinking and not a learnt reaction (it exhibits when you face a new problem and the way you attempt to solve it is the clue).
Many, many clashes between people originate in how they do things. They collect data in different ways, they process it in different ways as well. Sometimes they mind the way more, sometimes the outcome. Without reflection on our differences, stronger and weaker points etc, we often end up disdaining the way other people think, holding it less valuable than our own. Slow, jumping to conclusions, not having a strong opinion, dissecting things… these aren’t necessarily traits coming from certain mental or intellectual or personality deficiencies. That may just be a person’s unique way of thinking.
I agree with the first paragraph above. Grace perfects nature.
In the second paragraph, I disagree about right and wrong emotions. I believe emotions are morally neutral. How we choose to act on them is another story. Which, I think is what you’re getting at. I’m just pointing out that the emotion is neutral, the act that follows may or may not be. —KCT
I think the intellect ought to be used to make final decisions but the emotions are every bit as important to examine when making a decision. Emotions add a 'weight factor" to many of the pieces of information used to make a decision.
In decisions which have a moral component, the emotions may need to take second place. In a morally neutral situation, the emotions should sometimes be the deciding factor. If a decision is going to impact persons other than the decision-maker then I think it is morally necessary to consider the emotions of both the person making the decision and those who will be affected.
I “feel” that the government shouldn’t impede a women’s choice to have an abortion.
I “think” that the government shouldn’t impede a women’s choice to have an abortion.
The difference is that in the former, the person is relying on a myriad of non-defined objective and subjective experiences and thoughts to reach the conclusion but can’t synthesize and then communicate them in a way that isn’t internally personal. In the latter, the person can directly indentify opinions, values, and facts that support their position.
Neither one is inherently superior or inferior.
If I reach this position by “feeling”, there are experiences or thoughts that are errant or misapplied in my feeling. Similarly, with regard to thinking that the government shouldn’t impede a women’s choice.
What is important is that I find the Truth. For example, even if I weave a cogent argument that the government shouldn’t impede, my feelings (incorporating of intangible experiences, thoughts AND whisperings of the Holy Spirit) tell me it is wrong. It is in my “feelings” that I are directing me to the Truth.
Similarly, even if my feelings about individual liberty cause me to reach the conclusion that the government shouldn’t impede, my thoughts cause me to reach the tangible scientific conclusion that this is a human life deserving of government protection. It is in my “thoughts” that I found the Truth.
My point is that sometimes our “feelings” and “thoughts” collide. This is a great time to go to prayer for discernment. There is one Truth. And the Holy Spirit will aid us in finding it.
P.S. I neither think or feel that the government shouldn’t impede this immoral and unnatural act. It is just an example.
This isn’t a question that can be answered in isolation. In some contexts feeling is very important, and in other contexts, there is no place for reasoning based on emotions.
I just read your other thread, and I agree with 1ke. Because you left the context of your question out of this thread, you aren’t going to get any meaningful answers here.
A note to the other posters on this thread: First read Gospel’s other thread here: forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=182691 (especially posts #19 and #28) so you’ll have the context to answer this question properly.
To answer your question: your wife’s feelings will affect her perception of reality, so for her, thinking entails feeling.
Your wife is unable to reason clearly because her strong emotions are changing the way that she thinks. Even if your wife is wrong, you won’t be able to engage her intellectually, because her emotions are too strong.
It doesn’t matter if you’re right and she’s wrong. The most important thing is that you fix your marriage, by any means necessary.
This means that you need to clean up your wife’s problematic emotions in order to allow her to think properly. You need to repair your wife’s emotional state by any means necessary. This means that you need to forget about “thinking” for now, and concentrate on “feeling”.
So, to answer the question:
In most cases, **thinking **is more important, but in your case, **feeling **is more important.
What kind of question is that? It’s like say your building a dog house, what’s more important a power screw driver or a power saw? I’m sure you can make a nice analytical work out of that, but it’s not building the dog house. You really don’t need to worry about the question, if you got both the tools and know what to do with them use them both. It would look pretty stupid not to have properly trimmed boards on your dog house, and likewise if the dog house fell apart.
By integrating both of them to the carpentry you can do some beautiful things. Sure you can use them both for right and wrong reasons, that has nothing to do with the tools themselves, it has to do with the way the person uses them. Don’t let intellectual arrogance hold you back. Don’t neglectic all your intellectual tools, just because you have a bias towards one.