Few things can polarize the populace as can politics.

Might there be a way of changing the tone of the conversation?

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator may suggest a better perspective. The MBTI is one of the most enduring and trusted personality profiles. The MBTI yields a four-letter descriptor that identifies a person's preferences among four sets of, ironically, polarities. The descriptor represents, one, where we focus our attention and get our energy (Extraversion vs. Introversion); two, the way we take in information and the kind of information we like and trust (Sensing vs. Intuition); three, how we make decisions (Thinking vs. Feeling); and, four, how we organize our external world (Judging vs. Perceiving).

Research has established a fascinating correlation between a person's preference for either Thinking or Feeling--how they make decisions--and their political inclinations.

Those with a preference for Thinking make decisions by stepping back from the situation, taking an objective view; their preference for Thinking is a lens through which they focus on the long-term health of the supporting organization or system. Those with a preference for Feeling make decisions by stepping into the situation, taking an empathetic view; their preference for Feeling is a lens through which they focus on the immediate impact of decisions upon the individuals of the organization or system. Our preferences are so strong we can easily mistake them for objective truth.

Here is a key to changing the tone of the conversation. The "T" and "F" appellations are merely personal preferences and do not represent "True" and "False." There is no weight or judgment attached to either the Thinking or Feeling lens. Neither preference is right or wrong. Both preferences are necessary for the effective functioning of the organization or system. Both preferences can be equally mismanaged and abused.

When seeking to influence an opponent, be assured it is counterproductive for the Thinking to stoically double down on the facts and precedents, while appearing all the more to be out of touch and without compassion for the under-served and oppressed with genuine and immediate needs. It is equally ineffective for the Feeling to multiply the heart-rending anecdotes and emotional appeals and accusations, while even inadvertently giving the impression they are indifferent to the stability and viability of the supporting organization or system.

Finally, two exhortations for men and women of both preferences:

One, recognize that a person's MBTI typically doesn't change. You're not likely going to change someone's essential political philosophy or party affiliation. What you can do is sit down for coffee with a person of another preference, walk through the issue together, and respectfully consider solutions that respect the Thinking and the Feeling.

Two, remember, your preference--whether Thinking or Feeling--should not afford you license to shame another for their opposing preference.


What other factors shape your political and social views? How might your conversations yield greater fruit, if you spoke from the place of preference, rather than of right?