User Tag List

First 3947484950 Last

Results 481 to 490 of 491

  1. #481
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    But I can see how my morals are subjective ...
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt


    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  2. #482
    Geolectric teslashock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6
    Posts
    1,690

    Default

    I haven't really been paying too much attention to this thread, so forgive me if my budding in seems a bit capricious:

    However, it seems to me like some of the people around here are operating under different definitions for objective/subjective than SW is.

    SW seems to be using these definitions:
    Objective: of or pertaining to something that can be known, or to something that is an object or a part of an object; existing independent of thought or an observer as part of reality.
    Subjective: existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought

    While the more traditional uses of the words objective/subjective are as such:
    Objective: not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased
    Subjective: placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric.

    (all obtained from the most sophisticated reference material known to man, Dictionary.com | Find the Meanings and Definitions of Words at Dictionary.com)

    The definitions are a bit intertwined, but they are different enough to be worth mentioning. The first set of definitions contrasts ideas that come from within (subjective) with empirical facts that come from the external world (objective), while the second set of definitions contrasts impersonal reasoning (objective) with personal reasons (subjective).

    That being said, according to the second set of definitions for objective/subjective, Ti seems to fit under objective, while Fi seems to fit under subjective. Therefore, when Ti-ers make claims to their views being objective when contrasted to the subjective values of Fi, the Ti-ers aren't too far off. Logic, in its purest of forms, is guided by a universally accepted doctrine of deductive reasoning to reach a conclusion from a given premise and being able to use such deductive reasoning to assert that the conclusion is inarguable fact. This is the logic that Ti-ers associate with being objective. The fact that they value such logic, use logical thought processes as justification for their beliefs, and believe that the rest of the world should operate under such reasoning is subjective (as logic is essentially an abstract concept that has come from the thinking mind), but the reasoning in itself is objective, as it is not clouded by personal biases. Logic necessitates an impersonal lens, and logic does not come from within (as its governing laws have more or less been universally agreed upon). The only thing that comes from within for a Ti-er is the fact that he/she values logic (and this does indeed make Ti subjective, in one sense).

    On the other hand, Fi-ers' beliefs (at least according to how the Ti-er sees Fi) do come from "within", making them seem a lot more subjective to the standard Ti-er. Fi-ers seem to have a value system based largely on how certain issues make them feel. They can offer reasons for believing what they believe, but when you reach the heart of the matter, the very core of their belief system, everything seems to be backed by what feels right to the Fi-er and what feels wrong to the Fi-er, outside of an impersonal definition of right (eg, true) or wrong (eg, false).

    In a sense, that makes Ti more seemingly "objective" and Fi more seemingly "subjective", but according to SW's uses of subj/objective, any Ji is indeed subjective while any Je is indeed objective.

  3. #483
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Ti is subjective in where it starts from. Fi is subjective in where it finishes.

  4. #484
    Senior Member Space_Oddity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    CAT
    Posts
    359

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by poki View Post
    Ok, so if someone doesnt agree with you then they are not as much of a "soul-mate". Could it be possible you limit your "soul-mates" based on similiar internal morals and have based "universal morals" on this? You control who you are around and in essence steer your "universal" morals based on this?
    Well, Babylon Candle worded better in his post what I wanted to say. (I'm afraid my English language abilities don't allow me to express myself as clearly and eruditely as I would like to.) No - I don't limit my soul-mates on if we agree or not; I just call someone with whom I form a special bond of understanding my soul-mate. We don't have to agree, but we understand. So far, I've been best understood by other INFPs, but of course that sooner or later another type of person who will understand might emerge. (That doesn't mean these INFPs have to be my "best friends" - any type can be that. Soul-mate doesn't equal best friend, or love, for me.)

    Similar internal morals might have something to do with the "soul-mate" thing for me - I don't get why they shouldn't. But when I said I find something about Fi "universal" I wasn't really talking only about people I know. Literature and movies are full of Fi as well, and I feel it's always trying to convey similar thought.

    Quote Originally Posted by poki
    One thing I notice in Te is hesitation if you feel like someone is trying to unwillingly steer your logic. You close yourself off to maintain your morals or your decision. This may not be you, but people tend to surround themselves with like minded individuals.
    Well, they do - I think it's just natural. But of course it's not healthy if people surround themselves only with like minded individuals - they don't get any other perspective. I have friends of every type, but besides INFPs I've continuously got along the best with TPs and TJs - my TP friends are the most fun and we have the most interesting discussions (I call them my mind-mates), and TJs balance me with their common sense. However, I like these individuals because of their character, not necessarily their opinions. I take pride in being very open-minded, actually, but that doesn't make my values any less strong. I just don't try to impose them on everyone; I offer them as another perspective.

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld
    Umm, every person's Fi is uniquely individual. If it wasn't, every Fi would have to agree with every other Fi on every issue, which is clearly not the case. Fi is absolutely not universal or objective...but both Fi and Ti users do tend to make the mistake of believing their Fi/Ti to be objective/universal, when in fact neither is.
    Of course, but I haven't met any two persons in my life who would agree on every issue, no matter their type. I'd have to say that every person is individual and subjective in their own way, but that would return this discussion to point 0. I'm glad you think Ti is subjective as well, because I agree. But there are different notions and semantics of the words "subjective" and "universal", and I don't think we quite agree on them. Anyway, Babylon Candle worded better what I wanted to say.


    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld
    Not to mention, if every Fi person had the same universal ideas about ethics, that would really threaten the whole "we are all unique individuals who cannot be categorized by four letters" thing, wouldn't it?
    I've never claimed that. Of course people can be categorized. Of course some people will be "the same type of person". One absolutely doesn't need MBTI to notice that. But maybe the point is, the world and human interactions cannot be explained by this categorization alone. The categorization is description, not explanation.


    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld
    By the way, Fi and Ti are subjective because they exist only within the user and independently of any external influence.

    Fe and Te are objective because they depend on external conditions for their definitions of morality and logic.
    I like this explanation, but it's up to question if something exist "only within the user" or the connection to the world is just not visible. Fe and Te are correlated to human interactions and human objectives - that's more simple. (But as everyone uses both, no one is entirely subjective or objective, obviously.)
    Her head hung down
    Gazed at earth, finally keen,
    As the rabbit at the stoat,
    Till the earth was sky,
    Sky that was green,
    And brown clouds passed
    Like chestnut leaves along the ground.

    - SUSAN ANN AND IMMORTALITY, T. E. Hulme

  5. #485
    this is my winter song EJCC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    173 so/sx
    Posts
    18,440

    Default

    Everybody! Check out these posts:

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    ^ I think I understand to a higher degree than you think, but am still annoyed and irritated by it, so I make threads like this to take out my frustration. This is what looks to you like "forgetting what I already understand"--I'm not forgetting; I'm just trolling you because it pisses me off when Fi-ers expect the whole world to bend over backward to accommodate their arbitrary feelings. (You're damn right this is Fe at work.)

    What annoys me most is that society expects Thinkers to develop some manner of Feeling as they grow and develop, and we're ostracized if we don't...but many Feelers (specifically FPs) seem to have this sense of entitlement that their feelings can never be questioned and that they have no responsibility to learn any Thinking to balance them out. It's childish and one-sided. "I mean, that's how I feel about it--you can't question that or you'd be asking me to go against the very fabric of my identity!"

    Well, what if ignoring what seems logical to me and listening to your feelings is going against the very fabric of my identity?

    As one INFP friend told me, "Listen, if somebody you're working with has a feeling about something, you just have to go with that and respect it, no matter how unreasonable it is!" (Note that I still classify this person as a friend and hang out with him frequently. This implies that I still find enough things about his personality valuable to consider him a friend, despite his childish sense of entitlement to unconditionally have his feelings coddled. That should tell you something about your little "omg sim hates all Fi-ers!!!" theories.)

    Frankly I find this double standard unfair and I resent it. It's apparently okay for Fi-ers to "just be who they are" and operate in nonstop Fi mode, ignoring Thinking; in fact, this attitude is glorified and encouraged by popular media--but it's not okay for Ti-ers to "just be who we are" and ignore Feeling because that makes us insensitive assholes.

    I find it unreasonable that our cultural standards expect more Feeling out of T types than Thinking out of F types, and if the only place I can get away with fighting it sans significant negative consequence is on an internet forum, then that's what I'm gonna do.

    There's some straight up Fe for you. I've learned the hard way not to bring this shit up in real life.

    Now that I've actually explained some of my emotional motivations, maybe you all can shut the hell up with assigning them for me without my input. I don't hate Fi on principle and I don't complain about it because I'm secretly in love with PeaceBaby. I really honestly do have some INFP friends and I appreciate a lot of things about them--this has much, much bigger implications than that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Amargith View Post
    *smiles* Then we're more alike than you think. Fi is bashed more than you realize I think, irl. And NFPs I'm pretty sure share your feeling of resentment that everything taught in schools, everything appreciated out in the real world, is logic and cold hard facts. Sure, there's some room for it, but mostly in dream worlds like movies or novels for people to escape to and it's never considered serious or right for reality. So..a lot of NFPs probably are responding in the same way you are to feeling restricted. In our case we're told to man up, provide logic or be ridiculed. In your case, you're told you're rude and inappropriate

    I don't expect for a T to do any of those things. He can be just fine who he is. But don't be questioning my world because you're curious about something that you don't completely understand without showing some respect to the person who actually *lives* there. I didn't go: plz see this and understand me now! You came to look for NFPs and ask for explanations yourself. You find it odd that once you then judge those things from what most NFPs seem to think is a wrong understanding of how things work...they get annoyed at you and consider you rude? You're invading their space. I'm not telling you to stop analyzing or asking for logic. But you're asking it on a subject that just doens't use the same logic as you do. So either you learn the other 'type of logic', or you accept that you'll never understand. And bashing it, or getting frustrated at it won't change that.

    I get that you're venting. I'm pretty sure other NFPs here do the same as they too feel that pressure from society irl. From my personal pov: I'd prefer it if all those Fi-thread things died already coz they give me a migraine and make me feel like I'm not able to get away from the real world again. It's more miscommunication, false judgements and more people misunderstanding and getting the wrong idea. And yeah, you could say, you can ignore them. But as I stated before...that annoying rekindling of hope that *someone* will get it, doesn't wanna die
    There you go! Sim and the INFPs are all pissed off because they feel like victims (in various ways). Sim was engaging in some catharsis when he created this thread, which is understandable. You guys should also understand the INFPs' reasoning for being angry.

    /debate
    /thread
    ~ g e t f e s t i v e ! ~


    EJCC: "The Big Questions in my life right now: 1) What am I willing to live with? 2) What do I have to live with? 3) What can I change for the better?"
    Coriolis: "Is that the ESTJ Serenity Prayer?"



    ESTJ - LSE - ESTj (mbti/socionics)
    1w2/7w6/3w4 so/sx (enneagram)
    want to ask me something? go for it!

  6. #486
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    poki, do you think Ti more frequently claims to be objective, despite the fact that both Ti and Fi are of subjective origin?
    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    To refine, if the interpretation of objective (in this context) is to mean "not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion."

    And with the origins of both Fi and Ti being subjective in nature, would it not be an oxymoron for Ti users to claim themselves to be more objective, more rational?

    Do you think this so?
    Quote Originally Posted by poki View Post
    I think Ti is very rational and I would pit my ability to rationalize even the most irrational things against anyone. I can take rationalizing to an absurd level. I would never claim to be objective as I live in my head and realize that I dont have enough information to be objective. There is simply to much that is hidden.

    So...

    Te is objective and rational
    Ti is subjective and rational
    Fe is objective and irrational
    Fi is subjective and irrational

    This is pretty much what I notice. I would say that TPs can seem irrational externally as Fe is irrational when they are trying to work with others feelings.
    You have to be careful with the terms "rational" and "irrational". Since we're using Jungian concepts, then we should stick with his definitions of rational/irrational. And that is that judgment functions are rational, and perceiving functions are irrational.

    Objective/subjective is the term that can apply either to extraversion/introversion, or Thinking/Feeling.
    This ties into what were were discussing here: http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...ml#post1019939
    It seems "rational/irrational" is here being attempted to be substituted for "objective/subjective".

    What tesla said made the point as well.

    So it can actually be seen as:
    Te is objective objectivity
    Ti is subjective objectivity
    Fe is objective subjectivity
    Fi is subjective subjectivity
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  7. #487
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,501

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    You have to be careful with the terms "rational" and "irrational". Since we're using Jungian concepts, then we should stick with his definitions of rational/irrational. And that is that judgment functions are rational, and perceiving functions are irrational.

    Objective/subjective is the term that can apply either to extraversion/introversion, or Thinking/Feeling.
    This ties into what were were discussing here: http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...ml#post1019939
    It seems "rational/irrational" is here being attempted to be substituted for "objective/subjective".

    So it can actually be seen as:
    Te is objective objectivity
    Ti is subjective objectivity
    Fe is objective subjectivity
    Fi is subjective subjectivity
    Thanks for clarifying, I think this is where Ni and Si come into the picture in what you said vs what I said. Ni is universal and Si is not. I cant keep track of all the different definitions according to jungian, MBTI, etc. I want a universal theory to play with and will merge everything.
    Im out, its been fun

  8. #488
    Senior Member Space_Oddity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    CAT
    Posts
    359

    Default

    (I have to add, my notion of Fi might be a little extreme as 4 of 6 members of my immediate family are Fi-doms and my INTJ mum is also a pretty strong Fi-user, and I've been taught all of my life what is "right" and "wrong".

    Anyway, I'm probably wording my opinions clumsily. I didn't want to imply everyone should work according to Fi morals (or my own morals or whatever it is) - I live according to the motto "live and let live", but I don't like it when people suffer, and I think no one should make others suffer. And I admit I don't think that this principle (or Ti principles of logic, for that matter) is that much different for every individual. If it was, there would be no types, imo.)
    Her head hung down
    Gazed at earth, finally keen,
    As the rabbit at the stoat,
    Till the earth was sky,
    Sky that was green,
    And brown clouds passed
    Like chestnut leaves along the ground.

    - SUSAN ANN AND IMMORTALITY, T. E. Hulme

  9. #489
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    976

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    No, typology is not an evil conspiracy intended to subvert your right to individuality and self-expression.

    No, any and all attempts to categorize anything about your belief system or behavioral tendencies do not constitute a malevolent international plot to rid the world of original ideas.

    No, you're not so extraordinarily unique and special and unusual that your personality automatically defies all forms categorization and analysis.

    No, typology is not turning the world into nineteen eighty-fucking-four.

    No, studying typology does not ruin your ability to feel emotion or appreciate others on a personal basis.

    Yeah, we get it already--you're so special and original and creative that you can't possibly be boxed into one of sixteen arbitrarily distinguished categories [no matter how broadly defined they might be]! Yeah, we get it--you have paranoid delusions that any such categorization will turn everyone into robotic slaves to the evil Te agenda to squelch all forms of self-expression.

    And yes, everyone realizes how emotionally threatened you are by any attempt at categorizing your personality and realizes you're having a histrionic meltdown over nothing when you make these kinds of outlandish claims.

    The solution, you ask? Grow up, stop taking everything as a deliberate attack on your super special unique feelings, and get real.


    Your friend,

    simulatedworld
    Reading the above, I think of two INFP contemporaries and competitors, Bob Dylan and John Lennon, and the diverging paths they took through the 60s and 70s. Bob hated being labeled far more than he wished to be understood by the masses. John desperately needed to be understood far more than he hated to be labeled.

    In the work, and in their lives, it showed...

    I relate far more to John's choice. Ultimately, it's the better choice for most INFPs, the more mature one, and the one that allows for easier sleep...

  10. #490
    Geolectric teslashock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6
    Posts
    1,690

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    It seems "rational/irrational" is here being attempted to be substituted for "objective/subjective".

    What tesla said made the point as well.

    So it can actually be seen as:
    Te is objective objectivity
    Ti is subjective objectivity
    Fe is objective subjectivity
    Fi is subjective subjectivity
    +1 for simplifying it so well!

Similar Threads

  1. Public Service Announcement On Password Security
    By highlander in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 08-02-2016, 08:58 AM
  2. What does it really mean to be Fi-dom?
    By Stansmith in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 10-13-2013, 10:09 PM
  3. [Fi] are Fi doms prone to paranoia?
    By prplchknz in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 12-06-2012, 02:08 PM
  4. Public Service Announcement to Future Superheroes
    By Qlip in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-28-2011, 01:46 AM
  5. Replies: 30
    Last Post: 10-02-2010, 12:43 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO