[NF] Can NFs be ruthless, cruel or evil?

[Requeim]

i laughed pretty hard at that shark

maybe i felt just a little bit sorry for him as well

 

[Virtual ghost]

Ah...I think acting irrationally upon anger or hurt isn't a very logical thing to do. You should take this into consideration before you assume that you have be a T to behave with cruelty.

Although I will admit that evil behavior is probably more associated with the two NFs that have tertiary T - INFJs and their sinister reputation, and ENFPs rage i.e. let me bulldoze you with my Te.

That is because you are NF. Plus the social norms are bult in a way that it is not likely that you will profit from hurting people. However thinking is vital part of it.



Of course there can be a scenario that the person will hurt someone because they hurt them first. (what is typical for NFs)
But to hurt someone deliberatly with an element of suprise and without remorse you will need alot of thinking. Since thinking allows you to see a person as a object that needs to me removed (or whatever).
By this I mean that you don't pay any attentiion at to their feelings and you don't care about their llife story at all. Plus you don't see how much damage you can do to people that love this person by harming him/her. Actually you see but you don't care since he/she is standing in your way.


While at the same time you don't expreiance anything on the inside since you are thinking and all your emotions come down to subjectivity of your own actions and they are nothing more at this moment.



Trust me thinking is a vital part of being a "bad person".

 

[Liquid and Flammable]

Of course there is a scenario that the person will hurt someone because they hurt them first. (what is typical for NFs)

That's it. This can be a big problem, if you don't recognize, that you hurt them. For example a NT can criticize an NF on a way, which appears harmless to NTs. But the NF feels attacked.

There was a situation on a seminar, where the seminar leader was ENFP. Every evening there was a possibility to ask questions about the subjects of the day. Sometimes the subjects were a little bit esoteric, and so some people (I assume NTs) ask about this. The leader reacted on a very cruel and bold way, attacking the questioner for this question personally. This happened in a room of 500 people.

NFs have very strong beliefs, and if the strong beliefs were questioned, the NF can react on this cruel way.

 

[Ace_]

Liquid and Flammable, it's "react IN this cruel way" and it's "criticize an NF IN a way".

Your sig says corrections are welcome.

 

[sculpting]

Ruthless=unlikely

Cruel=as a defense mechanism in the short term, I cant see this in the long term being sustainable

evil=Yes. I think ENFPs make the best terrorists and martyrs. We can use Te in the short term for a defensive smack, but if you really, really offend our sense of (honor/integrity/justice/ideals), Te focuses on anniliation. We will destroy ourselves to destroy you.

I think we sense the inherent potential, so instead focus on endless forgiveness, compassion, and understanding. I work very hard to consciously choose to be forgiving and turn the other cheek, understanding the darker aspects that are the alternative.

 

[Queen Kat]

Wasn't Charles Manson NF?

 

[stillwater]

The premise of this argument is flawed. Saying that NFs can't possibly be evil (or are only evil in a reactionary manner) negates the idea that "the exception proves the rule." The minority who are evil (if we can say that about someone) gives greater creedence to the ways of majority who are not. Besides, otherwise it makes it sound really self-righteous, like "Oh, aren't the NFs the greatest of humanity, incapable of hate or malice, beautifully benevolent in heart, truly the enlightened ones compared to the heathen that trudge about in the filth of their calculated logic and hedonistic desires."

A bad-natured NF is capable of a much greater evil on a larger scale than most all the other types. This potential is rarely ever realized, but when faced with convincing the masses that their idealology is correct, they'll succeed far and above what more thinker/action oriented types will be able to pull off. No one is going to jump on the cliched INTx bandwagon of evil-take-over-the-world scenarios because people don't like them enough and they rarely have the people skills to make it work. Take the NF understanding of people and flip the switch to evil and it's the recipe for mass genocide (Hitler seems to ring a bell).

Clearly, across the board, evil is the antithesis of the usual NF's mode of existence. But it seems a great potential for doing good can easily become a great potential for doing bad: they use all the same tools, just to a different end. A hammer can build a fence just as well as it can take it down.

 

[jcloudz]

out of curiosity, so what NF`s are mass murderer`s? or killers?

 

[Requeim]

out of curiosity, so what NF`s are mass murderer`s? or killers?

Adolf Hitler, ENFJ?

 

[Memphis]

I know an INFP. She's the most (emotionally) manipulative, sneaky, game-playing, defensive SOB I know. I think it's a pride/value-thing or an insecurity thing. Or maybe she just think it's fun. But she always ends up getting caught in her own web.

Example: She got involved with this guy who was though of as a "player". She knew this going in and she thought it would be fun and within "her rights" to play with him and his feelings. She felt like it was justified since he was familiar with the game and was doing "a bad thing". The more he liked her, the more she wanted to treat him bad, cause she ultimately wanted him to feel ditched, or something. However, she ended up falling for this guy and he stayed true to his nature. Maybe she wanted to change him, I have no idea.

 

[Stanton Moore]

'Evil' behavior, or antisocial behavior in general, is almost always caused (or exacerbated) by truama, and as so, it is the result of a distortion of cognitive functions. So there is no way to accurately specify the cognitive preferences of an indiviual effected by it.
For instance, PTSD is just such a distortion. It has specific features, and may vary slightly based on I/E, but not much. This means that the effects of truama are independent of cognitive function. Usually the person goes into a fight/flight mode of sorts, which represents a more infantile way of dealing with the world.
So can NF's be Evil or antisocial? Of course. They respond badly to truama just like to everyone else, maybe moreso, since we seem to be sponges for such shit. And given our abilities to see through people to their true motivations, we may have an easier time manipulating others to our aims.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

I suspect every MBTI type is capable of anything, so NFs are only incapable of cruelty if you define the category as only those people who do not act cruelly.

A ruthless person is unlikely to be transformed by that compassion in their life, and so it is not a means to an end, but it still replaces some kind of void created and reveals the empty power ruthlessness represents. Cruelty can only exist as a reflection, a misplaced mirage, or a form of blindness that must dismiss reality in favor of seeing Other as not entirely real.

...But to hurt someone deliberatly with an element of suprise and without remorse you will need alot of thinking. Since thinking allows you to see a person as a object that needs to me removed (or whatever).
By this I mean that you don't pay any attentiion at to their feelings and you don't care about their llife story at all. Plus you don't see how much damage you can do to people that love this person by harming him/her. Actually you see but you don't care since he/she is standing in your way.

I'm curious if self is viewed in this same manner, or if the feelings and life story of self are seen as significant. I would think the most objective position is to see Self as equivalent to Other. In the same way that feeling a connection to a friend creates a subjective framework that can defy reason in favor of protecting that connection, the same could be said of self. It can be demonstrated that one human being is equivalent to another. To prefer Self to Other only on the basis that Self is the vantage point and consciousness from which an individual views the world is the core of subjectivity, since that is the core of personal intention. To be free of personal intention might not result in empathy or a connection to others, but it must view equivalent beings without preference for self. What do you think?

 

[Wonkavision]

Is it possible for you to turn off or ignore your logical analysis sometimes? If it is, then it's possible for NFs to turn off or ignore their empathy when it suits them.

A simple but very effective point.

 

[Benny]

'Evil' behavior, or antisocial behavior in general, is almost always caused (or exacerbated) by truama, and as so, it is the result of a distortion of cognitive functions. So there is no way to accurately specify the cognitive preferences of an indiviual effected by it.
For instance, PTSD is just such a distortion. It has specific features, and may vary slightly based on I/E, but not much. This means that the effects of truama are independent of cognitive function. Usually the person goes into a fight/flight mode of sorts, which represents a more infantile way of dealing with the world.
So can NF's be Evil or antisocial? Of course. They respond badly to truama just like to everyone else, maybe moreso, since we seem to be sponges for such shit. And given our abilities to see through people to their true motivations, we may have an easier time manipulating others to our aims.

I don't think this is true. Different temperaments react completely different from others to stress/trauma. We all have our own ways of dealing with stress and anxiety. People who are ESTP's for example most likely cope with anxiety in extremely similar ways as each other, but extremely different ways than people who are INFJ's. For example, an INFJ who had a terrible childhood will at the worst grow up to be very avoidant, depressed, and self destructive. They will be an extreme form of INFJ. An ESTP stemming from the exact same childhood will at the worst grow up to be narcissistic, antisocial, and sadistic. They will be an extreme form of ESTP.

If what your saying is true everybody who had any trauma as a child would become a sociopath. There's a reason there are a number of personality disorders.

So in my opinion NF's can be evil, but in a self destructive manner. There are many forms of evil.

 

[BlahBlahNounBlah]

I don't think this is true. Different temperaments react completely different from others to stress/trauma. We all have our own ways of dealing with stress and anxiety. People who are ESTP's for example most likely cope with anxiety in extremely similar ways as each other, but extremely different ways than people who are INFJ's. For example, an INFJ who had a terrible childhood will at the worst grow up to be very avoidant, depressed, and self destructive. They will be an extreme form of INFJ. An ESTP stemming from the exact same childhood will at the worst grow up to be narcissistic, antisocial, and sadistic. They will be an extreme form of ESTP.

If what your saying is true everybody who had any trauma as a child would become a sociopath. There's a reason there are a number of personality disorders.

So in my opinion NF's can be evil, but in a self destructive manner. There are many forms of evil.

Everything within the standard range of human action (this includes cruelty) has been engaged in by a member of every personality type. If you want to discuss majority, that's one thing ... but all ESTPs do not react the same way to trauma. If it were that easy to predict an individual's behavior based on nothing but a theory, MBTI would be much more useful.

 

[Synapse]

Isn't there a saying the people you know the most are the cruelest of all.

Whats worse logical cruelty or emotional cruelty.

Darkest of hearts are like shrapnel exploding from within, once combusted who understands the aftermath of a melt down that is least expected.

 

[Space_Oddity]

For example, an INFJ who had a terrible childhood will at the worst grow up to be very avoidant, depressed, and self destructive. They will be an extreme form of INFJ.

I disagree. I think that having a bad childhood often strenghtens the Fe in NFJ types (in fact, I suppose it might create it in a way), but you have to keep in mind that Fe can be a very effective weapon if misused. I've encountered an INFJ woman who had a very bad and lonely childhood followed by other trauma later in life, resulting in permanent anxiety and extreme neediness (= VERY unhelathy Fe) by which she completely overwhelmed her youngest daughter. The woman is a dominat figure in her family, she is a skilled manipulator, and I suppose she'll never really let the daughter go and live her own life. Her out-of-control Fe tells her that her daughter is somewhat obligated to be her company, and she actually doesn't consider the girl's own needs and desires at all. I guess the woman doesn't behave like that intentionally, but taking into consideration that the daughter cannot handle or even realize her own emotions at all, it indeed comes across as cruel and ruthless towards her.

I just wanted to point out that unhleathy Fe is not only turned against its user, but also (and I suppose mainly, because this wasn't the only time I saw an NFJ doing something like that) againts those close to them. In that case, it's not only self-destructive, but universally destructive, and can result in ruthlesness and cruelty (the insidious, passive-aggressive kind).

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

Isn't there a saying the people you know the most are the cruelest of all.

Whats worse logical cruelty or emotional cruelty.

Darkest of hearts are like shrapnel exploding from within, once combusted who understands the aftermath of a melt down that is least expected.

The problem with what you describe as logical cruelty is typically passive-aggression in the guise of reason, and yes, that is a rather unbreakable barrier for the person who uses it and for anyone with whom they interact. Giving completely over to emotion without referencing reason or consequences is also destructive. The inability to integrate the hardware in the brain that can be measured to produce emotional responses in all humans by suppressing those emotions and expressing them with a false detachment is also destructive, but because it has its own method of justifying itself, can perhaps be moreso. My impression is that the suppressed destructive emotion has more capacity to be misdirected than the childish, unfiltered outburst. For example, if someone has an oppressive, dysfunctional mother, the unfiltered emotion will probably react directly to her without regard to appearances or consequences. The suppressed response will direct the rage elsewhere towards a future girlfriend or wife. It is important to know what is felt and find a way to both filter and express it. I suppose it is a lifetime struggle to achieve in a healthy manner.

 

[runvardh]

I am both the child in the bed and the monster under it. I walk this line not only to protect myself from the world; but the world from myself, as well.

 

[Lurker]

Certainly.

Also, I noticed this hadn't been done yet, so....

fear the wrath of the failed artist. Honestly, I do think Hitler was a rather messed-up INFJ. /understatement