User Tag List

First 3111213141523 Last

Results 121 to 130 of 273

  1. #121
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amargith View Post
    OMT:

    What I meant was...well consider the difference between law and corporate business. The law provide the main guidelines of contracts between corporations everywhere. But, those coporations will, on top of that, negotiate the terms that they themselves also want to agree upon to guarantee their specific wants and needs being fulfilled.
    And they have to fulfill certain actions and procedures for those wants and needs to be enforceable.

    The same goes for people. The law provides the framework for society to work with. Aside from that, as far as I'm concerned, you can consider something to be unethical and immoral, but those things are still to be negotiated between people.
    How do you deal with strangers, then?

    Example: cheating is considered immoral, not illegal. And open marriages do exist, where technically, cheating goes on, a practice that is considered immoral by many, but it's none of their business. That's between those two people.
    No one's saying that they can't engage in their relationship the way they want to. Is it right for them to assume, however, that this makes cheating right per se? Does it give them the ability, if they divorce, to cheat on their next SO and when confronted, say "K, I'll be more mindful next time?"

    That's the level I'm talking about. This is even below that still. You have to at least determine first what you want in the relationship and let your prospect partner know. I dunno about you, but when I start dating someone I state that I want an exclusive relationship with them. And he, in turn, can express the fact that he wants it to be temporary, casual or date other people as well. Same thing.
    I'm really talking more about general interpersonal conduct and not the intimate relationships between close people. Of course those are varied from couple to couple(?). The problem is that there just isn't enough time on this planet to get to know everyone that closely.

    Edit: Sigh, I swore I wouldn't be a part of this anymore. We once again hijacked a thread for this ever lasting debate. Not that I mind the way it's going, the example that this INTJ provided of his interaction between him and his TP, has given us some serious stuff to work with, and it's getting us somewhere, but we really should stop derailing every thread into this topic people!
    Doesn't this speak to the heart of why Fe-types think xNFPs are selfish?

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    What makes you think I'm talking about running away?
    How do you enforce boundaries without a willingness to defend them.

    You're sounding like an INTJ.
    Close (we do have the same pattern with opposing orientations). INTJs shut themselves in. ENTPs shut various others out.

  2. #122
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    No, Te is the established law. Society can't function properly if murder is legal. If you violate Te laws, you'll likely run into legal consequences.

    Fe is a cultural standard that is (usually) not enforced through law--at least not in most Western countries. The only typical consequences for violating Fe laws are social rejection and alienation.
    Before codification, where did the principles that constituted the common law come from? Fe.

    Fe is the law of social interaction among non-familiar humans in a given community. That's the point I was making.

  3. #123
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amargith View Post
    The hell it is. You cannot fine me for being rude to you. You can just consider it unethical. You cannot punish or jail a spouse for cheating on you either. It's not illegal, therefore it's not the law. It's just the violation of a personal contract between two people.
    You violate Fe, you'll get ostracized.

    It's just as hard and binding as statute. You yourself were pointing out how restrictive and imposing it seemed.

  4. #124
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    How do you enforce boundaries without a willingness to defend them.
    Defending implies attacking or punishing?

  5. #125
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    Defending implies attacking or punishing?
    Well, there is obstinacy to the point of the attacker's boredom, but that just gives them an opportunity to regroup and return another day with better weapons.

  6. #126
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    Before codification, where did the principles that constituted the common law come from? Fe.

    Fe is the law of social interaction among non-familiar humans in a given community. That's the point I was making.
    What common law was there before codified laws existed? All that existed before that was total anarchy.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  7. #127
    Senior Member Uytuun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    nnnn
    Posts
    1,633

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    No one's saying that they can't engage in their relationship the way they want to. Is it right for them to assume, however, that this makes cheating right per se? Does it give them the ability, if they divorce, to cheat on their next SO and when confronted, say "K, I'll be more mindful next time?"
    Lol, I think I'll adopt "Kay, I'll be more mindful next time" as my new user title or signature or something.

  8. #128
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    What common law was there before codified laws existed? All that existed before that was total anarchy.
    Common law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    In English-speaking countries, codification of the law is a relatively recent development, for the most part.

  9. #129
    The High Priestess Amargith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Enfp
    Enneagram
    497 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEE Fi
    Posts
    14,657

    Default

    Strangers can be dealt with the way you want. Either you avoid them, as you're not interested in relationships, or you get interested in them and approach them about that interest....or you can go Fe and use the universal 'hi, how are you doing' to see what they're about. Personally, I'll go for the second approach. I will use the Fe-general norm to navigate till I know enough about the person to know how they personally like things, till we're comfortable enough to make a contract with one another and we know what we want from each other. No point in staying with the standard generic stuff, if we can maximize our benefits by tailoring our own contract.


    As for your 'i can cheat on my next gf coz i had an open relationship with the previous one': no. Again, that's doing stuff before you negotiate and know what to expect from one another. Just as much as she doesn't get to assume that he's there to have an exclusive long-term life arrangment without even discussing it with him. Communication is key.

    Ok boys, I'm out, coz I see where this is going and I don't have the stomach for this. Toodles!
    ★ڿڰۣ✿ℒoѵℯ✿ڿڰۣ★





    "Harm none, do as ye will”

  10. #130
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    Common law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    In English-speaking countries, codification of the law is a relatively recent development, for the most part.
    Right, but what standards for behavior would people have used before any form of government existed? Without any legal repercussions for any behaviors, it seems like the only motivating value for most people would be self-preservation and promotion of self-interest.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

Similar Threads

  1. [JCF] XNFPs and Knowing the "Essence" of People
    By finalcount in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 07-30-2012, 10:36 AM
  2. [MBTItm] XNFPs and the Discussion of Events/Feelings
    By SubtleFighter in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 06-23-2011, 02:04 PM
  3. [MBTItm] The XNFP and restlessness.
    By CrystalViolet in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 04-06-2011, 09:06 PM
  4. Hate to do this guys but...types and selfishness
    By FalseHeartDothKnow in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-01-2010, 11:11 AM
  5. [Fi] Are Fi and selfishness related?
    By Lightyear in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 235
    Last Post: 07-16-2009, 05:51 PM

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