You say a lot of things here that you really seem to believe are true -- I read them as conscious values you hold inside of you, and you are even rising up to state them here with conviction, so I *know* you believe them -- but when I engage you in these sorts of discussions, I feel like the way you are engaging and the sort of stances taken are saying something else entirely... which is why I felt I needed to clarify what I did. What you just said here surprised me because it was running counter to my perception. Why am I perceiving you that way? I honestly don't know... but it's clear there is a dissonance between your perception and mine that we have to work through.
Could you explain more about how someone can be honoring another person's "truth" if they actively disrupt it and engage in ways that deny it or downplay it? It sounds like you believe it to be true, so I want to understand, and I'm not getting it -- it doesn't seem to operate to me that way.
I was talking about Fi as a framework, not you specifically as a human being.Do you think, even for a second, that I don't know "realistically all of that can't be made manifest within a system of interacting parts and disparate moralities." But I can still aspire to a belief, an ideal, that it can.[/
It sounds like that comment bothered you.
Ah. That's how you were taking it?Help me understand what your point is. I guess I feel uncertain what you are trying to say to me. Get with the real world? Can I not even here say how I feel at the edges without someone feeling the need to pull me back to center, to get me back in line with the program?
I guess I could get offended too and respond with an, "After all you know *I'VE* been through in my life, you think I would demand someone else get back into the program and just merely follow status quo?!?" Geez. I mean, I've been bitten in the ass as much as you have or more because I haven't "toed the line" and I lost all of my social/family status because of chasing my personal truth.
No, I was describing how I saw Fi and Fe working -- I was describing. I was not PRESCRIBING behavior for you or insisting you get back into a box and merely follow rules. (Hell, I had an ESFP kid break me in; that boy can never be kept in a box for an instant, I had to learn to let him run free.)
But if we are going to describe Fe vs Fi -- yes, Fe is saying there are established protocols that mean something, based on human values and how people interact and function, and that Collective Morality can describe that, and Fi is saying there is Individual Truth that exists in each person and that needs to be expressed... and that both types of morality need to be synced up somehow.