I believe Fe types, being Js, are exponentially more aware of cause-and-effect in the external world, and account for real-world consequences in their moral computation, whereas Fi types are more likely to zone in on themselves and account for their personal emtions in moral computation while being somewhat blind to the "real" consequences of their behavior. Like Ti types, I think Fi types seek a more "purified" set of ethics, with all principles in internal harmony, while Fe users are more willing to modify ethics to fit the situation because they seek consistency in external results. To Te and Fe, there's little point in so much idealistic refinement when the constantly-changing parameters of the external world have morphed to create a new situation long before you've finally computed the ideal response to the first. Better to create a best-fit response with the resources at hand and jump on enacting that, so that the problem is actually adressed, instead of lingering to perfect a solution that will be essentially useless by the time it's formed...
I believe Fe types, being Js, are exponentially more aware of cause-and-effect in the external world, and account for real-world consequences in their moral computation, whereas Fi types are more likely to zone in on themselves and account for their personal emtions in moral computation while being somewhat blind to the "real" consequences of their behavior. Like Ti types, I think Fi types seek a more "purified" set of ethics, with all principles in internal harmony, while Fe users are more willing to modify ethics to fit the situation because they seek consistency in external results. To Te and Fe, there's little point in so much idealistic refinement when the constantly-changing parameters of the external world have morphed to create a new situation long before you've finally computed the ideal response to the first. Better to create a best-fit response with the resources at hand and jump on enacting that, so that the problem is actually adressed, instead of lingering to perfect a solution that will be essentially useless by the time it's formed...
Reconsider your question.
How does Ni morality form as opposed to Si morality?
How does Ti morality form as opposed to Ne morality?
How does morality form?
To understand better where I'm coming from, note that I believe most people overestimate the role of their tertiary/inferior, so you can't just split the population into Fe vs Fi and start discussing morality.
This is touching on a question that I had in my previous post. Do other functions beside Fe/Fi influence morality? It sounds like you're saying that since many people don't have Fe/Fi in their dominant or auxiliary functions, and yet they have morals, that morality can come from non-Feeling functions. This is something I'm curious about, with whether the morality of non-Feelers comes from their tertiary/inferior Feeling function or actually forms from their N/S/T dom/aux functions. (Of course personal morality is more complex than just breaking it into cognitive functions--I think "influences" might be a better word than "comes from/forms" on second thought.) Do you have any thoughts of how morality would be influenced by non-Feeling functions? Or is this a question that you're still exploring yourself?
This is touching on a question that I had in my previous post. Do other functions beside Fe/Fi influence morality? It sounds like you're saying that since many people don't have Fe/Fi in their dominant or auxiliary functions, and yet they have morals, that morality can come from non-Feeling functions. This is something I'm curious about, with whether the morality of non-Feelers comes from their tertiary/inferior Feeling function or actually forms from their N/S/T dom/aux functions. (Of course personal morality is more complex than just breaking it into cognitive functions--I think "influences" might be a better word than "comes from/forms" on second thought.) Do you have any thoughts of how morality would be influenced by non-Feeling functions? Or is this a question that you're still exploring yourself?
I believe Fe types, being Js, are exponentially more aware of cause-and-effect in the external world, and account for real-world consequences in their moral computation, whereas Fi types are more likely to zone in on themselves and account for their personal emtions in moral computation while being somewhat blind to the "real" consequences of their behavior. Like Ti types, I think Fi types seek a more "purified" set of ethics, with all principles in internal harmony, while Fe users are more willing to modify ethics to fit the situation because they seek consistency in external results. To Te and Fe, there's little point in so much idealistic refinement when the constantly-changing parameters of the external world have morphed to create a new situation long before you've finally computed the ideal response to the first. Better to create a best-fit response with the resources at hand and jump on enacting that, so that the problem is actually adressed, instead of lingering to perfect a solution that will be essentially useless by the time it's formed...
I believe Fe types, being Js, are exponentially more aware of cause-and-effect in the external world, and account for real-world consequences in their moral computation, whereas Fi types are more likely to zone in on themselves and account for their personal emtions in moral computation while being somewhat blind to the "real" consequences of their behavior. Like Ti types, I think Fi types seek a more "purified" set of ethics, with all principles in internal harmony, while Fe users are more willing to modify ethics to fit the situation because they seek consistency in external results. To Te and Fe, there's little point in so much idealistic refinement when the constantly-changing parameters of the external world have morphed to create a new situation long before you've finally computed the ideal response to the first. Better to create a best-fit response with the resources at hand and jump on enacting that, so that the problem is actually adressed, instead of lingering to perfect a solution that will be essentially useless by the time it's formed...
great observation!
so basically you're saying Fe is deductive morality and Fi is inductive morality? makes sense. similarly, I think Fe morality tends to come much more for the superego while Fi morality is more visceral (Fe often seems to have a bias of "it worked in the past, therefore it's right")
Fe types will often say things like "I was raised to believe...." or "it's difficult reprogramming what my parents taught me was right" ([MENTION=15607]The Great One[/MENTION] and I have talked about this at length). for strong Fi users on the other hand, values are just "there" and we're often left thinking "your parents created your values for you? ". for me, even as early as 5, I had my own ideas of right and wrong and, apart from a short period of time in which I tried to change them and failed miserably, they really have not changed much. I can honestly say that my values would be the same if I grew up in the slums of India, on the Communist Block, in an African tribe or in the courts of the Victorian aristocracy.