• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Fairness and Justice: T "principles" or F "values"?

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
this is one of the reasons why tests are flawed (imo). if a feeler finds being fair and bringing justice to those who deserves it to be idealistic and a personal belief then right their they are fair. if you ask me to choose between mercy and justice i can't choose.

Don't defend it. The world wouldnt be the same without it
 

chubber

failed poetry slam career
Joined
Oct 18, 2013
Messages
4,413
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
When we think of fairness", we normally think of someone complaining; or "whining" we call it, about some perceived slight from others. Or some "bleeding heart do-gooder" standing up for the slighted. Such emotiveness we normally associate with Feeling.
Yet, in Gary Hartzler's books on Functions and Facets of Type, "fairness" is actually associated with Thinking!

However, this is from the perspective of the person giving out measures of something to people, not the people doing the receiving. So "fair" is assumed to be something universal, and a Thinker would (in an objective, detached fashion) give to all equally, while an F would take into account other factors such as some starting off disadvantaged (sort of like many of the political debates in the US for the past few decades, involving the poor and social programs).
However, the F position is also trying to be "fair", and only looking at a broader time/circumstance perspective.

So I was wondering where exactly fairness and justice would fall in the T/F polarity.
Is it T when you're the one giving to others, but F when you're the one demanding fairness? Or is it T when you used some objective criteria like "equal shares for everyone"; and F when you try to take into consideration prior advantage/disadvantage or individual circumstances?
And then what attitudes of T and F are involved? "Objective" criteria such as "equal shares" can mean e (external) whether it's T or F. Universal standards are technically "external", but are considered introverted.

So the question is, which of the four judging functions are most closely associated with fairness and justice?

What about the position of the judging function, e.g. Auxiliary/Tertiary vs Dominant/Inferior?

But here's where it gets fuzzy. "Morality/ethics" are associated by Jung with Feeling! The "set of rules" would simply indicate an extraverted function (external standard). "The feelings we have for them" would be more like the internal standard. What the standards are would be T/F. T saying "true/false", and F saying "good/bad".
That too would push "fairness" as T by virtue of being "true/false". But it also seems to often become an issue of good/bad, especially for the person rising up and fighting unfairness/injustice. (to himself or others).

Would it be more "extreme" context based fair/unfairness for those where the Dominant and Inferior positions of judging functions?
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
The tertiary and inferior are reflecting the auxiliary and dominant, and so will be behind the preferred functional perspective.

I've actually learned a lot since starting this topic. Back then, I had to sort through the common assumptions that any emotions was connecting with a definite "Feeling" function (and a common stereotypes, such as T's being cold "vulcans" who wouldn't care about stuff like fairness). But for one thing, all of the functional products are "mixed together" in reality and, differentiated or "set apart" by our conscious functional perspective.
Basically, I had since come to define T/F as "impersonal" vs "personal" (or mechanical vs soulish; technical vs humane, true/false vs good/bad).

So the issue of fairness and justice, like everything else, has both elements of T and F and both attitudes.

The "mechanical" or impersonal element of fairness and justice is equal give; equal take. This can ignore individual human factors such as a lesser ability to have something to give, etc. Ti may take to the symmetry of equality (equilibrium), where Te may add in other objective factors such as rank; or be more proactive in changing things to make them more equal. Fi would reference the individual and support self or others based on an internal sense of "fairness", and Fe would reference the environment of people, to determine what's good to self or others.

Getting upset at unfairness or injustice may technically be "feeling", but it is not necessarily a differentiated F function. To think that would be to make the mistake of equating emotions with Feeling. It's a limbic (instinctual) reaction that is then interpreted by a differentiated function. Feeling is the "rational" judgment function that sorts out [limbic] feelings. The preferred function would be connected with which complex takes which perspective. (The complexes are what set the dominant, auxiliary, tertiary, inferior, and the rest).
 

chubber

failed poetry slam career
Joined
Oct 18, 2013
Messages
4,413
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
The tertiary and inferior are reflecting the auxiliary and dominant, and so will be behind the preferred functional perspective.

I've actually learned a lot since starting this topic. Back then, I had to sort through the common assumptions that any emotions was connecting with a definite "Feeling" function (and a common stereotypes, such as T's being cold "vulcans" who wouldn't care about stuff like fairness). But for one thing, all of the functional products are "mixed together" in reality and, differentiated or "set apart" by our conscious functional perspective.
Basically, I had since come to define T/F as "impersonal" vs "personal" (or mechanical vs soulish; technical vs humane, true/false vs good/bad).

So the issue of fairness and justice, like everything else, has both elements of T and F and both attitudes.

The "mechanical" or impersonal element of fairness and justice is equal give; equal take. This can ignore individual human factors such as a lesser ability to have something to give, etc. Ti may take to the symmetry of equality (equilibrium), where Te may add in other objective factors such as rank; or be more proactive in changing things to make them more equal. Fi would reference the individual and support self or others based on an internal sense of "fairness", and Fe would reference the environment of people, to determine what's good to self or others.

Getting upset at unfairness or injustice may technically be "feeling", but it is not necessarily a differentiated F function. To think that would be to make the mistake of equating emotions with Feeling. It's a limbic (instinctual) reaction that is then interpreted by a differentiated function. Feeling is the "rational" judgment function that sorts out [limbic] feelings. The preferred function would be connected with which complex takes which perspective. (The complexes are what set the dominant, auxiliary, tertiary, inferior, and the rest).

My question was about the impact of their (function) position, so a person who is has judging in their Auxilary position will be different from a person who is Dominant judging function. So how would this appear towards the outsider viewing the person. I understand that both T and F will be fair, but also they will prioritise fairness accordingly to their preferences.

It will seem inevitable for a Te person to see the Fe person as fake, because of how they prioritise fairness, or as you say, impersonal fairness, versus personal (or perhaps sociatal) fairness?
 

Norexan

Quetzalcoatl
Joined
Jul 2, 2017
Messages
2,222
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
8w7
Instinctual Variant
sp
Seek for Justice (have a very high senses of your importance) in various ways is Super-Ego stuff while Fairness is Ego. Fair people are usually one who can control themselves and their Super-Ego to overdo things or do wrong things. The most easy controlled Super-Ego is the one ruled by Ego Te(objectivness) or Fi(empathy).
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Seek for Justice (have a very high senses of your importance) in various ways is Super-Ego stuff while Fairness is Ego. Fair people are usually one who can control themselves and their Super-Ego to overdo things or do wrong things. The most easy controlled Super-Ego is the one ruled by Ego Te(objectivness) or Fi(empathy).
One thing people often overlook is that treating people fairly does not mean treating them all the same.
 

Norexan

Quetzalcoatl
Joined
Jul 2, 2017
Messages
2,222
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
8w7
Instinctual Variant
sp
One thing people often overlook is that treating people fairly does not mean treating them all the same.

That's will be true if we don't search truth about ourselves. If you are working in hospital you won't treat people same. First you will receive severe wounded youth and then others. But here, we are talking about people who search with their indedity , they want to discover who they really are and if we start compromising then we won't conclude anything.
 

rav3n

.
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,655
Fairness could easily be premised on logical consistency, which lands firmly in T territory. Justice too, relative to cause and effect.
 

GavinElster

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2017
Messages
233
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
3w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Well, there is a little F judgment always in fairness too, because you have to have some value system to even think one ought to be fair in the first place.

But, the key to understanding functions theory is to get the idea that things are rarely purely one function -- they're just, as Jung would say, often subordinated to the principle of one function. A good example of this is that a lot of value judgments based on our evolutionary survival instincts are really S dominating F, even if they're supposedly value judgments.

No, not all these are primitive S, as they can be quite sophisticated, just pragmatic and grounded more in the worldly facts than in refined reflection on what to value.

In any case, I think fairness can indeed involve an analogous combination of T and F, with F dominated by T. F judgment is truest to its principle when it is more intimately about assigning value, whereas fairness is often pretty dry and consistency-oriented despite not being value-neutral.
Also, F is capable of subjective value judgment (ie what I personally value), which is very far outside the domain of T.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
My question was about the impact of their (function) position, so a person who is has judging in their Auxilary position will be different from a person who is Dominant judging function. So how would this appear towards the outsider viewing the person. I understand that both T and F will be fair, but also they will prioritise fairness accordingly to their preferences.

It will seem inevitable for a Te person to see the Fe person as fake, because of how they prioritise fairness, or as you say, impersonal fairness, versus personal (or perhaps societal) fairness?
To a person with dominant Ji, the determination of right or wrong (such as "prioritizing fairness") will be more integral to their ego, and thus may have more of an emotional investment behind it), where if it's aux. it will more likely be used more to color their perceptions, but still not change the personal or impersonal leanings of their judgment.
 

chubber

failed poetry slam career
Joined
Oct 18, 2013
Messages
4,413
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
To a person with dominant Ji, the determination of right or wrong (such as "prioritizing fairness") will be more integral to their ego, and thus may have more of an emotional investment behind it), where if it's aux. it will more likely be used more to color their perceptions, but still not change the personal or impersonal leanings of their judgment.

I need to find out more about this ego and super ego. Is this Freud?
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Ego is both Freud and Jung. Super Ego is Freud, but Socionics has adopted it (and "Id", and added something called "Super Id") for the function stack, so when you see it mentioned in this context (as the person on the last page), that's what it's coming from.
 
Top