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

[Eric B]

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?

 

[disregard]

I think Fe values fairness and Fi values justice.

Te and Ti do not deal with fairness and justice. Those with Ti will value Fairness with their Fe and those with Te will value justice with their Fi.

Theoretically... I think that is how it goes.

 

[Colors]

I think it has to do with your philosophy (on how to decide "fairness" and "justice"), not your cognitive functions.

 

[ENTJ Extraordinaire]

it is easy to say that is based on philosophy, but we have to have a reason to hold that philosophy.

if we are brought up, believing that philosophy, then that philosophy is going to influence our functions, our personality type, etc.

I think Fe values fairness and Fi values justice.

i think if anything, this is going to be the best way of expressing the values, bearing in mind that these are only PREFERENCES. they are not going to apply universally. they are just general rules of thumb

 

[Maverick]

I always thought T was about valuing fairness...

According to Jung's original formulation of the cognitive processes, fairness and justice are associated with Extraverted Thinking. They are about treating everyone according to a set of rules (i.e. morality/ethics), regardless of the feelings we have for them.

A T Teacher might think "I hate that student, but s/he can pass because the criteria are met".

 

[ENTJ Extraordinaire]

one would assume that teachers would have a level of professionalism that would avoid such a situation

however i think it is quite safe to assume that not every teacher can be relied upon to be as level headed as that.

 

[nonsequitur]

I always thought T was about valuing fairness...

According to Jung's original formulation of the cognitive processes, fairness and justice are associated with Extraverted Thinking. They are about treating everyone according to a set of rules (i.e. morality/ethics), regardless of the feelings we have for them.

A T Teacher might think "I hate that student, but s/he can pass because the criteria are met".

I doubt it has anything to do with cognitive functions, and all to do with perspective and values. (though I must admit that I'm a T and I'm obsessed with being "fair" and "just".)

Using your example above, I'll talk about one of my students this semester.

I try very hard to be fair to all parties. But she doesn't try in class, I don't particularly like her, and she's not smart either. I wasn't sure whether I should fail her or not, because I couldn't decide if my personal dislike of her was influencing my decision. Further, I wasn't sure if the reason why I disliked her was only because she was so completely incompetent, therefore it constituted a reason for failing her. I'm also reluctant to fail students because I still remember what it was like to be a student, so I empathise with them.

I didn't fail her in the end. Because I decided that she had done enough work for her to pass. At the same time, I wondered if it was fair to the other students that I didn't fail her, because in comparison to them, she'd worked a whole lot less and didn't put in effort.

There are many ways to be "fair". The cognitive functions just guide that decision-making process, and do not determine whether "fairness" or "justice" are valued or not.

 

[ENTJ Extraordinaire]

well put, also bearing in mind that your NJ combination will immediately mean that you have high expectations, and very little room for error,

TAKE IT FROM ME, ENTJ! WE HAVE NO ROOM FOR ERROR, WHATSOEVER

not from others, or ourselves.

it irritates me greatly when i see others not putting in half the work i do

in fact, i mentioned this just today, in my Chemistry Class

i made the comment that although i am not top in my class, i worked a whole lot more than others, who seem to sit and bludge...and of course...in a subject like chemistry, FAIL!

that is simply not an option for an ENTJ!

we are far too overcritical of ourselves, and everyone else to allow such lack of action, and to allow it to go unnoticed, and so action has to be made

 

[Kora]

^ The contrarie for me. I always been able to be in the top of my class without too much effort, and I thought it was unfair that just because someone 'worked hard' but failed his/her exams deserved to pass the year. /offtopic

On functions, at least I'm prone to consider external factors while judging someone. You need the whole picture if you really want to reach the truth, which for me is true justice.

 

[Totenkindly]

I thought that the OP and Disregard's posts had intriguing ideas.

I've always been a little unsure how to approach the issue of "fairness" related to functions. After all, aren't T's just in some sense following their particular "values"? Everyone has values of some sort, regardless of T or F leanings.

I try to be fair when I deal with people. The more information I have about them and the more context, the more fair I feel that I can be. (So I usually try to learn more.) I basically model them inside me with that information, dump myself into their shoes, then determine what reasonable behavior would be and go from there in determining my reaction. I constantly finding my opinions of people being revised as soon as I learn something new; I even had a case already this morning where someone I was inclined to be distasteful towards was upgraded in my head once I saw them in some other environs and had more context for their behavior/intentions; but I would have preferred not to upgrade if I had the choice. Oh well, gotta be fair...!

I also know that many times I will feel I have to interact with someone disconnected from the way I personally feel about them. I might really like someone but have to get "hard" on them in order to treat them fairly; I might really dislike someone but have to be kinder to them than I wish as part of being fair to them; and of course, it's not just a matter of being fair to them but being fair to everyone around them in how I treat that person compared to the others.

Obviously I haven't shed any light on this, sorry. I just don't really know if a singular function is involved or a combination.

 

["?"]

So I was wondering where exactly fairness and justice would fall in the T/F polarity.

Eric you give a good account in both your examples and overall a very good analogy of how it works along the T/F dichotomy.

 

[Eric B]

I always thought T was about valuing fairness...

According to Jung's original formulation of the cognitive processes, fairness and justice are associated with Extraverted Thinking. They are about treating everyone according to a set of rules (i.e. morality/ethics), regardless of the feelings we have for them.

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).

 

[entropie]

Usually I dont say things like this but in this case, I must say in my opinion p types are the most fair. Fairness thereby is meant to be fair, according to facts.

I would breakdown a list as following:

1st: istp (fair and forgiving)
2nd: intp (fair but sometimes not caring)
3rd: entp (fair to others, but immorale to themselves [and maybe others in the process])
4th: isfp (fair but sometimes in a loyal way [where the "value" thing starts and the "principles" things end])


If I missed someone that is because I do not know enough about the other p types yet.

J types I generally do not see as being fair and my reasoning is the inherit logic.

"I do not think J types to treat p types fairly all the time".

Therefore they lack something and if I remember correctly p types are a member of our species.

But maybe I am treating them unfairly in thinking so

 

[mlittrell]

fairness and justice cannot be limited to type but only to an individual and individuals are NOT limited by type.

EDIT (combining two posts):

associating fairness or justice to a specific type or even temperament or function or whatever is a little bit ehh. Feelers can be fair and still be all for justice. Thinkers can be fair and still be all for justice.

 

[booyalab]

When we think of fairness", we normally think of someone complaining; or "whining" we call it, about some perceived slight from others.

We do?

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

thinking.


I hate threads like this.

 

[entropie]

fairness and justice cannot be limited to type but only to an individual and individuals are NOT limited by type.

EDIT (combining two posts):

associating fairness or justice to a specific type or even temperament or function or whatever is a little bit ehh. Feelers can be fair and still be all for justice. Thinkers can be fair and still be all for justice.

I guess the question aims more towards finding out, through what process someone derives a conclusion to be fair from. And how that shows itself. Fair alone can be interpreted in many different ways.

If its just a Feeling or Thinking thing, I dont know. But I would prefer to be treated fairly according to the facts given. If someone treats me fairly because I desrve it, I feel played for a sucker.

 

[Jack Flak]

It is thinking, but I thought that was well-understood. Prove me wrong yet again, will you, world? Even the questions in personality tests related to T/F favor T for fairness.

Impersonal arbitration defines Thinking as a function.

 

[booyalab]

Fair alone can be interpreted in many different ways.

yeah, like what about fairness for the baby bunnies and rainbows and the laughter of the children?

 

[Jack Flak]

yeah, like what about fairness for the baby bunnies and rainbows and the laughter of the children?

FEAR GOD, AND DREAD NAUGHT.

 

[mlittrell]

It is thinking, but I thought that was well-understood. Prove me wrong yet again, will you, world? Even the questions in personality tests related to T/F favor T for fairness.

Impersonal arbitration defines Thinking as a function.

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 they believe in justice. if you ask me to choose between mercy and justice i can't choose.

sorry for the poorly worded sentence.