User Tag List

First 123 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 25

  1. #11
    alchemist Legion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,897

    Default

    Je: action
    Ji: principles
    Feeling: social, emotion, values
    Thinking: systems, logic

    Fe: it's about doing what's right. The actions you take, the way you convey yourself, especially around other people. Maybe a person needs caring, or a group needs shepherding, or rituals are needed to keep us focused on what's important.
    Fi: it's about listening to our inner guidance system. Knowing which way to go as we move through life, that respects the inner experience of the individual. Knowing who to give our time to, and who to avoid.
    Te: it's about getting things done, making the system work efficiently. That way we can make the most of the resources we have, and build and plan to achieve success. The facts of the matter should be taken into account.
    Ti: it's about the way we frame information. Having things systemised correctly in our heads, so we can make the most rational decisions. We should remain detached, so as to see with clarity.
    the lone star flies alone

  2. #12
    Time-OverLord Norexan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    8w7 sp
    Socionics
    LIE Te
    Posts
    1,765

    Default

    First at all, what is morality? It is doing right action. Morality is based on idealism (Fi) is something right or wrong no matter for society thinks about it as good (Fe).
    For example for me it is normal to walk naked if you want but using people without any reason it is morally wrong. Not just wrong but destructible for society.
    I met certain people who complain me how this world is evil, how people are bad but they are so mindless they cannot realize that each action has reaction blah blah whining stuff..
    So whatever you do now it will have reaction in people around you. You CANNOT use something what is not yours and expect to live in same world.
    You cannot commit EVIL ACT (doing anything against the will of person) an EXPECT the world full of good people because PEOPLE LOOK AT YOU.
    You have to have responsibility for people around you, teach them right action not action for just action because every idiot can steal things and be something.
    True Neutral 8 1 5 7 3 Teexcellent>Niexcellent>Figood>Tigood>>>>Siaverage>Fe unused
    "There is no intellectualism in faith. Both atheist and theist choose their belief system based on ego and self-preservation." by 2017
    ===Logical Crusader===

    Dail [or Daer] ú-[o] chyn [or fyn/thyn] [?] Ú-danno i failad a thi; an úben tannatha le failad.

  3. #13
    Mastermind Fieldmarshal Sacrophagus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    MBTI
    XNTJ
    Enneagram
    854
    Posts
    1,590

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar View Post
    Ah, yes. We definitely needed Jim Crowe law to show us the way in society. . .

    "Git outa mah toilet room, black feller. Or ewz git hung and fried to a crisp with mah ciggyrette lighta."

    I probably would have been shot at or called a "nigga luvah" were I an adult back then. Logic was nowhere in sight, just skin color and general stupidity.



    What is that, a page from a cult handbook?
    That's exactly why no one should identify as a person of color, a religious person, a person of status, or cling to any patriotic bullshit and all that hokum. They set themselves to treat everything according to those puny details on a pitiful surface level.


    --------
    On topic, I will entertain your definitions.

    I don't give a shit who you are or what you do in your spare time as long as your actions do not create any obstructions in front of the current status quo. I welcome all attempts to make the subject of focus better, however. TJ definition works for me.

    The TP assertion that suggests "The end justify the means" is definitely something I don't identify with. I have a strong sense of honor and pride. I have a personal way of doing things that I only question to make it better, provided it aligns with my code of honor.

    FJ text seems a bit far-fetched to me. Were you implying that FJ seeks symbiosis and cohesion? If so, no thanks. FJs have a lot of work to do then, and I rather they stop sacrificing themselves and their needs for the sake of humanity.
    I do think that FJs think deeper than that and see higher purposes for their actions.

    FP way of thinking accepts all differences as long as their values are not endangered. Most of them react when those values are not respected or when they're not understood.

    I don't give a shit if someone understands or not. In fact, I never mention my values in context waiting for the others to understand or accept them. My values are mine. I really don't care if someone lives by them or not. Sharing the same values also doesn't make us friends.



    Regarding your divisions, I echo Peter's claim overall.
    الخَيلُ وَاللَيلُ وَالبَيداءُ تَعرِفُني *** وَالسَيفُ وَالرُمحُ وَالقِرطاسُ وَالقَلَمُ
    Swift steeds, dreary nights, and the desolate wasteland, all know me full well
    As do the sword, the spear, the paper and the pen.
    Likes Yuu liked this post

  4. #14
    Fe this! Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Deadpan View Post

    I say this because Fi dom/aux users can be highly judgmental, but still tend to allow others to do and feel as they please, as long as it isn't harming another individual (or harming the other's self, if the Fi user cares about the other).
    Can you (or anyone) give an example of how an FJ might not allow others to do as they please even though it's in no way harmful to other individuals?
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    INFJ 5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari -or- disagree with my type?

  5. #15
    Can't be satisfied. Peter Deadpan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    6,000

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    Can you (or anyone) give an example of how an FJ might not allow others to do as they please even though it's in no way harmful to other individuals?
    What I was trying to say is that FJs are sometimes (moreso than other types) very communicative of how they feel the social atmosphere should function, expecting others to adhere to certain communal standards of behavior.
    Perpetual mood


    “Sometimes I think I have felt everything I'm ever gonna feel.
    And from here on out, I'm not gonna feel anything new.
    Just lesser versions of what I've already felt.”


    - look it up yourself



  6. #16
    alchemist Legion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,897

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Deadpan View Post
    What I was trying to say is that FJs are sometimes (moreso than other types) very communicative of how they feel the social atmosphere should function, expecting others to adhere to certain communal standards of behavior.
    I can vouch for this in my own case. I'm often saying "please don't do that", often without the "please",
    however
    I know ESFPs do a similar thing, and I expect NFPs would too if they were more comfortable with confrontation.

    (though it's done in different ways, different motives etc. so I'll give it more thought)
    the lone star flies alone

  7. #17
    Can't be satisfied. Peter Deadpan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    6,000

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Legion View Post
    I can vouch for this in my own case. I'm often saying "please don't do that", often without the "please",
    however
    I know ESFPs do a similar thing, and I expect NFPs would too if they were more comfortable with confrontation.

    (though it's done in different ways, different motives etc. so I'll give it more thought)
    That's a fair assessment.

    I think it's kind of funny when IFPs snap though, but in the sense that the intensity and stubbornness can be second to none.
    Perpetual mood


    “Sometimes I think I have felt everything I'm ever gonna feel.
    And from here on out, I'm not gonna feel anything new.
    Just lesser versions of what I've already felt.”


    - look it up yourself



  8. #18
    alchemist Legion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,897

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Deadpan View Post
    That's a fair assessment.

    I think it's kind of funny when IFPs snap though, but in the sense that the intensity and stubbornness can be second to none.
    I thought about it, and I think the idea of trying to change the behaviour of another indicates extroverted judgement, and the term "social atmosphere" implies Feeling, so it's Fe, you're right.

    However (another however :P ) the notion of expecting something is more passive and Fi focused. FPs can expect to be treated a certain way (and expect others to be treated a certain way), but this is shown through their emotional reactions, and perhaps being demanding with Te, rather than the persuasion tactics that an FJ would employ.
    the lone star flies alone
    Likes Frosty liked this post

  9. #19
    Member Vendrah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    MBTI
    xNFP
    Enneagram
    9
    Posts
    98

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow Play View Post
    I think T/F and J/P are the two preferences which contribute the most towards one's moral outlook. One could argue that S/N affects how open one is to new ideas, and by extension determines how conservative or progressive they are, but I'm not going to explore that further in this post.

    Below are attempts to estimate what one's moral outlook might be based on their type.

    FJ: "We are one and we all want the same things. What's good for us all is also good for each one of us. There's a right and wrong way to act towards our fellow human beings, although it seems too many are confused about right and wrong and need guidance."
    FP: "It's each and every individual with their own needs who matters most. So many people forget this when they act like they know what's best for everyone else. Live and let live."
    TJ: "It's the consequences of actions which determine their right and wrong, regardless of how we feel about them. We all need to be held accountable to each other for our actions in order to maintain social stability."
    TP: "Morality is a construct decided upon by society to control others, and thus has little intrinsic value. It's the needs of the situation which matters most."

    I regard these positions as a hypothetical general rule instead of being true for all FJs, FPs, TJs, and TPs. Disregarding the issue of middle preferences, it's entirely possible to agree with more than one of the above statements, or to disagree with all of them. This post serves mainly to start a discussion.

    As for myself, I identify most strongly with the FP and TJ positions, and the least with the FJ position. Using the nu-MBTI of typology forums, I could argue for an FP or TJ typing on the basis of being on the Fi/Te axis, but I'd still show up as a TP for statistical purposes.
    I think that TPs, at least for INTP, means something like "Its a set of consistent principles that, applied in a logical framework, sets what should and what should not be done".

    Also, I think that I could actually write something for NT->"Its a construct of logical rules that comes from an inteligent analysis to give rational sense in order to achieve progress in the given enviroment". I could write for SJ either, for NF maybe but I couldnt come with anything for SP.

    But my main point here is to show that we could actually create many combinations for morality although I wonder which ones would be pretty fake and shallow on the subject, or if it is quite limited. I know that TJ justice is usually measured by results (consequences of action), but that judging only works if the system evaluated is very close to a meritocracy system because it always says that it is either your fault (when things goes downhill) or your merit (when it works). However, a meritocrathic system is more an exception than a rule in the real world (in terms of political debate there is not even a single one system that it is truly merithocratic). Giving a short resume to a very long discussion, meritocrathic systems needs to follow at least all four of these points:
    1) No or minimized heritages.
    2) Equal opportunities for every person. In political terms, the motto is equal opportunities for every children, which only works if there is a very good free education and health-care system.
    3) A system that can have some kind of "armory" or a defense against randomness. The results to be evaluated must be purely from merit and the random factor/distortions must be either minimal or zero.
    4) There is controversy on this, but it is very important to state that "input" must equal "output". Most, if not all, merithocrats agrees that no one can produce hundreds or thousands more than the average, so, all these super or ultra rich lacks merit at least partially. This is an important part that nobody, as far as I know, could tackle it and create a system from a completely objective point of view.

    Its quite funny to note that there is not a single country in the world, as far as I know, which passes in all of these four at the same time, however most games do. A regular game does provide equal opportunity to every players if anti-cheat is well stablished once they bought the game and the console (or a good PC). It does not have heritages, you dont inherit items from your parents. If you evaluate the average of results in long terms, the downs and ups from randomness tends to be equal and cancel each other(supposing that the further results are mostly or completely independent from the present results). And most developeres wont let the best players to produce hundreds or thousand times the average players at the same time frame (or handle hundreds or thousands of enemies in a row or without dying, they got bots for that), because if they do most of the player base will simply quit and not buy the game again.

    In most societies I believe (I live in Brazil so I will speak in brazillian society, although USA and others shouldnt change much), things arent completely meritocrathic. It is usually a middle point between meritocracy and anti-meritocracy (anti-meritocracy is the obedience of some of these 4 points in reversion - the output must be random or the result must be simply from heritage). In regular societies, the heritage is usually unlimited. There are not equal opportunity for every child. The results are subject to external crisis, floating on marketplace demands and a lot of random stuff. There are people winning hundreds or thousands times more than average per year/month.

    I did all this meritocracy tour just to state that TJs "justice" and "fairness" will only be truly fair if all these points I made are met (and maybe you will need even more points), which is more an exception than the rule. I can point many fails: A boss that fires a worker that is not showing up because he/she is sick; A boss that fires a worker due to market low demand; Crisis that bankrupt entrepreneurs; Rich people who deserve to have their life and shows off their superiority on poor people when that does come from pure heritage or by simply a series of fortunate events that made them fortunate (or a combination of both); And I could go further and further. Some of these "justices" can be very cruel from the FJs, FPs and ethical standpoint, and pretty unlogical for INTP/TP (the whole judging while there are inconsistency in the judging principles turns it against logic). Cases like when TJ "justice" says that poor people suffering from hunger deserves it (when most of them just had a series of unfortunate events that, guess what, made them unfortunate). I could go on with more examples. In the end, TJ "justice" is applied when it shouldnt be, creating more unfairness than fairness. To be honest, I wonder if some people who uses this TJ justice (actually, more people than just TJs does, and some TJ can become aware of this flaw and change, I believe) actually do care about it being unfair or only cares if it does seem or it is acceptable as fair despite being not.

    And I kind of refuted TJ justice in a INTP way (look for principles and look for inconsistency).

  10. #20
    Can't be satisfied. Peter Deadpan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    6,000

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vendrah View Post
    I think that TPs, at least for INTP, means something like "Its a set of consistent principles that, applied in a logical framework, sets what should and what should not be done".

    Also, I think that I could actually write something for NT->"Its a construct of logical rules that comes from an inteligent analysis to give rational sense in order to achieve progress in the given enviroment". I could write for SJ either, for NF maybe but I couldnt come with anything for SP.

    But my main point here is to show that we could actually create many combinations for morality although I wonder which ones would be pretty fake and shallow on the subject, or if it is quite limited. I know that TJ justice is usually measured by results (consequences of action), but that judging only works if the system evaluated is very close to a meritocracy system because it always says that it is either your fault (when things goes downhill) or your merit (when it works). However, a meritocrathic system is more an exception than a rule in the real world (in terms of political debate there is not even a single one system that it is truly merithocratic). Giving a short resume to a very long discussion, meritocrathic systems needs to follow at least all four of these points:
    1) No or minimized heritages.
    2) Equal opportunities for every person. In political terms, the motto is equal opportunities for every children, which only works if there is a very good free education and health-care system.
    3) A system that can have some kind of "armory" or a defense against randomness. The results to be evaluated must be purely from merit and the random factor/distortions must be either minimal or zero.
    4) There is controversy on this, but it is very important to state that "input" must equal "output". Most, if not all, merithocrats agrees that no one can produce hundreds or thousands more than the average, so, all these super or ultra rich lacks merit at least partially. This is an important part that nobody, as far as I know, could tackle it and create a system from a completely objective point of view.

    Its quite funny to note that there is not a single country in the world, as far as I know, which passes in all of these four at the same time, however most games do. A regular game does provide equal opportunity to every players if anti-cheat is well stablished once they bought the game and the console (or a good PC). It does not have heritages, you dont inherit items from your parents. If you evaluate the average of results in long terms, the downs and ups from randomness tends to be equal and cancel each other(supposing that the further results are mostly or completely independent from the present results). And most developeres wont let the best players to produce hundreds or thousand times the average players at the same time frame (or handle hundreds or thousands of enemies in a row or without dying, they got bots for that), because if they do most of the player base will simply quit and not buy the game again.

    In most societies I believe (I live in Brazil so I will speak in brazillian society, although USA and others shouldnt change much), things arent completely meritocrathic. It is usually a middle point between meritocracy and anti-meritocracy (anti-meritocracy is the obedience of some of these 4 points in reversion - the output must be random or the result must be simply from heritage). In regular societies, the heritage is usually unlimited. There are not equal opportunity for every child. The results are subject to external crisis, floating on marketplace demands and a lot of random stuff. There are people winning hundreds or thousands times more than average per year/month.

    I did all this meritocracy tour just to state that TJs "justice" and "fairness" will only be truly fair if all these points I made are met (and maybe you will need even more points), which is more an exception than the rule. I can point many fails: A boss that fires a worker that is not showing up because he/she is sick; A boss that fires a worker due to market low demand; Crisis that bankrupt entrepreneurs; Rich people who deserve to have their life and shows off their superiority on poor people when that does come from pure heritage or by simply a series of fortunate events that made them fortunate (or a combination of both); And I could go further and further. Some of these "justices" can be very cruel from the FJs, FPs and ethical standpoint, and pretty unlogical for INTP/TP (the whole judging while there are inconsistency in the judging principles turns it against logic). Cases like when TJ "justice" says that poor people suffering from hunger deserves it (when most of them just had a series of unfortunate events that, guess what, made them unfortunate). I could go on with more examples. In the end, TJ "justice" is applied when it shouldnt be, creating more unfairness than fairness. To be honest, I wonder if some people who uses this TJ justice (actually, more people than just TJs does, and some TJ can become aware of this flaw and change, I believe) actually do care about it being unfair or only cares if it does seem or it is acceptable as fair despite being not.

    And I kind of refuted TJ justice in a INTP way (look for principles and look for inconsistency).
    This is a very ST post for an xNFP.
    Perpetual mood


    “Sometimes I think I have felt everything I'm ever gonna feel.
    And from here on out, I'm not gonna feel anything new.
    Just lesser versions of what I've already felt.”


    - look it up yourself



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-15-2009, 11:06 PM
  2. Stereotype Types' Positions on MBTI
    By Jack Flak in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 11-23-2008, 05:14 AM
  3. An observation regarding N-types and their apparent abundance on the 1ntarw3bz.
    By Bear Warp in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 06-27-2008, 08:22 AM

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