[MBTI General] Is Altruism Foolish?

[stoic]

Is it foolish to want to help people find a righteous path to enlightenment? Much like the bodhisattva, may our mission be to enlighten others to void suffering. These people are already set in their ways, is it even possible? Is it a waste of time? Are we to only speak to those open and interested? Give me your thoughts.

EDIT: Apologies, my interpretation of Fe was flawed in associating it with only altruism. As it would seem many of you believe more in ethical egoism. I would like to re-establish this thread primarily focused on altruism, its positives and negatives.

 

[Red Ribbon]

I have no idea what you're talking about and I'm a dominant Fe user.

 

[Smilephantomhive]

[MENTION=35226]stoic[/MENTION] if people don't want enlightenment, they won't find it.

 

[Cellmold]

Enlightenment lends towards hyper self-consciousness as is always the dilemma of the philosopher.

To observe and yet remain engaged is seemingly impossible, one either has 'skin in the game' or is detached....drifting outside from a society they perceive, noting how those not detached go about their lives and creating the explanations and analysis for those lives, which they themselves are now distanced from.

What we attend to changes what is attended to in how we focus on it.

Wherever we are looking, everything else is going on where we aren't. The implicit's of what could be seen as a kind of 'inbetweeness' in engagement are lost, as is the necessary distance needed to function as a human being.

And so I want to remain unenlightened, because the world is heavy and it's pressures bear down on what is made light of, giving us the complexity of context and the uncertain that arises out of being.

Kurt Wagner was right; knowledge is difficult.

 

[ceecee]

As an INFJ, I see myself surrounded by ignorance. Rather, I see people who lack enlightenment. People succumb to desire and temptation. People lost in their beliefs and pursuits. I've found to live with personal indifference by vow instead of collective virtue seems to be the only viable lifestyle for peacekeeping. Problems with our disposition to status quo and present incompetence seem to be the drivers of conflict and insecurity. I can understand feeling complacent with this knowledge or deciding to attribute it to your own personal growth. Is it foolish to want to help these people become enlightened? Much like the bodhisattva, may our mission be to enlighten others to void suffering. These people are already set on their ways, is it even possible? Is it a waste of time? Are we to only speak to those open and interested? Give me your thoughts.

There are insufferable Fe users. Things like this ^^ is often the reason for that.

I never see one quite grasping that their self-righteous delivery tends to cause the in one ear and out the other reaction. And the actual message is lost.

 

[Tilt]

I find my Fe to be quite useful. Thank you very much!

 

[Lady Lazarus]

Yes.

 

[Poki]

If used inappropriately yes, but no function is foolish. It has its uses, strengths, and weaknesses.

Go in with no expectations though.

 

[Forever_Jung]

As an INFJ, I see myself surrounded by ignorance. Rather, I see people who lack enlightenment. People succumb to desire and temptation. People lost in their beliefs and pursuits. I've found to live with personal indifference by vow instead of collective virtue seems to be the only viable lifestyle for peacekeeping. Problems with our disposition to status quo and present incompetence seem to be the drivers of conflict and insecurity. I can understand feeling complacent with this knowledge or deciding to attribute it to your own personal growth. Is it foolish to want to help these people become enlightened? Much like the bodhisattva, may our mission be to enlighten others to void suffering. These people are already set on their ways, is it even possible? Is it a waste of time? Are we to only speak to those open and interested? Give me your thoughts.

Whoa, whoa, slow down there Siddhartha. I think a little self-awareness on your part might help you communicate with others more effectively. No one wants to hear from some dink who says stuff like "As an INFJ, I see myself surrounded by ignorance".

 

[Red Memories]

I do not think it is wrong to try to make people aware of another POV, but you should accept the amount of reception may be low unless someone is truly looking for enlightenment and feedback.

 

[stoic]

Whoa, whoa, slow down there Siddhartha. I think a little self-awareness on your part might help you communicate with others more effectively. No one wants to hear from some dink who says stuff like "As an INFJ, I see myself surrounded by ignorance".

I simply don't believe many people are able to step outside of their prejudice without taking an observational standpoint and letting go of their bias towards a situation. Take our post-modern era of social movements as an example. It's clear to me how a subjective "oppressed" collective can manipulate a victim mentality and compel others, especially the young. This separation of acceptance to status quo is damning when it effects conservatives, they hence become the "oppressed". We live in a time of such hypocrisy that it's hard not to see ignorance in its turmoil.

"Opinion is the medium between knowledge and ignorance." -Plato

 

[stoic]

Enlightenment lends towards hyper self-consciousness as is always the dilemma of the philosopher.

To observe and yet remain engaged is seemingly impossible, one either has 'skin in the game' or is detached....drifting outside from a society they perceive, noting how those not detached go about their lives and creating the explanations and analysis for those lives, which they themselves are now distanced from.

What we attend to changes what is attended to in how we focus on it.

Wherever we are looking, everything else is going on where we aren't. The implicit's of what could be seen as a kind of 'inbetweeness' in engagement are lost, as is the necessary distance needed to function as a human being.

And so I want to remain unenlightened, because the world is heavy and it's pressures bear down on what is made light of, giving us the complexity of context and the uncertain that arises out of being.

Kurt Wagner was right; knowledge is difficult.

Well written.

Much is to be said for the necessity of origin to survival. Philosophy has been quite troubling for me.
I wrote in a previous article my belief is that either, nothing means anything or consciousness means everything.
If we abide to the possibility, the latter is quite hopeful and would likely encourage for us to find meaning since enlightenment in itself is subjective.

Personally, I've found my own sense of enlightenment with this understanding...

 

[Red Ribbon]

In layman's terms. Fe types tend towards others. Is it foolish to believe that we can put time and energy into helping someone and have a truly lasting impact on them? For example, I often find that my guidance and compassion goes over people's head. In one ear, out the other.

Um... I don't really understand this? Is this Ni? I don't help people to have an everlasting impact on them. I live life for myself. If I ever help someone, it's because I'm a nice person. I don't expect an outcome. I also don't understand how you think you can have an everlasting impact on someone. It's not possible.

 

[Cellmold]

Well written.

Much is to be said for the necessity of origin to survival. Philosophy has been quite troubling for me.
I wrote in a previous article my belief is that either, nothing means anything or consciousness means everything.
If we abide to the possibility, the latter is quite hopeful and would likely encourage for us to find meaning since enlightenment in itself is subjective.

Personally, I've found my own sense of enlightenment with this understanding...

I was leaning towards the idea that people make mistakes and are impulsive, and it's easy to believe in leading people towards what feel like more favourable ways of living life and acting in the world, which I know well.

But it's also easy to get trapped into high-minded ideas about what would be best for a person, and not looking at myself while doing so, bringing that awkward detachment from engaging with life.

In essence, don't stress too much about whether people are ignorant or succumbing to temptations or etc..; there's more information than ever in a time where people are less equipped to use it. Daily irritations with the arrogance and pettiness of those around us, while also being ourselves part of that arrogance and pettiness de temps en temps.

It's a..nuance and a flimsy one at that. Act in one way and impose upon others your lessons which may be for their benefit, or maybe leave it and let them sort it out for themselves (it's their life afterall). To say it's contextual is a gross reductionism, but it's the only one language allows.

We can have lasting impacts on one another, regardless of what theories about people we subscribe to. It's phenomenological & to some extent I don't know if anyone has ever hurt me so much that I should drop my unravalling's on them because I believe it will be a path to giving them a better life in some form or another.

It's highly ironic (in the most paranoid sense) to attempt to call to light the ideas of introspection, only to follow it's extremes and find the limitations of rationality staring you in the face. And come back to ancient intuitions from childhood, un-abstracted by the trapped memories of time.

We are scum and we are saints. Often both at the same time; that's paradox for you.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

listen to what I'm sayin', sir. right now, you havin' a feedback.

 

[Atomic Fiend]

A tool cannot be foolish, only it's use.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

The desire to impact others can be positive, but the desire to control or change others can be destructive, and in some cases can be about our lack of control or lack of peace within ourselves.

There is always a reason that people are however they are. For each of us to find enlightenment, we do have to walk our individual path, which no one can walk for us. We have to see it from the inside out and cannot have it forced upon us. I think there is an element of enlightenment in being able to let go of control over others. We have to maintain our own boundaries, show kindness in the world, offer help, but respect the inner boundary of self both in us and others, as this is also a form of insight. The Dalai Lama has a good quote about this.

The purpose of religion is to control yourself, not criticize others. Rather, we must criticize ourselves. How much am I doing about my anger? About my attachment, about my hatred, about my pride, about my jealousy? These are things we must check in daily life.

There is wisdom in letting go of our inner constructs about people in general, and allow them to walk the path meant for them, not the path meant for us.

 

[stoic]

Um... I don't really understand this? Is this Ni? I don't help people to have an everlasting impact on them. I live life for myself. If I ever help someone, it's because I'm a nice person. I don't expect an outcome. I also don't understand how you think you can have an everlasting impact on someone. It's not possible.

Lasting impact, nothing is everlasting. I'm more concerned with providing moral support and drivers to benefit others.

 

[Red Ribbon]

Lasting impact, nothing is everlasting. I'm more concerned with providing moral support and drivers to benefit others.

I don't relate. I'm an egoist, not an altruist. If I help someone, it's because I'm feeling generous. I don't think to myself, "I want to help some people." I'm still a dominant Fe user.

Fe is about the depersonalization of ethics. It has nothing to do with being altruistic. Take my case, for example I am an Fe user but I see altruism as evil. If your question is, is altruism stupid, then yes it absolutely is. Fe in itself isn't. Fe users are perfectly capable of being egocentric and uncaring of others.

 

[ThatsWhatHeSaid]

More FEelish than FOolish, I'd say.

scattered applause

Thank you!