[Fi] The INTJ Fi Demand

[SuperFob]

Lol, well alright then. Good for him.

Lol, it was a generalization on my part. He asked for an example so I just threw one out, and there's no way I'm assuming it sums up a type. You went much more in depth into it.

 

[Rhapsody]

What I mean is, INTJs don't seem at all averse to cursing, slang, wearing outlandish clothing, or making inappropriate comments. I don't see how someone like that could be considered to have a moral code. It's not unforgivable, but I still find it tacky enough that I wouldn't want to be seen with such a person.

How are cursing, slang, etc. and having a moral code mutually exclusive? Or maybe we're using different definitions of moral code here?

Where are these "principles" INTJs have? I don't see or understand them. Any concrete examples of when they might come into play?

Random examples that are hopefully helpful: My mom is very into saving the environment, to the point that she won't let my dad and me wash the dishes because she thinks we waste too much water when we do it. She's also joked about becoming an ecoterrorist and killing all of humanity to save the planet.

As for my Batman-friend, her entire life's mission is basically to help people, and she's come up with a very detailed, extensive plan on how she's going to start a non-profit organization with the goal of improving the lives of people in her city. On a smaller scale, she also won't tolerate sexist behavior from men and has at least once (that I know of) given a guy a verbal castration for being a jerk to a fellow female coworker.

 

[Athenian200]

The big one is responsibility. It covers a lot of things. I make no excuses. I aspire to recognize when something is my fault and do what I can to make reparations. This might not make sense to you, but making reparations doesn't necessarily involve verbally saying sorry. I am far more likely to go behind the scenes and try to correct the damage, or to do something nice for the person I've offended. I despise cheap excuses and "just words" apologies, and I don't really like to receive them either. I feel that it is immoral to try to pass blame on. I am likely to actually take responsibility for things that are only partly my fault if I have to choose between admitting fault or not. The thing is, I'm able to do this because I am not afraid that all of my chances at success in a venture will be ruined by accepting blame. Also, when I make a mistake, I feel that I deserve to pay for it and I accept consequences without complaint. To not do this would be against my morals.

The second would be honesty. I'm a terrible liar. When I know something is one way, I can't bring myself to try to convince someone of an untruth. When I see others willfully lie and manipulate for their own gain, I think it nothing short of despicable. An example of this would be an old friend of mine (INFJ, actually) who had no qualms about lying to his mother, to the movie theater clerk, anyone. He'd lie about anything if it meant he could get what he wanted. He was very kind and sweet most of the time, but that side of him made me sick. Even when I see that kind of behavior in a lesser degree, I look down on it.

Sometimes I feel like I'm playing the game by different rules than everyone else. There are a lot of people who don't have problems doing things that I find contemptible, but I am just not capable of operating on that level (there might be exceptions, but they would be very, very few).

I really don't like responsibility. I'll voluntarily take it on if it's something I'm passionate about, but most of the time I'd really rather let someone else be responsible for a situation.

Damage? Well, if I cause someone damage, I'll pay them for it. You're right, words are empty if you cause financial damage. You should always reimburse someone if you cost them money that they didn't freely offer you as a gift. Otherwise, I figure it's just a faux pas I'm apologizing for, and all I can really do is apologize and try not to do it again.

I personally prefer not to lie, but I often omit or stretch the truth if it will give me an advantage. For instance, I once did all of the work on a group project in school because I couldn't get the other lazy kids to work with me, and when the teacher asked me about their contributions (when they hadn't made any except holding up posters while I read from them), I said, "Well, I think they all did the best job they were capable of." Which wasn't a lie, that was my opinion of them... that the best they could do was stay out of my way and let me handle it rather than messing it up with their lousy ideas and poor understanding. I might blatantly lie if I felt threatened by the truth to the point that I was afraid someone would hurt me if I told it to them, but that's really the only reason I would tell a boldfaced lie.

The goal in life is to give back what you owe to those who deserve it. If you can do more, you should do more. You shouldn't squander your talents and abilities, whatever they are, you should try to make something of your life because to not do so would be a waste.

So uh...basically what you said.

Well, this one I take exception to, and I really, really dislike TJs for this reason.

My attitude is that you should try to avoid owing anyone anything, so that way you have as few obligations as possible. If you do incur a debt, you should pay it back, but you have no responsibility to push yourself. To do so is inherently pointless because the sun will supernova and all evidence of human existence will eventually be erased anyway. The only thing I'd demand of people is that they live up to their own expectations and desires from life (provide those don't seriously hurt others) rather than doing what someone else expects of them in terms of a career or relationship, which is unfair and leads to unhappiness.

How are cursing, slang, etc. and having a moral code mutually exclusive? Or maybe we're using different definitions of moral code here?



Random examples that are hopefully helpful: My mom is very into saving the environment, to the point that she won't let my dad and me wash the dishes because she thinks we waste too much water when we do it. She's also joked about becoming an ecoterrorist and killing all of humanity to save the planet.

Oh! Okay, I get it. For INTJs, moral codes are about performing actions that produce positive results, whereas for me a moral code is about avoiding actions that produce negative results. Basically, I consider inaction to be inherently more moral than action (thus an action is something that can be immoral, while failing to act isn't), whereas INTJs seem to have the opposite prejudice.

 

[poppy]

I really don't like responsibility. I'll voluntarily take it on if it's something I'm passionate about, but most of the time I'd really rather let someone else be responsible for a situation.

Damage? Well, if I cause someone damage, I'll pay them for it. You're right, words are empty if you cause financial damage. You should always reimburse someone if you cost them money that they didn't freely offer you as a gift. Otherwise, I figure it's just a faux pas I'm apologizing for, and all I can really do is apologize and try not to do it again.

Lol, yes, if you cause someone financial damage you should pay for it. My sense of damage and necessary amends extends a little farther than that though.

I personally prefer not to lie, but I often omit or stretch the truth if it will give me an advantage. For instance, I once did all of the work on a group project in school because I couldn't get the other lazy kids to work with me, and when the teacher asked me about their contributions (when they hadn't made any except holding up posters while I read from them), I said, "Well, I think they all did the best job they were capable of." Which wasn't a lie, that was my opinion of them... that the best they could do was stay out of my way and let me handle it rather than messing it up with their lousy ideas and poor understanding. I might blatantly lie if I felt threatened by the truth to the point that I was afraid someone would hurt me if I told it to them, but that's really the only reason I would tell a boldfaced lie.

Wooo long post on morality.

Lol. I've done that before. Except my opinion is usually that they're lazy bastards, but it never would have done any good to tell the teacher that. So instead I usually ended up devising a way to ensure that they did work on the next project, or I'd just suck it up and admit that if I really wanted them to do the work I should have put my foot down.

About the only time I lie is when it comes to insignificant things, where I don't want to have to go into details (ie "Did you do anything today?" "No, I just went to the store")

Well, this one I take exception to, and I really, really dislike TJs for this reason.

My attitude is that you should try to avoid owing anyone anything, so that way you have as few obligations as possible. If you do incur a debt, you should pay it back, but you have no responsibility to push yourself. To do so is inherently pointless because the sun will supernova and all evidence of human existence will eventually be erased anyway. The only thing I'd demand of people is that they live up to their own expectations and desires from life (provide those don't seriously hurt others) rather than doing what someone else expects of them, which is unfair and leads to unhappiness.

Alright, well I don't blame you there. And I'm also of the opinion that one should try not to incur debt but I treat obligation, debt, and promises very seriously.

Oh! Okay, I get it. For INTJs, moral codes are about performing actions that produce positive results, whereas for me a moral code is about avoiding actions that produce negative results. Basically, I consider inaction to be inherently more moral than action (thus an action is something that can be immoral, while failing to act isn't), whereas INTJs seem to have the opposite prejudice.

Yes, you got it. Though your view of morality as being about avoiding negative results is absolutely alien to me. Failure to act seems quite immoral to me (in many situations). We are clearly on very different sides of a divide there.

 

[Lethe]

My attitude is that you should try to avoid owing anyone anything, so that way you have as few obligations as possible. If you do incur a debt, you should pay it back, but you have no responsibility to push yourself. To do so is inherently pointless because the sun will supernova and all evidence of human existence will eventually be erased anyway. The only thing I'd demand of people is that they live up to their own expectations and desires from life (provide those don't seriously hurt others) rather than doing what someone else expects of them in terms of a career or relationship, which is unfair and leads to unhappiness.

The sun in my world will already be a supernova.

For me, I gave them my firm word on it and I must see to it that I carry my promise to the end. They might be forgiving of my failures, but I certainly won't. My conscience is too sensitive to allow these actions to go uncompensated. I will demand myself to pay for this loss in any way I can.

Alright, well I don't blame you there. And I'm also of the opinion that one should try not to incur debt but I treat obligation, debt, and promises very seriously.

Also, when I make a mistake, I feel that I deserve to pay for it and I accept consequences without complaint. To not do this would be against my morals.

Agreed.

 

[Heart&Brain]

Oh, yeah. Human, definitely. You guys definitely have feelings, but I've always seen them as being more about weird poetic stuff and emotional depth, not really about right and wrong.

You might be more human than me... remember, I relate to C3-P0, the protocol droid.


Principles? You mean like logic and mathematical axioms?

What I mean is, INTJs don't seem at all averse to cursing, slang, wearing outlandish clothing, or making inappropriate comments. I don't see how someone like that could be considered to have a moral code.

WTF - I beg your pardon!?!
I don't believe what I'm reading here: slang and funny clothes = morals??? You are joking, right?

I try to imagine how your version of the UN Human Rights Charter would look:
1. Memberstates agree to ensure the integrity of the individual in that every citizen must wear clothes within colorcode 3,5-4,2. This obligation must be strictly observed at all times, including at times of systematic genocide, civil war, coup d'etat, foreign invasions and birthdayparties of second cousins.
2. When declaring unprovoked war memberstates must refrain from doing so in any offensive terms that alludes to bodily waste, sexual acts or blasphemic notions, lest they will face a fine of 25 cent and 10 minutes in the corner.
3. Member states must guarantee that all corruption, electorial fraud, torture of political prisoners will be conducted without the use of any socalled 'slangwords' (oops...) or inappropriate comments stating unwanted and possibly offensive truths about the said activities.


Oh, sorry, maybe you were talking about the moral behaviour of individuals? Like:
A good person will always be neatly dressed while killing or harming others.
A good person never uses cursing or blasphemic words when lying and cheating.
A good person will make sure that their threats, harrassments, blackmailing, abuse of power and emotional terror is conducted without the use of blunt or inappropriate comments, as these could be offensive.

....

Luckily, I don't think this is a type-related disagreement. None of the INFJs or Fe-users in general that I know, would ever defend such a conception of the nature of "ethical principles".

are about? It's not unforgivable, but I still find it tacky enough that I wouldn't want to be seen with such a person.



You know, this is why I once joked that F stands for "Formal" and T stands for "Terse."

Where are these "principles" INTJs have? I don't see or understand them. Any concrete examples of when they might come into play?

 

[Athenian200]

Lol, yes, if you cause someone financial damage you should pay for it. My sense of damage and necessary amends extends a little farther than that though.

Well, if I caused someone pain and suffering, I'd pay them money for that, too. I just... tend not to see anything that can't be measured in financial terms as being "real" damage. To be honest, I don't consider a faux pas to be truly damaging in most cases, which is why I see an apology as sufficient. It's basically just a way of acknowledging responsibility for the mistake and trying to avoid it in the future, but not doing anything because it wasn't a big deal, just a minor gripe and honest mistake. To me there are only two categories of offense. The kind that bother them but don't really hurt them (which you apologize for), and the kind that hurt them enough that you owe them something (which you give them the amount of money it's worth or equivalent services/goods for). I find that this perspective makes my life a lot simpler. To be honest, on some fundamental level, I don't fully understand how someone can be truly hurt by something other than a financial blow or the loss of a loved one.

Yes, you got it. Though your view of morality as being about avoiding negative results is absolutely alien to me. Failure to act seems quite immoral to me (in many situations). We are clearly on very different sides of a divide there.

Well, I admit there can be cases where inaction is immoral, like failing to pay your bills on time or showing up late to something, but most of the time it's actions...

WTF - I beg your pardon!?!
I don't believe what I'm reading here: slang and funny clothes = morals??? You are joking, right?

I try to imagine how your version of the UN Human Rights Charter would look:
1. Memberstates agree to ensure the integrity of the individual in that every citizen must wear clothes within colorcode 3,5-4,2. This obligation must be strictly observed at all times, including at times of systematic genocide, civil war, coup d'etat, foreign invasions and birthdayparties of second cousins.
2. When declaring unprovoked war memberstates must refrain from doing so in any offensive terms that alludes to bodily waste, sexual acts or blasphemic notions, lest they will face a fine of 25 cent and 10 minutes in the corner.
3. Member states must guarantee that all corruption, electorial fraud, torture of political prisoners will be conducted without the use of any socalled 'slangwords' (oops...) or inappropriate comments stating unwanted and possibly offensive truths about the said activities.


Oh, sorry, maybe you were talking about the moral behaviour of individuals? Like:
A good person will always be neatly dressed while killing or harming others.
A good person never uses cursing or blasphemic words when lying and cheating.
A good person will make sure that their threats, harrassments, blackmailing, abuse of power and emotional terror is conducted without the use of blunt or inappropriate comments, as these could be offensive.

....

Luckily, I don't think this is a type-related disagreement. None of the INFJs or Fe-users in general that I know, would ever defend such a conception of the nature of "ethical principles".

I can hardly believe you understood me so poorly. Those things that you're implying I'd support are part of the moral codes as well... so much that no one would even question them. The ones I mentioned are simply the ones I'm likely to encounter on a regular basis.

But I have to admit, that would make me feel more pity for people that behaved that way if they behaved that way so... nicely. I'd think to myself it was a shame to see people with good taste go down the wrong path. But I'd still admit they were doing something wrong.

 

[Lethe]

Luckily, I don't think this is a type-related disagreement. None of the INFJs or Fe-users in general that I know, would ever defend such a conception of the nature of "ethical principles".

Fe: Principles of right and wrong of a group.
Fi: Principles of right and wrong of an individual.

I think what Athenian was trying to emphasize how foreign the INTJ's moral code is to her. She ultimately wanted someone explain this concept.

Since I'm on a Fi-roll, isn't it harsh over-judging her for something she didn't know? Sure, she was off the charts, but I feel she deserves some understanding first.

 

[poppy]

Well, if I caused someone pain and suffering, I'd pay them money for that, too. I just... tend not to see anything that can't be measured in financial terms as being "real" damage. To be honest, I don't consider a faux pas to be truly damaging in most cases, which is why I see an apology as sufficient.

Just out of curiosity, were you exaggerating earlier when you said that you couldn't imagine someone who says crass/insulting things as being moral? Because I would think that saying something insulting would be a faux pas if anything was...in which case this would seem to be a contradiction. Unless the faux pas is only immoral if you don't say sorry?

It's basically just a way of acknowledging responsibility for the mistake and trying to avoid it in the future, but not doing anything because it wasn't a big deal, just a minor gripe and honest mistake. To me there are only two categories of offense. The kind that bother them but don't really hurt them (which you apologize for), and the kind that hurt them enough that you owe them something (which you give them the amount of money it's worth or equivalent services/goods for). I find that this perspective makes my life a lot simpler. To be honest, on some fundamental level, I don't fully understand how someone can be truly hurt by something other than a financial blow or the loss of a loved one.

That makes sense enough. That was the lesson my mother always tried to teach me "if someone perceives what you have said as hurtful, you should apologize". I never got it. If I say something that I don't mean as hurtful, it's not my fault if someone is offended, as I wouldn't have said it if I didn't think it was in their best interest to hear it. I would consider this so insignificant as to not warrant apology.

Well, I admit there can be cases where inaction is immoral, like failing to pay your bills on time or showing up late to something, but most of the time it's actions...

Hmm...see, I don't see paying bills late or being late to an appointment as being immoral. Rude, yes, but not immoral because chances are the only person you're really hurting is yourself. Unless, say, you promised you'd be on time to participate in something that another person depended upon you being present for (in which case it falls into "promises" and is therefore very important).


I think my sense of morality is really all or nothing.

 

[Athenian200]

Just out of curiosity, were you exaggerating earlier when you said that you couldn't imagine someone who says crass/insulting things as being moral? Because I would think that saying something insulting would be a faux pas if anything was...in which case this would seem to be a contradiction. Unless the faux pas is only immoral if you don't say sorry?

Yes, that. That's the reason why I'd apologize.

That makes sense enough. That was the lesson my mother always tried to teach me "if someone perceives what you have said as hurtful, you should apologize". I never got it. If I say something that I don't mean as hurtful, it's not my fault if someone is offended, as I wouldn't have said it if I didn't think it was in their best interest to hear it. I would consider this so insignificant as to not warrant apology.

Right, those are the kind of situations I'd offer only an apology for. Because there was no real harm done, and I personally don't think I did anything really wrong. Thus, I don't really understand how I owe them anything, and an apology is the only thing I can think of to offer. Real harm is something I'd try to make up for with money or equivalent services.

What I really mean by "I'm sorry" most of the time, is "I don't understand why you're upset, but I hope you don't stay mad at me about it because it doesn't seem like something you should have been hurt by. Nonetheless, I'm offering you a minor verbal consolation on the grounds that you might be more sensitive than me, and hope that this is sufficient."

Hmm...see, I don't see paying bills late or being late to an appointment as being immoral. Rude, yes, but not immoral because chances are the only person you're really hurting is yourself. Unless, say, you promised you'd be on time to participate in something that another person depended upon you being present for (in which case it falls into "promises" and is therefore very important).


I think my sense of morality is really all or nothing.

Well, I guess I see paying bills and appointments as promises, because I imagine what would happen if no one paid their bills, and the company went under. It's because I see the contract I have with the people I'm paying as being a promise... the most binding kind. That's really the only difference there. And I suppose I'd only consider being late to an appointment as immoral if I implicitly promised I'd be there... if I said, "there's a chance I might show up," and then didn't, I wouldn't consider it to be wrong.

 

[poppy]

Yes, that. That's the reason why I'd apologize.

Yep, you lose me there.

Right, those are the kind of situations I'd offer only an apology for. Because there was no real harm done, and I personally don't think I did anything really wrong. Thus, I don't really understand how I owe them anything, and an apology is the only thing I can think of to offer. Real harm is something I'd try to make up for with money or equivalent services.

Well, I guess I see paying bills and appointments as promises, because I imagine what would happen if no one paid their bills, and the company went under. It's because I see the contract I have with the people I'm paying as being a promise... the most binding kind. That's really the only difference there. And I suppose I'd only consider being late to an appointment as immoral if I implicitly promised I'd be there... if I said, "there's a chance I might show up," and then didn't, I wouldn't consider it to be wrong.

But we're essentially in agreement here

So essentially INTJ morality operates outside the confines of politeness, which is why we come off as pretty terse and rude, but we take big breaches of ethics very seriously (especially if we're the perpetrators). That's also why I was shocked to find you thought we had no moral code.

 

[Athenian200]

So essentially INTJ morality operates outside the confines of politeness, which is why we come off as pretty terse and rude, but we take big breaches of ethics very seriously (especially if we're the perpetrators). That's also why I was shocked to find you thought we had no moral code.

I guess the thing is, I take that kind of morality (the "don't harm" kind) for granted to such an extent that I would consider someone whose morality doesn't go beyond that to have no moral code. I consider what you call a "moral code" to be so basic that any remotely decent person, civilized or uncivilized, would recognize it. To me a moral code is what distinguishes civilized people from uncivilized ones... eh, maybe I just don't understand morality very well.

 

[Lethe]

I think my sense of morality is really all or nothing.

Yes, I'm personally not a fan of the middle-ground. Either I keep my actions tied into my morality, or simply have none.

That makes sense enough. That was the lesson my mother always tried to teach me "if someone perceives what you have said as hurtful, you should apologize". I never got it. If I say something that I don't mean as hurtful, it's not my fault if someone is offended, as I wouldn't have said it if I didn't think it was in their best interest to hear it. I would consider this so insignificant as to not warrant apology.

Again, same. I would not apologize for my words due to a misinterpretation of the meaning because I am unlikely to accept such a responsibility. I cannot be expected to not offend anyone (which typically happens by accident) at some point, and I also find it impractical to cater to every single sensitive whim. If apologizing happens to be the superior option, I may ask him/her for the things they deem as less offensive, and I would intend to correct this problem through my actions.

But apologizing for something that violates my moral code?

Sure.

Though it doesn't always jive with the social group I'm interacting with. And I don't plan on changing my Fi so others could feel comforted by it anytime soon.

 

[poppy]

Again, same. I would not apologize for my words due a misinterpretation of the meaning because I am unlikely to accept such a responsibility. I cannot be expected to not offend anyone (which typically happens by accident) at some point, and I also find it impractical to cater to every single sensitive whim. If apologizing happens to be the superior option, I may ask him/her for the things they deem as less offensive, and I would intend to correct this problem through my actions.

Yes, I'm with this. As much as I would like to be the kind of person who tries not to offend others by being brisk or harsh, that's a major part of the way that I operate and I can only curb it so much. I do value people's long term state of mind and feelings as I genuinely want them to be happy and confident people, but temporary feelings and bruised egos will always come second to what needs to be done.

 

[Kalach]

I've mostly seen it manifest as them accusing their opponent of "immaturity." The idea of basing an arguments validity on the "maturity" of the person making it is very, very Fi.

This hints at the thing that had me thinking about an INTJ Fi Demand in the first place. See, by "demand" I'm meaning something directed out at other people. Fi makes demands of other people? Well no, technically it only makes a bunch of demands on the user. But in tertiary position it'll help be the origin of a collection of prejudices that get expressed in the workings of the higher functions, prejudices that the users may well stick by and require other people to fall in step with if they're to interact well.

Demanding for example that other people be mature or be dismissed, like say telling someone "Oh, grow up!" when they're getting pissy about a perceived slight or they're expressing things I think are irrelevant to making things work, is--I speculate--something like the INTJ saying, "Stop fucking around, get your Fi in ORDER! Decide for yourself what is good--and be right about your decision--and then LET's GO! Or, hell, let's not go! Are you in or are you out! Try and know what you WANT, dammit!"

There is of course in there a subtext. If the INTJ is demanding you get your Fi in order, then the INTJ has some simple ideas about what order will be. The INTJ is also assuming that Fi is the order of the day, that you have, use it, and will understand it.

I think--just think--we don't do this to everyone. Just the people we interact with closely. Probably we do it to ourselves too.

 

[poppy]

Demanding for example that other people be mature or be dismissed, like say telling someone "Oh, grow up!" when they're getting pissy about a perceived slight or they're expressing things I think are irrelevant to making things work, is--I speculate--something like the INTJ saying, "Stop fucking around, get your Fi in ORDER! Decide for yourself what is good--and be right about your decision--and then LET's GO! Or, hell, let's not go! Are you in or are you out! Try and know what you WANT, dammit!"

I'm guilty of telling people things like "man up!" (a little odd coming from a female, I admit, but it conveys the right idea) or "stop being such a drama queen!".

That makes sense in the case of Fi prejudice acting under Te desire for efficiency As in, "I don't have time for your moral or personal dilemmas right now".

 

[Alwar]

I'm guilty of telling people things like "man up!" (a little odd coming from a female, I admit, but it conveys the right idea) or "stop being such a drama queen!".

That makes sense in the case of Fi prejudice acting under Te desire for efficiency As in, "I don't have time for your moral or personal dilemmas right now".

Do you find it easier to be friends with males over females?

 

[poppy]

Do you find it easier to be friends with males over females?

Immeasurably!

Of course there are exceptions, but I find it easier on average to associate with men as they're more frequently conditioned/encouraged to possess traits I prefer in friends

 

[Alwar]

Immeasurably!

Of course there are exceptions, but I find it easier on average to associate with men as they're more frequently conditioned/encouraged to possess traits I prefer in friends

I hear this so often that I sometimes wonder if any female likes other females lol.

 

[Lethe]

I'm guilty of telling people things like "man up!" (a little odd coming from a female, I admit, but it conveys the right idea) or "stop being such a drama queen!".

That makes sense in the case of Fi prejudice acting under Te desire for efficiency As in, "I don't have time for your moral or personal dilemmas right now".

Out of a bursting frustration, I have said those lines before to my parents, teammates, and anyone messing around with the efficiency.

I might as well paste a "I agree with Poppy" quote in my signature now.

Somehow, I think thescientist would agree: she writes how she feels her ENFP co-worker should 'man up' and cut the BS with some honesty for once.

It seems like it might make sense, the idea of the supreme pragmatist having a quite simple, but rigid moral code. It seems we are for the most part quite permissive, but at the core there's definitely some rules about what other people can and cannot do with respect to us. And when those lines are crossed, the person who crossed the line IS WRONG!! In a complete and quite encompassing way, that person is known to be wrong, quite wrong, and will be treated as such. I don't think we particularly seek revenge, for that often takes too long and exhausts the demand for simple moral rectitude. Rather we excise people, remove them from our consideration. Or we aim to.

The INTJ Fi Demand is that others will know our brand of right from wrong or they will not be considered objects of our true concern.

I couldn't respect my parents for a long time because they were on the conflicting spectrum what I considered morally correct. When I was younger, I expected them to 'man up' and openly live up to their decisions - right or wrong. I was angered that my mother imposed her emotional dilemmas on myself and my siblings, while my father could never admit his thoughtless choices that negatively affected the entire family. I would confront them on their 'faults' and to my utter disappointment, I received denials and deceptions. As you said above, I quickly removed them from my consideration (and trust). Yet even then, I knew I must keep the responsibility of paying back their efforts in raising me -- no matter how poorly they treated me in my time of dire need. My sense of morality doesn't operate on people's reactions to them.