User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 37

Thread: Morality in NTs

  1. #11
    Senior Member sculpting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009


    I have noticed that being around IXFJs seems to very much increase the Fe level of ENTP men.

    I dont know why but it appears externally to almost amplify the Fe way they interact with others. When the pair interacts, you can almost see the interaction and how each becomes more and more engaged as they exchange happy Fe vibes.

    So maybe you always knew logically what you should do, and had a rudimentary sense of Fe, but you and your girlfriend sort of help grow/develop and strengthen each other's Fe and become more caring to everyone around you in the process???

    I dunno, I am Fe blind, just a guess. I can see how this would be the same for two Fi users as well.

  2. #12
    Senior Member Moiety's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008


    I don't really get the question here. Whether or not NTs naturally understand what morality means?

    I'm confused.

  3. #13


    ENTPs are meant to be one of the most perceptive about people of all types. I wouldn't draw a line at NF. I think morality in that sense just comes down to intent. If you see a reason to do it, or learn something that puts it into your system of understanding, you can be amazing at it. There are a lot of ENTPs that have gone a lot further than ENFPs in terms of moral crusades. When it comes to helping charities and involvement in community, many ENTPs I know are brilliant. Seem to have far more of the activist gene in them than us. If you say protest to me, I just think of silly things like taking "save the whales" signs to workplace protests.

    An INTJ I know holds far stronger moral values in some areas than me. Takes a stand on things, like refusing to steal things off the roof of the nightclub even though he was taller and they were awesome.
    Freude, schöner Götterfunken Tochter aus Elysium, Wir betreten feuertrunken, Himmlische, dein Heiligtum! Deine Zauber binden wieder Was die Mode streng geteilt; Alle Menschen werden Brüder, Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.

  4. #14
    lab rat extraordinaire CrystalViolet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    5w4 sx/sp


    Morality to me is not some thing you can impose on people, but some thing that comes from within. It's the ability to take a rule or law and judge whether it is reasonable and just. It's not about doing it just because everyone else does it. Which, some times, means I treat the law with a grain of salt at times. I give the appearance of being a law abiding citizen because most laws and rules make sense to me. The ones that don't, I disregard. Morality is also about having scruples. You know respecting other people. For me, that's things like treating other co-workers well, not dobing them for some minor indiscretion to lead the attention away from yourself or covering your butt. It's also things like pulling your weight with the work load. In short, Jenocyde said it right, do onto others what you want done onto you.
    Currently submerged under an avalanche of books and paper work. I may come back up for air from time to time.
    Real life awaits and she is a demanding mistress.


  5. #15
    Senior Member Qre:us's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008


    Quote Originally Posted by toonia View Post
    The concept of the individual acting against the world is a very Western European concept. Most of the positions defined as "immoral" are placing the well being of self as priority over everything else even if this results in socially destructive behaviors. I would argue that many "immoral" positions require an irrational process of dismissing elements that are acting upon its systems. By discounting the interconnectedness of mankind in favor of ensuring only the needs of self, the eventual outcome is likely the destruction of self. The most striking, large scale example of this is the way in which the corporation acts only in self interest as a parasitic entity that will consume and destroy its resources and in the end destroy itself. That is our model of reason in modern society that is used as an antithesis to morality, and it is irrational to its core.

    There are numerous ways of defining "self". From what I understand of it, the basic foundation of sociology analyzes various levels of the "self". The individual is one level, but the family, community/tribe, etc. continuing in the large spheres of social constructs all define the individual. Morality has a great deal to do with how self is defined, how large the circle of self is seen as comprising, how many others it encompasses, and the processes through which the well-being of those within that circle are ensured.

    The leaders of morality in our world like Mother Teresa and Ghandi distill it down to the idea of increasing the circle we count as self to embrace all of humanity.
    This is a very holistic way of looking at morality. And, one I perscribe to myself.

    I don't think you can look at morality as something self-contained within an individual, without considering, as toonia pointed out, all other relevant players within the system in which the individual resides.

    For me, each moment is chock full of potential, and my action, reaction, inaction, will set off an unique domino effect. Thus, it is up to me, living moment to moment, to be conscious of how my actions at any given moment affect not just the progress of myself, but, any other things connected (likely to be connected) to it, as far as my mind can conceive or anticipate. And, to note the degree of energy expended by my action/reaction, or conserved by my inaction.

    I've said previously on this board, that I'm not nice just because being nice is...nice. I'm "nice" when I know that there's someone, some thing, that will benefit from my kindness.

    A simple example that I've faced in rl:
    In a large group, if a newcomer arrives, and everyone is jumping in to say "hello" to the person, I'm not going to extert the action (energy) to add in my little greeting, lost amidst all others.

    However, if we're in a large group, and a newcomer arrives, and it seems no one noticed them, or acknowledged them, I will make it a point to greet that newcomer and welcome them.

    I do not like having "what-ifs" in my life. If I come upon a situation, and my internal evaluation points to someone or something that needs "help", I am not the type to initially think, "oh, they'll figure something out, or someone else will come and help them".....if I do this, it bugs me for the rest of the day, wondering, "what-if"...did the help arrive?

    Everything is this world is far more inter-connected that we can conceive, it's a shifting of energy, all within the system, to maintain a sort of balance. If I see a toppling of the balance, in what my value judgement has evaluated to be the "negative" end of the scale, I cannot help but step in.

    Be it, stopping the car, because a family of geese, unknowingly started to cross a busy intersection, so one can hold up traffic from both ends, until they cross, and giving the runt of the litter a little bump on the tush because it couldn't go over the sidewalk ledge, to seeing an unwatched toddler in the mall, somehow getting herself on an escalator, her chubby fingers dangerously close to the teeth of the revolving stairs, and plucking her out of there, to a person who one can tell does not know how to read English, and cannot speak it, trying to ask about the meats served in a restaurant, with a frustrated server, and so drawing a cow, chicken, pig or fish on a napkin, showing them to X off which they do not want....whichever way, life is full of potential interactions, "worlds" colliding, even if for a passing moment.

    If in those moments, I can do something, that changes the course of the domino effect it will unfold, to something I evaluate as "positive"*, anticipating all likely ripple effects to it, as far as I can conceive, I will act. I cannot not act.

    *positive, in the simples way to me is evaluated as:
    result+energy expenditure > lack of result + energy conservation

    The > of course, is subjective to me.

    Karma is dharma. It's all cause and effect, and I'm just one node in that chain of cause and effect, and as that node, my orientation will determine the activation of a whole intricate web/system filled with nodes, attached by pathways. So, when an effect from some other node(s), comes and collides with my node, my reality; then, for that moment, it is my cause, and then, I determine its effect, and on it goes. From me, to those around me, to my community, to society, to the global world, and beyond.

    And, that to me, is how I practice my morality, not because I'm NT, but because I'm human, who cannot fight determinism (the global cause/effect of the world), but do have free will, from moment to moment, when a piece of reality arrives at my node, and I have the choice then to act, not act, or react according to my capability and capacity.

    I personally don't think it's type dependent, but, individual dependent; this knowing/understanding/acting of "morality".

  6. #16
    pathwise dependent FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007


    F people are generally better at morality-related stuff than T people, given an equal baseline level of psychological health.
    ENTj 7-3-8 sx/sp

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010


    I'm a moral-relativist. I believe morality is subjective and ultimately a matter of personal preference. I don't subscribe to the notion that there is a universal code - that anything is truly "right", "wrong", "good", or "bad".

    That being said, I exercise my morals as I do my preferences. Just as say, I don't like sea-food, I don't like specific actions. I use what socio-economic power I have to discriminate against people who go against the grain of my morals and aid those that generally promote them or live by them. In that sense, I can come across as devout in my beliefs, even though I know they're ultimately subjective.

  8. #18
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009


    In my opinion, to the extent that (stereotypical) NF morality differs from NT morality, one is rooted in feelings while the other is predicated upon reason. For example, if there was a runaway trolley that was going to kill five people and the only way to avert that catastrophe would be to push an obese man in front of the trolley (thereby stopping it but killing him), an NT would be more likely to make the correct decision. On the other hand, when it comes to dealing with everyday emotional situations, NFs are more adept than NTs.

    When one thinks of morally virtuous people, one might think of Mother Teresa, who exemplifies compassionate, NF-based morality. On the other hand, Bill Gates, as a philanthropist, used NT-based logic to determine how to best help people. And, of course, he did far more good than a hundred Mother Teresas could have done -- yet he is seldom seen as a moral paragon. The problem isn't that NTs aren't moral, but that our concept of morality is founded upon emotion rather than reason.

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008


    If not for social cooperation, there would be no reason to even have morals. Actions which enhances social cooperation are deemed moral. Actions which detracts from it are immoral.

  10. #20
    a scream in a vortex nanook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007


    i understood what FDG meant. i hope i speak for all NF when i say: no need to illustrate it any further.

Similar Threads

  1. [NT] the morality of NTs
    By ThatGirl in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 102
    Last Post: 01-24-2014, 01:41 AM
  2. Your Morality, In A Nutshell
    By Thalassa in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 119
    Last Post: 07-23-2012, 12:56 PM
  3. Struggle with morality in a capitalist world
    By PeaceRobin in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 01-24-2011, 05:53 PM
  4. [NT] physical violence in NTs
    By murkrow in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 08-08-2009, 01:40 PM
  5. What was Socrates view on morality in The Republic?
    By WobblyStilettos in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-23-2008, 11:57 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