[Fi] Fi-based Judgments and the INFP

[Aesthete]

It's nothing too bizarre. It's merely "this is what I feel/value and how I want to live my life but everything I am doing is without inherent meaning." It keeps the Fi humble in a way as it sees itself as one construct amongst many and asserts itself because it is no less meaningless than others. Of course I try and keep my values congruent with supporting evidence; I would personally value a theory built around observable science over one I do not believe to be true e.g valuing the idea that the planets revolve around the sun due to the star's bending of local space-time more than a theory that asserts that God moves the Sun across the sky by hand and creates wind by farting. This is a failure on my part on maintaining a purely nihilistic outlook. If Fi was the only function in effect I would probably become like a moral objectivist but this would be in the height of the moment, with the other three working away smoothly I see myself as understanding nihilism but falling short of its realisation.

I do not think its possible or anyoneto become truly nihlist, the F function in humans will cause them to prefer one one object over another. Nihilism for me is to stare into an infinite abyss and to feel relatively comfortable in doing so. However I often find myself looking up into the sky for whichever reason and end up with periods of existentialism which are far easier for me to attain. I do not go further than that and do not believe in purpose or destiny and it will take me a lot of effort to change my mind into believing in objective ideals beyond a passing possibility.

Thank you.
[MENTION=14363]Standuble[/MENTION]

I wasn't sure how your Fi could make nihilism an ideal (as that would be quite contradictory), but I see it deals with different matters.

 

[greenfairy]

An unexpected question in an unexpected place but one which I am interested in answering. I don't think the function itself leads to nihilism but more how the definition of that function may influence the grand scheme of things. This is a little simplified but I hope its sufficient:

A) You come to the conclusion that the Fi leads to the creation of subjective ethics, morals, viewpoints and perspectives through the values you personally ascribe to it. You also conclude that the amount of value being placed is changing based on your own life circumstances.
B) You come to the conclusion that Fe adapts a person to external values which have their origins in the Fi realm which obtained popularity. You also conclude that a society's morals and values can change over time.
C) From the above two ideas you ask whether all morality, all ethics and all values have their roots in the subjective and working on the notion that the lack of agreed value has the implication that there may be no actual objective value, meaning and no objective ethics and morals in the universe.
D) Observation of the outside world and situations where the value of an object changes e.g. 1kg of Helium-3 in the hands of a carpet cleaner compared to 1kg of Helium-3 in the hands of a nuclear physicist.
E) Concluding that nothing has value and meaning in itself you eventually end up with nihilism.

Be aware that Fi if anything actually undermines nihilism as the creation of value for the individual leads to a state of existentialism which asserts that an individual meaning and purpose can be achieved but that there is no inherent value or purpose in it. From my understanding NTs are better at remaining consistent with nihilism than NFs as value carries less sway over their decision making.

It's nothing too bizarre. It's merely "this is what I feel/value and how I want to live my life but everything I am doing is without inherent meaning." It keeps the Fi humble in a way as it sees itself as one construct amongst many and asserts itself because it is no less meaningless than others. Of course I try and keep my values congruent with supporting evidence; I would personally value a theory built around observable science over one I do not believe to be true e.g valuing the idea that the planets revolve around the sun due to the star's bending of local space-time more than a theory that asserts that God moves the Sun across the sky by hand and creates wind by farting. This is a failure on my part on maintaining a purely nihilistic outlook. If Fi was the only function in effect I would probably become like a moral objectivist but this would be in the height of the moment, with the other three working away smoothly I see myself as understanding nihilism but falling short of its realisation.

I do not think its possible or anyoneto become truly nihlist, the F function in humans will cause them to prefer one one object over another. Nihilism for me is to stare into an infinite abyss and to feel relatively comfortable in doing so. However I often find myself looking up into the sky for whichever reason and end up with periods of existentialism which are far easier for me to attain. I do not go further than that and do not believe in purpose or destiny and it will take me a lot of effort to change my mind into believing in objective ideals beyond a passing possibility.

Fascinating! This is kind of where I am right now, except my value system looks Fe because I see that that's where it lies to the extent that it can be objective at all. Collective well being and individual well being in relationship are what make sense to me, and make life worth living in a feeling way. But outside of the realm of human experience it doesn't mean anything, and that doesn't bother me. In fact, it makes me feel better because it eliminates all the messy argument and conflict over right and wrong. It's so easy to just say harmony and well being are the answer and then interpret situations in the context of these.

(And of course this contains the implicit question of whether how I am could be consistent with INFP, even though I'm 95% sure I'm not.)