[Jungian Cognitive Functions] IXFPs are surprisingly capable of tremendous acts of evil

[Infinite Bubble]

Yeah, I don't see anything surprising, it's no more or less so than it'd be in regards to any other type.

 

[Jaq]

I've heard a few stories before about acts of evil from my IXFP friends. So I agree with this to a great extent.

 

[Elfboy]

if anything, I'm surprised how NOT prone they are. when I was first learning about functions, I pictured Fi as this super assertive, convicted, aggressive function that led revolutions, exploded in anger when their values where crossed and practiced a vigilante, chaotic-good sort of justice (like, I would have probably seen most of them as Sexual 1s, cp6s, 7s or 8s)

the more I learn about them, they're much more mellow/gentle most of the time

 

[Lark]

Are tremendous acts of evil a consequence of emoting or are they a consequence of cold calculated planning? Are they impulsive and immediate or spontaneous or are they long in the planning and execution?

 

[Galena]

Are tremendous acts of evil a consequence of emoting or are they a consequence of cold calculated planning? Are they impulsive and immediate or spontaneous or are they long in the planning and execution?

Any or all of the above, and so much more...

 

[Il Morto Che Parla]

The thread title is genius!

IXFP’s are surprisingly capable of tremendous acts of evil

However they tend to be incapable of bringing these realities to fruition.

Maybe it has already been pointed out, but these two statements contradict each other.

 

[highlander]

The thread title is genius!



Maybe it has already been pointed out, but these two statements contradict each other.

I think the key words are "tend to"

 

[Istbkleta]

I'm sorry, I was just thinking it was hilarious to imagine that IxFP disorganisation and bad follow-through are the central impediments to their potential villainy - "you know, if I could only get my shit together I could be truly evil".

It's something INTPs get accused of often.

Who knew disorganization and weak extroversion could be forces of Good.

Thank you for bringing this perspective. It made my day (as a slacker!)

 

[Poki]

INFPs are my functional opposite; they're all grounded and realistic with stuff, wanting to keep the proper principles and preserve stability, just like those boring old ISTJs!

ISTPs on the other hand have both Ti and Ni, the ultimate functions of supreme intellect! Se is also there to give our extreme visions a reality check, to take pieces from the external world and build them up into an integral construct!

If you want to be like God and become an ISTP, too bad. INFPs are farther away from the divine ISTP level than anyone..... hahahahahahahaha!

Yet I wouldn't trade the ones in my life for the world. They have what I dont.

 

[Standuble]

I would definitively agree with this. Superunknown was right to accuse Fi of being like the monster under the bed because it is. It allows the self to be understood to the point where everything repulsive and horrible about the self is not just known but accepted. In layman's terms there is an ultimate evil/antichrist down there and you will see it and realise that it is you. When you do you will either run from it or get in touch with it (be aware that the latter is more useful to personal development.)

I have imagined myself filling many roles of self actualisation: curing cancer, sacrificing myself to stop a catastrophic nuclear reactor explosion, leading a revolution against a tyrannical oppressor, writing a best selling novel, becoming an astronaut, becoming a time traveller, becoming a facepalm inducing OP super hero or magician, becoming immortal etc. However I have also envisioned myself as the villain and at my deepest (with any and all inhibitions removed) I can see myself as pretty much the devil himself and see myself capable of such atrocities and acts of pure terror and callousness that manage to far outweigh anything the Nazis and other unpleasant little nuggets throughout history ever managed to accomplish. You can envision a version of yourself bringing ruin to the whole world (or even the universe itself) and actually enjoying it. It's one of the reasons why I believe Hitler was an INFP. What's worse is sometimes it feels fun playing the antagonist even if I rarely get beyond harmless manipulation and shameless selfishness.

I can't say if this is typical of IFPs. I would think that even if it were very few would be willing to admit it to others. Of course I think others are just as capable of "tremendous acts of evil" but in their cases have they had the luxury of seeing it within themselves in full capacity and learnt to accept it? Is it possible to fear something you understand?

 

[Stanton Moore]

I read somewhere that IXFP’s are surprisingly capable of tremendous acts of evil - more so than any other type. However they tend to be incapable of bringing these realities to fruition. It's an Fi dom thing that is at the root of this.

Any truth to this? Thoughts/opinions?

Sigh…

So IXFP’s are capable of evil but incapable at the same time?
Come on...

 

[Standuble]

Sigh…

So IXFP’s are capable of evil but incapable at the same time?
Come on...

He explained this half way down the previous page. "Tend to" are the key words.

 

[Stanton Moore]

The OP claims that group X are capable of evil, Then says that that same group tends not to be able to engage in evil for some related reason.
I presume that he means that some members of group X are capable of evil, but most are not.
He claims it’s feature Y (Fi), but that is illogical since all members of group X have that feature by definition. Therefore there must be another reason for the capability, or the statement is itself false…

Some people smoke cigarettes.
Most of them don’t get lung cancer.
So why do some people get lung cancer?
The answer can’t be ‘because they smoke’, because most people who smoke don’t get lung cancer. Therefore there is some other factor at play other than smoking.
Do you see it now?

 

[prplchknz]

I am

 

[Standuble]

The OP claims that group X are capable of evil, Then says that that same group tends not to be able to engage in evil for some related reason.
I presume that he means that some members of group X are capable of evil, but most are not.
He claims it’s feature Y (Fi), but that is illogical since all members of group X have that feature by definition. Therefore there must be another reason for the capability, or the statement is itself false…

Some people smoke cigarettes.
Most of them don’t get lung cancer.
So why do some people get lung cancer?
The answer can’t be ‘because they smoke’, because most people who smoke don’t get lung cancer. Therefore there is some other factor at play other than smoking.
Do you see it now?

I thought what he was saying "group x are capable but a sub-section of group x have not managed to find a way to express this capability." It's like saying "I'm a great artist but I don't have a canvas on hand to paint."

I think we have interpreted "Fi is the root of this" differently too. I interpreted it as "Fi is the root of the aforementioned evil desire" and I suspect that you interpreted it as "Fi causes the incapability." [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION] would hopefully be able to set the record straight.

 

[Stanton Moore]

I thought what he was saying "group x are capable but a sub-section of group x have not managed to find a way to express this capability." It's like saying "I'm a great artist but I don't have a canvas on hand to paint."

And then he said that 'Fi' is the reason for the ability to express evil, but it can't be the thing that conjoins all members of a group, since most member of the group don't engage in the bahavior.

All cats can bite, but most do not.
Therefore being a cat can't be the source of the biting behavior. There must be some thing alse at play to make some bite.

 

[Standuble]

And then he said that 'Fi' is the reason for the ability to express evil, but it can't be the thing that conjoins all members of a group, since most member of the group don't engage in the bahavior.

All cats can bite, but most do not.
Therefore being a cat can't be the source of the biting behavior. There must be some thing alse at play to make some bite.

I've completely lost your line of reasoning but I assume it's related to the post I made just above this post. You seem to have interpreted his statement as "Fi=ability to express evil" when I seriously think he meant "Fi=capacity to be evil". I've read his post several times and I haven't been able to determine that your interpretation was his intention.

I would conclude (using type model) that Fi=" capacity to be evil" and Te= "capacity to express that evil". There would be a larger amount of flexibility regarding the variance of the inferior function's strength and utilisation from member to member inside a type which wouldn't exist for a dominant (in other words members of a type would be good at using their type's dominant function regardless.) Basically some would be good enough with their Te to actualise their evil schemes whilst those without a good Te would not have the opportunity.

 

[Stanton Moore]

I've completely lost your line of reasoning but I assume it's related to the post I made just above this post. You seem to have interpreted his statement as "Fi=ability to express evil" when I seriously think he meant "Fi=capacity to be evil". I've read his post several times and I haven't been able to determine that your interpretation was his intention.

I would conclude (using type model) that Fi=" capacity to be evil" and Te= "capacity to express that evil". There would be a larger amount of flexibility regarding the variance of the inferior function's strength and utilisation from member to member inside a type which wouldn't exist for a dominant (in other words members of a type would be good at using their type's dominant function regardless.) Basically some would be good enough with their Te to actualise their evil schemes whilst those without a good Te would not have the opportunity.

It's really not that complicated. I give up.

 

[highlander]

I thought what he was saying "group x are capable but a sub-section of group x have not managed to find a way to express this capability." It's like saying "I'm a great artist but I don't have a canvas on hand to paint."

I think we have interpreted "Fi is the root of this" differently too. I interpreted it as "Fi is the root of the aforementioned evil desire" and I suspect that you interpreted it as "Fi causes the incapability." [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION] would hopefully be able to set the record straight.

And then he said that 'Fi' is the reason for the ability to express evil, but it can't be the thing that conjoins all members of a group, since most member of the group don't engage in the bahavior.

All cats can bite, but most do not.
Therefore being a cat can't be the source of the biting behavior. There must be some thing alse at play to make some bite.

Actually, I didn't make this up. I simply repeated what I heard somewhere else. It was also indicated that INFPs would understand what this meant. I was looking for an explanation as much as you are.

 

[Lady_X]

does it mean that they're capable of thinking up super evil schemes...like that others wouldn't think of? like how deeply twisted and just WRONG?? but then they realize this and don't do it?