[MBTI General] a question about INFJ

[Wandering]

Well, that almost sounds like no one has the right to hold to their personal convictions in the face of cultural expectations except those the individual INFJ believes has a right to hold to their convictions!

Heh? Not quite. I grant everyone the right to hold whatever personal convictions they want (not that I actually have such right to grant, but you get the idea). However, I will not *support* everyone's convictions equally.

Fi may be over-shadowed by Fe in the INFJ archetype, but it is still there

 

[heart]

Heh? Not quite. I grant everyone the right to hold whatever personal convictions they want (not that I actually have such right to grant, but you get the idea). However, I will not *support* everyone's convictions equally.

Fi may be over-shadowed by Fe in the INFJ archetype, but it is still there

Well, I don't support people's convictions and values that I don't agree with on an individual basis anymore than I support a whole culture's convictions and values that I don't agree with.

 

[Wandering]

The internal life of the INFJ would be Ni-Ti, wouldn't it? Wouldn't that give them a solid foundation for a internal moral compass without letting Fe sway it too far astray?

Yes and no.

Yes because the Ni-Ti axis sure gives INFJs a solid, thorough, not too illogical foundation to build on.

No because it utterly fails to take people's feelings into true consideration.

That's why Fe must be kept in its place of Auxiliary, and not be overshadowed by either Fi or Ti: because it's the only function that pushes INFJs to take other people's feelings into consideration. Without its input, INFJs turn into lean mean thinking machines who can elaborate complex and precise moral systems - but are hopelessly immoral themselves since they fail to actually CARE about other people.

Ni-Ti without Fe is a heartless theoretical exercise.

My Ne wants to do many things that Fi-Si just could never abide!

I'm not saying Fe should take Ni-Ti over either. INFJs are not ENFJs! (I would know, I live with one )

 

[Wandering]

Well, I don't support people's convictions and values that I don't agree with on an individual basis anymore than I support a whole culture's convictions and values that I don't agree with.

But do you grant people the right to hold those convictions and values, even if you don't support them?

That takes us back to the old "tolerance vs acceptance" debate. Where does one end and the other begin? I personally don't think there is an objective answer to that question, and that people end up having to decide for themselves on that matter, which inevitably leads to conflicts along the lines of:

- By saying this, you cross into the acceptance realm.
- No, it's still only tolerance.

Or inversely:
- You are being intolerant.
- No, I just don't accept it.

Without universal standards to judge on those matters, disagreements, misunderstandings, and even conflicts are inevitable. And yet, *not* discussing those issues would be even worse. I'm getting a moral headache

 

[Haphazard]

So what is that guide post? Sure not a internal moral standard?

If not, then what?

Ni is a perpetual game of 'follow the shiny.' It finds a lead and takes it. Call it immoral if you like, but it's certainly prevented stagnation... I'm pretty sure any dom Ni type would strangle a Jimminy Cricket if they ever had one. We need to let our minds be free to chase whatever strikes us, or else we'd suffocate and die.

This conversation is disturbingly familiar -- oh yes, it's the exact same thing with INTJs and INTPs.

INTJ: "You're being too pedantic!"
INTP: "You're being imprecise!"

*sigh*

Agree to disagree? Neither INFPs nor INFJs are inherently bad people -- certainly, they're much better than any given NT.

 

[Kiddo]

Ni is a perpetual game of 'follow the shiny.' It finds a lead and takes it. Call it immoral if you like, but it's certainly prevented stagnation... I'm pretty sure any dom Ni type would strangle a Jimminy Cricket if they ever had one. We need to let our minds be free to chase whatever strikes us, or else we'd suffocate and die.

That I think is where the difference between NiFe and NiTe comes into play. INFJs do have a conscience, it is just composed of different values as opposed to INFPs. XNFPs think in terms like, "Rape is always wrong, Murder is always wrong, etc." whereas INFJs think in terms of principles like "Do unto others as you would have them unto you, etc." 99.99% of the time we end up doing the same thing in any given situation, but our approaches are very dissimilar. But since both types are governed by a set of values, both types do have an inner conscience. Obviously though, INFJs don't have a Jimmy Cricket who tells them right from wrong, but rather a little seer in their head who imparts wisdom.

Agree to disagree? Neither INFPs nor INFJs are inherently bad people -- certainly, they're much better than any given NT.

I think that is all we can do. This is undoubtedly the most distinguishing factor between INFJs and INFPs. We can agree on pretty much anything, but when it comes to moral and ethical judgments, it's like night and day.

 

[cafe]

That I think is where the difference between NiFe and NiTe comes into play. INFJs do have a conscience, it is just composed of different values as opposed to INFPs. XNFPs think in terms like, "Rape is always wrong, Murder is always wrong, etc." whereas INFJs think in terms of principles like "Do unto others as you would have them unto you, etc." 99.99% of the time we end up doing the same thing in any given situation, but our approaches are very dissimilar. But since both types are governed by a set of values, both types do have an inner conscience. Obviously though, INFJs don't have a Jimmy Cricket who tells them right from wrong, but rather a little seer in their head who imparts wisdom.

Is that really how it works for INFPs? I've always thought of my values as kind of a template and it is, indeed, based on the golden rule. The hard part is getting my head around the concept that things that bother me don't bother everyone else or things that don't bother me are a big deal to some people. That's when I shrug, play along as best I can, and say 'to each his own.'

This is off topic, but this thread has made me realize why I hate Pinocchio with such rabid passion. Growing up, I was Jiminy Cricket to my mother's Pinocchio. She never listened and she always got us into trouble. Terribly frustrating.

 

[Kiddo]

Is that really how it works for INFPs? I've always thought of my values as kind of a template and it is, indeed, based on the golden rule. The hard part is getting my head around the concept that things that bother me don't bother everyone else or things that don't bother me are a big deal to some people. That's when I shrug, play along as best I can, and say 'to each his own..

Pretty much. Here is an example. Say we came across evidence that about 1000 years ago there were a tribe of people on a remote island who killed off their elderly at a certain age because they had to control their population with their limited resources. Here is your typical responses...

XNFP: That is murder! That is so wrong no matter what the situation! They were clearly savages for doing such a thing and not doing everything in their power to preserve the lives of their elderly. They should have just had fewer children even if it would have meant the tribe eventually dieing off. That entire culture is clearly disgusting and useless for having such a practice.

XNFJ: Although I don't think I would agree with the practice in the present, it was 1000 years ago in a remote part of the world. That was a part of their culture and how they had learned to survive. For all we know, the elderly consented to the practice in order to ensure the welfare of the future generations and it could have been an integral part of their religious beliefs. So I wouldn't exactly call it wrong since that was their chosen way of life and it kept the people from staving.

 

[halfaninstant]

Not quite. Having to navigate by following a map would eventually kill the heart of any INFJ. Instead, INFJs learn how to read the currents and the winds and all that stuff so that wherever and whenever we navigate, whether it's a whole new place or somewhere we've already been, whether it's by night or by day, we'll always know what's coming. Sure we need to have a very crude map of the ocean, but filling in the details would bore us to death. Instead, we thrive on uncovering the patterns and on using them to examine each new situation on its own.

I can only speak from my personal experiences, but those two are not mutually exclusive things... they may not even be all that different. roadmaps are the answer to our past situation. before we use it for something new, we figure out of the new situation is similiar enough with the past. if not, we analyze the roadmap to find the commonality, and using that i examine the new situation.

is that not doing both? isn't it better to have both?

You wouldn't, you're an Introvert. However, if someone insists on scrutinising your beliefs and on pointing out what they see as inconsistencies or any other kind of "flaws" in them, then you are likely (I'm not saying you will, just that you are likely) to explode in some sort of moral rage and tell the other person that they are wrong to think that way, that your way is the only right way, and that anyone with a shred of morality would see that you're right. That's puzzling to INFJs, who take it for granted that everyone thinks their own way is the most right way, and who are far more interested in understanding WHAT your way is and WHY you think it's the best way not only for you but for everyone else.

again, i don't find that to be true... i have my moral compass, but i find it vitally important to hear other people's perspective on it. if it is meaningful, i change my perspective to reflect it, if not i discard. emotons and feelings of my morals are my own, and if you attack me based on emotions, i fight back because you're violating my personal space. if you are attacking it with reason, it makes me happy - you care about me, you have something worth talking about, and it might make my understanding of the world better, thus allowing me to see greater patterns and deciding my path in life.

You're pushing my INFJ buttons with that one Please bear with me as I put you through my INFJ grinder, OK ? Here goes: better world according to who? You? What makes you think that your vision of a better world is necessarily anybody else's vision? In fact, chances are that there would be quite a few people who would be *less* happy in your "better world" than they are now, so why would you even want to change their world? And so forth and so on. Typical INFJ/INFP interaction. Nothing wrong with either type, just that our priorities are completely at odds.

Again, it all depends on what you call "better", which in turn depends on what you VALUE. Since INFPs and INFJs value starkly different things, they necessarily have a very different idea of what "better" means.

better world according to me - i don't stop others from making a difference in the world as to how they view it to be... how they see their vision to making the world better. unless it is something that violates the happiness of others. I'm all for everyone making reality what they view is best and i don't force others to go with my plan... i make them see the beauty of it or ask them to leave and start their own "crusade".

The emphasis is on "original". IOW: you cannot change your past. You cannot change what happened to you, you cannot change the way you used to think, you cannot change the values that you were taught when you were a kid. You can change how you REACT to all those NOW, but you cannot directly change them. Someone who was raised as a girl can never intimately know what it's like to be raised as a boy. Someone who was raised Catholic can never fully understand what it's like to be raised Protestant. Someone who grew up white can never fully appreciate what it's like to grow up black. And so on. We can try to compensate for those things by learning, studying, discussing, empathising, whatever. But we can never change the fact that we had *those* experiences, and not *these*.

i agree - you can't change the past... but i believe there is too much emphasis on the past.... Oh, it makes us our current self, but eventually the present will be the past, and the future will be the present. all things that happens changes us, and the present can change us just as dramatically as the past have.

anyway, i find this discussion very useful - thank you. i did not realize INFJ holds onto nothing of their flashes- though i suspect their patterns are very similiar to our roadmaps.

 

[halfaninstant]

Pretty much. Here is an example. Say we came across evidence that about 1000 years ago there were a tribe of people on a remote island who killed off their elderly at a certain age because they had to control their population with their limited resources. Here is your typical responses...

XNFP: That is murder! That is so wrong no matter what the situation! They were clearly savages for doing such a thing and not doing everything in their power to preserve the lives of their elderly. They should have just had fewer children even if it would have meant the tribe eventually dieing off. That entire culture is clearly disgusting and useless for having such a practice.

XNFJ: Although I don't think I would agree with the practice in the present, it was 1000 years ago in a remote part of the world. That was a part of their culture and how they had learned to survive. For all we know, the elderly consented to the practice in order to ensure the welfare of the future generations and it could have been an integral part of their religious beliefs. So I wouldn't exactly call it wrong since that was their chosen way of life and it kept the people from staving.

i'd have to disagree - i would say the second. however, i would add that they have improverished themselves with killing off the source of knowledge and wisdom that could guide them. then i would tack on my emotional standing - that perhaps whatever the cause of this could be addressed in a different manner and the resulting deaths of elderly individual would not be needed.

if it was beliefs and the elderly actively participated, then i would back off. if it was not voluntary and i was living in that age, i would devote myself to analyzing why and how to fix the cause of this - if it was food, find better agricultural techniques.. or just growing more food. if it was cultural, then i would try to understand whether it is a valid cultural point, or if it was a made cultural due to necessity. if it was out of necessity, why... and fix that, then challenge the culture to point out that it is no longer required. and if they choose to continue it, i'll back off from them, but pursue ways of helping the elders out of that situation because they are not in it voluntarily.

 

[Kiddo]

i'd have to disagree - i would say the second. however, i would add that they have improverished themselves with killing off the source of knowledge and wisdom that could guide them. then i would tack on my emotional standing - that perhaps whatever the cause of this could be addressed in a different manner and the resulting deaths of elderly individual would not be needed.

That entire situation was not meant to be interpreted as "this is what I would do" but rather as an example of what typical INFP and INFJ responses look like. I would be surprised if did get a lot of agreement because it assumes a preset of values for the INFP and INFJ. An INFP who was in favor of consented euthanasia would disagree with the example I provide for the INFP. So there really wasn't any sense in disagreeing with it, when the purpose was to demonstrate how INFP and INFJs typically disagree, not provide a situation where you could argue that you would have done things differently and what your personal opinion on such a culture would be.

In other words, it wasn't a working example, it was meant to just show the basic mechanics and structure of the typical INFP and INFJ response.

 

[halfaninstant]

You honestly believe that morals are what give meaning to life?

Personally I think the meaning of life is to love, to help others, to procreate, etc. It's just hard for me to imagine that all life on earth is pointless if they don't accept one set of values, perceptions, cultural ideals, etc, so that everybody lives by the same moral standard.

how is moral exclusive from love? you're separating actions from principals and morals.

without action, principals and morals are meaningless. they have meaning in the internal world, but they fail to affect reality.

my principals demand acton. my action is a reflection of my principals. i love because love is an action that reflects my principal. i help others because that is an action that reflects my principals. There should be no separation.

and no - i never said that life is pointless if people don't accept one set of values and principals. you're jumping to the wrong conclusion. In my eyes, life would be pointless WITHOUT morals and principals. There is no meaning outside of your actions... meaning behind your actions.

to your INFJ self - you have hunches of what is right - you do things because of it.. but that is your reason. in a way, the ideas which you create from your hunches defines you. it is the pattern that makes you you. you act, you live, you think in terms of your pattern... love and acceptance, etc.. is a result of the patterns you see.


correct me if i'm wrong - my understanding of INFJ is incomplete.

 

[Wandering]

I can only speak from my personal experiences, but those two are not mutually exclusive things... they may not even be all that different. roadmaps are the answer to our past situation. before we use it for something new, we figure out of the new situation is similiar enough with the past. if not, we analyze the roadmap to find the commonality, and using that i examine the new situation.

is that not doing both? isn't it better to have both?

INFPs and INFJs are both NFs: we both have iNtuition and Feeling as our two main primary functions. So we are all going to do both.

However, it makes a difference whether iNtuition is Dominant or not, because it will determine if the roadmap will be used as the main guiding tool, or as an accessory.

For INFJs, for example, the answer to a past situation is not a roadmap: it's a pattern. A roadmap is linked to a context, a pattern is not. When faced with a new situation, using a roadmap or using a pattern makes a difference. In order to use a roadmap, you have to find specific indicators in the landscape, so that you can super-impose the roadmap onto it. When using a pattern, the indicators don't matter as such: it's only their respective positions to one another that matters.

i have my moral compass, but i find it vitally important to hear other people's perspective on it. if it is meaningful, i change my perspective to reflect it, if not i discard.

That's Fi-Ne, yes.
1) You have your moral compass.
2) You open up to other people's perspective on it.
3) If you find that perspective meaningful according to your own set of criteria, then you modify your moral compass.

Ni-Fe is different. My brain is fried right now so I'm not very satisfied with this explanation, but here goes:
1) We learn what people think.
2) We strive to reconcile the contradictions by building a pattern that allows for everyone's opinion at the same time.
3) We check whether this pattern works in the real world.

Can you see the opposite flows of in-out and out-in? Fi/Ne vs Ni/Fe? That's one major difference right there.

better world according to me - i don't stop others from making a difference in the world as to how they view it to be... how they see their vision to making the world better. unless it is something that violates the happiness of others.

Ah, but isn't that a given? There is NO vision that allows for increased happiness for *everyone*. In order to make one group of people happier, then necessarily another group of people must be made less happy. Then the problem becomes: how do we select which group of people should be made happier, and which group less happy? Why do we value one group over the other? What does it imply about our morality? And so on.

i agree - you can't change the past... but i believe there is too much emphasis on the past.... Oh, it makes us our current self, but eventually the present will be the past, and the future will be the present. all things that happens changes us, and the present can change us just as dramatically as the past have.

True. But remember, INFJs are all about *patterns*. We are not interested in instant shots. Where something or someone is at now is only of limited interest to us: what interests us is where they come from, and where they are going. The past, the present and the future are all of equal importance to us when studying a phenomenon, because they are all part of the specific pattern of that phenomenon. So for us there can hardly be too much importance put on the past, at least during the time we study something, because studying this past is a fundamental part of understanding the phenomenon. Without the past, we have no hope of understanding the present, and thus projecting the future. We're utterly lost.

anyway, i find this discussion very useful - thank you.

Welcome

i did not realize INFJ holds onto nothing of their flashes

Sometimes we'll remember our most influential flashes, but most of the time, we end up forgetting them sooner or later, because they don't matter anymore: once the lesson is learned and the mental patterns are changed accordingly, there is no more *point* in remembering what insight exactly led to that.

Incidentally, this can lead to confusion in people around INFJs, because sometimes we'll start arguing a position that's radically different from a position we were arguing some time before. Worse: if you confront us with that fact, we might deny it! It's not lying, it's not covering. It's just that this old position doesn't make sense to us anymore, so we have a hard time remembering that we used to support it. We discarded it once we realised it was flawed, and we truly don't remember how we used to defend it.

though i suspect their patterns are very similiar to our roadmaps.

Yes and no. They *look* similar, but the way they are used is very different. Say you and I are presented with a crude map of some corner of the ocean, a map that shows only some of the bigger islands, and we are asked to indicate the best route from Island A to Island B. A roadmap user will consult their map and see if they can *identify* those islands. Once they do, it becomes obvious which route is best: it's plainly written on their roadmap. A pattern user will consult their collection of patterns and see if they can *match* a pattern to the specific map they've been given. Once they do, they'll indicate the route that is best according to the pattern.

What's the difference? The roadmap is specific and based on someone's experience of traveling around those specific islands, while the pattern is general and will still work even if nobody's ever been to those islands. Even more exciting (from an INFJ's point of view, at least), is that this pattern might also be of use in totally different contexts, like for example when navigating around mountains, or when building sand castles. The pattern is purely imaginary, it's not attached to any real-life anchor (that's *Introverted* iNtuition for you )

The downside of patterns, of course, is that INFJs keep re-inventing the wheel. Like for example we'll go through our pattern-research to find the best route between the islands, only to realise once we're done that DUH! We've been there before and we already know the best route! If we'd only bothered to check our stock of partial roadmaps instead of jumping straight into our collection of patterns...

 

[halfaninstant]

That entire situation was not meant to be interpreted as "this is what I would do" but rather as an example of what typical INFP and INFJ responses look like. I would be surprised if did get a lot of agreement because it assumes a preset of values for the INFP and INFJ. An INFP who was in favor of consented euthanasia would disagree with the example I provide for the INFP. So there really wasn't any sense in disagreeing with it, when the purpose was to demonstrate how INFP and INFJs typically disagree, not provide a situation where you could argue that you would have done things differently and what your personal opinion on such a culture would be.

In other words, it wasn't a working example, it was meant to just show the basic mechanics and structure of the typical INFP and INFJ response.

eh - i believe that in fact INFP can understand both sides of a subject just as well as INFJ, but they feel a need to express their disagreement. maybe that wasn't very clear from what i said.

but maybe i'm wrong - my understanding of INFP is incomplete as well.

 

[Kiddo]

how is moral exclusive from love? you're separating actions from principals and morals.

How are morals inclusive to love? Heart was arguing that morals are the only thing that gives life purpose. Personally, my morals have nothing to do with love. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you is just common sense.

without action, principals and morals are meaningless. they have meaning in the internal world, but they fail to affect reality.

I disagree in the sense that not acting is an action. If I just let people come by and kill my neighbors while I sit by sipping coffee, then that doesn't speak very highly of my character. Principles and morals have the value we as individuals and society as a whole, ascribe to them.

my principals demand acton. my action is a reflection of my principals. i love because love is an action that reflects my principal. i help others because that is an action that reflects my principals. There should be no separation.

Love is a value, not a principle. A principle is a rule or standard of behavior. Whereas a value is an ideal. Both INFPs and INFJs have values like love, forgiveness, equality, freedom, etc.

and no - i never said that life is pointless if people don't accept one set of values and principals. you're jumping to the wrong conclusion. In my eyes, life would be pointless WITHOUT morals and principals. There is no meaning outside of your actions... meaning behind your actions.

So you are arguing there is no meaning to perceptions? I guess that means things like, the color red, the smell of cookies, etc. are meaningless and the only reason we have names for them is because...why exactly do we have names for meaningless things?

to your INFJ self - you have hunches of what is right - you do things because of it.. but that is your reason. in a way, the ideas which you create from your hunches defines you. it is the pattern that makes you you. you act, you live, you think in terms of your pattern... love and acceptance, etc.. is a result of the patterns you see.

I've said something similar. We read the patterns in the currents. We learn to understand different perceptions, experiences, beliefs, cultures, and we can navigate the waters by learning when to change our course long before we run into dangers. It is a learned process of trial and error. That is different from the INFP method of following a preset course on a map, which is basically, following internal standards that have been imprinted since childhood by family upbringing, culture, etc.

correct me if i'm wrong - my understanding of INFJ is incomplete.

Corrected.

 

[Wandering]

how is moral exclusive from love?

It is, simply. It is perfectly possible to hold to a morality that has nothing to do with love.

you're separating actions from principals and morals.

Because they *are* separate.

without action, principals and morals are meaningless. they have meaning in the internal world, but they fail to affect reality.

Spoken like a true Dominant Judger Fi is a Judging function, it demands action. But INFJs are Dominantly Perceivers: Ni doesn't *care* whether its insights and patterns are carried out in the real world or not. We have to rely on our Auxiliary Judging function, Fe, for that.

my principals demand acton. my action is a reflection of my principals. i love because love is an action that reflects my principal. i help others because that is an action that reflects my principals. There should be no separation.

And yet there is. I'd be quite surprised if that wasn't a daily struggle for many INFJs: how to act what we think and feel? What comes so easily to Dominant Judgers can be overwhelmingly complicated for us, because our nature is to Perceive, not Judge.

In my eyes, life would be pointless WITHOUT morals and principals. There is no meaning outside of your actions... meaning behind your actions.

Not the way I see it. There is meaning in the life of a braind-dead person, because of the way that person affects the lives of those around them. There is meaning in a dead tree as long as that dead tree somehow affects something else. Meaning is derived from the connections between people and things, not (just) from the morals and principles behind the actions.

to your INFJ self - you have hunches of what is right - you do things because of it.. but that is your reason.

Not necessarily, actually. The hunches are Ni, but it's Fe that most often drives us to action, and those two don't necessarily agree. It's quite common for an INFJ to act in a way that they don't think is right or useful, simply because they are following Fe instead of Ni. Conflict avoidance is one typical example: we'll shut up and say nothing even though we think we should, simply to avoid upsetting people.

 

[Kiddo]

Not the way I see it. There is meaning in the life of a braind-dead person, because of the way that person affects the lives of those around them. There is meaning in a dead tree as long as that dead tree somehow affects something else. Meaning is derived from the connections between people and things, not (just) from the morals and principles behind the actions.

Oh, I wish I had said that. Excellent point.

Not necessarily, actually. The hunches are Ni, but it's Fe that most often drives us to action, and those two don't necessarily agree. It's quite common for an INFJ to act in a way that they don't think is right or useful, simply because they are following Fe instead of Ni. Conflict avoidance is one typical example: we'll shut up and say nothing even though we think we should, simply to avoid upsetting people.

Or the opposite is true. We will argue relentlessly and deliberately even though we feel we shouldn't. The reason for that being we are so driven by our perceiving function to defend an idea that might not even be clearly developed.

 

[halfaninstant]

How are morals inclusive to love? Heart was arguing that morals are the only thing that gives life purpose. Personally, my morals have nothing to do with love. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you is just common sense.

there are two types of love - an action you do and an action done unto you.

love done unto you is a reflection of your actions (which may be love done onto others). actions should be a reflection of morals... i think we all strive to express ourselves, we may come off incorrectly, but in general we get our point across.

Love done unto you is therefore a reflection of your morals. if you are unloved, your morals are probably off - or your actions does not represent your morals - or you are deceiving yourself about your morals.

Do unto others as you would have do unto yourself is not just common sense, it is a good moral because when it is your moral, your actions reflect it, and the love you gain from that action tells you it is right.

separation of morals from love is to separate cause and effect - you can, but it doesn't do anything for you.

I disagree in the sense that not acting is an action. If I just let people come by and kill my neighbors while I sit by sipping coffee, then that doesn't speak very highly of my character. Principles and morals have the value we as individuals and society as a whole, ascribe to them.

i never said inaction wasn't an action. no action is a reflection of your morals.

Love is a value, not a principle. A principle is a rule or standard of behavior. Whereas a value is an ideal. Both INFPs and INFJs have values like love, forgiveness, equality, freedom, etc.

love is an action. love is derived from morals. love returned to you is a reflection of morals. lets ignore principals and ideals. i think moral is enough for now.

So you are arguing there is no meaning to perceptions? I guess that means things like, the color red, the smell of cookies, etc. are meaningless and the only reason we have names for them is because...why exactly do we have names for meaningless things?

there is no meaning beyond its existence. and the only meaning that truly matters to me is what ties it to us. the nams ties them to us. names have more meaning than the object.

I've said something similar. We read the patterns in the currents. We learn to understand different perceptions, experiences, beliefs, cultures, and we can navigate the waters by learning when to change our course long before we run into dangers. It is a learned process of trial and error. That is different from the INFP method of following a preset course on a map, which is basically, following internal standards that have been imprinted since childhood by family upbringing, culture, etc.

there is nothing preset about an INFP's map. not from culture, not from upbringing. we define our maps as we live and experience life - trial and error.

oh my, doesn't that sound familiar?

 

[halfaninstant]

It is, simply. It is perfectly possible to hold to a morality that has nothing to do with love.


Because they *are* separate.

i think you misunderstood - i think my last post clarified it better. love is the reflection of morality. happiness is the reflection of morality.

Spoken like a true Dominant Judger Fi is a Judging function, it demands action. But INFJs are Dominantly Perceivers: Ni doesn't *care* whether its insights and patterns are carried out in the real world or not. We have to rely on our Auxiliary Judging function, Fe, for that.

interesting - i don't thnk i quite understand what you mean yet.

And yet there is. I'd be quite surprised if that wasn't a daily struggle for many INFJs: how to act what we think and feel? What comes so easily to Dominant Judgers can be overwhelmingly complicated for us, because our nature is to Perceive, not Judge.

i agree - we don't always act the way that reflects us. i think both NF in general strive to match our actions with our thoughts and emotions.

though i general, i believe we succeed more oftan than not - and we're more aware when it is an issue with our action not aligning with our thought and feeling than the issue being with our thoughts and emotion.

Not the way I see it. There is meaning in the life of a braind-dead person, because of the way that person affects the lives of those around them. There is meaning in a dead tree as long as that dead tree somehow affects something else. Meaning is derived from the connections between people and things, not (just) from the morals and principles behind the actions.

true. the meaning is not in that there is a dead person though - the very existence doesn't mean much besides existence. it is the connection that matters. but if seeing a brain-dead person elicit nothing from me... no emotion, no thought - than what meaning does it have outside of existence? that it is there so that we can refer to it? or them.

i know i'm being cold hearted to say that.. i'm just drawing a point that i feel.

 

[Kiddo]

there is nothing preset about an INFP's map. not from culture, not from upbringing. we define our maps as we live and experience life - trial and error.

Are you kidding?

Every individual is the sum of their family bringing, values, experiences, culture, etc. INFJs are as well, the only difference is they learn to read currents outside of that. Typically XNFPs have the idea that their moral standards are derived from the one an only, correct way of perceiving and doing things. Obviously, that is just an illusion they have adopted so they don't have to question the relativity of their own beliefs. But this is the first time I've ever heard an INFP suggest the exact opposite of what INFPs typically believe. Have you not seen heart argue against the culturally relative, changing perspective for all these pages? That is considered "corruption of the core," "selling out," etc.