On Good and Evil, and Model B
I've concluded that good and evil are respective to how we use functions, and are not properties of the functions themselves in any manner.
Let me clarify though, that there are conscious and subconscious utilities of functions. We have default subconscious patterns of function use. For example, we use our background id functions to observe our more primal, and especially antisocial tendencies. ("evil") This is our natural method of using them in relation to the ego. But what if we use it instead in relation to the foreground id? In that case, the situation gets a little murkier: we are thus using the same functions we use to apprehend the evil within us for the purpose of illuminating the deeper good in our own natures.
I think this dynamic is the root of the "good vs. evil ancient legend" cultural archetype, where a superb force for goodness and purity is said to have banished evil in the course of a creation myth. We are observing the work of transcendent functioning in our world from before us and observe it to be good, even if we are not comfortable processing it consciously in our own minds. We thus argue that "evil" was dispelled by the creative contribution of the transcendent functioning person, even as we look at the evil within us as a forewarning that the "evil" might one day return....
Obviously if you're not into the study of morality, or are skeptical of it altogether, then you won't find much to like.
But by that token, I guess you don't have much more to learn from socionics. Victor Gulenko himself has stated "ethics" as a matter of socionics study to be a prime matter of concern for our generation....
Tags for this Thread