The concept of spirituality and EIIs-INFjs

[Not A Communist Shill]

To me, 'spirituality' is a vague and sickening word, but I'm using it here to represent a certain notion about EIIs.

Do EIIs find that they consciously engage themselves in 'spirituality', however you wish to define it? I see the word and the concept as fluffy and misty and nauseatingly unclear, while appreciating that EIIs can be lucid thinkers.

[WVBRY]

I think anyone of any type could potetentially be intrested in "spirituality", im not sure which types are more likely to, and I agree its a sickening word.

[Lobo]

That's the stereotype, but a good question is if INFjs would still be "spiritual" if they are not born into an environment that encourages spirituality in some way. My spirituality is not very consistent in that I can go 180 degrees in the opposite direction once I find something that doesn't "fit" in the model, or there is a good point raised. I really couldn't tell you much about INFj spirituality really.

[The Greeter]

I don't really understand the question to be honest. What do you define as 'spirituality'?

[Not A Communist Shill]

Heh, I suppose if I try to explain the reasoning behind this thread I'll probably find there's nothing left to explain.

Now most people have a life strategy that falls somewhere between complete selfishness and complete selflessness. And there must be an optimum point where these two balance out - i.e. helping others is in your interest, to a certain degree, but helping yourself is also important!

With EIIs I get the impression that determining such a balance fills their mind with a heavy mist - erm, I can see that they have given great thought on the matter, but it just seems out of place. I suppose it would be like seeing a monk and thinking "why on earth would you want to do that?". And although they don't necessarily have to have a religion, they are pious people, or at least tend to be heavy in thought! So I was wondering why it seems that EIIs need some justification to act the way they do, other than "it's the right thing to do" or "because it's logical" - I don't see why EIIs wouldn't say those things, but I get the feeling they are making things unnecessarily complex.

I really doubt that I'll ever become a religious person again, but even though I see myself as doing things in a strictly logical way (even if I'm doing things because I like to do them!), I suppose I could be ‘spiritual’ in the sense that I show concern for my fellow human beings – outside of my head though, I despise that word – I just use it lightly to mean an internal feeling I have.

[UDP]

Heh, I suppose if I try to explain the reasoning behind this thread I'll probably find there's nothing left to explain.

Now most people have a life strategy that falls somewhere between complete selfishness and complete selflessness. And there must be an optimum point where these two balance out - i.e. helping others is in your interest, to a certain degree, but helping yourself is also important!

With EIIs I get the impression that determining such a balance fills their mind with a heavy mist - erm, I can see that they have given great thought on the matter, but it just seems out of place. I suppose it would be like seeing a monk and thinking "why on earth would you want to do that?". And although they don't necessarily have to have a religion, they are pious people, or at least tend to be heavy in thought! So I was wondering why it seems that EIIs need some justification to act the way they do, other than "it's the right thing to do" or "because it's logical" - I don't see why EIIs wouldn't say those things, but I get the feeling they are making things unnecessarily complex.

I really doubt that I'll ever become a religious person again, but even though I see myself as doing things in a strictly logical way (even if I'm doing things because I like to do them!), I suppose I could be ‘spiritual’ in the sense that I show concern for my fellow human beings – outside of my head though, I despise that word – I just use it lightly to mean an internal feeling I have.

I think I understand where you are coming from, about EIIs... some EIIs. ALthough I wonder if your question is more about religion than EIIs.

If you've gone away from religion because you're trying to learn things, that's fine. Just don't close any doors and turn away from religion simply because what you tried left you unfulfilled. My advice to people is to keep looking, and go where the leads take you.

Now most people have a life strategy that falls somewhere between complete selfishness and complete selflessness.

Selflessness, in the typical sense, can simply be another form of selfishness - just a sort of ethically appealing way of going about it. You could rationalize things by always giving and never standing up for yourself. A number of ethical types (more so Si valuing ones) happen into that. Yet that sort of going about things doesn't help anyone, it just makes you seem like a doormat, and encourages others to exploit you.

And there must be an optimum point where these two balance out - i.e. helping others is in your interest, to a certain degree, but helping yourself is also important!

I've had similar thoughts. But now I feel like this thinking that you helping yourself vs helping other people is somewhat of an illusion; it depends on what you see yourself as, and what you see other people as.

If all you see yourself as a meatbag and others as other meatbags, and that's it, then it's just a sort of mercantilism. But that way of going about things seems unappealing, particularly to those who try to understand things. Then there are some people who try to understand end up overusing logic or 'thinking', and in doing so miss things.

This is totally unsolicited advice, but, just reading your last post, I feel like warning you to not 'overthink'.

Good luck.

[07490]

UDP why is your charisma so reckless? due to you reckless charisma A Beta is Drawn to you and now all I want is to be your #1 EII bitch. None other involved is that understandable?

[UDP]

Yeah, it's nice to see you, too.

[Not A Communist Shill]

Ryu, my question isn't strictly about religion. It's about how EIIs work internally I guess. I suppose that when there is a LII and an EII of equal disposition (whatever that means) consider things, the LII can be describe as just as 'moral' from an objective standpoint as the EII (although such an observation would be impossible).

But (and I describe this in loose terms to illustrate the point, as it does not serve to limit certain behaviours to only one type here), the LII would be expected to see things in terms of numbers and probability and squaring the circle and that sort of thing, while the EII...what? Seems to weigh up things in terms of give and take and proximity and stuff like that (Diana described the difference between Ti and Fi (and Te and Fe?) very well somewhere. Now while I can get my head round that...what about 'spirituality'? Isn't an EII able to see things in a level-headed "logical" manner, rather than for example using some religion or "spirituality" as a foundation stone which to the EII, perhaps gives them some comfort that their humanitarianism (as corny as that is) is supported by something higher?

(These questions seem somewhat silly now, and really do stereotype EIIs to the max - another thread could be "can INFjs be evil" - my answer to which is, yes I think they probably can be).

I think that people who consider themselves "spiritual" people tend to say they do the right thing because it's the right thing to do, rather than because their "spiritualism" or religion tells them to (this is perhaps rather circular however).

This of course applies to me also, but I like to think that I do not need the supposed warm comfort of religion to justify doing the right thing etc. (I'm not exactly a moral crusader though). Perhaps a significant element of this is that with EIIs, they feel that their "spirituality" ties them to humankind, and hence they have to be a part of something which involves others (i.e. a common "spirituality") - this again starts to be circular. I would like to be part of a group of fellow like-minded individuals, of course, but to me, the EII manner of thinking seems cloudy and whimsical and limpwristed.

...And yet...at times, it can be very powerful...and I know full well that I am rather EII-like in mindset at times. And hence this thread.

[The Greeter]

Subterranean, I am not going to give a complete answer because I don't have one.

Personally, I do not think that an EII finds it necessary to be part of a common 'spirituality'. At the very least, it is not something that inspires us to be part of it. If we choose to do so, I think our path to 'spirituality' is actually a rather lonely one, not that others don't take it, but that we take it alone.

Religion does not inspire me to do the right thing. Something in me that I can't explain, that probably in and of itself is not logical, spiritual or rational, inspires me. What you say about EII's: cloudy and whimsical and limpwristed, is probably right with respect to humanitarianism. In an argument for doing the right thing, I can only go so deep and, usually a logical person, will exploit the flaws in my own reasoning and all I have left to say is "I just do it because I want to."

I will have to think about whether I want to talk about EII's and a higher entity because I think each relationship will be different and quite personal.

[UDP]

Ryu, my question isn't strictly about religion. It's about how EIIs work internally I guess. I suppose that when there is a LII and an EII of equal disposition (whatever that means) consider things, the LII can be describe as just as 'moral' from an objective standpoint as the EII (although such an observation would be impossible).

I don't really understand what you're getting at.
The only thing I can think of is that LIIs use "logic" and seem more "objective" in that, and EIIs, because of Fi, have to go through this process of how they feel and what they think is right ethically... .but I don't think me saying that does anything for your understanding.

But (and I describe this in loose terms to illustrate the point, as it does not serve to limit certain behaviours to only one type here), the LII would be expected to see things in terms of numbers and probability and squaring the circle and that sort of thing, while the EII...what? Seems to weigh up things in terms of give and take and proximity and stuff like that (Diana described the difference between Ti and Fi (and Te and Fe?) very well somewhere. Now while I can get my head round that...what about 'spirituality'? Isn't an EII able to see things in a level-headed "logical" manner, rather than for example using some religion or "spirituality" as a foundation stone which to the EII, perhaps gives them some comfort that their humanitarianism (as corny as that is) is supported by something higher?

Hm.
Yeah.
.... you've never met EIIs that don't refer to a religion or a 'spirituality' to make up their minds about things? There are some on this forum who are that way.

(These questions seem somewhat silly now, and really do stereotype EIIs to the max - another thread could be "can INFjs be evil" - my answer to which is, yes I think they probably can be).

I don't know of a person that is unable to be evil.

I think that people who consider themselves "spiritual" people tend to say they do the right thing because it's the right thing to do, rather than because their "spiritualism" or religion tells them to (this is perhaps rather circular however).

This of course applies to me also, but I like to think that I do not need the supposed warm comfort of religion to justify doing the right thing etc. (I'm not exactly a moral crusader though). Perhaps a significant element of this is that with EIIs, they feel that their "spirituality" ties them to humankind, and hence they have to be a part of something which involves others (i.e. a common "spirituality") - this again starts to be circular. I would like to be part of a group of fellow like-minded individuals, of course, but to me, the EII manner of thinking seems cloudy and whimsical and limpwristed.

I'm sure you know this, but... I don't really see all EIIs using or dealing with spirituality in the same way. So I'm not sure how to categorize or analyze how that type uses spirituality. I've seen a number of different types, and also EIIs, use spirituality in a variety of ways.

I've seen people/EIIs who use religion as a way to hide from reality and rationalize things so that their world makes sense; I've seen EIIs use spirituality as a way to help other people and pursue what is true; I've seen it taken up simply because it's what the rest of their family did; I've seen people pursue spirituality in defiance of their family surrounding. And so on. So it's very difficult for me to say that EIIs uniformly deal with spirituality in one way - even on a 'socionic' level.

What's really going on, to me, is people using religions or spiritualities in different ways to fill different needs or address different issues in their lives. Few people seriously pursue what the truth is, regardless of type (imo).

...And yet...at times, it can be very powerful...and I know full well that I am rather EII-like in mindset at times. And hence this thread.

I have a feeling I haven't answered anything or helped you in this thread, as I don't really understand what you asking for clarification about... perhaps because your approach or mindset is a bit different or forieng to me right now. So I might need more information about things like:

"the EII manner of thinking" - what is that? Describe it?

"I suppose that when there is a LII and an EII of equal disposition (whatever that means) consider things, the LII can be describe as just as 'moral' from an objective standpoint as the EII (although such an observation would be impossible)."
- Is it impossible? How or why is it impossible, in your eyes?

"Isn't an EII able to see things in a level-headed "logical" manner, rather than for example using some religion or "spirituality" as a foundation stone which to the EII, perhaps gives them some comfort that their humanitarianism (as corny as that is) is supported by something higher?"
- What is your underlying feeling as to why they perhaps might not be that way?


I kind of can feel what you're getting at, but, I'm not sure.

[Beautiful sky]

I will go to church, if the church helps support real causes for human welfare. If I find that the church is misusing funds, they can count me out as their member.

Generally, I like that church provides shelter for the homeless, helps provide psychological counseling, and helps foster good values in kids, provides safe activities for kids as well; but, I would be really upset to hear that they abuse kids-that is intolerable to me.

Spirituality is not so much a belief in a higher power, it is more a valuable and contributive, or responsible way of living that I believe should be the agenda for all individuals.

[Beautiful sky]

Spirituality to me is that something made all of this and that something I call God. I desire to have a one on one friendship with God but every day I fail, I let him down and at times I am not happy with him and all he does though I know I will never understand everything and after all, he is God and he can do what he likes. He is the reason for living, without God, why bother. He promises more than this existence and I have faith in that more.

Suzzy, the evidence against you as EII is insurmountable with every post you make.
Your values and outlook on humanity, environment, and creatures is NOTHING like that of mine...don't you wonder why?

[Nowisthetime]

Do EIIs find that they consciously engage themselves in 'spirituality'.

I know one atheist EII who says that she wants to keep a distance to religious people and religions life, because it could actually influence her, and she doesnt want to be influenced by it.

[Beautiful sky]

I know one atheist EII who says that she wants to keep a distance to religious people and religions life, because it could actually influence her, and she doesnt want to be influenced by it.

That's true, we do not want religion to influence us or our actions towards people, we don't really care for a text from the stone ages that dictates the modern treatment of people; all humanity should be valued.

[Nowisthetime]

That's true, we do not want religion to influence us or our actions towards people, we don't really care for a text from the stone ages that dictates the modern treatment of people; all humanity should be valued.

I was surprised, because she is very independent, I didnt see her as someone who could be influenced. But I can understand that she is cautious, because she takes moral commitments very seriously.

[Beautiful sky]

I was surprised, because she is very independent, I didnt see her as someone who could be influenced. But I can understand that she is cautious, because she takes moral commitments very seriously.

Great observation, me too.

[anou]

I know one atheist EII who says that she wants to keep a distance to religious people and religions life, because it could actually influence her, and she doesnt want to be influenced by it.

That`s something I also feel sometimes (if I interpreted it the right way...). It`s the feeling your mind is nothing stable, without form, something fluid which could adapt easily... Therefore input should be selected carefully, because it influences your thoughts, your view of yourself and surroundings and it could build boundaries, which didn`t exist before, limiting your visibility, limiting the expanse of your thoughts. It`s like zooming on something which causes the feeling of a lost of the "whole" picture. It feels like your mind is not as "free" as before... It`s the fear of "tunnel vision".

I think this mentality of the atheist EII you know could also be seen as a sort of "spirituality"... (I hope I understood what you wrote the right way)

[Nowisthetime]

That`s something I also feel sometimes (if I interpreted it the right way...). It`s the feeling your mind is nothing stable, without form, something fluid which could adapt easily... Therefore input should be selected carefully, because it influences your thoughts, your view of yourself and surroundings and it could build boundaries, which didn`t exist before, limiting your visibility, limiting the expanse of your thoughts. It`s like zooming on something which causes the feeling of a lost of the "whole" picture. It feels like your mind is not as "free" as before... It`s the fear of "tunnel vision".

I think this mentality of the atheist EII you know could also be seen as a sort of "spirituality"... (I hope I understood what you wrote the right way)

I dont know how to interpret it, because I cannot see into the mind of an EII. But from what I have read about them, I guess that people who take their convictions very seriously (and for whom convictions lead to actions), they have to be careful about what they expose their mind to.

I think of it this way: Truly spiritual people have to be careful about spirituality, because when it hits them it's serious, not just some fooling around.

(This is just one example, I dont know EII:s well enough to generalize)

[anou]

I dont know how to interpret it, because I cannot see into the mind of an EII.

Oh, I hope you didn`t feel offended because of my words... I just thought you possibly might had some discussions about the reasons with the EII... I just made a guess based on my own experiences Not really related to socionics... Hm, I don`t think our ideas are mutually exclusive, though...

[Nowisthetime]

Oh, I hope you didn`t feel offended because of my words... I just thought you possibly might had some discussions about the reasons with the EII... I just made a guess based on my own experiences Not really related to socionics... Hm, I don`t think our ideas are mutually exclusive, though...

Oh no! Of course I'm not offended! I never discussed it with her. She just told me and that was it.

The context was that some Jehovas witnesses knocked on the EIIs door one day and invited her to a spiritual meeting the same afternoon. I was like, yeah, maybe we should go, It could be fun (I am atheist/agnostic too, but I dont really have any need to distance myself from religious people). But she took it more seriously.

I liked your ideas.

[anou]

Oh no! Of course I'm not offended!

I`m relieved to hear that.

[mikesilb]

Hi everyone,

This is actually my first post on this Socionics board. I am (most likely, yet open to be typed) an EII and am very spiritual in general. I don't necessarily feel that my main spirituality comes from a religious source. It comes more from a deeply personal interaction/relationship with the Divine (which probably relates more to a larger sense of oneness with life, the Universe, and Everything). I find this relationship to be deeply personal, deeply satisfying, and deeply sacred. While it may or may not show up in my outer behavior, it definitely resonates on a profound level within my internal experiences.

I really can relate to the quote below from earlier in this thread:

I dont know how to interpret it, because I cannot see into the mind of an EII. But from what I have read about them, I guess that people who take their convictions very seriously (and for whom convictions lead to actions), they have to be careful about what they expose their mind to.

I think of it this way: Truly spiritual people have to be careful about spirituality, because when it hits them it's serious, not just some fooling around.

As an Ne-subtyped EII, I can certainly focus more on outer relationships and connections/patterns in the way that thrives. I can also become more lighthearted in my connections with the outside world. However as an EII (with its inherent dominance), when it comes to my spirituality and all the values that are associated with it, it gets way more personal and serious to me.

In fact, I know that I can potentially be mislead and duped into a path/trap that I do not want to go into. As a result, I will often become very picky and discriminating/discerning as to which forms of spirituality feel right to me. It is definitely not something that I take lightly. As an Enneagram type 6 (which is a type that can doubt/question things quite often), I will often use to evaluate how well a given philosophy/spirituality jibes with my own values and framework. If there is a mismatch, I will probably turn the other way, but if it matches, I will be much more prone to explore the terrain of that spirituality.

So in a nutshell, I totally agree with the quote above by Nowisthetime. To me, spirituality is deeply personal and sacred and is an important component to my life.

GLAD TO BE HERE!!!!

[Not A Communist Shill]

(bump)
I've always considered myself as a "spiritual" person privately, but not publicly, because associating with the word in such a way would be unacceptable to me. Essentially, I have various feelings that do not have a satisfactory label, but which I can clearly see I share with others, to varying degrees.

A large part of the feeling could perhaps be described as piety - which is normally understood to mean solely in a religious sense. However, I agree with the perspective of Socrates/Euthyphro: https://www.reddit.com/r/Stoicism/co..._with_atheism/

To a lesser extent, I think my feelings of "spirituality" are associated with the feeling of being in love, the awe of being alive and part of nature, and having a sense of common purpose with other humans.

[Beautiful sky]

Spirituality is bigger than sexual desire in EII. By this what is meant is that the EII will will search for a place or practice where they find meaning. I used to be engaged in various activities at school and church even at home with my parents for this In school it was jjournalism where I made the school paper and in it had various human stories Experiences of teachers, holocaust memorial, the meanings came from a human foundation. I brought connection to others in giving them the story At church it was group bible study where people participate in offering their perspective and stories. All this raised questions of how one should live. What is bigger than us?

We should live by stand morals as hurting others isn't right. We should be patient and tolerable. The bigger meaning in life is that we all die (no one is superior to others). We all are responsible for our environment.

So EII goes about thinking about life, values, principals, guidance in this way. Sex? What's sex? Too busy thinking about these aspects

[Not A Communist Shill]

I think what is called "spirituality" is unique to each person, and need not have anything to do with "humanism". I'm not convinced sexual desire can be considered spiritual by itself. I'm not sure why you introduced sex to the topic merely to say you think too much about it.

[Aylen]

I think what is called "spirituality" is unique to each person, and need not have anything to do with "humanism". I'm not convinced sexual desire can be considered spiritual by itself. I'm not sure why you introduced sex to the topic merely to say you think too much about it.

Now, now, let's not be too hasty.

“Have you ever lost yourself in a kiss? I mean pure psychedelic inebriation. Not just lustful petting but transcendental metamorphosis when you became aware that the greatness of this being was breathing into you. Licking the sides and corners of your mouth, like sealing a thousand fleshy envelopes filled with the essence of your passionate being and then opened by the same mouth and delivered back to you, over and over again - the first kiss of the rest of your life. A kiss that confirms that the universe is aligned, that the world's greatest resource is love, and maybe even that God is a woman. With or without a belief in God, all kisses are metaphors decipherable by allocations of time, circumstance, and understanding”
― Saul Williams, , said the shotgun to the head.

If sex is not transcendental I don't want it. Once you experience it, you can never go back.




[maybe I'm just joking, maybe]

[Not A Communist Shill]

Now, now, let's not be too hasty.



If sex is not transcendental I don't want it. Once you experience it, you can never go back.




[maybe I'm just joking, maybe]

I would consider sexual desire to be outside definitions of spirituality simply because such yearnings are of the body, visceral. That is quite distinct from the feeling of being in love, and perhaps also from the experience of kissing and other forms of sensuality (although strictly, they are also physical): this is a large part of the reason why I object to the use of the concept of "spirituality". I believe that Maritsa possibly started talking about sex simply because I was talking about the feeling of being in love being something I have associated with "spirituality": this is even though she has attacked self-typed EIIs for waxing lyrically about lust etc., because apparently, EIIs are only about the Agape form of love. I was rather puzzled by her mentioning of sexual desire in this thread when nobody had mentioned it, and when she did, she wished to say that spirituality for EIIs was more than that.

[Aylen]

I would consider sexual desire to be outside definitions of spirituality simply because such yearnings are of the body, visceral. That is quite distinct from the feeling of being in love, and perhaps also from the experience of kissing and other forms of sensuality (although strictly, they are also physical): this is a large part of the reason why I object to the use of the concept of "spirituality". I believe that Maritsa possibly started talking about sex simply because I was talking about the feeling of being in love being something I have associated with "spirituality": this is even though she has attacked self-typed EIIs for waxing lyrically about lust etc., because apparently, EIIs are only about the Agape form of love. I was rather puzzled by her mentioning of sexual desire in this thread when nobody had mentioned it, and when she did, she wished to say that spirituality for EIIs was more than that.

Funny thing about transcendental sex. It does not seem to originate in the body and doesn't feel like lust to me. It is like linking into someone else's energy and feeling an expansion of consciousness, that includes areas of the body that might normally respond to physical touch (good or bad).. There is nothing "bad" about the experience except coming down from it. Hard to explain. Sometimes the physical, in comparison, is kind of disappointing once you had astral/energy sex. But not for long. You just can't get hooked on the astral aspects if you ever want to get physical again. Tantra is not an easy path to follow. I have abandoned it many times because it focuses on what I believe to be too much Si, at times. I think it is very spiritual though.

The biggest problem is merging the "spiritual" with the "physical" sexually.

For me most sexual feelings begin in my imagination so they originate in my mind. Not that I have never responded to only physical touch or felt lust. Ugh so hard to explain. I guess what I am saying is sometimes everything is "spiritual", (my concept of spiritual) and other times, nothing is. I just seem to go through phases with it.

Love is a state of awareness or "being" in my perspective. I usually associate my love for others as being connected to something greater than words can do justice so yes something spiritual and unbounded. I could not possibly explain what my spirituality consists of in whole. It is not really religious, in nature, yet it can encompass aspects of many religions, symbolically.

I feel like this is kind of convoluted but I tried.

[niffer]

Now, now, let's not be too hasty.



If sex is not transcendental I don't want it. Once you experience it, you can never go back.




[maybe I'm just joking, maybe]

Wow, one of the most beautiful quotes I've ever read.. ty.

[Not A Communist Shill]

@Aylen I think we just have varying degrees to what we consider as possibly "spiritual" . I just naturally consider everything to be physical (including mental states), and feel vastly irritated that I should directly or indirectly consider something as being spiritual . I do understand what you are saying - I just don't think fantastic, transcendental, and perhaps inexplicable or difficult to define experiences are cheapened by suggesting "there is no such thing as the spiritual" etc.! I don't think it limits the scope of the poetic realm either.

[Aylen]

@Aylen I think we just have varying degrees to what we consider as possibly "spiritual" . I just naturally consider everything to be physical (including mental states), and feel vastly irritated that I should directly or indirectly consider something as being spiritual . I do understand what you are saying - I just don't think fantastic, transcendental, and perhaps inexplicable or difficult to define experiences are cheapened by suggesting "there is no such thing as the spiritual" etc.! I don't think it limits the scope of the poetic realm either.

I understand what you are saying too. Sometimes I will even think everything is "physical". Then I remember how abstract my concept of the world actually is. My dreams are less abstract than "reality", sometimes.

I went through a phase not long ago where the word "spiritual" annoyed me. I was trying to distance myself from my past associations with some spiritual and philosophical groups. I have integrated that past me, for the most part, and have accepted, it is what it is.

[Eliza Thomason]

I think what is called "spirituality" is unique to each person, and need not have anything to do with "humanism". I'm not convinced sexual desire can be considered spiritual by itself. I'm not sure why you introduced sex to the topic merely to say you think too much about it.

LOL.

[Eliza Thomason]

Now, now, let's not be too hasty.
If sex is not transcendental I don't want it. Once you experience it, you can never go back.




[maybe I'm just joking, maybe]

Its actually supposed to be transcendental.

Holy Sex.