******, nietzsche ubermensch/untermensch, evil

[noaydi]

****** : ENFJ probably dominant ? Or Ni subtype. Was ****** healthy ? Possibly. I don't know after all if healthyness is related to morality. The story of ****** is quite coherent to how he developped, and aside at the end where he became paranoid, he was very active all his life. Perhaps some could say he was even very healthy. This is not especially my POV, that's I POV I wanna test. The relation to healthyness and "good" morality.


Nietzsche ubermensch, untermensch, evil : It could be projection that don't relate to type, but that each type could be in some way. If some can developp this view I would be happy.

If we was looking for type absolutely, I would say :

Ubermensch : either ESTp or ESFp
Untermensch : either INFj or INTj (notice I'm untermensch, what a cool knowledge to have. Basically feeling now the worst kind of stuff in humanity)

Evil : ESTj

[noaydi]

Jesus Christ : ENFj

Antechrist : INFp or ISTp

[Tallmo]

****** was ideologically possessed. Thats not healthy. It is basically a huge onesidedness of the psyche. People can be possessed in different ways. Some people are possessed by goodness, thats also unhealthy.

Possession leads to self confidence on the surface because the person doesnt have to deal with normal diversity of the mind, internal conflicts, uncertainty etc. He just goes full steam ahead with his "truth". Its a form of unconsciousness.

[Aramas]

I would define healthy as "being as effective as one can be given his circumstances." That gets rid of moral ideas related to psychological health and doesn't impose external goals on people. By that definition, ****** was one of the healthiest people in the world. He was definitely EIE-Ni.

Sklavmoral as Nietzsche called it was his term for the NeSi method of success. He hated it because he was not a member of a judicious quadra, and the presence of it hurt his goals. "This is why we can't have nice things."

I don't try to type most fictional characters. Most of them don't really have types. They are just simplified caricatures of human nature to put pieces of dialogue and action in books.

[Muddy]

https://allthatsinteresting.com/alois-******

Not much of a mystery as to why ****** ended up unhealthy.

[Sol]

Good: Jung
Evil : Gulenko
Ubermensch : Delta
Untermensch : Reinin's traits users

[Tonatiuh]

****** : ENFJ probably dominant ? Or Ni subtype. Was ****** healthy ? Possibly. I don't know after all if healthyness is related to morality. The story of ****** is quite coherent to how he developped, and aside at the end where he became paranoid, he was very active all his life. Perhaps some could say he was even very healthy. This is not especially my POV, that's I POV I wanna test. The relation to healthyness and "good" morality.


Nietzsche ubermensch, untermensch, evil : It could be projection that don't relate to type, but that each type could be in some way. If some can developp this view I would be happy.

If we was looking for type absolutely, I would say :

Ubermensch : either ESTp or ESFp
Untermensch : either INFj or INTj (notice I'm untermensch, what a cool knowledge to have. Basically feeling now the worst kind of stuff in humanity)

Evil : ESTj

You have not read nietzsche at all have you?

[Sisyphean]

Did someone name-drop the record holder for Se-seeking behavior and the one for Fe-program? You have my attention.

[noaydi]

I read nietzsche somewhat wrongly, plus I didn't read that much the ubermensch part. If you understood it perfectly, enlightened us

[noaydi]

I'm re reading the wikipedia page.
Ubermensch : INFp ?

I'm at loss with this concept.

Dostoievski seem to had a conception of Ubermensch who was having a moral superiority who was able to forget moral when it come about realizing his idea (crime and punishment). This is kind of things that I can understand easily (or perhaps I'm still wrong...). But Nietzsche ubermensch sound obscure

[noaydi]

Note : he identified goeth as ubermensch. Wich type is goeth ?

[Hela]

No type is really the ubermensch. The ubermensch is a rejection of external values, and substitution with one's own. Any type that's actualized itself fully will be semi-ubermenschian, actualization makes anyone more self-driving.

But, Nietzsche's vision of it tracks best to Se/Ni types. He looked at the world through that lens, so he wrote a lot about about domination, will, insight. The drive to power through outside pressures, as opposed to the more Judicious framing of letting those pressures pass oneself by.

I also think your interpretation of Crime and Punishment is way off. Raskolnikov's entire problem is that he lacks the courage of his convictions, he unscrupulously chooses the easy way out time after time. Forgetting about what fetters him, in this case his morals since Dostoevsky writes moral plays, is what got him sent to Siberia.

[noaydi]

I didn't give my interpretation of crime and punishment. here it is :

Imo dostoievski ubermensch have nothing to do with the ubermensch of Nietsche. Dostoievski considered "ubermensh" in a bad way (like a philosophy wich can induce weak people into error) a little how a consider it : out of an act of desesperation and wanting to do an "important" act (probably because Raskolnikov was feeling his life was going nowhere), he decided to go over his "normal" moral and kill someone just because he was feeling his ego was limitating himself out of jealousy toward those who act from Se, wich he interpreted it as something valuable "for being famous" (in the Raskolnikov mind, killing someone goal was an act wich he felt that it will make somewhat him famous or at least doing something from his life). Definition itself of unhealthyness for Fi dom (and Se POLR). The "hero" was typically unable to appreciate what god given to him (Fi moral) and was jealous of other. In this way I very agree when you say Raskolnikov lack the courage of his conviction (this is, after all, the entire pitch of the book). It was just a desesperate action, a kind of random action coming from unhealthyness and not knowing any other way to feel important anymore.
This is my interpretation only thought.
It could be at the same time a kind of attack versus INFp who try to bypass Fi for the advantage of Se, and Delta quadra (especially INFJ) tend to view Se as random and possibly evil, but I doubt the goal of Dostoievski was so precise.

I respect crime and chatiment because I see it as an extrem attack on Ni demonstrative and the proper author narcissism (and a little Se polr) for the sake of Te and indirectly showing what is a healthy version of Fi. A complete 400 page book have been writing only from this internal fight. Respect.

Ive never seen another author succeding as much at writing from his proper fight vs narcissism/vanity.

I myself have the goal of writing after my musical period but I don't see myself at all at this level.

Imo Crime and punishment can be seen as the better attack versus the proper author narcississm that have been made.

This is only my interpretation and generally due to my fucked up brain I'm always false and reframed by other. But for this post, it stay my analysis.

I'm interested into analysis of crime and punishment, if you have other, or better one, plz share.


Imo the nietzsche ubermensch is either ESTp, ESFp

[LukaDoncic]

Nietzsche was all about firing and launching his inexorable arrow of extrication at the devil of gravity, to be magnificent in the shining dawn and the elevator to the ultimate noon.

Basically, he was ready for his fate, and when the game would reach its point of highest pressure, he would be most valor clad and victorious!!*