Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 41

Thread: INFp and ENFj Ni does it discriminate between good/evil?

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default INFp and ENFj Ni does it discriminate between good/evil?

    Does Ni discriminate between good and evil behavior, in your view? Or right vs wrong behavior?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    220
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    not really I don't think. for me, whatever feels natural = good

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What I'm thinking is that IEI is the ward of right and wrong. Specific information elements can be associated with good or evil, in a broad sense, and Ni makes the determination. It also determines whether acts of good or evil, right or wrong are products of the environment, or a thing's essential nature.

    For example, a lot of people thought the decision of the AIG execs to accept bonuses was morally wrong. This would be an ethical judgment of a Te sort, reflecting the use of Ni to judge Te.
    Last edited by tcaudilllg; 04-06-2010 at 03:33 PM.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    IEIs always have a bone to pick with somebody. Someone's always doing nefarious deeds that must be righted by the pure of heart.

    The IEI view: people commit good or evil acts because they have either good or bad hearts.
    The EIE view: people have choice in doing good or evil, and their emotions will shape which one they choose.

  5. #5
    mikesilb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    198
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Just out of curiosity...how might this perspective on good/evil be similar or differ from the -dominant perspective of EII?

    I always thought that focuses a lot on this domain. How might beta-NFs view this differently from delta-NFs?
    Mike
    Enneagram: 6w7 so/sx (Tritype: 6w7/9w1/2w3 or 6w7/9w1/3w2)

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mikesilb View Post
    Just out of curiosity...how might this perspective on good/evil be similar or differ from the -dominant perspective of EII?

    I always thought that focuses a lot on this domain. How might beta-NFs view this differently from delta-NFs?
    An intention is a choice of motives. Therefore an evil intent would have to be diagnosed with Ni, or so I figure. Good and evil don't seem to have an obvious connection to Ne, which is why I take this view.

  7. #7
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    yeah, I think I first look to whether the behavior has an impact on the person themselves (in some negative longterm fashion) or the way the world functions. A persons tendency to act is an issue of their motives and their immediate environment. So I look at a person and their situation, I think about the motives they have in the situation, and then I realize the ways they might try to effect the situation. From there what's good and what's evil seems to be apparent; the choice to act comes from a persons intentions. Discriminating between good and bad intentions is then a matter of judging long term impacts. Thinking about good and evil in this way is situational and relative, but within the situation it becomes clear what's absolutely good or evil.
    Last edited by crazedrat; 04-06-2010 at 07:44 PM.
    INTp

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazedratXII View Post
    yeah, typically I think good and evil comes from something inside the person. I define it mostly by whether the behavior has an impact on the person themselves (in some negative longterm fashion) or other people in the world. Impacts can become pretty obscure, and that's why I think IEIs have weird justifications for what's good and evil.
    So you would subscribe to the belief that "the road to hell is paved with good intentions"?

    Would you go so far as to offer that one choice was definitely the right one or the wrong one? One problem I have in my own experience is that when it comes to diagnosing a person "evil", I almost feel a sense of wrongness on my own part in claiming them as such because I have a tinge of empathy for anyone who would have to bear the label of an "evil" person. Do IEIs not feel this compunction?

  9. #9
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I would rather say the road to hell is full of delusions of goodness. Yes there is always the lingering thought the person deserves empathy. I think this is for two reasons. First because when summing up whether something is good or evil IEIs consider long term impacts, which are partially artificial structures. The second is that a persons motives seem to arise from deficits in their situations. In this way I think IEI blames the circumstance and the social structure more than the actual person. But, at the moment in question, the perpetrator is defined by their circumstances and their social structure. The only blame the person permanently has is for being generally too weak to handle adversity. What I mean is, the person is not to be punished beyond the actual situation. When the situation ends and is no longer relevant, the person is forgiven; but considered weak. Within the situation the person gets tons of blame and aggression thrown at them. This is sort of vague though because many situations cross over into eachother.
    I mean, if I saw george bush at a party I would talk to him and I wouldn't feel a surge of hatred toward him, because he's no longer in office and has no power; I would still realize his tendencies, but as long as they didn't become relevant at the party I wouldn't treat him differently.
    I think there is also the lingering thought that if we can remove a person from their circumstances; i.e. take george bush out of office and strip him of all political power, they can then be forgiven.
    Last edited by crazedrat; 04-06-2010 at 08:02 PM.
    INTp

  10. #10
    mikesilb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    198
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    An intention is a choice of motives. Therefore an evil intent would have to be diagnosed with Ni, or so I figure. Good and evil don't seem to have an obvious connection to Ne, which is why I take this view.

    I agree with the Ni/Ne statement, but there is still the Fi aspect of good/evil which I would have thought would also make this topic intriguing to EIIs and IEEs in addition to the Beta-NFs above. I was just curious how that difference might lie in terms of all four NF types.
    Mike
    Enneagram: 6w7 so/sx (Tritype: 6w7/9w1/2w3 or 6w7/9w1/3w2)

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    But what about their motive to reclaim power?

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mikesilb View Post
    I agree with the Ni/Ne statement, but there is still the Fi aspect of good/evil which I would have thought would also make this topic intriguing to EIIs and IEEs in addition to the Beta-NFs above. I was just curious how that difference might lie in terms of all four NF types.
    I think you're thinking about the intent to exercise an evil option. An evil possibility, to realize it if one can.

    Under crazed's criterion, Saddam Hussein should have been forgiven, maybe even let go after being removed from power. (that's my interpretation of what he said... correct me if I'm wrong, crazed) However there remained his intent to reclaim power, which would have been an evil exercise of his capability. The motive to claim power was not evil in itself, however he did it with an eye to making himself more equal than others, punishing his enemies, etc. which in turn would lead to a cascade of ill will and evil acts.

  13. #13
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah that's it tcaud. He would have to be locked up because he would still have supporters and would still have the will to reclaim power. He could cause some trouble still. But yeah, I didn't favor the death penalty even for him. Not necessary, really.. But then, when I saw an overwhelming cry for the death penalty, I also didn't have any motivation to offer resistance / make a case for his defense.
    INTp

  14. #14
    Haikus Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    22,740
    Mentioned
    531 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    Evil????? HUM????

    Good and Bad of Ethics of relationships in EII

    Not good and EVIL

  15. #15
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    Does Ni discriminate between good and evil behavior, in your view? Or right vs wrong behavior?
    doesn't it depend on the rational ego function? Rational functions have a judgement.

  16. #16
    mikesilb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    198
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maritsa33 View Post

    Good and Bad of Ethics of relationships in EII

    Not good and EVIL
    What is the difference? Being evil is definitely within the sphere where ethics of relationships can come into play. Obviously evil is an extreme on the moral/ethical spectrum but it still lies on it. So I can't see why Fi might not have to internally grapple with it (irrespective of whether I am or am not an Fi-dominant type).
    Mike
    Enneagram: 6w7 so/sx (Tritype: 6w7/9w1/2w3 or 6w7/9w1/3w2)

  17. #17
    Haikus Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    22,740
    Mentioned
    531 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mikesilb View Post
    What is the difference? Being evil is definitely within the sphere where ethics of relationships can come into play. Obviously evil is an extreme on the moral/ethical spectrum but it still lies on it. So I can't see why Fi might not have to internally grapple with it (irrespective of whether I am or am not an Fi-dominant type).
    Evil is malicious....NO NO NO...that's all wrong, I'm sorry.

  18. #18
    mikesilb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    198
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maritsa33 View Post
    Evil is malicious....NO NO NO...that's all wrong, I'm sorry.
    Malicious indeed but it is still part of the spectrum. Unless we are talking about the topic on more of a "comic book" level of superheroes and villians...but assuming that this isn't what was intended, it still lies on some ethical spectrum.
    Mike
    Enneagram: 6w7 so/sx (Tritype: 6w7/9w1/2w3 or 6w7/9w1/3w2)

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Evil is more pervasive than right or wrong. Right and wrong are isolated incidents... evil is a pattern of wrongs which reinforces and begets itself. Evil leads to more evil, good leads to more good... but sometimes the two can be confused, which is where wisdom comes into play.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Here's a chart I made of what I believe to be the subcomponents of Beta Ni. (presented here in the form of a belief element positioning chart).

    Code:
    +----------------+----------------+
    |      Evil      |      Good      |
    |                |                |
    |  (Internally   |  (Internally   |
    |    Dynamic     |     Static     |
    |   Collection)  |   Collection)  |      Soul             Fool
    +----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
           Self            Rival      |     Wrong      |     Right      |
                                      |                |                |
                                      |  (Internally   |  (Internally   |
                                      |    Dynamic     |     Static     |
                                      |  Individuals)  |  Individuals)  |
                                      +----------------+----------------+
                                      |   Free Will    |     Fate       |
                                      |                |                |
                                      |  (Externally   |  (Externally   |
                                      |    Dynamic     |     Static     |
          Synnex           Shadow     |   Collection)  |   Collection)  |
    +----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
    |     Choice     |  Determinancy  |   All-Parent      Abomination
    |                |                |
    |  (Externally   |  (Externally   |
    |    Dynamic     |     Static     |
    |  Individuals)  |  Individuals)  |
    +----------------+----------------+
    IEI life seems to be a kind of "high drama", like this contest against a brutal, uncaring environment that has a volition all its own, with the stakes being the human soul. The aim is not to let environmental factors, whether temporary or permanent, control either oneself or a group to the point of damnation.

    Right and wrong don't have to be associated with good or evil; however, a concordant "moral authority" type (like say, MLK or Jesus) will always make this correlation. We are conditioned to correlate right/wrong (or alternatively, correct/incorrect) with good/evil as a factor of this authority.
    Last edited by tcaudilllg; 04-07-2010 at 04:28 AM.

  21. #21
    mikesilb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    198
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hi tcaudilllg,

    As a potential EIE (and hence, the creative function Ni), I am intrigued by the nature of this chart. Can you explain the general scheme of the chart, so I can internally check out how it may apply to certain themes/dichotomies in my life (such as the ones that you include below)? I am debating as to whether I am an EII or an EIE, and this chart (and my personal relationship) may shed some light in terms of this underlying question. If it is too annoying to explain, that is OK too. Thanks in advance!

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    Here's a chart I made of what I believe to be the subcomponents of Beta Ni. (this is Crazedrat's political type chart, in particular).

    Code:
    +----------------+----------------+
    |      Evil      |      Good      |
    |                |                |
    |  (Internally   |  (Internally   |
    |    Dynamic     |     Static     |
    |   Collection)  |   Collection)  |      Soul             Fool
    +----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
           Self            Rival      |     Wrong      |     Right      |
                                      |                |                |
                                      |  (Internally   |  (Internally   |
                                      |    Dynamic     |     Static     |
                                      |  Individuals)  |  Individuals)  |
                                      +----------------+----------------+
                                      |   Free Will    |     Fate       |
                                      |                |                |
                                      |  (Externally   |  (Externally   |
                                      |    Dynamic     |     Static     |
          Synnex           Shadow     |   Collection)  |   Collection)  |
    +----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------+
    |     Choice     |  Determinancy  |   All-Parent      Abomination
    |                |                |
    |  (Externally   |  (Externally   |
    |    Dynamic     |     Static     |
    |  Individuals)  |  Individuals)  |
    +----------------+----------------+
    Mike
    Enneagram: 6w7 so/sx (Tritype: 6w7/9w1/2w3 or 6w7/9w1/3w2)

  22. #22
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Betans have the most partisan ethics (I have subjectively decided that you are the spawn of evil, now prepare to face your trial!)

    Alphans have the most relative ethics (evil? I was just considering the situation from this transcended point of view... Them, evil? Surely they had their reasons.)

    Deltans have the most forgiving ethics (evil? No, we can't determine that from these isolated cases)

    Gammans have the most harsh ethics (it's clear what they did, and we must give them what they've got coming; justice demands it)

    Or something like that.

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mikesilb View Post
    Hi tcaudilllg,

    As a potential EIE (and hence, the creative function Ni), I am intrigued by the nature of this chart. Can you explain the general scheme of the chart, so I can internally check out how it may apply to certain themes/dichotomies in my life (such as the ones that you include below)? I am debating as to whether I am an EII or an EIE, and this chart (and my personal relationship) may shed some light in terms of this underlying question. If it is too annoying to explain, that is OK too. Thanks in advance!
    You should talk to greenantler. She knows the system about as well as I do.

    I've explained the belief element/political type system in the political type theory thread.

  24. #24

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    155
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't embrace the idea that anyone's "evil"..like it's completely pervasive or something. I feel like there's a better part to anyone, and they just need to be woken up. But I would say that I do see wrong acts in a bigger way than just "wrong". I see all kinds of things from one wrong act. If I saw someone I knew who was mean to dogs, then I start seeing a general shittyness about them as potential mates, friends, or parents or something. So for all intents and purposes, I'm seeing "evil" on a general wide character level. I just think it can be corrected.. that they just need some better ideals or something. I don't think they're destined to be that way.

  25. #25
    Currently God Brilliand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Nevada
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    4,246
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaz View Post
    I don't embrace the idea that anyone's "evil"..like it's completely pervasive or something. I feel like there's a better part to anyone, and they just need to be woken up. But I would say that I do see wrong acts in a bigger way than just "wrong". I see all kinds of things from one wrong act. If I saw someone I knew who was mean to dogs, then I start seeing a general shittyness about them as potential mates, friends, or parents or something. So for all intents and purposes, I'm seeing "evil" on a general wide character level. I just think it can be corrected.. that they just need some better ideals or something. I don't think they're destined to be that way.
    Sounds oddly Delta NF... eh... I don't know for sure that that's what it is, but looking back at your type thread, I'd still consider you a variable type. Let's not draw any conclusions from your self-typing as yet.



    LII-Ne

    "Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
    - Blair Houghton

    Johari

  26. #26

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    155
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    heh fair enough

    i mean, if Betas are real conclusive about people's characters and whatnot, then sure, I'm not beta then. i don't believe in cursed monsters like vampires and werewolves. i believe in humans. and as bad as humans can be, they are not cursed. there's even lighter sides to some of the most heinous individuals. which tells me they're only neck deep in shit. not completely submerged in shit.

    not that i'd personally waste my time or anything with these near-hopeless cases though. i'm not stupid i'd still fight people like this if i had to. i i'm just saying that i could see how certain events and ideals could lead to changes in them.

    [edit] eh, offtopic, but if i were to click with another quadra, it'd be alpha. not delta.
    Last edited by Kaze; 04-20-2010 at 09:13 AM.

  27. #27
    Currently God Brilliand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Nevada
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    4,246
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah, okay, I retract my statement that that's related to Delta NF. Whatever your type, it's probably fair to say that not all EIEs believe in good and evil at all, let alone a strict binary.



    LII-Ne

    "Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
    - Blair Houghton

    Johari

  28. #28

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    155
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well it's funny anyways.. you made me start questioning type again, except on a quadra lvl

    Whatever my type/quadra, lets say I can be incensed enough to take action in stomping out or at least getting away from things or people that can't make life easier for others. There's real danger out there..I get a dreadful, omnious feeling about shit sometimes. I'm not like "It's all relative dudes!" "It's all good.." No... But then, I might wonder what the deeper issue is behind these people. I don't think calling it "evil" gets to the bottom of it.
    Last edited by Kaze; 04-20-2010 at 10:10 AM.

  29. #29
    sigma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Romania
    Posts
    641
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    Does Ni discriminate between good and evil behavior, in your view? Or right vs wrong behavior?
    Good vs. Evil and Right vs. Wrong are judgments and as such they can be transcended.

    I prefer to distance myself from those concepts ever since I understood them through the view of Nonviolent Communication.

    I prefer to view people as either connected or disconnected from their needs. Aware vs. Unaware.

    The moral vs. immoral dichotomy remains but has become heavily internalized. People are not moral/immoral per se but rather within my own personal view over morality. Being aware of this highly subjective characteristic prevents me from slipping into a judgmental attitude.
    "What is love?"
    "The total absence of fear," said the Master.
    "What is it we fear?"
    "Love," said the Master.

    I chose Love

  30. #30
    Blaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,725
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    Betans have the most partisan ethics (I have subjectively decided that you are the spawn of evil, now prepare to face your trial!)

    Alphans have the most relative ethics (evil? I was just considering the situation from this transcended point of view... Them, evil? Surely they had their reasons.)

    Deltans have the most forgiving ethics (evil? No, we can't determine that from these isolated cases)

    Gammans have the most harsh ethics (it's clear what they did, and we must give them what they've got coming; justice demands it)

    Or something like that.
    this sounds right.

    ILE

    those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often

  31. #31

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Saugerties,NY
    TIM
    ENFj-fe
    Posts
    947
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There really is no such thing as good and evil, I believe that we don't get judged by God per se; it's more about the irrationality involved in committing crimes against someone else because it always comes back to bite you in the ass. But, my belief is that God is objective and has no concept between the two dichotomies; good and evil is a human construct.
    EIE tritype 5w4, 4w5, 9w1


    As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being.
    Carl Jung, "Memories, Dreams, Reflections", 1962

  32. #32
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    5,989
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaz View Post
    I feel like there's a better part to anyone, and they just need to be woken up. But I would say that I do see wrong acts in a bigger way than just "wrong". I see all kinds of things from one wrong act. If I saw someone I knew who was mean to dogs, then I start seeing a general shittyness about them as potential mates, friends, or parents or something. So for all intents and purposes, I'm seeing "evil" on a general wide character level. I just think it can be corrected.. that they just need some better ideals or something. I don't think they're destined to be that way.
    I pretty much agree with this, or rather the inner me does... the outer me debates these things with myself, but this is what I thought "in the beginning" it's just that I'm not sure about it, so I look elsewhere before going back to it. I guess it can be summed up in that I think there's a good person inside of everyone. For this reason I often think of people as inherently good and that if they're not acting as such then they may be lost. Of course I re-enter the debate with myself when it gets to what the inherently good who otherwise seem "bad" start doing to others. It's generally the whole issue of justice that I find so far irresolvable.

  33. #33
    wants to be a writer. silverchris9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,107
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There is freshness and honesty and inner clarity and... sure, some acts are evil, but they are more evil insofar as they have a negative effect on the soul than anything else. Evil acts can be defined as those which have a negative effect on the soul; good acts can be defined as those which have a positive effect on the soul. This is, of course, a functional definition, not an innate definition or something of the sort. I suppose more factually, evil is not-in-accordance-with-reality and good is in-accordance-with-reality. But since reality is hard to understand, the earlier definition is easier to deal with. So do I judge people as good or bad? I try not to, since I usually don't know them (and the closer you get to someone, the more morally complicated they become, always). But do I think that in some sense, some people simply have healthier souls than others, and that this state of having a healthier soul has real, practical, possibly even supernatural benefits for a human being? Yes, of course, completely so.

    EDIT: also, some other terms for what I mean by healthy might include "self-actualized," "able to activate all their positive potentials" (as opposed to privations), "free," "more fully themselves," "more able to act/instantiate/be themselves," etc.
    Not a rule, just a trend.

    IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.

    Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...

    I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.

  34. #34
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I recently had a chat with a proponent of voluntary human extinction. I am quite persuaded that she is both evil and stupid.

  35. #35
    wants to be a writer. silverchris9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,107
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    I recently had a chat with a proponent of voluntary human extinction. I am quite persuaded that she is both evil and stupid.
    Eh. Depends on how much she actually believed it.
    Not a rule, just a trend.

    IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.

    Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...

    I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.

  36. #36
    Blaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,725
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morcheeba View Post
    There really is no such thing as good and evil, I believe that we don't get judged by God per se; it's more about the irrationality involved in committing crimes against someone else because it always comes back to bite you in the ass. But, my belief is that God is objective and has no concept between the two dichotomies; good and evil is a human construct.
    this. and for political purposes.

    ILE

    those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often

  37. #37
    Nothing in the cage of my ribcage
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,704
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ...I'm thinking that almost every human beings thinks like this... or maybe I am wrong. Anyway, I think that people should stop Socionicizing things so much, because this is just nonsense... you guys are talking about nothing... never coming to a particular conclusion about anything. They create nothing but stereotypes and some agreed-upon subjective-interpretations of something like "Type XXX is like this/thinks like this" or "Yeah that sounds about right." etc. It's like seriously what the hell! This is full of crap. I hate Socionics.

  38. #38
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    Does Ni discriminate between good and evil behavior, in your view? Or right vs wrong behavior?
    No, but it does define them, or at least apprehend them on a visceral level, even if it doesn't always abide by them. Remember, the introverted information cycle goes Si ->Ti -> Ni -> Fi.

  39. #39
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singularity View Post
    ...I'm thinking that almost every human beings thinks like this... or maybe I am wrong.
    You are wrong. Some people support the death penalty, others oppose it.

    Anyway, I think that people should stop Socionicizing things so much, because this is just nonsense... you guys are talking about nothing... never coming to a particular conclusion about anything.
    This sounds like a rehearsed speech which you've given before or seen before. You probably just didn't read very well.
    They create nothing but stereotypes
    Stereotypes are very useful.
    and some agreed-upon subjective-interpretations of something like "Type XXX is like this/thinks like this" or "Yeah that sounds about right." etc.
    If it is agreed upon, it is not entirely subjective
    It's like seriously what the hell! This is full of crap. I hate Socionics.
    Then go away
    .
    INTp

  40. #40
    Nothing in the cage of my ribcage
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,704
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "Then go away"

    lol. Yeah, I probably will. But you didn't really understand my point, maybe because I didn't express myself clearly.

    "You are wrong. Some people support the death penalty, others oppose it."

    I'm talking about the general ways that people reach to the conclusion of what is "moral" and what is not. Obviously, a lot of people contemplate about moral issues. Obviously, people have many different ways of arriving to that conclusion, and the reasons are varied. It could have to do with their upbringing or general life experiences or religion or whatever. It could have to do with certain kind of ideals or rules that they have created within themselves. It could have to do with how they feel about themselves or how they feel about the situation. And so on and so forth... I think that it would require a more... basic, rooted approach to make it relevant to Socionics.

    "Stereotypes are very useful."

    I don't think so.

    "If it is agreed upon, it is not entirely subjective"

    ...what. Then you just have more people who agree with your nonsense. It's like a cult.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •