Quote Originally Posted by Lord Pixel View Post
I know you were trying to sort of get me to choose between the 2. And I'm saying these descriptions are a mixture of MBTI INFP and INFJ so I relate to both because I mostly relate to MBTI INFP anyway.

Function wise tho I do not relate to Ni first, Ne ignoring, Fe, And Se suggestive.
4. Altruism as an ideological component of the EGO program of Dostoevsky.

Thus, the EII's goodwill and niceness are not unlimited. Altruism, as any other psychological function, has a certain purpose and limits (its own limit of environmental expediency and viability). It cannot be directed against the carrier of this program and threaten his own survival or undermine his own well-being. An "altruist" won't give up the last crumbs of sustenance; he won't share something of which he has very little because this will make him vulnerable and nonviable. There is a limit to self-sacrifice for any person. This limit is regulated not only on conscious level but subconscious level as well, on the level of the most basic instinctive and psychological programs. Thus an altruist can share only that which he has in excess, or that which he is able to acquire in excess from others, making them work towards some output and then stimulating them towards unlimited self-sacrifice.

Altruism, as the ideological component of the evolutionary ethics of relations of Dostoevsky (+Fi), is quite rational and does not contradict the pragmatism of these types, but to the contrary makes it even easier to accept and partake in it. It is a popular role model for imitation: representatives of this dyad readily get involved in various charitable activities, in organization of which the EII has no equal among other types. The EII, like no one else, knows how to entice people to the most extreme (and transcendent) concessions, motivating them to give up the most needed and necessary, especially if he has promised such concessions to someone else on their behalf. Those who agree to make a contribution will comply and obey their "guarantor" not wanting to disappoint him and put him in an "awkward position." And this is one of the reasons why Dostoevsky is considered to be the Auditor/Supervisor of the entire Socion: he can allow himself any sort of coercion against anyone, he can control and direct of actions of others against their will ("work over their head"), meanwhile positively framing his intents thereby safeguarding himself from criticism and being completely convinced of his own infallibility and rightness.

The LSE, of course, is not put off by all these "ethical capabilities" of Dostoyevsky. In everyday matters, the altruistic program of EII (+Fi) very adequately combines with the program of "heightened pragmatism" of LSE (+Te) – with his aspirations to constantly increase the technical potential, to improve the process of production, to perform the job with maximum output, methodically and with high quality (+Te) in critically short periods of time (-Ni).
https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...Stratiyevskaya