Population density is what encourages :Fi:

[1981slater]

In my opinion, introverted functions have a better understanding of phenomena than their extroverted counterparts.

good understanding of nature / bad understanding of people
bad understanding of nature / good understanding of people

good understanding of emotions / bad understanding of business
bad understanding of emotions / good understanding of business

has a worse understanding of nature than
has a worse understanding of people than
has a worse understanding of business than
has a worse understanding of emotions than

In the past, people had to deal with lots of hard-to-explain natural phenomena. That's why people were really useful. Besides, population density was low and their duals had to create links with other tribes as quickly as possible. / people were virtually useless and didn't reproduce much. Only the most attractive, perhaps.

Modern life involves living with thousands of people around. people (unable to understand natural phenomena) became now useful, as they can understand people quickly. Besides, there is no need of understanding nature. In order to thrive, people have to think about making business (). That's how schizoid people () became useful.

Today, / people represent a small % in the population, as having those ego functios won't probably help you thrive in highly populated cities.

/ people work in groups. In the past, it paid off to cooperate with others.
/ people are individualists. It pays off to be selfish in the 21 st century

[1981slater]

Any feedback?

[FDG]

Any feedback?

What about types? They're usually good at understanding natural phenomena.

[consentingadult]

Although I do not have an answer to the relationship between population density and Fi, I do think the following is dead wrong:

/ people work in groups. In the past, it paid off to cooperate with others.
/ people are individualists. It pays off to be selfish in the 21 st century

Both combinations of Ti+Fe and Te+Fi are capable of cooperation, only the way they go about it is different. Ti+Fe is more all-encompassing, i.e. within a group of people it covers all of the social domain, involving a lot of social dynamics, especially social pressure mechanisms that strive to make people conform and thus be inclusive.

With Te+Fi, cooperation is much more voluntary based, but behavior is also more critically assessed. No one is asking you to conform, but if you do not show the appropriate behaviors, you are not granted access to the group.

Sociologically speaking, the emergence of (individualistic) Fi+Te societies in the Western World is the result from the rise of a bourgeois stratum in an otherwise feudal society. This rise, which also included the development of a bourgeois ethics that ideal-typically banned the use of force from human relations and replaced it with the ethics of meritocracy, was indeed first observed in highly populated areas of Europe, such as Northern Italy and the Low Countries. As to Northern Italy, I do not know what came first: high population density or a capitalist-bourgeois social structure. But for the Low Countries, a major factor of their rise was the population surplus in the late Middle Ages (so more a matter of over-population instead of high population density), which could be made productive with early capitalist economic structures. Protestant-Capitalist ethics (Fi+Te) was invented to rationalize such an economic social structure and to give the feudal social organization of society a bad name (so nowadays everyone believes that e.g. slavery is a bad thing, not realizing that such believes are just social knowledge constructs).

Ultimately this led to the Enlightenment, which de facto ended the feudal era and started the Modern(ist) Era. However, the Modern Era give rise to the new stratum of the Proletariat, which by these days have risen economically on the social ladder, but not so much culturally (Fi-wise, in the sense of being capable of showing capacity for developing self-restraint). The current economic crisis we are in, is the final transition from the Modern Era to the Post-Modern Era, in which the descendants of the Proletariat become the dominant cultural force at the "expense" of the middle class bourgeois. This selfish 21st century society you are talking about, will, imho, not be dominated by Te+Fi (a thing of the past), but by Fe+Ti. This will probably be a more Alpha kind of Fe+Ti than a Beta type of Fe+Ti, because there will not be much room for Se-like attitudes (yes, the Western World are becoming softies!)

Unless of course, shit will hit the fan for some reason and history will branch off into another direction.

[1981slater]

What about types? They're usually good at understanding natural phenomena.

have a better understanding of nature than , FMPOV

have a better understanding of nature than , FMPOV for instance

That's why I focus on the rational functions, which build models according to what they get from irrational functions.... By the way....

perceives reality, the scenario we are dealing with
perceives alternate scenarios related to the one we are dealing with
perceives the most problable outcome of the present situation (cooperates with )
perceives how the visions of could be implemented

[1981slater]

Although I do not have an answer to the relationship between population density and Fi, I do think the following is dead wrong:



Both combinations of Ti+Fe and Te+Fi are capable of cooperation, only the way they go about it is different. Ti+Fe is more all-encompassing, i.e. within a group of people it covers all of the social domain, involving a lot of social dynamics, especially social pressure mechanisms that strive to make people conform and thus be inclusive.

With Te+Fi, cooperation is much more voluntary based, but behavior is also more critically assessed. No one is asking you to conform, but if you do not show the appropriate behaviors, you are not granted access to the group.

Sociologically speaking, the emergence of (individualistic) Fi+Te societies in the Western World is the result from the rise of a bourgeois stratum in an otherwise feudal society. This rise, which also included the development of a bourgeois ethics that ideal-typically banned the use of force from human relations and replaced it with the ethics of meritocracy, was indeed first observed in highly populated areas of Europe, such as Northern Italy and the Low Countries. As to Northern Italy, I do not know what came first: high population density or a capitalist-bourgeois social structure. But for the Low Countries, a major factor of their rise was the population surplus in the late Middle Ages (so more a matter of over-population instead of high population density), which could be made productive with early capitalist economic structures. Protestant-Capitalist ethics (Fi+Te) was invented to rationalize such an economic social structure and to give the feudal social organization of society a bad name (so nowadays everyone believes that e.g. slavery is a bad thing, not realizing that such believes are just social knowledge constructs).

Ultimately this led to the Enlightenment, which de facto ended the feudal era and started the Modern(ist) Era. However, the Modern Era give rise to the new stratum of the Proletariat, which by these days have risen economically on the social ladder, but not so much culturally (Fi-wise, in the sense of being capable of showing capacity for developing self-restraint). The current economic crisis we are in, is the final transition from the Modern Era to the Post-Modern Era, in which the descendants of the Proletariat become the dominant cultural force at the "expense" of the middle class bourgeois. This selfish 21st century society you are talking about, will, imho, not be dominated by Te+Fi (a thing of the past), but by Fe+Ti. This will probably be a more Alpha kind of Fe+Ti than a Beta type of Fe+Ti, because there will not be much room for Se-like attitudes (yes, the Western World are becoming softies!)

Unless of course, shit will hit the fan for some reason and history will branch off into another direction.

Thanks for the input. It is really interesting

[1981slater]

I think that, as you say, there will not be much room for attitudes (beta , macho man behaviour etc) but gamma is different, as it consists of "acquiring wealth".

[1981slater]

have a better understanding of nature than , FMPOV

have a better understanding of nature than , FMPOV for instance

That's why I focus on the rational functions, which build models according to what they get from irrational functions.... By the way....

perceives reality, the scenario we are dealing with
perceives alternate scenarios related to the one we are dealing with
perceives the most problable outcome of the present situation (cooperates with )
perceives how the visions of could be implemented

In this sense, reminds me of Robert Axelrod's exploration and reminds me of Axelrod's exploitation

[1981slater]

says to "help me explore"
says to "help me exploit"

[1981slater]

to explore = to try new things
to exploit = to do what works

Or perhaps I am wrong and explores and exploits, whereas exploits and explores or viceversa. I don't know

[1981slater]

I will return to the main point. would work better in cities, and in rural areas

[FDG]

I will return to the main point. would work better in cities, and in rural areas

Really I don't think this is true...think about Delta Te-Fi, very "rural" in feel.

[Pookie]

I will return to the main point. would work better in cities, and in rural areas

I believe the decisive has been linked to excelling in a primal society(Think tribes and dawn of the planet of the apes) where application of force and probabilty of outcome are necessities for maintaining the status quo/ acquiring strategic goals. Whereas judicious has excels in communities more akin to today's societies. More people packed in together, too many people to figure probabilities(because you meet too many people you don't know) and readily applying force to get your way will cause problems amongst strangers, arising enmity and resentment and such. Whereas Ne and Si really find a home in society with Ne carving new paths and ideas in a seemingly endless world of opportunity, and Si finding ways for application as well as knowing how to make the right type of affect on others for a desired outcome. Where Se has strong impact, Si has knowledge on the subtleties of affect.

Now with that said, i want to juxtapose the ideas about conjunct and disjunct; parallel and perpindicular. Democratics - Parallel / Aristocratics - Perpindicular. Decisive - Conjunct / Judicious - Disjunct.
All of these are supposedly in relation to the path of society as a whole.
Gamma is the most akin to society's direction, which makes sense to me as they are the most concerned with material success.
Delta is the most removed from society's direction, even going so far as removing themselves from the commotion. Hence the farmlife stereotype.
Beta has to intersect with society's direction, but moves the opposite way. Bringing life to the idea that they are the revolution quadra.
Alpha is in their own little bubble, but still going along with the flow of common life. I.E. Homemakers, Strategists, and Visionaries.
___________
Those are alot of notes, and im not going to tie them altogether but here's a more direct response to the OP.

I think what you attribute to Fi, is classically attributed to Ne/Si. And that out of each of the three most important dichotomies(Merry/Serious, Judicious/Decisive. Aristocratic/Democratic), i believe that Merry/Serious is the one that is the most removed from Society's influence. As, the two different Fi quadras are on opposite ends, classically, in regards to how they operate in society.

But nonetheless its a good topic of discussion and i enjoyed your post.

[1981slater]

Really I don't think this is true...think about Delta Te-Fi, very "rural" in feel.

Perhaps you are right...then rural delta / beta...urban alpha/gamma?

[1981slater]

I believe the decisive has been linked to excelling in a primal society(Think tribes and dawn of the planet of the apes) where application of force and probabilty of outcome are necessities for maintaining the status quo/ acquiring strategic goals. Whereas judicious has excels in communities more akin to today's societies. More people packed in together, too many people to figure probabilities(because you meet too many people you don't know) and readily applying force to get your way will cause problems amongst strangers, arising enmity and resentment and such. Whereas Ne and Si really find a home in society with Ne carving new paths and ideas in a seemingly endless world of opportunity, and Si finding ways for application as well as knowing how to make the right type of affect on others for a desired outcome. Where Se has strong impact, Si has knowledge on the subtleties of affect.

Now with that said, i want to juxtapose the ideas about conjunct and disjunct; parallel and perpindicular. Democratics - Parallel / Aristocratics - Perpindicular. Decisive - Conjunct / Judicious - Disjunct.
All of these are supposedly in relation to the path of society as a whole.
Gamma is the most akin to society's direction, which makes sense to me as they are the most concerned with material success.
Delta is the most removed from society's direction, even going so far as removing themselves from the commotion. Hence the farmlife stereotype.
Beta has to intersect with society's direction, but moves the opposite way. Bringing life to the idea that they are the revolution quadra.
Alpha is in their own little bubble, but still going along with the flow of common life. I.E. Homemakers, Strategists, and Visionaries.
___________
Those are alot of notes, and im not going to tie them altogether but here's a more direct response to the OP.

I think what you attribute to Fi, is classically attributed to Ne/Si. And that out of each of the three most important dichotomies(Merry/Serious, Judicious/Decisive. Aristocratic/Democratic), i believe that Merry/Serious is the one that is the most removed from Society's influence. As, the two different Fi quadras are on opposite ends, classically, in regards to how they operate in society.

But nonetheless its a good topic of discussion and i enjoyed your post.

Betas do "apply force", but they do in a "visible", "non-subtle" way.
Gammas do also apply force, but in a "covert" way.
They probably do so because they see the world as a "zero-sum" game.