Reducing People to Intentions

[marooned]

I think the OP is related to both Ni and Fe, but that the significance of Fe in this is huge. I see calling people out on what are seen to be their "underlying motives" (as in the example in the OP) as largely Fe related.

[redbaron]

I think the OP is related to both Ni and Fe, but that the significance of Fe in this is huge. I see calling people out on what are seen to be their "underlying motives" (as in the example in the OP) as largely Fe related.

yes. I think it's sometimes hard to isolate functions in the behavior of any type without looking at what the function is blocked with.

[leckysupport]

yes. I think it's sometimes hard to isolate functions in the behavior of any type without looking at what the function is blocked with.

Yeah, I wouldn't even say reducing people to intentions is Ni and Fe. But I would say that Chris's example was strongly Fe related simply because the intention was defined as a role (i.e. "the hero", "the intellectual", "the funny guy" etc.).

[The Greeter]

This surprises me quite a bit, actually. I tend to reduce people to intentions as well, so to say that it is mostly a Ni+Fe realm seems untrue.

But to me, action is also important.

Actions and intentions can be evaluated separately.

If I may use Rubicon's example: if I observe Rubicon doing the dishes, when nobody else is, I would say she was "good person" due to her actions, regardless of her intention. One should take into account the multitude of actions she could have chosen just to avoid contact with the people in the room, many which involve not being of any help at all. Essentially, I evaluate helping someone as "objectively" good.

After such a comment, if she were to then explain to me that her intentions were not so good, I would simply state that at least the course of action she chose is "noble", even though she may be "subjectively not good".

But in order to evaluate a person's character holistically, both the subjective and objective must be taken into consideration. But one can always comment on instances, just as the aforementioned EII did.

[Exodus]

I think the OP is related to both Ni and Fe, but that the significance of Fe in this is huge. I see calling people out on what are seen to be their "underlying motives" (as in the example in the OP) as largely Fe related.

Definitely, this is more than . ESEs and SEIs do this a lot too, in particular characterizing actions as an expression of someone's motivations. Like "so and so just did that because ..." As an LII I am very conservative about judging what people's motivations are.