Ethics vs. Logic and Man

[perpetuus]

Thread title was cut short. It should have read "Ethics vs. Logic and Manipulation"

Ethical types are said to be more vulnerable to logical manipulation; logical types are said to be more vulnerable to ethical manipulation.

Can someone better explain this and perhaps offer some concrete and/or hypothetical examples of/reasons for how and why said manipulations might occur? Generally, just a better explanation would be appreciated.

I placed this in this particular subforum because I am considering this dichotomy as I try to pinpoint my own type.

[Tigerfadder]

I think that logical manipulation is putting someone in a spot, maybe a work position, where you find it beneficial. Ethnical when you use right and wrongs and other ethnical reasonings to get what you want.

[Sanguine Miasma]

Let's see.
When it comes to bases you should give them swift help for the task. They also like to learn it.
base. Well, give them clear logic which will give them much needed clarity.
bases are addicted to strong emotionality.
bases need to know what is ethically right and how to treat others.


Ethical mobilizing types:

They need it well to get a little distance for their creative and and get re-energized by it.

Clear and precise aim. Some description make xLI sound like they might be bit "corruptible" when treated nicely.
xLE need some ethical emotive energy to continue.

xEI? They need clear explanations to phenomena it it not all conclusive just something that applies to situation.

xEE? Something that they should do? To feel important? Maybe.

[Tallmo]

I think this is just one of the main pillars of socionics. That people have super-id functions that are receptive.

[Wavebury]

I always thought ethical manipulation concerned people, logical types are easily influenced by what we normally call manipulation, that is emotional manipulation. Ethical types are easier to convince in terms of ideas and arguments formulated by logical types, ethical types are more likely to succumb to a logical partners' ideas and objective arguments on a topic. I would say that means ethical types are easier to brainwash, whereas logical types are easier to manipulate emotionally.

@Toynbee if you are asking about finding your own type, actually I think it's best to type by strengths. If you can influence people through logical argumentation then you are logical, if you use persuasion, you are more likely ethical. Both might cites facts and logic, but ethical types are trying to persuade people into causes, goals, activities, etc, logical types to criticize and expose what is objectively right and wrong in their view (be it methods, arguments, etc) .

Aushra Augusta, the founder of socionics said that a person can, through their strong functions, both influence others and use the information for themselves, whereas with your weak functions you can use the information for yourself but not infleunce others and society. I think this theory is legit.

[perpetuus]

I always thought ethical manipulation concerned people, logical types are easily influenced by what we normally call manipulation, that is emotional manipulation. Ethical types are easier to convince in terms of ideas and arguments formulated by logical types, ethical types are more likely to succumb to a logical partners' ideas and objective arguments on a topic. I would say that means ethical types are easier to brainwash, whereas logical types are easier to manipulate emotionally.

@Toynbee if you are asking about finding your own type, actually I think it's best to type by strengths. If you can influence people through logical argumentation then you are logical, if you use persuasion, you are more likely ethical. Both might cites facts and logic, but ethical types are trying to persuade people into causes, goals, activities, etc, logical types to criticize and expose what is objectively right and wrong in their view (be it methods, arguments, etc) .

Aushra Augusta, the founder of socionics said that a person can, through their strong functions, both influence others and use the information for themselves, whereas with your weak functions you can use the information for yourself but not infleunce others and society. I think this theory is legit.

If we're talking about how I best influence and manipulate others (keep in mind I don't use the word manipulation in a negative connotation here), I think it's going to be very obvious both to myself and people who know me that logic will usually trump ethics. I can make pretty good if/then statements/reasonings to people in making my case. When it comes to appealing to people's ethics and/or emotions, I'm at a disadvantage and it's a tactic I would shy away from using.

[Bertrand]

manipulation in all kinds flows from wanting to be a good/logical person but being unsure of yourself so allowing others to influence you in those areas you're receptive to feedback on. whether or not you're "manipulated" in a good or bad way depends on the person (good manipulation is just called help). when receiving desired feedback on a function it doesn't feel like manipulation it feels like someone is helping you direct your actions in a way you agree with. "how to manipulate others" necessarily flows from what you're good at and what other people want. you can't fool all of the people all of the time. you can force people to do things if you trap them, but usually that comes as a wolf in wolf's clothing. not only that you can't force all of the people all of the time, people can always form a coalition and overthrow you no matter how strong or clever you think you are

[Sol]

Base Te are easier than average to get something from them if you show sympathy to them, will do something good to them, if you are polite.
Base Ti when you show admiration, praise them, show flattery - they take it as sincere actions more than average.
Other T types have same, but in lesser degree. There are nuances in F which T types are harder to notice and hence they are easier manipulated by emotions. T types are not emotional, so when you was able to touch them - they are well disarmed.

Base Fi - easier trust to direct information and opinions like it's correct without good checking and doubts. Also they are the most conformistic types for people they personally like.
Base Fe - easier trust to explanations. Also they highly trust to formal statuses. Unlike Fi, Fe are highly conformistic for those with certificates, degrees, formal ranks and occupations - they respect opinions of their boss.
These types are harder to notice weak places in all this T stuff.

[Bertrand]

give me a massage

[Exodus]

Base Te are easier than average to get something from them if you show sympathy to them, will do something good to them, if you are polite.
Base Ti when you show admiration, praise them, show flattery - they take it as sincere actions more than average.
Other T types have same, but in lesser degree. There are nuances in F which T types are harder to notice and hence they are easier manipulated by emotions. T types are not emotional, so when you was able to touch them - they are well disarmed.

Base Fi - easier trust to direct information and opinions like it's correct without good checking and doubts. Also they are the most conformistic types for people they personally like.
Base Fe - easier trust to explanations. Also they highly trust to formal statuses. Unlike Fi, Fe are highly conformistic for those with certificates, degrees, formal ranks and occupations - they respect opinions of their boss.
These types are harder to notice weak places in all this T stuff.

One of those rare occasions when I can agree with you. Good post.

[Adam Strange]

Because logical types are good at logic so they can detect bad logic but are weak[er] in ethics so they are more likely to get swayed by bad ethical reasoning and vice-versa.

Very true for me. I can see gaps in logic in a heartbeat, but I totally suck at knowing how the things I say will affect people's feelings.

[Sol]

One of those rare occasions when I can agree with you. Good post.

banal classical theory

[perpetuus]

give me a massage

What’s in it for me?

Because logical types are good at logic so they can detect bad logic but are weak[er] in ethics so they are more likely to get swayed by bad ethical reasoning and vice-versa.

Very true for me. I can see gaps in logic in a heartbeat, but I totally suck at knowing how the things I say will affect people's feelings.

This seems to be a running theme in my life.

[Bertrand]

haha nothing since you don't want Fi and are good on Ne, I just wanted to bring in the perceiving base types into the discussion