Originally Posted by
Galen
I get that, but what I'm trying to ask is what makes something wrong when we can't even really establish what being "morally wrong" means in the first place?
"Wrong" means "that which one regards with disgust / disdain / disapproval / negative sentiment," "Right" means "that which one regards with approval / acceptance / delight / positive sentiment," and "Moral" means "that which one consistently regards with disgust / disdain / disapproval / negative sentiment or approval / acceptance / delight / positive sentiment." Therefore "Morally Wrong" means "that which one consistently regards with disgust / disdain / disapproval / negative sentiment."
Originally Posted by
Galen
Instead I propose when coming to judgments regarding some objectionable act that one turns the focus back onto themselves, where "what you did was wrong" becomes "what you did pissed me off."
And that's why you're not an IEE. Get out of Delta you fucking greaseball ILE. I know your kind, and I "regard them with disgust." Consistently.
But forealz, all you're really suggesting is a change in the use of language, as "what you did was wrong" means or equals "that which pissed me off," and in this case, "that which pissed me off" means or equals "that which I regard with disgust / disdain / disapproval / negative sentiment." I wonder, though, if "that which pissed me off" means or equals "that which I regard with disgust / disdain / disapproval / negative sentiment" in all cases.
Anwyay, I truly think that you at least value Fe rather than Fi. Look at the evidence: in an online forum dedicated to a Communist Bloc brand of Jungian Case Analysis, you took the time to make a topic wherein, thus far, you've argued for the existence of Moral Relativism not vehemently, but with an undeniable vigor. Furthermore, you suggested that humankind stop using the word "wrong" to name "that which pisses me off". Makes me think of a young, benevolently devious (but devious nevertheless saith the Fi) ILE writing catty ditties that mock his classmates, or creating a pinewood derby car in the shape of a dildo (and still winning), or going to a Halloween party dressed as Superman saying he's me-dressed-as-Superman - basically, using his "Extraverted Intuition" and his "Introverted Logic" to establish himself in the social context - only to get repeatedly flogged by an Fi-valuing moral Inquisitor.
Seriously though, do you realize that "that which pisses me off" means or equals "that which causes me to experience anger," and that "that which causes me to experience anger" means or equals "that which causes me to experience a negative emotion," and that according to a body of theories popularly known as "socionics," "negative emotions" are "consistently regarded with disgust" by a whimsical group of geniuses and socialites called the Alpha Quadra? Do you realize that "Extraverted Feeling" means "external dynamics of fields" and that "Introverted Logic" means "internal statics of fields"? Do you understand that the introverted thinker seeks the extraverted feeler because he sees the field - he sees the relationship between his behavior and peoples' emotional responses - but that he can't predict with certainty what impact his actions will have on others?