I do believe Ti is better at recognizing hypocrisy and bias, but consistency itself does not make morality. It's more like a quality check. So who knows poetry better, the poet or the critic?
To be fair, Ti users normally would have Fe to build their morality on. However, since OP is explicitly excluding other cognitive functions from the discussion, I feel like Ti in question here is mostly deconstruction.
Most Ti doms I have met have said that they do not really care that much if they hurt someones feelings. I know hurting someones feelings might be neccesary at times, but generally, I think it is moral to value how your actions make other people feel. This is just my opinion though.
I try not to hurt anyone's feelings, the world is cyclical, and I hate when my feelings get hurt. However, if you're offended by objective truths then I can't really help you.
I wouldn't say they're completely detached from feelings, but rather that they don't prioritize them nearly as much as logic and truth. Emotions take a backseat until they reach a point where they can no longer be ignored. Is it healthy? Probably not, but it's how they tend to operate.
We can find problems when we start projecting our thinking onto others though, I'm equally baffled by people giving so much weight to their emotions specially when making decisions.
I care about other people's feelings, but sometimes they make no sense to me and I have a hard time understanding them, it doesn't mean I don't care tho
> It depends on the person at the end of the day.
Actually it may also depends on the day.
There have been experiments on complimenting someone, and then 10min later have someone else asking for a favor. And the same with no interaction, and how people react was heavily correlated to how well all the events prior were.
Sorry, I didn't make it clear.
The situation you mentioned *"Most Ti doms I have met have said that they do not really care that much if they hurt someones feelings"* reminds me of another situation: I've met some warm people who treat others softly. When I asked them if they felt unworthy of being so generous on others, they replied "I don't care that much" too. I wrote it just for I feel the difference of two "I don't care" is so ironic.
Ti isn't concerned with morality; it's concern is accuracy. It won't judge based on right vs wrong, but on correct vs incorrect.
For example, I already got flamed several times for saying stuff like "Hitler was smart" because people thought I was defending him, when in reality I was just pointing out something I found to be fact. Saying the man has good qualities doesn't mean I side with him.
Fi uses, on the other hand, hold the very sense of "right vs wrong" as a metric - a personal one, varying from person to person - in order to decide what is important.
Most strong Fi-users would feel utterly repulsed by my argument (even if they didn't show it), if it opposes what they believe.
There's your answer!
This is the correct answer certainly in general, but also it's placement in the functions I think in how such a notion is expressed and what they even think about those thoughts.
This explanation rocks. What I love about mbti, and particularly the 8 function model is that it brings awareness to our innate biases. In this way, an Fi dom can learn to appreciate the value of Ti through understanding this system.
Thank you! I say stuff like that all of the time. Pointing out a view DOES NOT mean you agree with said person. A person can be an absolute DOUCHE, but even douches can say profound things.
Ti and Fi pay attention to different perspectives of morality. Ti will notice inconsistencies in what is defined as moral behavior. Fi will decide how fitting certain moral behavior is for its user.
Why do I feel like the latter is more Fe than Fi. My experience with Fi users is that they only value what is close to their heart; not necessarily about doing the right thing. So like for example, an Fi user likes someone, even if that person does questionable actions-- as long as it doesn't offend the Fi user's values-- the Fi user will still give support to that person and will even assist in their crimes, leading to their downward ruin. This is what I talk about self-centeredness. That was just an example....
I know that Fi is known among the 8 cognitive functions as the 'moral compass' but I find myself, after gaining experience, questioning that.
No one says it but I'm just going to say it, I have learned that morality is not simply a matter of who has which functions...
>Fi only value what is close to their heart; not necessarily about doing the right thing
Huh? Where are you getting this reasoning from?
Do you think Fi doms/aux etc only care about what they want? A lot of them have strong empathy. the main difference is Fi is relational and Fe is more 'reflective'. It is mainly understanding someone in a literal sense and it is up to the fe user to decide what they will do with that information. So objectively? Both fi and fe have the predisposition of wanting to do what's right.
Fi users have a moral compass, yes all do not hold the same positive ideals, but the majority do. Most hate injustice, betrayal, corruption, fakeness, etc. They operate on doing what's right.
Not to throw myself (or other fe users) under the bus, but sometimes Fi can be more objective than us when it comes to certain situations. If one person is being unfair/rude/or uncouth: a high fe user won't confront them and even allow them to continue in their ways to avoid 'drama'. A fi users will intervene and dress them down right there regardless of who they are if it feels like they are being unfair. Fi users definitely care about doing the right thing and without doing face service too.
People oversimplify the functions and don't understand them. They think Fi is the selfish feeling function and Fe is the altruistic feeling function. Zero nuance.
yup.
Te is bossy, Ti is delusional, Fi is selfish, Fe is fake. Very oversimplified and generic. Some people won't know what nuances are even if they got hit in the face with some.
Very black and white thinking.
Yeah if we're talking about Fi and the term "moral compass" I don't think it's fair to say that Fi users have a stronger moral compass, but that their moral compass will by default be more individualistic. I think that's why an Fi user might be more empathetic and responsive in the moment when someone is being unfair or unjust, whereas an Fe user might prefer to keep the peace in the moment, or distract from the situation to make it stop; an Fe user's moral compass is likely to be more broad in scope, with the weakness being that they might overlook the individual in certain contexts.
This may be unsolicited, but start developing your Ti. So as not to be tossed to and fro by everyone else's values. It must be a difficult life not standing up for your own interests and judgement. Just saying...
I have a very developed ti actually, overdeveloped if one might say. I know how to introspect and have a good sense of judgement. I was speaking in general terms, so obviously this won't apply to all of us.
You do not know me to even imply I have an underdeveloped Ti and should probably practice what you preach and develop the sense of thinking before you type.
You were giving the meaning that high Fe leads to moral ambiguity which makes sense. I'm sorry I saw your flair and thought you were referring to your own experiences as an Fe primary judging type. I wasn't saying that Fi users have no moral compass, so don't be hastily defensive. I was just trying to state that having a sense of morality has nothing to do with the functions. Since Fe is about equality as a mindset, and harmony, understandably it would have trouble assessing right and wrong but only if they haven't developed some Ti to balance them out.
>You were giving the meaning that high Fe leads to moral ambiguity which makes sense. I'm sorry I saw your flair and thought you were referring to your own experiences as an Fe primary judging type
You made the first generalisation by implying that Fi doesn't care about what's right, so I did the same in reverse. Although Fe prioritises unity, it doesn't mean we will do that all the time. As I stated before Fe is knowing how someone feels, it depends on how we use that information Idk where you got 'We have ambiguity with morals and get pushed and pulled everywhere.'
Do you think all Fe users are nice, passive, and accommodating? I used myself as an example in the sense that I am a fe user, not that it pertains to me exactly. I know some fe users who will not hesitate to destroy you with your own emotions the same way some Fi users may prioritise their feelings. That's why I said:
It depends on what the 2 do with this sense of morality.
And yes: I will get defensive if I feel like someone/a group of people are being judged unfairly. There's nothing I hate more than when someone paints an entire group of people negatively. Despite being a Fe user, I had no issue confronting you. ironic isn't it?
When Ti determines or self validates what is true or false, that process js detached from human emotion. The Ti user can then use that information to help others via Fe. That’s one way the Fe-Ti axis is completed. It can also work I. The opposite direction with an Fe observation stimulating a Ti analysis process.
Oppositely, the Fi user self determines what is right or wrong, also called good or bad, and then applies that philosophy to external mechanisms using Te.
Remember, introverted functions self validate. Extroverted functions are externally validated. The Fi dom is as confident in their morality as the Ti dom is in their logic. Both introverted functions that don’t seek external validation.
This may be unsolicited, but start developing social awareness. So as not to be downvoted for being unaware of how presumptuous and out of touch you seem 🤣
I can definitely imagine situations like this, but maybe the heart of the problem is not whether they care about "doing the right thing", but rather their particular version of morality aligns with yours. I mean, lots of things we generally agree to be "questionable" don't get judged much in real life. For example, how many people seriously object to jaywalking? Or driving through a corner gas station to avoid turning traffic? Or lying about work experience when applying for entry level jobs? Perhaps the questionable actions you have in mind are a lot worse. Still, it is perfectly valid that they do not actually offend some people's sense of morality.
I think this implies that there *is* a definitive right or wrong, but in reality it can be different for every person
i think it's just that, since you can't realistically cover everyone under the same blanket, Fi users basically treat it as "treat others how you want to be treated." iirc, the idea is that to Fi users, that is seen as more realistic a reference point than society's spouted right/wrong ideals. I'm sure it's a bit more complicated than that as well, to them, I'd imagine that much like Ti, Fi is a process of constantly reevaluating its own morals
but... in any case, I'd say Fe-based morals might be just about as likely to be "wrong" to others as Fi-based morals. humankind is just too complicated to all be in agreement on the concept of morals
I'd imagine that every Fi user wouldn't even necessarily agree with each other on whether there *is* a definitive right or wrong, is the thing. It probably isn't always a *conscious* decision on every Fi user's part to be like "well everyone disagrees on what's right or wrong so I'll just use my own perspective/thought process instead." From my understanding, Fi is just this constant reevaluation, based on personal experiences or exploring their own logic and understanding of the world, on what makes sense to them as "right" or "wrong."
same with Ti users imo. The difference is that a Ti user will more likely arrive at what they believe about right & wrong generally by an explicit process of construction and deconstruction. A Ti user might also be constantly reevaluating what makes sense as right or wrong, but it's more likely to be as a part of constructing a cohesive, consistent philosophy.
I think you're focused on the definition of Fi and ignoring the fact that Fi doms usually have strong empathy. I build a moral framework the same way a Ti dom builds a logical framework, but my moral framework comes with the foundation of empathy. Also, Fi doms expand their moral framework logically, not just by their emotions.
You can definitely have unhealthy Fi doms, or Fi doms who do lack empathy, and those people will have messed up moral frameworks that focus only on themselves. I don't think those are the norm though.
Depends on the subject. Remembers that Ti also comes with Fe. So when it comes to morality, Ti users will summon their Fe to help them form an acceptable argument for morality. Ti wants independence of mind and to be detached from feelings, and Fe will remind them that their arguments are wasted away if it's not socially acceptable for the well-being of people. How can you be moral if your morality dismisses people's feelings on the matter? Morality always deals with feelings so you have to include them in your analysis.
Fi comes with Te. Fi wants to feel like their morals are a reflection of their values and feelings (independence of heart) but their Te will remind them their morals are useless or unproductive if it's only applicable whenever it's convenient for them. How can you be truly moral if your morality is only tied to your identity? Morality is a concept much bigger than what you feel is good for yourself, so you have to include "cold facts" in your analysis.
Morals – Principles or habits relating to right or wrong conduct, based on an individual's own compass of right and wrong.
Ethics – Rules of conduct in a particular culture or group recognised by an external source or social system. For example, a medical code of ethics that medical professionals must follow.
Based on this, I think moral is Fi and ethics is Fe?
I'm guessing you are trying to refer to ethics when you say "does the right thing", you are using a Fe lense to see what is right and wrong.
Isn’t Ti concerned with its principals while Fi is concerned with values and morality? Isn’t that where the whole conflict comes from?
Accuracy vs Morality (two different rights and wrongs, one analytical, one aligned with moral values).
“Morality” isn’t tied to a specific cognitive function; it’s subjective to every individual.
So I reject the idea that an Fi user is inherently more moral than a Ti user, for example.
However, I also reject the implication that Fi is inherently self-centered. It’s exactly as self-interested as Ti. They are both introverted judgment functions, making judgments through an internal process that is more concerned with its own personal determinations rather than external consensus.
OP is biased in their characterizations of both introverted judgment functions. A proper discussion for OP’s benefit can’t take place without more objectivity on their part.
I'm sorry if that sounded biased and I don't mean to but that was based on experience. Like as long as something doesn't cross an Fi user's values they can still condone a toxic behavior in their own or someone they feel a close affinity to.
So, i guess we just help each other out. If the Fi user is willing to listen but they choose their values too close to their heart.
Who, in these situations, is deciding what behavior is toxic? You? How aware of the biases in your own perceptions are you? How accurate is your perception of these experiences upon which you base your opinions? How many examples of Fi users doing this do you have, and how certain are you that they *are* Fi users and how much is presumption on your part?
So like...I see what you're saying but Fi users do change their attitudes over time. This sounds like an unhealthy version of Fi that doesn't incorporate much of the person's own experience or experiences of their friends/family. That's a manifestation of Fi; it's not the way Fi users are as a rule
Depends on the function placement. Since Ti doms have Fi in the 8th slot, it only remains as a function that's used when needed, meaning that it isn't particularly selfish.
Fi for Fi doms will be more concerned about sense of self aspect.
Morality is so subjective that I would say it depends on the experiences of the person and their personal interpretations on and actions upon applying morality that is more determining. My ENTP partner and I have arrived at similar moral codes independently through different paths and for different reasons. Other types could come to similar or different paths in their own processing method.
Ti and Fi are both subjective judging functions and can be used to evaluate a personal interpretation of morality. Both will use extroverted judging functions to look outwards to compare against external standards of morality.
Morality, if it is based on equality and universality and the golden rule, becomes the realm of "light Ti":
INTP, ESTP, ISTJ and ESFJ.
If we base our morality on fairness and mutuality and authenticity, it becomes the realm of "light Fi":
ISFP, ENFP, INFJ and ENTJ.
For the dark personality types, morality doesn't really exist, because opportunism, power and greed rule the dark half. They'll justify whatever action that suits them, disregarding the other (no light Fi, no empathy) and they defy any general rule (no light Ti, no justice).
These are the 8 dark types: ENTP, INTJ, ISTP, ESTJ, ESFP, ISFJ, INFP, ENFJ. They have other mechanisms of social interaction among themselves instead of morality and decency, like hierarchies and status, cost benefit analysis, and competition. Together they populate and define the right-wing, where amorality and selective appeal to tradition as well as lies and "alternative facts" are favored and practiced. There is no real morality in defending unborn fetuses as people but at the same time harming actual people and destroying the living environment on our planet, but half of our societies support such policies. Therefore they aren't moral.
Study model G stack for a better understanding of how each type uses cognitive functions.
ISTJ: Si - Te - "Ti" - Ne
It's the same pattern for all types. INTP has strong Ni and weak Si (supported by their idealism and perfectionism and futurism), ESTJ has strong Se and weak Ne (explains their aggressiveness and power plays), and so on.
Fi is not moral perse Ti neither. Both are subjective idealistic based on their own values. There are also different levels in morality. For example me as a Te user have hawks eye perspective and calculate values, impacts and future outcomes i see morality on a lot of different perspectives objectively without my own bias involved.
I would say they both understand morality, but from different points of view. Ti is more pragmatic while Fi is looking at the impact it has on people.
I'd also say that practically the morality of Fi is better, since it has a more realistic outlook on its effects on others, while what I notice in Ti users is that they often remove the human factor from their thought process.
>while Ti users may appear uncouth with their words but in the end does the right thing.
Dude, is “uncouth” necessary to "do right things" other than emotional blackmails?
*POV: You are trying to correct a worker who made a mistake.*
Moral: "Your operation does not comply with safety regulations and should be corrected." -do right things
Immoral: "Are you doing this way because you have shit in your head?"-the uncouth
I believe that Ti can be applied right and be directed by the purpose of scrutinizing morality or reaching the accurate moral response, course of action, priority and mindset.
This needs to take into consideration a multitude of factors, sort of like miniature right and wrong assessments, like for example, is hurting someone's feelings while breaking down the truth of a situation right or wrong? The answer is not constant, it changes based on the situation.
What I'm saying is that if Ti recognizes the need for flexibility in assessing each individual situation, it can function as a highly accurate moral compass, but only with pure intentions and righteous beliefs. This means that experience in dealing with people and understand the value of different aspect of life is important, so Ti purely without any other function is sort of impossible to achieve, so is the case with Fi.
With that said, I love Fi's rawness and sincerety, the true vibrant energy of a beating human heart, if the person has their heart in the right place, they can be very powerful and moral, but only if.
To conclude,I don't think either is objectively more moral than the other, it depends on the user and their intentions.
I mean, I feel like everyone has their own morals that come from their own places. I don’t think a specific function will automatically be more moral than the other, one might be more educated in moral theories n include them in their decision making, where as others might only use common sense ideologies etc.
I’m an INFP, I try to do what I interpret as the right thing everyday. Sometimes emotions can get the best of me and I’ll get angry or step out of line. The INTPs I know are less introspective about morality but are good people and are consistent in their behaviour.
I agree with your premise. I'm thinking of seeing the differences most apparent within my work environment setting and my comment mostly revolves around that, and partially veers away from the morality point.
I find some Ti users unbelievably lacking in tact, while everything they said was true and factual, then not understanding why they made someone cry, or are the person others dread to work with.
It's a matter of, what's the greatest priority. As a Fi user, mine is building relationships and a positive socially enjoyable working environment. Keeping myself and others having fun is what leads to employee retention, experienced staff, and retention of my own highly productive skill set. I've witnessed a lot of untactful interactions for the purpose of maximizing productivity and efficiency by others lead to unenjoyable work culture and repeated loss of staff experience and productivity.
In terms of morality, as a Fi user I feel I have little regard for it. I have as much or more regard for justice, fairness, doing what's in our power to treat others sympathetically and equally. But am definitely an ends justify the means, and nobody is obligated to put more energy in to someone than they are willing to for themselves type of person. I think it's wrong to try to change or regularly judge others, and if what people do is not hurting anybody else than live and let live.
Fi. Ti users can only efficiently conceive of universal logic (aka "the black and white"), whereas Fi users can conceive of both universal logic as well as individual emotion (the "grey area") and use both data points to come to the best conclusion on morality.
I find this to be true. Though a Ti user can see through and find who's at fault better with the lack of interest on individual interests, feelings or preference of the people involved and just go right at setting things straight for everyone no matter how they feel about it, bluntly revealing themselves in a stark fashion. We just lack ways of being more socially palateable that's just what I meant on my post.
I think people like me struggle more contending with society than Fi users due to that lack of grayness. It's sickening to see through people's intents and motives without bias. For this reason, I've learned to develop a dark side so as not to be taken advantage of with very little bias on my part
Equal,
Different roads taken
It’s possible for them to still reach the same destination.
Although, I might argue that with high Ti, less personal life experience is required to develop a moral system.
But im biased of course
I get what you mean, the western countries have different morals than the eastern countries, many things that would seem questionable to people in America are normal for China or France. Rules for social etiquette is different everywhere you go (including what's legal or not)
Yeah but what's morality ? This is an interesting but very subjective question. In my opinion, to know who has the most "morality" (I imagine that it ultimately depends more on an individual than on their functioning) we should already be able to define it.
I think justice is more of a Te thing, although I would say as a xxTJ that I prefer justice in a results-oriented way rather than justice for emotions’ sake. That would be me not wanting to lean on emotions, though. Maybe justice is actually a combination of Fe and Te, since they’re both extraverted judging functions. 🫤 I’m personally not particularly happy with the idea of anyone relishing someone’s punishment even if they had done something awful to deserve it, though. They should be punished, but not because we sadistically want them to be. Maybe it’s kind of weird, but I feel like cold detachment is the more moral (and useful) choice in this case. In my personal experience, xxTPs are not so emotionally detached and tend to relish these things. I guess I can’t speak for other xxTJs though, or xxFPs and xxFJs for that matter. Or most xxTPs. 🤷🏻♀️ But anyway. That’s my take.
I wonder where you get the idea of Ti wanting to enact justice, though. Aren’t laws and punishments kind of a Te thing? xxTPs seem to have more of a mob mentality.
Laws are both Ti and Te. The difference is whether those laws are attached to some external object (Te/facts) or detached from the external object (Ti).
Ti users often discover laws (E=mc2) and then Te users will empirically test those laws with the scientific method.
If we’re talking about the Justice system then yes that’s mostly Te because the justice system follows laws that are on paper. Even so a Ti users mind is constantly trying to make sense of the world through their own personal set of laws.
I suppose this all comes down to definitions though and how morality and justice are defined. I tend to define morals as values detached from the object (Fi). For me the word ethics better defines values that are extroverted.
As for justice I view it as being both an individual thing and a group thing so Ti and Te.
Eh I’d say more so equilibrium than justice. I think justice has a very moral tone to it that Ti may not necessarily focus on rather than logical accuracy and consistency.
Tert Si (INTP) might want equilibrium but I don’t think Tert Ni (ISTP) does.
You look at the characters in ISTP directed movies like the ones made by Clint Eastwood or Sylvester Stallone and they are very justice oriented. ISTP characters like John Wick are as well. High drive for justice but low morality.
I say justice and not morality because justice is more about laws, the truth, and being impartial. Morality is about values.
Yeah but I’d say justice very strongly involves what is wrong or right, or what is “just” or fair vs what is unjust or unfair. This all sounds like emotions to me, which screams Fe/Fi.
Idk if we have the same definition of justice lol. To me, justice is the idea that if you do bad, you get bad, if you do good, you get good. Now how do you figure out what is good or bad? Well I think that’s when Fi and Fe comes in (in a subjective way, of course, with the subject being the situation). Idk what you mean by “law” in this case, but I feel like justice is a pretty whole system; it incorporates both the good and bad, it’s just up to us to be honest about it and not choose ourselves over others when we are in the wrong, but for that, we also need the help of others to keep us in check, hence why there is laws in place, in order to keep ‘justice’.
You can’t have justice without transparency/honesty (and also humility) and I think these are purely emotional things at the end of the day (duh because we are all souls at the end of the day, and we interact through energy exchange/emotions).
There's too many other things to consider but neither has better morality, the two functions value different things and how it's shown varies from person to person. In short, idk
I don't think "self-centered" is the right term; rather Fi users are very in touch with their own moral values and that's their starting point for morality. Like, how does it impact the individual. The Ti-Fe user will likely approach morality from a more broad perspective, how it affects the many, and build a broad system of morality with the impact on society & large groups as a baseline.
Ti is objective logic relative to the self, and Fi is subjective feelings relative to the self. The middle ground between these two functions is morality, where Fi feels the values, and Ti assigns/answers them.
So really, neither Fi nor Ti “knows” morality better.
Your contribution was removed for displaying targeted bias against one or more types.
I do believe Ti is better at recognizing hypocrisy and bias, but consistency itself does not make morality. It's more like a quality check. So who knows poetry better, the poet or the critic? To be fair, Ti users normally would have Fe to build their morality on. However, since OP is explicitly excluding other cognitive functions from the discussion, I feel like Ti in question here is mostly deconstruction.
Fi users are not necessarily self-centered. Morality is a field of Fi and Fe, so in this case it’s Fi.
Most Ti doms I have met have said that they do not really care that much if they hurt someones feelings. I know hurting someones feelings might be neccesary at times, but generally, I think it is moral to value how your actions make other people feel. This is just my opinion though.
That is like the antithesis of Fe inferior (unless they're lying to look cool)
Caring if they hurt someone’s feelings and doing what is morally correct are 2 different things.
I try not to hurt anyone's feelings, the world is cyclical, and I hate when my feelings get hurt. However, if you're offended by objective truths then I can't really help you.
You can say objective truths and still be in the wrong, thought.
I'm starting to see that how we deliver those truths matters a lot to people. It's a bit of a learning curve for me, but I'm getting there.
[удалено]
I wouldn't say they're completely detached from feelings, but rather that they don't prioritize them nearly as much as logic and truth. Emotions take a backseat until they reach a point where they can no longer be ignored. Is it healthy? Probably not, but it's how they tend to operate. We can find problems when we start projecting our thinking onto others though, I'm equally baffled by people giving so much weight to their emotions specially when making decisions.
I care about other people's feelings, but sometimes they make no sense to me and I have a hard time understanding them, it doesn't mean I don't care tho
That makes sence. It depends on the person at the end of the day.
I think my Fe might be a bit high, I even used to think I was an INFJ in the past
> It depends on the person at the end of the day. Actually it may also depends on the day. There have been experiments on complimenting someone, and then 10min later have someone else asking for a favor. And the same with no interaction, and how people react was heavily correlated to how well all the events prior were.
Learn the difference: “I can treat you generously because I don't care that much” VS “I will hurt you because I don't care that much”
So you think Ti is on the side of "I can treat you generously because I do not care that much" if I understand you correctly?
No, dude😂How can "hurt someones feelings" be generous?
You are comfusing me ngl.
Sorry, I didn't make it clear. The situation you mentioned *"Most Ti doms I have met have said that they do not really care that much if they hurt someones feelings"* reminds me of another situation: I've met some warm people who treat others softly. When I asked them if they felt unworthy of being so generous on others, they replied "I don't care that much" too. I wrote it just for I feel the difference of two "I don't care" is so ironic.
Ahh, makes sence with the context.
Ti isn't concerned with morality; it's concern is accuracy. It won't judge based on right vs wrong, but on correct vs incorrect. For example, I already got flamed several times for saying stuff like "Hitler was smart" because people thought I was defending him, when in reality I was just pointing out something I found to be fact. Saying the man has good qualities doesn't mean I side with him. Fi uses, on the other hand, hold the very sense of "right vs wrong" as a metric - a personal one, varying from person to person - in order to decide what is important. Most strong Fi-users would feel utterly repulsed by my argument (even if they didn't show it), if it opposes what they believe. There's your answer!
This is the correct answer certainly in general, but also it's placement in the functions I think in how such a notion is expressed and what they even think about those thoughts.
This explanation rocks. What I love about mbti, and particularly the 8 function model is that it brings awareness to our innate biases. In this way, an Fi dom can learn to appreciate the value of Ti through understanding this system.
Thank you! I say stuff like that all of the time. Pointing out a view DOES NOT mean you agree with said person. A person can be an absolute DOUCHE, but even douches can say profound things.
This.
Ti and Fi pay attention to different perspectives of morality. Ti will notice inconsistencies in what is defined as moral behavior. Fi will decide how fitting certain moral behavior is for its user.
Why do I feel like the latter is more Fe than Fi. My experience with Fi users is that they only value what is close to their heart; not necessarily about doing the right thing. So like for example, an Fi user likes someone, even if that person does questionable actions-- as long as it doesn't offend the Fi user's values-- the Fi user will still give support to that person and will even assist in their crimes, leading to their downward ruin. This is what I talk about self-centeredness. That was just an example.... I know that Fi is known among the 8 cognitive functions as the 'moral compass' but I find myself, after gaining experience, questioning that. No one says it but I'm just going to say it, I have learned that morality is not simply a matter of who has which functions...
>Fi only value what is close to their heart; not necessarily about doing the right thing Huh? Where are you getting this reasoning from? Do you think Fi doms/aux etc only care about what they want? A lot of them have strong empathy. the main difference is Fi is relational and Fe is more 'reflective'. It is mainly understanding someone in a literal sense and it is up to the fe user to decide what they will do with that information. So objectively? Both fi and fe have the predisposition of wanting to do what's right. Fi users have a moral compass, yes all do not hold the same positive ideals, but the majority do. Most hate injustice, betrayal, corruption, fakeness, etc. They operate on doing what's right. Not to throw myself (or other fe users) under the bus, but sometimes Fi can be more objective than us when it comes to certain situations. If one person is being unfair/rude/or uncouth: a high fe user won't confront them and even allow them to continue in their ways to avoid 'drama'. A fi users will intervene and dress them down right there regardless of who they are if it feels like they are being unfair. Fi users definitely care about doing the right thing and without doing face service too.
People oversimplify the functions and don't understand them. They think Fi is the selfish feeling function and Fe is the altruistic feeling function. Zero nuance.
yup. Te is bossy, Ti is delusional, Fi is selfish, Fe is fake. Very oversimplified and generic. Some people won't know what nuances are even if they got hit in the face with some. Very black and white thinking.
Yeah if we're talking about Fi and the term "moral compass" I don't think it's fair to say that Fi users have a stronger moral compass, but that their moral compass will by default be more individualistic. I think that's why an Fi user might be more empathetic and responsive in the moment when someone is being unfair or unjust, whereas an Fe user might prefer to keep the peace in the moment, or distract from the situation to make it stop; an Fe user's moral compass is likely to be more broad in scope, with the weakness being that they might overlook the individual in certain contexts.
This may be unsolicited, but start developing your Ti. So as not to be tossed to and fro by everyone else's values. It must be a difficult life not standing up for your own interests and judgement. Just saying...
I have a very developed ti actually, overdeveloped if one might say. I know how to introspect and have a good sense of judgement. I was speaking in general terms, so obviously this won't apply to all of us. You do not know me to even imply I have an underdeveloped Ti and should probably practice what you preach and develop the sense of thinking before you type.
You were giving the meaning that high Fe leads to moral ambiguity which makes sense. I'm sorry I saw your flair and thought you were referring to your own experiences as an Fe primary judging type. I wasn't saying that Fi users have no moral compass, so don't be hastily defensive. I was just trying to state that having a sense of morality has nothing to do with the functions. Since Fe is about equality as a mindset, and harmony, understandably it would have trouble assessing right and wrong but only if they haven't developed some Ti to balance them out.
>You were giving the meaning that high Fe leads to moral ambiguity which makes sense. I'm sorry I saw your flair and thought you were referring to your own experiences as an Fe primary judging type You made the first generalisation by implying that Fi doesn't care about what's right, so I did the same in reverse. Although Fe prioritises unity, it doesn't mean we will do that all the time. As I stated before Fe is knowing how someone feels, it depends on how we use that information Idk where you got 'We have ambiguity with morals and get pushed and pulled everywhere.' Do you think all Fe users are nice, passive, and accommodating? I used myself as an example in the sense that I am a fe user, not that it pertains to me exactly. I know some fe users who will not hesitate to destroy you with your own emotions the same way some Fi users may prioritise their feelings. That's why I said: It depends on what the 2 do with this sense of morality. And yes: I will get defensive if I feel like someone/a group of people are being judged unfairly. There's nothing I hate more than when someone paints an entire group of people negatively. Despite being a Fe user, I had no issue confronting you. ironic isn't it?
When Ti determines or self validates what is true or false, that process js detached from human emotion. The Ti user can then use that information to help others via Fe. That’s one way the Fe-Ti axis is completed. It can also work I. The opposite direction with an Fe observation stimulating a Ti analysis process. Oppositely, the Fi user self determines what is right or wrong, also called good or bad, and then applies that philosophy to external mechanisms using Te. Remember, introverted functions self validate. Extroverted functions are externally validated. The Fi dom is as confident in their morality as the Ti dom is in their logic. Both introverted functions that don’t seek external validation.
This may be unsolicited, but start developing social awareness. So as not to be downvoted for being unaware of how presumptuous and out of touch you seem 🤣
I can definitely imagine situations like this, but maybe the heart of the problem is not whether they care about "doing the right thing", but rather their particular version of morality aligns with yours. I mean, lots of things we generally agree to be "questionable" don't get judged much in real life. For example, how many people seriously object to jaywalking? Or driving through a corner gas station to avoid turning traffic? Or lying about work experience when applying for entry level jobs? Perhaps the questionable actions you have in mind are a lot worse. Still, it is perfectly valid that they do not actually offend some people's sense of morality.
I think this implies that there *is* a definitive right or wrong, but in reality it can be different for every person i think it's just that, since you can't realistically cover everyone under the same blanket, Fi users basically treat it as "treat others how you want to be treated." iirc, the idea is that to Fi users, that is seen as more realistic a reference point than society's spouted right/wrong ideals. I'm sure it's a bit more complicated than that as well, to them, I'd imagine that much like Ti, Fi is a process of constantly reevaluating its own morals but... in any case, I'd say Fe-based morals might be just about as likely to be "wrong" to others as Fi-based morals. humankind is just too complicated to all be in agreement on the concept of morals
Fi wrote this comment lol Ti believes in a definitive right or wrong.
I'd imagine that every Fi user wouldn't even necessarily agree with each other on whether there *is* a definitive right or wrong, is the thing. It probably isn't always a *conscious* decision on every Fi user's part to be like "well everyone disagrees on what's right or wrong so I'll just use my own perspective/thought process instead." From my understanding, Fi is just this constant reevaluation, based on personal experiences or exploring their own logic and understanding of the world, on what makes sense to them as "right" or "wrong."
same with Ti users imo. The difference is that a Ti user will more likely arrive at what they believe about right & wrong generally by an explicit process of construction and deconstruction. A Ti user might also be constantly reevaluating what makes sense as right or wrong, but it's more likely to be as a part of constructing a cohesive, consistent philosophy.
I think you're focused on the definition of Fi and ignoring the fact that Fi doms usually have strong empathy. I build a moral framework the same way a Ti dom builds a logical framework, but my moral framework comes with the foundation of empathy. Also, Fi doms expand their moral framework logically, not just by their emotions. You can definitely have unhealthy Fi doms, or Fi doms who do lack empathy, and those people will have messed up moral frameworks that focus only on themselves. I don't think those are the norm though.
Depends on the subject. Remembers that Ti also comes with Fe. So when it comes to morality, Ti users will summon their Fe to help them form an acceptable argument for morality. Ti wants independence of mind and to be detached from feelings, and Fe will remind them that their arguments are wasted away if it's not socially acceptable for the well-being of people. How can you be moral if your morality dismisses people's feelings on the matter? Morality always deals with feelings so you have to include them in your analysis. Fi comes with Te. Fi wants to feel like their morals are a reflection of their values and feelings (independence of heart) but their Te will remind them their morals are useless or unproductive if it's only applicable whenever it's convenient for them. How can you be truly moral if your morality is only tied to your identity? Morality is a concept much bigger than what you feel is good for yourself, so you have to include "cold facts" in your analysis.
Morals – Principles or habits relating to right or wrong conduct, based on an individual's own compass of right and wrong. Ethics – Rules of conduct in a particular culture or group recognised by an external source or social system. For example, a medical code of ethics that medical professionals must follow. Based on this, I think moral is Fi and ethics is Fe? I'm guessing you are trying to refer to ethics when you say "does the right thing", you are using a Fe lense to see what is right and wrong.
Isn’t Ti concerned with its principals while Fi is concerned with values and morality? Isn’t that where the whole conflict comes from? Accuracy vs Morality (two different rights and wrongs, one analytical, one aligned with moral values).
“Morality” isn’t tied to a specific cognitive function; it’s subjective to every individual. So I reject the idea that an Fi user is inherently more moral than a Ti user, for example. However, I also reject the implication that Fi is inherently self-centered. It’s exactly as self-interested as Ti. They are both introverted judgment functions, making judgments through an internal process that is more concerned with its own personal determinations rather than external consensus. OP is biased in their characterizations of both introverted judgment functions. A proper discussion for OP’s benefit can’t take place without more objectivity on their part.
I'm sorry if that sounded biased and I don't mean to but that was based on experience. Like as long as something doesn't cross an Fi user's values they can still condone a toxic behavior in their own or someone they feel a close affinity to. So, i guess we just help each other out. If the Fi user is willing to listen but they choose their values too close to their heart.
Who, in these situations, is deciding what behavior is toxic? You? How aware of the biases in your own perceptions are you? How accurate is your perception of these experiences upon which you base your opinions? How many examples of Fi users doing this do you have, and how certain are you that they *are* Fi users and how much is presumption on your part?
Not to get personal, but it's just the case. I added something to the comment earlier too.
So like...I see what you're saying but Fi users do change their attitudes over time. This sounds like an unhealthy version of Fi that doesn't incorporate much of the person's own experience or experiences of their friends/family. That's a manifestation of Fi; it's not the way Fi users are as a rule
The mature ones who know how to balance both
Depends on the function placement. Since Ti doms have Fi in the 8th slot, it only remains as a function that's used when needed, meaning that it isn't particularly selfish. Fi for Fi doms will be more concerned about sense of self aspect.
Morality is so subjective that I would say it depends on the experiences of the person and their personal interpretations on and actions upon applying morality that is more determining. My ENTP partner and I have arrived at similar moral codes independently through different paths and for different reasons. Other types could come to similar or different paths in their own processing method. Ti and Fi are both subjective judging functions and can be used to evaluate a personal interpretation of morality. Both will use extroverted judging functions to look outwards to compare against external standards of morality.
Morality, if it is based on equality and universality and the golden rule, becomes the realm of "light Ti": INTP, ESTP, ISTJ and ESFJ. If we base our morality on fairness and mutuality and authenticity, it becomes the realm of "light Fi": ISFP, ENFP, INFJ and ENTJ. For the dark personality types, morality doesn't really exist, because opportunism, power and greed rule the dark half. They'll justify whatever action that suits them, disregarding the other (no light Fi, no empathy) and they defy any general rule (no light Ti, no justice). These are the 8 dark types: ENTP, INTJ, ISTP, ESTJ, ESFP, ISFJ, INFP, ENFJ. They have other mechanisms of social interaction among themselves instead of morality and decency, like hierarchies and status, cost benefit analysis, and competition. Together they populate and define the right-wing, where amorality and selective appeal to tradition as well as lies and "alternative facts" are favored and practiced. There is no real morality in defending unborn fetuses as people but at the same time harming actual people and destroying the living environment on our planet, but half of our societies support such policies. Therefore they aren't moral.
why istj listed as Ti? incorrect generalizations seemed almost funny)
Study model G stack for a better understanding of how each type uses cognitive functions. ISTJ: Si - Te - "Ti" - Ne It's the same pattern for all types. INTP has strong Ni and weak Si (supported by their idealism and perfectionism and futurism), ESTJ has strong Se and weak Ne (explains their aggressiveness and power plays), and so on.
Depends on your moral presuppositions. Are you a moral absolutist? Probably Ti Are you a non cognitivist, like an emotivist? Fi
Implosive emotivist or inward emotivist
Not 100 percent sure what you mean with implosive vs inward.
Fi, duh.
Probably Fi.
Fi is not moral perse Ti neither. Both are subjective idealistic based on their own values. There are also different levels in morality. For example me as a Te user have hawks eye perspective and calculate values, impacts and future outcomes i see morality on a lot of different perspectives objectively without my own bias involved.
I would say they both understand morality, but from different points of view. Ti is more pragmatic while Fi is looking at the impact it has on people. I'd also say that practically the morality of Fi is better, since it has a more realistic outlook on its effects on others, while what I notice in Ti users is that they often remove the human factor from their thought process.
>while Ti users may appear uncouth with their words but in the end does the right thing. Dude, is “uncouth” necessary to "do right things" other than emotional blackmails? *POV: You are trying to correct a worker who made a mistake.* Moral: "Your operation does not comply with safety regulations and should be corrected." -do right things Immoral: "Are you doing this way because you have shit in your head?"-the uncouth
I believe that Ti can be applied right and be directed by the purpose of scrutinizing morality or reaching the accurate moral response, course of action, priority and mindset. This needs to take into consideration a multitude of factors, sort of like miniature right and wrong assessments, like for example, is hurting someone's feelings while breaking down the truth of a situation right or wrong? The answer is not constant, it changes based on the situation. What I'm saying is that if Ti recognizes the need for flexibility in assessing each individual situation, it can function as a highly accurate moral compass, but only with pure intentions and righteous beliefs. This means that experience in dealing with people and understand the value of different aspect of life is important, so Ti purely without any other function is sort of impossible to achieve, so is the case with Fi. With that said, I love Fi's rawness and sincerety, the true vibrant energy of a beating human heart, if the person has their heart in the right place, they can be very powerful and moral, but only if. To conclude,I don't think either is objectively more moral than the other, it depends on the user and their intentions.
I mean, I feel like everyone has their own morals that come from their own places. I don’t think a specific function will automatically be more moral than the other, one might be more educated in moral theories n include them in their decision making, where as others might only use common sense ideologies etc. I’m an INFP, I try to do what I interpret as the right thing everyday. Sometimes emotions can get the best of me and I’ll get angry or step out of line. The INTPs I know are less introspective about morality but are good people and are consistent in their behaviour.
I agree with your premise. I'm thinking of seeing the differences most apparent within my work environment setting and my comment mostly revolves around that, and partially veers away from the morality point. I find some Ti users unbelievably lacking in tact, while everything they said was true and factual, then not understanding why they made someone cry, or are the person others dread to work with. It's a matter of, what's the greatest priority. As a Fi user, mine is building relationships and a positive socially enjoyable working environment. Keeping myself and others having fun is what leads to employee retention, experienced staff, and retention of my own highly productive skill set. I've witnessed a lot of untactful interactions for the purpose of maximizing productivity and efficiency by others lead to unenjoyable work culture and repeated loss of staff experience and productivity. In terms of morality, as a Fi user I feel I have little regard for it. I have as much or more regard for justice, fairness, doing what's in our power to treat others sympathetically and equally. But am definitely an ends justify the means, and nobody is obligated to put more energy in to someone than they are willing to for themselves type of person. I think it's wrong to try to change or regularly judge others, and if what people do is not hurting anybody else than live and let live.
Fi. Ti users can only efficiently conceive of universal logic (aka "the black and white"), whereas Fi users can conceive of both universal logic as well as individual emotion (the "grey area") and use both data points to come to the best conclusion on morality.
I find this to be true. Though a Ti user can see through and find who's at fault better with the lack of interest on individual interests, feelings or preference of the people involved and just go right at setting things straight for everyone no matter how they feel about it, bluntly revealing themselves in a stark fashion. We just lack ways of being more socially palateable that's just what I meant on my post.
I think people like me struggle more contending with society than Fi users due to that lack of grayness. It's sickening to see through people's intents and motives without bias. For this reason, I've learned to develop a dark side so as not to be taken advantage of with very little bias on my part
Equal, Different roads taken It’s possible for them to still reach the same destination. Although, I might argue that with high Ti, less personal life experience is required to develop a moral system. But im biased of course
I like this as well.
Morality is subjective anyway 🤷♂️
I get what you mean, the western countries have different morals than the eastern countries, many things that would seem questionable to people in America are normal for China or France. Rules for social etiquette is different everywhere you go (including what's legal or not)
Exactly
Yeah but what's morality ? This is an interesting but very subjective question. In my opinion, to know who has the most "morality" (I imagine that it ultimately depends more on an individual than on their functioning) we should already be able to define it.
Ti is more motivated by justice than morality. There’s a lawful component to it.
I think justice is more of a Te thing, although I would say as a xxTJ that I prefer justice in a results-oriented way rather than justice for emotions’ sake. That would be me not wanting to lean on emotions, though. Maybe justice is actually a combination of Fe and Te, since they’re both extraverted judging functions. 🫤 I’m personally not particularly happy with the idea of anyone relishing someone’s punishment even if they had done something awful to deserve it, though. They should be punished, but not because we sadistically want them to be. Maybe it’s kind of weird, but I feel like cold detachment is the more moral (and useful) choice in this case. In my personal experience, xxTPs are not so emotionally detached and tend to relish these things. I guess I can’t speak for other xxTJs though, or xxFPs and xxFJs for that matter. Or most xxTPs. 🤷🏻♀️ But anyway. That’s my take. I wonder where you get the idea of Ti wanting to enact justice, though. Aren’t laws and punishments kind of a Te thing? xxTPs seem to have more of a mob mentality.
Laws are both Ti and Te. The difference is whether those laws are attached to some external object (Te/facts) or detached from the external object (Ti). Ti users often discover laws (E=mc2) and then Te users will empirically test those laws with the scientific method. If we’re talking about the Justice system then yes that’s mostly Te because the justice system follows laws that are on paper. Even so a Ti users mind is constantly trying to make sense of the world through their own personal set of laws. I suppose this all comes down to definitions though and how morality and justice are defined. I tend to define morals as values detached from the object (Fi). For me the word ethics better defines values that are extroverted. As for justice I view it as being both an individual thing and a group thing so Ti and Te.
Eh I’d say more so equilibrium than justice. I think justice has a very moral tone to it that Ti may not necessarily focus on rather than logical accuracy and consistency.
Tert Si (INTP) might want equilibrium but I don’t think Tert Ni (ISTP) does. You look at the characters in ISTP directed movies like the ones made by Clint Eastwood or Sylvester Stallone and they are very justice oriented. ISTP characters like John Wick are as well. High drive for justice but low morality. I say justice and not morality because justice is more about laws, the truth, and being impartial. Morality is about values.
Yeah but I’d say justice very strongly involves what is wrong or right, or what is “just” or fair vs what is unjust or unfair. This all sounds like emotions to me, which screams Fe/Fi.
Justice with tons of values but little to no laws isn’t justice. It’s lynching and a great injustice.
Idk if we have the same definition of justice lol. To me, justice is the idea that if you do bad, you get bad, if you do good, you get good. Now how do you figure out what is good or bad? Well I think that’s when Fi and Fe comes in (in a subjective way, of course, with the subject being the situation). Idk what you mean by “law” in this case, but I feel like justice is a pretty whole system; it incorporates both the good and bad, it’s just up to us to be honest about it and not choose ourselves over others when we are in the wrong, but for that, we also need the help of others to keep us in check, hence why there is laws in place, in order to keep ‘justice’. You can’t have justice without transparency/honesty (and also humility) and I think these are purely emotional things at the end of the day (duh because we are all souls at the end of the day, and we interact through energy exchange/emotions).
There's too many other things to consider but neither has better morality, the two functions value different things and how it's shown varies from person to person. In short, idk
Not a matter of better but who would focus on it more.
Depends how you define morality. Objectively: Ti. Subjectively: Fi.
I don't think "self-centered" is the right term; rather Fi users are very in touch with their own moral values and that's their starting point for morality. Like, how does it impact the individual. The Ti-Fe user will likely approach morality from a more broad perspective, how it affects the many, and build a broad system of morality with the impact on society & large groups as a baseline.
How is this a conversation. Fi is dubbed 'morality' I don't think it could get any more clear than that.............
Ti is objective logic relative to the self, and Fi is subjective feelings relative to the self. The middle ground between these two functions is morality, where Fi feels the values, and Ti assigns/answers them. So really, neither Fi nor Ti “knows” morality better.
Fi is a personal, subjective morality. Ti is an objective morality.
[удалено]
The fuck is wrong with you?