Ideology of Fe...

[Satya]

I struggle to understand the thinking of the ideological and religious. I really do. It isn't based on reason. It isn't based on values. It isn't based on virtue. It isn't based on happiness or any real philosophical precept. Over the course of every debate I have ever had with ideological and religious thinkers, I have approached it from every one of those angles. They may supplement their beliefs with those aspects, but the actual core of their beliefs has nothing to do with them. I've come to the conclusion that it is mindless groupthink. When Fe is taken to the extreme and people do everything they can to minimize conflict by establishing a set of social norms that they feel must be adhered to at all costs in order to maintain the harmony of the group, then you get the distortions of ideological thinking. Consensus is derived without critical thinking, analyzing, or evaluating. Take this recent story for example...

Martin Ssempa, who pastors the evangelical Makerere Community Church in Kampala, has become the face of Uganda's anti-homosexuality movement. He has organized anti-gay rallies. He preaches that many homosexuals are pedophiles who deserve severe punishment, and he wants to ensure that "sodomy and homosexuality never sees the light of legality in this land of the people of Africa."

"This is sick, and it is therefore deviant," he told a large church crowd. "We do not want it."
He even shows hard-core gay pornography in churches and conferences — images that, critics say, whip up sentiment against gay men and lesbians.

"Martin Ssempa makes no bones about going around to churches, to community centers, to different neighborhoods and saying things like gays and lesbians should be put in prison, they should be killed," says Michael Jones, a gay-rights activist in the U.S. who has been following Ssempa's activities.

Uganda's Anti-Homosexuality Bill — which criminalizes homosexual practice — is working its way through the legislature. President Yoweri Museveni has asked the authors to "soften" the bill — but that hasn't happened yet. Among other things, the bill imposes the death penalty for gay sex with a minor, or having sex with your gay partner if you are HIV-positive. Two consenting adults can get life in prison. A straight person who knows someone is gay, and doesn't report it, could get prison time as well.

So why does Canyon Ridge Christian Church in Las Vegas — a megachurch with some 6,000 congregants each week — financially support Ssempa?

Kevin Odor, the senior pastor there, says Ssempa has been "misrepresented."

"His heart is not to kill people," Odor says. "He is a pastor of the Gospel that believes in redemption and his heart is to redeem people."

Odor says Canyon Ridge began supporting Ssempa's huge campus ministry, which preaches abstinence to college students, in 2007. Odor says he does not "personally" endorse the death penalty or life sentences for gay men and lesbians. Asked why he would support someone who does, he sighs.

"We want to help the AIDS problem in Africa, and we found somebody who is making a difference," he says. "So we support him."
Odor says in March — after Canyon Ridge leaders talked to Ssempa — the Ugandan minister reversed himself and now says he favors removing the death penalty from the bill, though he still wants to criminalize homosexuality. As recently as February, Ssempa told a television interviewer: "If you do not want the death penalty for pedophiles, what punishment do you want otherwise?"
Ssempa's turnaround satisfied Odor, and he sees no reason to condemn the minister. Nor does he think he should denounce the Anti-Homosexuality Bill.

"Why do we, as a church in America, need to say something about a bill in Uganda?" he asks.

"They're engaging in Ugandan politics whether they like it or not," says Jones, the gay-rights activist. "Calling Martin Ssempa, who is one of the foremost religious and political figures in Uganda, a strategic partner is automatically engaging in Ugandan politics. There's just no way around that."

Odor says his church has "a heart" for homosexuals. He notes that Canyon Ridge participates every year in a march for people with AIDS, and for the past two years the church opened its campus for HIV Testing Day.

"We love everybody, including people with AIDS," he says. "There are two things: how you got AIDS and that you have AIDS. That you have AIDS is a matter of compassion. The church should be compassionate for people with AIDS."

Warren Throckmorton, a professor at the evangelical Grove City College in Grove City, Pa., says Odor is trying to have it both ways.
"What we have here is a church that wants to be viewed as moderate and outreach-minded and compassionate, and yet they're supporting a set of values and principles elsewhere that are very harsh and deadly, frankly, to the very community you say you want to reach," he says. "If you preach compassion here, you have to support compassion elsewhere."

On Friday, the Southern Nevada Health District severed its ties with the church, saying it was "profoundly concerned" about the relationship with Ssempa. For his part, Odor says the church is only trying to help people with AIDS — and because of that, he says, "we are being crucified."

Where is the critical thinking? Where is the analysis? Where is the evaluation? What evidence do they provide that this preacher is "helping" with the AIDs epidemic? What values are being served here? Is this the value of family and tradition? What virtues are being served by showing hardcore pornography in churches and community centers? How does stirring up anger and resentment serve that virtue? How is this increasing anyone's happiness or serving any greater good?

The reality is that this is ideological thinking. This is the product of unrestrained Fe. This is why I so desperately call on NFJs to use that other judging function that they have in their possession. And yet I'm often met with resentment for doing so. Why? Because group identity is more important to you than humanity. You are willing to aid in the increase in the suffering of the world or stand idly by, simply to protect the cohesiveness of the group.

Perhaps my charges are unfounded or I am overgeneralizing, but try to see yourselves as I have come to see you. INFJs are known as the Protectors, but do you really know what you are protecting and what you are willing to sacrifice to protect it?

 

[Trifoilum]

Where is the critical thinking? Where is the analysis? Where is the evaluation? What evidence do they provide that this preacher is "helping" with the AIDs epidemic? What values are being served here? Is this the value of family and tradition? What virtues are being served by showing hardcore pornography in churches and community centers? How does stirring up anger and resentment serve that virtue? How is this increasing anyone's happiness or serving any greater good?

The reality is that this is ideological thinking. This is the product of unrestrained Fe. This is why I so desperately call on NFJs to use that other judging function that they have in their possession. And yet I'm often met with resentment for doing so. Why? Because group identity is more important to you than humanity. You are willing to aid in the increase in the suffering of the world or stand idly by, simply to protect the cohesiveness of the group.

Perhaps my charges are unfounded or I am overgeneralizing, but try to see yourselves as I have come to see you. INFJs are known as the Protectors, but do you really know what you are protecting and what you are willing to sacrifice to protect it?

The problem with INFJs is that they're dominated with Ni; one of its manifestation is purpose. Especially within these kind of area; what others seen as treacherous, bigotry, and evil, they see as the only way, or the necessary evil; no hard feelings to those struck, I did what I have to do.

INFJs, along with INTJs, IINM are generally described as stubborn and determined, bordering to obstinacy.

Now about the case;

I remembered reading examples of INFJs being Mother Teresa (whom treated sick people not out of humanism but out of religious purpose, her opponents claimed), Mahatma Gandhi (whom secured India's freedom with one of the most questionable methods, despite being successful), and most controversially; Adolf Hitler (whom allegedly rescued Germany and bringing it to glory, to the expenses of everyone else in the world).
@Add; oh, there's claims that Jesus (whom...well. Well) is an INFJ too.

With the assumption that this is an act of an INFJ (...and I'm leaning towards this, really. It sounds more like a norm (Fe) set by faith (Ni) instead of the opposite), this is just the same as above mentioned people; questionable acts done with full conviction, with varying degree of success. Is this acceptable? No. Is this good? Depending on people and their morals, might not. Is this true for him? I believe so.

When this happens, it's a total battle of convictions and morals. It's hard to judge them as all black or white, even though some are probably more black or white than others.

Without the assumption, I would agree that this action by itself is completely wrong and unrestrained use of Fe.

 

[Satya]

I would choose the word "devotion" rather than "conviction". It's a love for the purpose rather than an unshakable belief. That is what makes it so dangerous. It goes beyond simply believing, and moves on to an outright affection for the purpose. Religous people simply don't believe in the concept of God, they love the concept of God; as much or more than they love one another. In the Bible it even tells men that they are to love God more than they are to love one another. So whoever controls their perception of the concept of God, controls them through the exploitation of their love for that concept. Fe and love are interlinked because people wish to connect with others, to belong and feel needed, by our very nature. But it is the fact that people are so unaware of how easily manipulated they are through controlling that emotion that leads to such catastrophes. And when you love something, you don't care why, you simply do because it gives you pleasure to love it, and to imagine that it loves you as much as you love it. People will always love the concept of God simply because they believe that God loves them.

I have little doubt that I could control any INFJ by controlling their perceptions of whatever they love. And they wouldn't care that I was controlling them, they may even welcome it as proof of their devotion.

 

[Tamagochi]

I believe that is a huge overgeneralization from your part. All cognitive functions can produce errors and dangerous behavior. Remember that Te for example can be used to cure cancer as well as make nuclear weapons. Having a preference for a particular function does not provide an excuse.

 

[Satya]

I believe that is a huge overgeneralization from your part. All cognitive functions can produce errors and dangerous behavior. Remember that Te for example can be used to cure cancer as well as make nuclear weapons. Having a preference for a particular function does not provide an excuse.

Interesting.

I feel if you allow Fe to become a devotion and thus define your purpose by a concept, then whoever controls your perception of that concept will ultimately control you.

Ti serves the purpose of detaching a person from the concepts that they cherish. Without Ti, Fe will ultimately distort an individual's thinking and they will do everything they can to protect the concepts they have developed affection for without any analysis or evaluation of the consequences of doing so.

 

[Quinlan]

It's disgust and fear without critical thinking, I dunno if that's Fe.

 

[Trifoilum]

I would choose the word "devotion" rather than "conviction". It's a love for the purpose rather than an unshakable belief. That is what makes it so dangerous. It goes beyond simply believing, and moves on to an outright affection for the purpose. Religous people simply don't believe in the concept of God, they love the concept of God; as much or more than they love one another. In the Bible it even tells men that they are to love God more than they are to love one another. So whoever controls their perception of the concept of God, controls them through the exploitation of their love for that concept. Fe and love are interlinked because people wish to connect with others, to belong and feel needed, by our very nature. But it is the fact that people are so unaware of how easily manipulated they are through controlling that emotion that leads to such catastrophes. And when you love something, you don't care why, you simply do because it gives you pleasure to love it, and to imagine that it loves you as much as you love it. People will always love the concept of God simply because they believe that God loves them.

I would say devotion is more of a SF trait than anyone else; devotion implies following, conviction is more of a.. NJ trait, I think. But I don't see why you're wrong, or I'm right, so nyeeh~

Italicized part ; I'm sure this is just a matter of faith (which kinda strays out from the topic, but no; not always.
Bolded part : Indeed, it's completely true. But then again, there's always a good and bad side of everything; so is this. Yes, other judging function were needed to analyze them further, but more often than not, it's affected in a whole meta kind of level; instead of 'criticizing', it became 'supporting'. Blind optimism / fanaticism, rather than realism.

And on another level, I believe people with greater Fe would understand that no, this kind of way isn't good at all. This, is pure, widespread, unadulterated Fe ; indignation. That's perfectly political.

I have little doubt that I could control any INFJ by controlling their perceptions of whatever they love. And they wouldn't care that I was controlling them, they may even welcome it as proof of their devotion.

A cold, rather uncomfortable fact, but I agreed with you. But that's just the same with every other type. Only using different aspects.

Interesting.

I feel if you allow Fe to become a devotion and thus define your purpose by a concept, then whoever controls your perception of that concept will ultimately control you.

Ti serves the purpose of detaching a person from the concepts that they cherish. Without Ti, Fe will ultimately distort an individual's thinking and they will do everything they can to protect the concepts they have developed affection for without any analysis or evaluation of the consequences of doing so.

And it's the same with every other functions; over reliance and overuse towards anything would cause disruption and other stuff. I'd hate to self-advertising but I put a link towards an article explaining this. I believe this also could be applied to the Fe case above.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

Functions/preferences do not account for convictions, devotion, beliefs, ideologies - but only how one prefers to process them.

 

[Siamese cat]

In my opinion, Satya you are making the same mistake, though less problematic one, as those who are heavy into ideology which serves them an explanation for the things that they don't understand fully. Ideologies exist because people need an explanation for the things that happen to them and around them. When early people needed an explanation for the storms that ruined their crops they invented Gods because they were unable to explain the storm differently. As general knowledge advances so does people expand their views about religion. Now you have a confused individual, probably slightly disgusted by their own latent homosexuality and when they are unable to understand that sentiments, they turn to religion and became anti-gay activists as part of some religion. This is an extremely plastic example, I'm aware that not every latent homosexual will turn to religion and became and anti-gay preacher, nor that the problem od that particular man has to be latent homosexualism, as well as that not every spiritual person will be a proponent of anti-gay thought.

 

[Trifoilum]

Functions/preferences do not account for convictions, devotion, beliefs, ideologies - but only how one prefers to process them.

I do agree.

 

[Billy]

Group think is logical, genetically its how we preserve ourselves which is a survival instinct imprinted into us by nature. Selfless egalitarianism is the new trend brought on by consciousness, it is both a virtue and an illogical idealism.

I hope more of us evolve. But its not today, which makes all the anger I see in your posts Satya completely unessential. You cant change people, shit is always going to be the way it is until we evolve more, humanity unfortunately is only the 1st phase of our evolution in consciousness as rational beings, but we still retain our reptilian brains, so we are both divine, and animal.

The world we want, to see humanity as 1 organism, 1 cause, will not come probably for another million years into our evolution. We probably wont even be human at that point but something greater. If we survive.

 

[DefectiveCreative]

Ti serves the purpose of detaching a person from the concepts that they cherish. Without Ti, Fe will ultimately distort an individual's thinking and they will do everything they can to protect the concepts they have developed affection for without any analysis or evaluation of the consequences of doing so.

And without Fe, Ti can become so detached from concerns for the well-being of others that an individual's thinking can become almost sociopathic.

(I don't know what his type was, but I think Josef Mengele might be a good example of this. Everything he did was logical, but completely devoid of human compassion).

 

[VH]

I struggle to understand the thinking of the ideological and religious. I really do.

It seems much more like you have your own Fe bias against religion that causes you to not think clearly, because you follow up this statement with...

It isn't based on reason. It isn't based on values. It isn't based on virtue. It isn't based on happiness or any real philosophical precept.

If you were truly struggling to understand the thinking of the ideological and religious, you wouldn't be so resolute in making these sorts of statements.

Over the course of every debate I have ever had with ideological and religious thinkers, I have approached it from every one of those angles.

I've only ever seen you approach these debates from a few versions of the same angle, which is rather intense intolerance. You've used different tactics in your debates, but I've never seen you take different angles.

They may supplement their beliefs with those aspects, but the actual core of their beliefs has nothing to do with them.

The actual core of their beliefs has everything to do with these things. That doesn't mean that the people who practice those beliefs are practicing them correctly. People are human and often make errors in understanding and perception. These people are no exception.

I've come to the conclusion that it is mindless groupthink.

There is a lot of mindless groupthink going on in the world, across the spectrum of ideology and causes, religious, scientific, conservative, and liberal. This is also nothing new. Human beings have been doing this since the inception of history, probably longer. This is because groupthink is primarily a function of Si, and the majority of human beings are Si users.

When Fe is taken to the extreme and people do everything they can to minimize conflict by establishing a set of social norms that they feel must be adhered to at all costs in order to maintain the harmony of the group, then you get the distortions of ideological thinking.

Actually, when Fe is taken to the extreme, it does everything it can to minimize conflict by being open to the desires and expectations of others, no matter who they are. The situation you are describing is actually Si. Although you've flavored it with some Fe sensibilities, STJs have a nearly identical approach when their Si becomes too extreme also ascribe to doing "everything they can to maximize efficiency by establishing a set of social norms that they feel must be adhered to at all costs in order to maintain the productivity of the group, then you get the distortions of critical thinking" which is the same statement flavored by Te.

Consensus is derived without critical thinking, analyzing, or evaluating.

When Si becomes overpowered, it can cause people to skip pattern recognition, and certainly cause them to assume that any and all conditions equally apply to the sensibilities it provides. The simplest reason for this sort of cognitive imbalance is actually just a lack of Ne development and preference.

In the cases where Fe is a factor in the way Si is coming to closed minded groupthink, a similar issue is at work, whereas the user has underdeveloped Ti.

Take this recent story for example...

This is yet another example of an isolated group being ridiculous and honestly has little if any bearing on the whole of religious people. Quite frankly, I find it offensive that yet again you're providing isolated examples to validate your intolerance of religious people. How would you feel if there were a member that was constantly digging up articles that 'proved' the points the sorts of religious people in this article makes as examples? Every intolerant group has watchdog outfits that spend their time looking for such things. All one would have to do to keep coming across articles that support these sensibilities is subscribe to one of these watchdog groups, and wala... you've got an endless supply of isolated examples to 'prove' and validate your intolerance, without taking the whole into consideration because you're hyper-focused on the extremes.

 

[VH]

You know what Satya, I think I've figured out the problem. As an INTP, ESFJs make you insane.



This means you need to develop more Fe and Si in order to be able to tolerate them. Heh. Ironic.

 

[Satya]

It seems much more like you have your own Fe bias against religion that causes you to not think clearly, because you follow up this statement with...

If you were truly struggling to understand the thinking of the ideological and religious, you wouldn't be so resolute in making these sorts of statements.

I've only ever seen you approach these debates from a few versions of the same angle, which is rather intense intolerance. You've used different tactics in your debates, but I've never seen you take different angles.

This forum does not even account for a tenth of the debates I have had on these topics. You also shoulsn't take my words out of context, which is what you are doing when you separate a sentence to make a personal judgment irrespective of the following line which explains for how I came to that conclusion.

The actual core of their beliefs has everything to do with these things. That doesn't mean that the people who practice those beliefs are practicing them correctly. People are human and often make errors in understanding and perception. These people are no exception.

No it doesn't. I wish it did, but it does not. An error in perception can easily be corrected with more information, an analysis, or evaluation. These people choose not to do so as you would have seen had you waited to read the entire post before you started responding to me.

There is a lot of mindless groupthink going on in the world, across the spectrum of ideology and causes, religious, scientific, conservative, and liberal. This is also nothing new. Human beings have been doing this since the inception of history, probably longer. This is because groupthink is primarily a function of Si, and the majority of human beings are Si users.

I disagree. I profoundly think that groupthink is a judging funtion, and that function is Fe. Just look up the definition of groupthink.

"Decision making by a group, especially in a manner that discourages creativity or individual responsibility."
"Groupthink is a type of thought exhibited by group members who try to minimize conflict and reach consensus without critically testing, analyzing, and evaluating ideas."

Explain to me how that is Si. Decision making is a perceiving function? Group cohesion is related to sensing? Avoiding conflict is related to sensing? Seeking consensus is related to sensing? It's time to accept facts. Groupthink is the result of extroverted feeling. Sorry you don't like it, but that is the reality.

Actually, when Fe is taken to the extreme, it does everything it can to minimize conflict by being open to the desires and expectations of others, no matter who they are. The situation you are describing is actually Si. Although you've flavored it with some Fe sensibilities, STJs have a nearly identical approach when their Si becomes too extreme also ascribe to doing "everything they can to maximize efficiency by establishing a set of social norms that they feel must be adhered to at all costs in order to maintain the productivity of the group, then you get the distortions of critical thinking" which is the same statement flavored by Te.

I think you are trying to convince yourself, not me.

This is yet another example of an isolated group being ridiculous and honestly has little if any bearing on the whole of religious people. Quite frankly, I find it offensive that yet again you're providing isolated examples to validate your intolerance of religious people. How would you feel if there were a member that was constantly digging up articles that 'proved' the points the sorts of religious people in this article makes as examples? Every intolerant group has watchdog outfits that spend their time looking for such things. All one would have to do to keep coming across articles that support these sensibilities is subscribe to one of these watchdog groups, and wala... you've got an endless supply of isolated examples to 'prove' and validate your intolerance, without taking the whole into consideration because you're hyper-focused on the extremes.

Isolated examples? I point out a 6,000 member church supporting the most influential preacher in Uganda and it is an isolated example? You never cease to amaze me in how far you are willing to go to whitewash the reality VH. I do have to say it is funny that a moderator has to make this about me when I'm speaking purely in the generalities of MBTI type. Just because you are a moderator does not give you a license to attack people specifically because you don't like what they have to say.

 

[Billy]

Funny, I remember when Satya was telling me I wasnt an INFJ because I didnt have all the Fe he did.. heh.

 

[Satya]

Funny, I remember when Satya was telling me I wasnt an INFJ because I didnt have all the Fe he did.. heh.

I still hold that opinion.

 

[Billy]

I still hold that opinion.

Most sensors would.

 

[Satya]

Most sensors would.

Oh how nice it would be if I were a sensor.

 

[Billy]

You very well probably are, you have what we call a "1 track mind".