INFJ Morals...are they circumstantial or life-long?

I don't know -- 'should' is so limiting isnt it? I dislike my own 'shoulds' and don't see why I would want to inflict them upon anyone else.

I personally have life-long morals that slowly shift as my experiences, understanding and introspection allow them to. Some of my morality is circumstantial -- but a great deal of it is guided by core principles such as fairness and making life better for others (be the change you want to see, etc).

 

it makes no sense to portrait infj as moralists. such a clishee!
especially if you think infj=NiFe

my istj father is as "idalistic" and upright (uptight) as one can be.

only retarded people have a rigid rule based morality.
as for situational moral - its not a system of thought but a product of understanding and understanding is a product of personality. assuming that one does not change his moral equals assuming that he is stuck in development, which is the next best thing to retardation. of course, you don't have to change those views, that are just right. but this cannot be type related.

i see two basic type related factors:

due to emotionality, the moral of an infx is somewhat concerned with safety in rather subjective matters, that is to say he does not just ask for money but for friendliness and openness, an inviting ambiance

due to intuition he understands that power is really just circumstantial opportunity, so his moral is concerned with enabling and ensuring such often rather subtle circumstances, that empower humanity.

these are two sub-lines of moral development that have always been a part of society and politics, so obviously they are subject to evolution (development)

a typical example for ensuring a basic friendly ambiance (ie one that stops you from killing yourself) and for compensating a lack of circumstantial opportunities (lack of money), is shoplifting romantic science fiction anime videos. this is moral because it is assumed to be justified. otherwise there would be guilty conscience. most juvenile crimes are based on moral justification, not ignorance of one's conscience (own true understanding of moral) - assuming that most juveniles are not yet dead on the inside. so these crimes are a product of the moral line of intelligence.

 

yes, of course they are.

but less hard core republicans are just another line or perseptives, they are concerned with important things about which we are often in denial

btw: by rule based morality i did not refer to law enforcement.
law enforcement is a practical approach (product/act) OF moral and other interests, it s not an example of moral (intelligence) in itself. the retardation is in confusing this (forgetting this), which indicates a disowned moral intelligence. on a scale, intelligence does not get any more retarded than "disowned".

 

hmmm I really think ones morals highly depend on their upbringing...while most of us are Idealists and we follow a certain set of ideals and morals...I think for the most part as children we are molded to be what we are...There are those who would say it is immoral to be promiscuous...but I dont see it that way I see it as a road to self discovery...

 

yeah, in a fantasy world, i would have liked to become a profiler, but in reality i cant even look at uniforms without going into internal opposition.

 

I think morals, right v. wrong, and things of that nature are bound by language. Its all in how you word the situation, the perspective, the moral, etc.

 

From what I have seen, INFJs are either moral relativists or fundamentalists. We seem to like the extremes.

 

true for what is usually called moral.
thats why i have a hard time imagining that someone, who's first function is perceiving, could identify with common morals, in the un-reflected way some people do. enfp dont do it. entp dont do it ... neither do I

 

I don't think I go on either extreme at least I don't think so.

 

if someone gets all worked up over deconstructing something, he is most likely a constructor himself, in the first place. i mean, someone who argues that nothing were left, once one had deconstructed all constructs.
such shallow fragmentation is not Ni. constructing is "judging" (T or F).
i have observed this radical (de)constructionism in enfp, entp, and inxx whose first function was judging (Ti + Ne or Fi + Ne)

 

I kinda consider myself right in the middle...I am not a radical about anything...I will bitch and moan when my ideals are contradicted but i dont go all radical about it

 

Yah, I guess I'm in the middle as well.

I have relative values, but they are pretty absolute to me personally.

 

I was a Jesus Freak when I was a kid. What does that tell ya?