[INFJ] - infj philosophers? | INFJ Forum

[INFJ] infj philosophers?

chad

Regular Poster
Feb 4, 2015
77
100
547
MBTI
infp
infj philosophers like plotinus,plato, and even infj poets like Leo Tolstoy and fyodor dostoevsky and infjs in general have this spiritual quality to them . like they very holistic,alot speaks on the true inner self,like tolstoy said you are just a mirror and peoples insults are only a reflection in the mirror,that sought of thing,like ehkart tolle an infj speaks on how he found his true self,inner self,being one again,or one with the whole,infjs are very good at seeing there inner core of being,very poetic,like alot of infjs tend to follow this enlightenment were they enjoy seeing themselfs in that space,i cant explain it,but how do you guys identify with this?,i think perhaps infjs are good at understand the ego vs true self?
 
INFJs and philosophy? Yum yum :yum:

It's definitely an interesting topic. I think there is something kind of unique about INFJ philosophers. They tend not to be the best at creating nearly perfectly consistent systems - INTPs are. INFJ philosophers are often quite idiosyncratic and will gladly risk being guilty of a fallacy here and there, if that must come as an inevitable by-product of expressing an original insight. It's quite striking really: INFJ philosophers have the insight almost before they begin writing, with the benefit of their Ni. The same applies to INTJ philosophers, who also benefit from Ni-dom, but their INFJ counterparts, through Fe, will tend to be much more concerned about the human condition - morals, in other words. You see that in Plato, Wittgenstein, Spinoza, even Schopenhauer: "How can human being be happy?" pervades their work, even though the work, because of Ni and Ti, might sometimes be very abstract or esoteric. You don't see moral concerns so much in INTJ philosophers like Hegel, Sartre and company. While in the case of INFP philosophers, like Rousseau and Kierkegaard, the question will be posed in more individual terms (Fi): "How can I be happy?" and a reader may get inspiration from them by mirroring.

I think that's what is best about INFJ philosophers: they tend to put their vision at the service of the universal, of humanity as a whole. Their philosophy, or their fiction (in the case of Dostoevsky, say) may begin with a specific example or character, but it will always expand outwards until it is universalized. So yes, Ni-Fe can yield incredible insights into the infinite layers of the human psyche, and human motivations, and it also has the ability to convey the notion that "this applies to everyone". What reader, when he reads Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment, doesn't identify with Raskolnikov's life and plight, even though he's a murderer? Spinoza's philosophy is universal, so is Plato's and Plotinus's. Even Wittgenstein, though he was arguably not the most proficient Fe user, thought about philosophy as 'quietism', that is, as a way to resolve problems and puzzles and reach inner peace in that way - a method accessible to everyone. A great individual insight at the service of a universal mission: that is, in my eyes, the unique worth of an INFJ philosopher.
 
Last edited:
INFJs and philosophy? Yum yum :yum:

It's definitely an interesting topic. I think there is something kind of unique about INFJ philosophers. They tend not to be the best at creating nearly perfectly consistent systems - INTPs are. INFJ philosophers are often quite idiosyncratic and will gladly risk being guilty of a fallacy here and there, if that must come as an inevitable by-product of expressing an original insight. It's quite striking really: INFJ philosophers have the insight almost before they begin writing, with the benefit of their Ni. The same applies to INTJ philosophers, who also benefit from Ni-dom, but their INFJ counterparts, through Fe, will tend to be much more concerned about the human condition - morals, in other words. You see that in Plato, Wittgenstein, Spinoza, even Schopenhauer: "How can human being be happy?" pervades their work, even though the work, because of Ni and Ti, might sometimes be very abstract or esoteric. You don't see moral concerns so much in INTJ philosophers like Hegel, Sartre and company. While in the case of INFP philosophers, like Rousseau and Kierkegaard, the question will be posed in more individual terms (Fi): "How can I be happy?" and a reader may get inspiration from them by mirroring.

I think that's what is best about INFJ philosophers: they tend to put their vision at the service of the universal, of humanity as a whole. Their philosophy, or their fiction (in the case of Dostoevsky, say) may begin with a specific example or character, but it will always expand outwards until it is universalized. So yes, Ni-Fe can yield incredible insights into the infinite layers of the human psyche, and human motivations, and it also has the ability to convey the notion that "this applies to everyone". What reader, when he reads Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment, doesn't identify with Raskolnikov's life and plight, even though he's a murderer? Spinoza's philosophy is universal, so is Plato's and Plotinus's. Even Wittgenstein, though he was arguably not the most proficient Fe user, thought about philosophy as 'quietism', that is, as a way to resolve problems and puzzles and reach inner peace in that way - a method accessible to everyone. A great individual insight at the service of a universal mission: that is, in my eyes, the unique worth of an INFJ philosopher.
nice! this brough much clarity thankssssssss!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ren
INFJs and philosophy? Yum yum :yum:

It's definitely an interesting topic. I think there is something kind of unique about INFJ philosophers. They tend not to be the best at creating nearly perfectly consistent systems - INTPs are. INFJ philosophers are often quite idiosyncratic and will gladly risk being guilty of a fallacy here and there, if that must come as an inevitable by-product of expressing an original insight. It's quite striking really: INFJ philosophers have the insight almost before they begin writing, with the benefit of their Ni. The same applies to INTJ philosophers, who also benefit from Ni-dom, but their INFJ counterparts, through Fe, will tend to be much more concerned about the human condition - morals, in other words. You see that in Plato, Wittgenstein, Spinoza, even Schopenhauer: "How can human being be happy?" pervades their work, even though the work, because of Ni and Ti, might sometimes be very abstract or esoteric. You don't see moral concerns so much in INTJ philosophers like Hegel, Sartre and company. While in the case of INFP philosophers, like Rousseau and Kierkegaard, the question will be posed in more individual terms (Fi): "How can I be happy?" and a reader may get inspiration from them by mirroring.

I think that's what is best about INFJ philosophers: they tend to put their vision at the service of the universal, of humanity as a whole. Their philosophy, or their fiction (in the case of Dostoevsky, say) may begin with a specific example or character, but it will always expand outwards until it is universalized. So yes, Ni-Fe can yield incredible insights into the infinite layers of the human psyche, and human motivations, and it also has the ability to convey the notion that "this applies to everyone". What reader, when he reads Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment, doesn't identify with Raskolnikov's life and plight, even though he's a murderer? Spinoza's philosophy is universal, so is Plato's and Plotinus's. Even Wittgenstein, though he was arguably not the most proficient Fe user, thought about philosophy as 'quietism', that is, as a way to resolve problems and puzzles and reach inner peace in that way - a method accessible to everyone. A great individual insight at the service of a universal mission: that is, in my eyes, the unique worth of an INFJ philosopher.

I also agree, that Dostoevsky and alike have this intuitive and emotional, even moral quality to them. This also lets them ask the "big" questions. The topic of "Crime and Punishment" of the justified murder is audacious really, but still, Dostoevsky dares to put it in the public.

Just know I started reading poems by Kahlil Gibran and without knowing it before, his texts strongly resonated with me, so I looked up what other people think what personality type he might have been, and again INFJ.

Just like Dostoevsky he likes to play with the paradoxical as no human being is just one thing and I like that, bullying your, the reader's that is, expectations. After all, that's what will make you think, isn't it? And philosophy is not just there to plainly explain and state things, but even more so to encourage us to think for ourselves. Dare to appear stupid as in the very word is the latin "stupere" which means to marvel at something, to be astonished. Only with that skill (!) can you obtain real wisdom that goes beyond learned knowledge.