Peoples' Frameworks | INFJ Forum

Peoples' Frameworks


Permanent Fixture
Dec 24, 2008
Ok INFJs, I got a challenge for you. This is a great question in philosophy and I want to see what everyone thinks. Let me lay out what is going on first.


A framework is a set of beliefs used to understand the world. For example, the ancient Greeks had a very religious framework built around a pantheon of gods. If the ground started shaking, and the land was torn in twain, through their framework they would likely interpret this event as a sign of the gods' anger. Today, our society works through a framework that is generally more naturalistic: we seek explanations devoid of the supernatural and instead interpret events as a series of physical causes and effects.

The Question

What makes a framework valid?

1) "A valid framework produces beliefs that are consistent with the truth of the world."

The problem with this answer is that whatever "the truth of the world" is can only be judged through a framework! To the Greeks, an earthquake really is the disapproval of the gods, and the physical causes are only the means through which they started it. This answer is circular: you would have to use the framework to judge itself, and so you might as well not even have asked the question. The best you could do is affirm what you already assumed.

2) "Well, another framework, B, confirms our first framework, A!"

The problem here is that, now, you have to ask, "Well, what makes B valid then? You can probably see where this is going, because then you would either have to say, "Well, A also reconfirms B!" and we have circularity again, or you would have to say, "Well, C confirms B!" and you get an infinite regression that never ends: D confirms C, E confirms D, and so on.

So what do you think the solution to this question is? What makes a framework valid? Does "validity" even apply to frameworks? If not, then how do we determine which one to adopt?
Last edited:
I think frameworks have to be adopted outside our own mindsets. I think the more information we have, the bigger our framework becomes - and hopefully this will mean we can have a better ability to adjust our frameworks as necessary. The truth is, no one knows everything. We assume we know things, but we're getting our information from either our five senses or supernaturally. Or both. All are subject to interpretation, though...sort of like the five blind men and the elephant (IMO).

There's no such thing as a perfect human framework - it can't be man made. I do think, however, that there is a perfect supernatural framework, but that's my take on it.
What makes a framework valid? Does "validity" even apply to frameworks? If not, then how do we determine which one to adopt?

I looked up the definition of valid. One definition has to do with logic, essentially that the conclusion follows the premise. Another definition that I pulled out had to do with effectiveness.

I think these are essential components to how I evaluate the worthiness of my frameworks. For me, it is valid if it effectively synthesizes the input I've received thus far and is able to provide an acceptably cohesive structure for analysis and solid shelter for conclusions from that input.

My framework changes as new input challenges the current structure's stability. I don't really pick one framework as valid and ask new input fit into the chosen framework. When I discover a deficiency of effectiveness in my current framework, I evaluate my chosen structure and determine where some remodeling is in order.

I may prefer my own framework, but I think that the validity of a framework is a very individual thing depending on the circumstances and input that person has to work with in building. What is a logical and effective framework for one may not be so for another given differing environments.
I'd agree with tovlo on effectiveness or productivity. That's mostly my intention/motivation in things. That along with learning and going the route the least harmful. I'm answering your question with problem-solving in mind.
Pardon me the simple question but is a frame work another word for a World View?

either way, a framework can only be validated in it'self and only by those who hold to theframe work. Circular yes but also the only plausible answer.