Personality Cafe banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,439 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Can we prevent people from intentionally harming others by simply developing all their functions?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,303 Posts
No. No no no no. Look at Tammy II from Parks and Recreation, she uses Fe, Se, Ti and Ni in a very developed way, she could be either xSTP or xNFJ. And what is she above all?

Oh yeah, fucking evil.

And the worst thing? As Ron says, "She's got no weaknesses". She's a fucking psychopath, and she has all her functions developed. That's more scary, to be honest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,439 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
@Gray Romantic So people who can use all eight functions properly can still be hateful bigots??

I was told that higher intelligence meant less bigotry. Until recently when a classmate told me it was completely cultural and even high IQ people are still as equally likely to be racist.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
951 Posts
I don't think someone who's psychologically healthy can be evil, but there may be more to it than just developing functions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
583 Posts
If you talk about not having mental issues that's true, but it's pointless talking about good or evil (so morality): what is good for you might be evil for someone else. We can't say that the development of the cognitive functions coincides with what we consider good and fair.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,886 Posts
Plato may not think so. If you are well developed, maybe well educated, evil simply is impossible. I would argue that it's also an active process to overcome evil...hmmm....not necessarily what cognitive functions are used, but how they used...is this a balance of objective and subjective experiences? But, is overcoming evil always a goal? Should it be? Can be it discarded seem being seemingly really functional? Blah blah...losing conviction and coherence...ughhhh....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,439 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
@cotti Just to clarify, hurting someone for the sake of hurting them (mental, physical, sexual etc.) is the definition of evil in this case. And are you confident with relative morality? That can justify ANYTHING
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,687 Posts
Wait, what's constituting as well developed? Are we talking about all the functions being clearly present and accounted for, or are we talking about them being used in a useful, productive manner?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,439 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Wait, what's constituting as well developed? Are we talking about all the functions being clearly present and accounted for, or are we talking about them being used in a useful, productive manner?
'well-developed' means having the ability to use them. So you would be able to have mastery over Se, Ti, Fe, and Ni as well as the shallow functions
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
583 Posts
@cotti Just to clarify, hurting someone for the sake of hurting them (mental, physical, sexual etc.) is the definition of evil in this case. And are you confident with relative morality? That can justify ANYTHING
Nope, i don't want to say that everything can be justified; actually we should explain what does developing function means. What i wanted to say is that we are assuming that the development of the functions automatically leads to a "good" devolopment, as if we were created to be good. Anyway, i wondered that question as well so i am not saying it's stupid :happy:

Oh sorry I didn't read your explanation of developing functions. Well i think you can have a perfect use of your auxiliary function (for example Fe) but still use it in an "immoral" way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,261 Posts
See, it's funny, because most people who are considered "evil" and just merciless, un-empathetic and willing to harm often end up being psychopaths. ie sociopaths. ie have antisocial personality disorder. ie personality disorder. Or in other situations they might be talking about someone who has narcissistic personality disorder. Or perhaps even borderline personality disorder.

But 'evil' is such a tricky and subjective word. So when focusing on 'developed type' : sure. I think they're cognition structure can still be in tack (which is what personality types are: cognition). I would argue in this case that "personality disorders" don't really see a strong correlation between personality disorders and cognitive types/cognitive traits/F,T,S,N etc. I would argue that yes, a person can still have a developed type (as in developed their cognitive functions) and lack traits such as ability to feel empathy, etc, resulting in an "evil" person.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
315 Posts
Honestly, what is "evil?" It can be perceived differently from one person to another. The definition itself is a person who is immoral, and immorality could be perceived by one person in someone's actions but not another. There is a lot of gray areas. I think there's some exceptions like say-- murder (and even then there is 'intent to kill.') But otherwise, it's really up for interpretation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
79 Posts
@cotti Just to clarify, hurting someone for the sake of hurting them (mental, physical, sexual etc.) is the definition of evil in this case. And are you confident with relative morality? That can justify ANYTHING
Hurting someone for the sake of hurting them isn't really evil - it's sadistic. And that's just a facet of evil. Also, I think what one considers "evil" is ultimately very subjective. Someone might consider the people behind the judicial system evil, because they're against the death penalty and see it as morally reprehensible.

But sure, I would say that a person with a well developed cognition can be just as "evil" as anyone else. The cognitive functions are just the tools, and if you have superior tools, so much the better for you. It all depends on how you use them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
884 Posts
I think it is safe to say if you are a sociopath there is not much stopping you from act immorally.

If anything a more functionally developed sociopath would only see themselves as more superior to others and worthy and themselves all the more capable to get away with what society deems objectively bad behaviour.

What we consider objectively bad behaviour is behaviour which if acted on risks breaking down social order. This includes behaviour that may instill panic (isolated or public), behaviour which disenfranchises the individual's ability to achieve and maintain social circles (humans being zoon politikon) which in turn can worsen their mental well being, and behaviour which negatively impacts a victim's ability to function normally long term (abusive friendship/relationship, rape, coercion, any form of violence really, lying, manipulation for personal gain).​

Behaviours that really immediately break down social circles and have lasting impact are manipulation, and those actions that are inherently violent. A weaker developed individual is more apt to act out in violence. A stronger developed person will seek out manipulation as the keys to manipulation are charisma lying and shamelessness. All of which are increased with intellectual aptitude (which includes arrogance) and a keenness to self-preservation.

That said having developed functions does not necessarily mean you will possess normal empathy and sympathy, the lack of which leads to reprehensible and objectively bad behaviour. Sure as a more developed sociopath you may gain an understanding of what other people are feeling... or will feel should you act in a certain way... but do you ultimately care?

Because we are concerned with how stronger development weeds out bad behaviour let's entertain the idea of a well developed individual with varying examples of sociopathic behaviour. How does this pan out?

- A strong sociopath will spend little hesitation acting on their desires, manipulation is just a means to their end. The more developed the more skillful and careful. All the incentive is there for them.

- Now strong sociopaths aren't exactly known for depression. Rather someone with weak sociopathic (weak empathy) tendencies, that has high developed functions and therefore high aptitude for manipulation, has room for the additional element of depression. The weaker empathy will have them spend some time wrestling with their conscience about manipulating. But how weak their empathy or how weak their current mental state will affect where they lean.

Weaker empathy or those who are depressed (that is will climb on top others to feel better, to feel whole) they will ultimately try to rationalize/excuse/justify their selfish desires.

Stronger empathy and lack of depression they may have internalized ideas to manipulate but ultimately are not likely to act on them often.

Strong empathy but with depression, I'm inclined to not believe this is a mixed bag but rather the stronger empathy will generally override sociopathic thoughts as the greater sense of what manipulative behaviour onto others will cause victims to feel is more so ultimately felt by them and thus only make them feel worse about themselves.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
974 Posts
Can we prevent people from intentionally harming others by simply developing all their functions?
Eh, I'd say there's a correlation, but not a causation. If you look at the types that commonly have antisocial personality disorder (like a third of the prison population) it's EXTP. If they worked to get in touch with their Fe would it give them some kind of sympathy (or at least stop them from hurting people)? I'd say maybe in some cases, but simply developing Fe doesn't guaranty anything accept a heightened ability to make value judgments and, as in the case of Hitler, those can cause lots of intentional harm to people.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top