Personality Cafe banner
1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
217 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
My closest friend is an INFJ. She had me play the Last of Us with her, so this sort of a spoiler sorry. We went over what would we do in the following scenario:

A viral outbreak takes place and infects a large percentage of the world. It turns out that your loved one is immune. Doctors want to cut her open and will kill her in the process of extracting that which makes her immune, for the purpose of reverse engineering a cure, that will save humanity from extinction.

She asks if I would sacrifice my loved one, I say "no." She's utterly shocked and goes into how she knows it would be hard but ultimately she would do it.

I think this is an Fi / Fe difference so I'm trying to understand Fe. Does it value the greater good even more than family, significant others, the self and etc? Meaning, will it sacrifice the things around it that it truly loves if it means helping the 'greater good' unconditionally?

Explain your value system to me, what those values are and if there are exceptions i.e. moments in which you'll act against those values. And anything else Fe related really.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Halcyon

·
Registered
Joined
·
183 Posts
I'm not entirely sure about whether I use Fe or Fi, but my viewpoint isn't really based on my functions anyways. I think it has more to do with my upbringing (though, it might normally be based on whether you use Fe/Fi). I grew up being taught to give of yourselves and to treat others as equals (whether they be loved ones, family, or total strangers). The same line of thinking as my dad telling us not to agree with him just because he's our dad, but rather to agree/disagree with him based on whether what he says really is right/wrong.

Some other input from Fe/Fi users might reveal more though, as far as functions are concerned.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,610 Posts
Fi user here. I wouldn't choose to kill the loved one.

I'd let my loved one decide. If they make the sacrifice, and aren't coerced, I'm okay with it.

If you sacrifice others, or demand sacrifice from others, I'd probably side with the virus.

Humanity needs to live? Why? There is no need. Nor for the loved one to live. You aren't fighting for life: everyone dies. Death wins. You are fighting for time. To postpone death.

If humanity cannot come up with another way besides a fatal dissection, human intellect has failed.

If humanity cannot come up with another way besides demanded sacrifice and moral cannibalism, human morality has failed.

If humanity cannot come up with another way besides one plan, human pragmatism has failed.

If humanity cannot come up with another way besides protecting the dignity of the individual, the dignity of the species has failed.

Humanity has failed the test of merit. While I don't need to enforce punishment, I don't need to assist them in their survival.

Humanity deserves to survive? Deserves doesn't enter the equation. It either will or it won't and the world that should be will never come compared to the world that is.

I question the greater good. I question good itself. In this case it is species centric conceit, and I feel no need to assist them or support them.

Would I risk the survival of strangers for the certainty of a few peoples' deaths? Risk is. Uncertainty is. It will be even if I never existed. The risk is there in some form regardless of your chosen option.

I am not loyal to your survival. I am not loyal to life. I am not loyal to humanity. I am not loyal to the majority. I am not loyal to the minority. I am not loyal to humanity. Regardless of what I do in life there is sufficient diversity within the human race for parts of it to hate me or deem me immoral. What greater good would I accept over me?

I'd pit the best I have within me at getting a win-win situation, even if it means taking a harder road than the easy path. Because I'm crazy and to me this is what it means to me to spend a life well. I'm not done with using intellect and morality yet. If and when it is exhausted of itself, human intellect and morality, and not for the sake of ease before hand, perhaps darker paths would seem more attractive. Not before and not while I can help it.

Because in a sufficient mass people are cowards who are willing to throw morality away if it means survival unless their death is already the likely outcome. But what better time to break face and pull out the best you have? To do what you would wish to do before you die, or before taking a darker path?

Now is the time to see what life amounts to when it holds nothing back. Lets see if the win-win situation can be found and brought about.

What of the cost in human life? What of the people who die during the time spent finding an alternative? Is the blood on my hands? Is responsibility really that simple and clear cut? Do I determine who gets sick? Who doesn't have the means to survive? Who would live and who would die? Or is it just numbers, that I am willing to let some die rather than picking individuals out?

It is funny. Life and time. Responsibility. A question of numbers. A question of costs. What is worth more, the dignity of human life, or of human life itself? Who gets to rule in favor of dignity? Who gets to cast the vote for who survives and who dies so others risk finding a way to steal more time from death?

I'd still stand by my decision to let my loved one decide to make the call on their own sacrifice. If they choose not to out of sheer cowardice, even that is fine.

Why? What am I protecting? What could possibly account for being weighed against human life?

I am not protecting anything. I am being me. In the event of reaching a place where reason and intellect fail to provide prudence, it seemed inevitable that I would be me and opt to be me.

There is no moral ground for my actions. I'm a dog chasing its own tail. Or rather, I am a man who decides to step into the abyss of the uncertain and uncharted after considering the other options. Perhaps I will return from that abyss a savior. Perhaps a destroyer. I don't actually care. I am compelled to turn my back on humanity, which upon drawing from its internal resources has found itself wanting. I will decide what to do after the abyss carves itself onto my being. Not before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,289 Posts
Hahahas omg I love the Last Of Us :D

The thing is, if it was certain that they would be able to produce a vaccine after Ellie's life and Ellie chose to do it, then I would (very reluctantly and sadly) let her go. But the thing is, nobody knows if that would really happen! So nope, not gonna sacrifice the person I've fought so hard to protect based on luck! Oh, even if they're able to produce a cure, it has to be sustainable and available for everyone! Well, obviously I guess, since it doesn't make sense to sacrifice one person's life for to save another xD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,594 Posts
My closest friend is an INFJ. She had me play the Last of Us with her, so this sort of a spoiler sorry. We went over what would we do in the following scenario:

A viral outbreak takes place and infects a large percentage of the world. It turns out that your loved one is immune. Doctors want to cut her open and will kill her in the process of extracting that which makes her immune, for the purpose of reverse engineering a cure, that will save humanity from extinction.

She asks if I would sacrifice my loved one, I say "no." She's utterly shocked and goes into how she knows it would be hard but ultimately she would do it.

I think this is an Fi / Fe difference so I'm trying to understand Fe. Does it value the greater good even more than family, significant others, the self and etc? Meaning, will it sacrifice the things around it that it truly loves if it means helping the 'greater good' unconditionally?

Explain your value system to me, what those values are and if there are exceptions i.e. moments in which you'll act against those values. And anything else Fe related really.
Never would I force anyone, loved one or not, to sacrifice themselves for others. Never would I stand by while someone was forcibly sacrificed for others. Nobody has that right. Nobody.

If my adult loved one wanted to sacrifice herself, that's her call and I would deeply admire her for it. But no one has the right to decide that for her.

I believe in nature. If she's immune while most other people or not, maybe there's a good reason for that.

Do I care about the welfare of other people? Yes, exceedingly so. Paralyzingly so, sometimes. But that includes the person or persons about to be sacrificed for the good of the many, and it's not a damn numbers game for me. And, frankly, if the only way the many can continue living is by murdering someone else and cutting them up for parts, then I'm not so sure our species would be worth saving.

We are a species of individuals. Interconnected in many ways, sure, but still individuals, and our value is not just magically diminished simply because we find ourselves amongst the minority. Basically, this scenario, when broken down to its most basic parts, is saying that the moment you are among the minority of a given situation, you just don't matter as much as the majority. That you've lost your intrinsic value the moment the majority can benefit from spending it for its own sake.

Death is a natural part of life. Nobody escapes it. But we shouldn't be forcibly speeding it along for those who've done nothing wrong just so we can delay it for others.

I don't think this is a Fi vs. Fe thing. I think you're going to find differing opinions among people of either function.
 

·
Registered
INFJ 6w5, 1w2, 2w1 Sx/Sp
Joined
·
10,590 Posts
I was pretty much thinking what everyone else was and that is it's not my place to decide that for someone else but lets say it was just for the sake of the question. Would I let them be sacrificed? Over my dead body. Also I would question if there is not a better way to extract a cure from a person. And...I think default settings pretty much covered it all lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
360 Posts
i think this has more to do with the individual infj than say a difference between Fi and Fe, or maybe it has something to do with a combination of Ni-Fe which is concerned with people in general.

i would let my loved one go if they were the one that wanted to make the sacrifice, than i dont think i should stand in the way of that act for selfish reasons, but never would i force them
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kizuna

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,362 Posts
A peek into my inner world as I consider the scenario:

First response: I would not sacrifice my loved one either. And I'm Fe-aux.

Thinking about why: I don't see humanity's extinction as that huge of a deal, and my loved one (Fi-dom) probably wouldn't either.

Next response: It's really not my decision to make, it's hers. If she is unable to make the decision, I need to take into account how I believe she would respond based on what I know about her and her values. Right now, I'm actually not sure so I will try to remember to ask her. If she was making the decision herself, I would beg her to not sacrifice herself because the thought of that being done to her makes me almost sick with aversion and every instinct in me stands up to protect her from being murdered and used like a lab rat but it would have to be her decision. It would destroy me for that to happen to her.

Question about the scenario: Am I going to die from this virus? That is relevant to me first from the perspective of how much of a right I have to beg her to say no. if I am going to die and essentially leave her anyway, it is a different scenario than if we would survive together amidst the extinction of most of the rest of humanity. (I really feel like we both might find the latter scenario appealing, but the former one removes me from the picture and lays the experience only on her.

Next thought: Even if I was going to die from the virus, if I had to be alive when they did that to her I would tear myself to pieces. Probably literally. Not that that matters but I need to be honest with myself and not try to push down the pain/horror.

Analysis-in-process
: Fe-aux doesn't necessarily make me loyal to humanity as a whole. Fe-aux orients me to a collective.

In this case, the collective is my beloved (and the other member of our family, my bird, who - actually, I would need to take him into account too, who will care for him, how to make this best for him, that raises a whole other set of questions but the first thing would be to check with my beloved to see what she thinks and assess whether we have shared values from which to move and go from there).

So that's the beginnings of the unfolding response in me as I consider this scenario.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,362 Posts
And I just read the comments and if I may state the obvious:

So far it seems to me that so far, every Fe-aux participant in the discussion (all INFJs) has a focus on what the other person chooses to do. Not that it's only the Fe-auxes, but I find it notable.

It kind of reminds me of how I am when my beloved asks me what I want for dinner:

Me: I don't know .... what do you feel like?
Her: Well, we could make this or this or this
Me: *shrug* Do you have a preference?
Her: Well, there's this or this or this or this
Me: Well, hmmm. Not this, but do you have a preference between this one and that one?
Her (hopefully more amused than frustrated with me by this point): Okay, this one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,649 Posts
that friend who chose the sacrifice option in the game simply didn't take it seriously enough. anyone can misjudge a situation when you don't make an effort to truly put yourself into that position and mentally and emotionally absorb whatever comes with the decision. i mean, it's like when you're angry and you yell "i wish you'd DIIEE!!!" at your mom... it's not what you REALLY think or feel.
 
Joined
·
186 Posts
I would not. Loyalty to my family is always first. It's a rather odd, but very strong characteristic I possess. I used to be all-serving in the greater good, but after a couple of hard knocks realized that there is a reason that it is set up the way it is. I have my mere control of putting good where it will make a change. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,450 Posts
I wonder if everyone acted in a utilitarian way if most people would be satisfied, or more so than they are now. It's an absurd and idealistic thought experiment but there might be an embedded lesson there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
509 Posts
The important question for me would be, would the action be fair to everyone involved? Using person as a means to an end is never fair. Every rational being is an end in themselves and one human life is just as sacred as a thousand, imo. In this case, if we're concerned about the greater good, would killing the only one person who's immune to the virus really be beneficial to the greater good, especially in the long run? Sure, the lives of everyone else is saved, but the immediate action might not be the best one to take and future implications should also be considered. The individual's family would be thankful, like everyone else [and definitely much more than everyone else] that their loved one died for them, but I'm sure the pain and perhaps guilt they would feel would be incomparable. It's best to exhaust all other possible options to keep the person alive, but ultimately the choice would be left to the individual to make. It woudn't be my place to dictate what they should do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
556 Posts
I use crazy amounts of both Fi and Fe so I'm kinda useless here... I think humanity is shit (Fi), and I wouldn't sacrifice someone that I loved to help save people that I don't really care about (Fi), but if that person wanted to sacrifice their life to save asshole strangers then I would let them (Fe), and if they didn't want to but everyone else was trying to catch and kill him/her, then I'd defend them (Fe) because I dislike people trying to exert their will on to others, I value freedom of choice (both Fe & Fi).

Based on my opinions and values, my Fi would make me incredibly selfish in that situation; if the loved one felt the same and I picked up on it then I'd probably become a very protective xenophobic nasty-ass person.

Also you guys spoiled that game for me, I tried not to read but I saw literally 1 word in 3 separate posts, and then the INFJ magic instantly filled in all the gaps! ;^; (I wonder, do INTJs also suffer from this magical affliction?)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kizuna

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,621 Posts
Nothing to do with types, everything to do with moral philsophy.

The utilitarian answer to this question Does the greater good take precedence over yourself or loved ones? is yes. (The fundamental axiom of utilitarianism, according to Jeremy Bentham, is it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong.)

I suspect most people would disagree as most people don't buy into this particular brand of moral philosophy, regardless of their type.
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top