# Fi and "Political Correctness"



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

*I've heard people blame Fi in ego for being politically correct, and also for being politically incorrect.

I've heard people blame Fi PoLR (or Fi in superego in general) for being politically correct, and also for being politically incorrect.

Obviously these are very contrasting claims.

Do you know if Fi can be connected with politically correct or politically incorrect tendencies?*

In raising this question, I do have concerns about the rather imprecise definitions of political correctness and incorrectness used by most people. For instance, such definitions seem to be highly dependent on context, such as which region/country/culture you are in. Moreover, I know from my own day-to-day experiences that what's politically correct at my house of worship is politically incorrect at work, and vice versa. So it can vary at a micro-level.

----

*Examples of statements that can be considered politically correct or incorrect depending on the context (these are real examples):*

*"I'd be willing to date and marry someone of any race; doesn't matter so long as we are in love."*

*"I ask my students to put only their student numbers on their papers. Names are often coded for gender or language, so I do not want to see their names. I do this to guard against possible unconscious bias."* - There's a large body of evidence that most people are unconsciously biased - even and perhaps especially those who insist they are not.

*"It is not fair that my wife can talk back to me but I cannot hit her."* - Fair would be that your wife can _talk_ back to you and you can likewise _talk_ back to her. I have had two acquaintences (both straight men) say this to me; one is probably an IEE and the other probably an SLE. Go figure.

*"I hate Islam."* - Politically incorrect in almost all contexts. Note, the hate is directed at Islam as a religion and not at Muslims as people. The expression of hate here doesn't seem consistent with superego Fi.

Then there's always the idiot who says he's an *"equal opportunity hater"* - Expressions of hate yet again not consistent with Fi in superego. (From my Fi-devaluing perspective, I ask, why hate on anyone, never mind a whole group of people?!)

*"I've had bad experiences with Christians."* - Focus on own personal experiences. No idea if this is even type-related.

----

Related reading:
Fi PoLR - Misunderstood | the16types.info

----


@FreeBeer since I know political in/correctness is an interest of yours...? @Graveyard if you have any comments inkface:


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Adherence, in general, is Weak. You must adhere to complete abstinence from the element (polr), adhere to endlessly doing (suggestive), adhere to social norms (role), or adhere to personal standards (mobilizing). "Rules" are Ti, so adherence to social norm rules is Role. Adherence to social norms relationships is Role Fi. Lemme know if you can't fill in the blanks, and I'll think up on it.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

x.x how did this start? I should INtroduce. Hi I'm FreeBeer, former IEE & long time PerC veteran.

Ok, well I really like ppl such as Donald Trump, Ann Coulter, Milo Yiannopoulos, Sam Harris and so on. I'm very active on the debate and current events sub forums & many "INFP" liberals consider me racist, misogynist, bigoted, xenophobic and a whole host of other things, because I'm for family, against immigration, against gay marriage, imo feminism & Islam are cancer (sincerely fuck you people), I'm for capitalism, for Austrian Economics, against the European union, for minimal government and generally non "liberal" on many other issues...for example imo democracy is terrible & ppl seem to fal to understand that we don't live in democracies. Imo libtards have quite a few brain cells loose & college brainwashes these ppl.

I could be ENFp or INTj, I sincerely do not know, but as the great Martin Luther King once said: Here I stand, I cannot do otherwise. God help me, amen!

Like most of these ppl I too have a "talent" for riling ppl up and I find it fun tbh. Its not like I do it intentionally, but ppl get pissy, when their perspectives on life are openly challenged.





















*FREE SPEECH OR BUST IMO. I DON't CARE WHO IT OFFENDS.*

@Jeremy8419 My issue with Fi is that I fail to establish close relationships with ppl & tbh most of the time I'm not interested in & don't really care about establishing anything like that. I'm fairly sure I'm not psychopathic, however I have thought about the possibility, BUT my relationships with most ppl are very shallow and I keep them at distance. Who isn't close can't hurt me sort of way. I'd say I build up berriers in order to protect myself & am rather isolationist.

Anyway my case against psychopathy is based on me suffering from social anxiety for more then a decade. Psychopaths don't fret over how they are perceived and don't feel guilt over letting ppl down and such things. I certainly do.

Other then talking about ideas with them and liking to have ppl around me, I mostly have only a handful of ppl I'm sort of close to. This distance is usually very obvious when i'm not affected by ppl dying on me. I sincerely don't feel any different if someone in the family dies, i may panic about financial issues and responsibilities being thrust upon me, but I don;t have the emotional reaction & I'm really sure I'm in touch with my feelings.

I have thought about rationalizing this with my persistent neurotic depression, which makes me rather emotionless and numb, for example I don;t know if I can feel happy. I do get angry tho, I'm almost never sad... which is odd because in my teenage years I was. What I mainly am capable of feeling is anger, everything else is very dulled out. I'm get angry slowly, then it blows up and goes away in about a day lamo. Normally I'm quite upbeat & relaxed, but I don't really feel much...and boredom comes very easily.

I could also be schizoid, but that was ruled out by my former psychologist, so idk:


----------



## To_august (Oct 13, 2013)

It's not the question about "what", but about "why". Only by having a profound reasoning explaining _why _any given person expresses themselves in a politically correct (or incorrect) manner, we can pinpoint the IEs that are working behind the scenes. 

It's mostly useless to do so with politicians I think, because what they tell to the public is not the same thing they may truly support (if they care to support anything apart from their wallets at all). They just play to people's desires to take offices they want, and choose political agenda depending on the voting public they aim to get votes from.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

To_august said:


> It's not the question about "what", but about "why". Only by having a profound reasoning explaining _why _any given person expresses themselves in a politically correct (or incorrect) manner, we can pinpoint the IEs that are working behind the scenes.


My reasoning has a lot to do with the migration crisis. Before I saw with my own two eyes the disconnect between what the western media was saying and what the situation on the ground in Hungary was last year.... I was a liberal. That woke me up to SJW hypocrisy and just how far gone the left was :/ .. very shocking tbh.

Nowadays I just go with what makes sense based on hands on experience, I look at things rather pragmatically and threw ideology out the window. 

Imo ppl are too shit scared to say what really is on their minds due to fears of losing their jobs, being socially ostracized and so on. I went through a rather tough time reprogramming myself to not care what ppl think of me, so being honest, loud and blunt about this comes rather easily.



> It's mostly useless to do so with politicians I think, because what they tell to the public is not the same thing they may truly support (if they care to support anything apart from their wallets at all). They just play to people's desires to take offices they want, and choose political agenda depending on the voting public they aim to get votes from.


Completely agree.

The fan art gallery is neat btw.


----------



## To_august (Oct 13, 2013)

FreeBeer said:


> My reasoning has a lot to do with the migration crisis. Before I saw with my own two eyes the disconnect between what the western media was saying and what the situation on the ground in Hungary was last year.... I was a liberal. That woke me up to SJW hypocrisy and just how far gone the left was :/ .. very shocking tbh.
> 
> Nowadays I just go with what makes sense based on hands on experience, I look at things rather pragmatically and threw ideology out the window.
> 
> Imo ppl are too shit scared to say what really is on their minds due to fears of losing their jobs, being socially ostracized and so on. I went through a rather tough time reprogramming myself to not care what ppl think of me, so being honest, loud and blunt about this comes rather easily.


I'm not too keen on labels and tbh not really interested in them. Not too concerned with where I politically stand even. Right, left, middle, all seem the same except for my own code, which is the only one that matters to me. It may coincide with people in general or may not, but I don't care.

Anyways, what SJW means these days? I guess it's someone who brings up social issues in sanctimonious manner to glorify oneself without actually having deep seated convictions? I don't know if I should care or not about such people, but they just seem worthless. For me issues of justice, discrimination and equality has always seemed to be the very basic needs and as clear-cut as they can be. Justice is bringing commensurate measure for the respective deed, equality has to do with... well, being equal and not with bringing someone down for the sake of advancing someone else (how equality can be understood as a disbalance escapes me). None of it has anything to do with public institutions or supporting some group of people, or wearing some label. It's not even ideological - unless one may call it personal ideology - but, anyways, it's perfectly case-by-case, concrete. Hypocrisy that covers real issues up is odious ofc.

People being scared is understandable. If you have something important to lose, you won't want to lose it, but one has to also have the courage to break the hushing up cycle and take responsibility. That's the question of counterbalances too. Part of the not caring about what others think for me was the realization that they actually don't. Nobody gives a shit about anybody, except for very few close people, and everybody are far more absorbed with their own problems rather then who I am or how I express myself.

I know I didn't answer your type concerns, but it's just my outlook on some points you mentioned.



> Completely agree.
> 
> The fan art gallery is neat btw.


Thanks


----------



## Verity (Aug 2, 2014)

I'd say that trying to match what is generally considered the primary ethical values in a society can be attributed to normative Fi, but it's not at all exclusive to political correctness, and "politically correct" is a very arbitrary term that gets used in countless different contexts, more often than not as a slanderous rethorical device. 

For example: "I'm quite critical against Islam as an ideology, just like I am towards all religion." is something I could say(I'm going with the primary norm in my society by treating all religions equally, but I'm going against the dominant opinion of _one group_ in society by being critical against Islam) and it's like I always need to show that I'm not intentionally discriminating(because again, it's against the norm). While a 3D Fi type could say "I hate islam" while having a more nuanced view of the ethical values involved, or a 1D type could do the same... Because they felt like it or something. 

Still, it's extremely context-dependent(as is everything in Socionics).

Came to think of it, I think an xLE can have such a bad conception of ethical values that they unintentionally understand them as rules(Ti is used instead), and therefore think that the people who holds the arbitrary properties of "Political Correctness" as a personal value are following a rule, which the xLE in turn may reject("they are all sheep!").


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Fi deals with the morality of society so therefore it's more about our attitudes to morality eg political correctness or incorrectness and what we value in relation to that, rather than these two attitudes in and of themselves.


----------



## Ixim (Jun 19, 2013)

FreeBeer said:


> x.x how did this start? I should INtroduce. Hi I'm FreeBeer, former IEE & long time PerC veteran.
> 
> Ok, well I really like ppl such as Donald Trump, Ann Coulter, Milo Yiannopoulos, Sam Harris and so on. I'm very active on the debate and current events sub forums & many "INFP" liberals consider me racist, misogynist, bigoted, xenophobic and a whole host of other things, because I'm for family, against immigration, against gay marriage, imo feminism & Islam are cancer (sincerely fuck you people), I'm for capitalism, for Austrian Economics, against the European union, for minimal government and generally non "liberal" on many other issues...for example imo democracy is terrible & ppl seem to fal to understand that we don't live in democracies. Imo libtards have quite a few brain cells loose & college brainwashes these ppl.
> 
> ...


Well, do you know who also acts like RED letters?

Well, I do. The only real difference being that my anger is acute instead of a slow burn -> eruption. I just tend to overreact to something that hurts me or whatever. And I do have strong beliefs etc.

But I am not in any way, shape or form conservative lol. I like Goldielocks as well, but his plans have ZERO potential and ZERO practical value. Like the recent idea that US should charge foreign nations for using their AF protection. That is a fine idea from the logical standpoint. It is like renting a house and not charging people for staying in. But this is NOT BUSINESS, this is POLITICS and as my PM will soon find out...it's a WHOOOLE ANOTHER BALL GAME. Diplomacy, treaties, allies, etc etc ALL prevent you from just changing your AF protection policy overnight. So, as all Trump ideas, a BEAUTIFUL IDEA with ZERO potential and even negative consenquences in the real world.

Also, why hate anyone?  

As for OP, as long as a person can create his own set of norms(or even more)...it's 2D+. Which is just to say about my Trump theory which will ultimately get proven right. In short: "Don't type public personalities-who knows how they are in private life". I expected that to be common sense, but hey! The more you know!


----------



## FourLeafCloafer (Aug 5, 2014)

FreeBeer said:


> I could be ENFp or INTj, I sincerely do not know, but as the great Martin Luther King once said: Here I stand, I cannot do otherwise. God help me, amen!


That was Martin Luther, not Martin Luther King. I'm a fan of both though.

(To add to that, I'm a fan of _most_ of Martin Luther's ideas. I'm patently against his antisemitism.)


----------



## Anonymous Disaster (Mar 15, 2016)

Isn't political correcteness more of a Fe thing?


----------



## Ixim (Jun 19, 2013)

Anonymous Disaster said:


> Isn't political correcteness more of a Fe thing?


Agreed. I never linked it to Fi-I can be plenty of straightforward proven I feel strongly about something.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

Not related to type, imo. Everyone can be politically correct/incorrect for different reasons and motivations. 

Tbh I feel like a lot of people use the term "political correctness" as though it is some sort of shackle holding them back. I simply see it as respect for different viewpoints and identities. I like to be honest, and I may not respect the soundness of your argument, but it's another thing entirely for me to not respect you as a person entitled to live a safe and happy life. 

There's no real harm in making your comments more inclusive and less derogatory... I think a respectful person would see that automatically and wouldn't need to tout the "MY FREE SPEECH IS BEING ENCROACHED UPON!!" argument. People who tend to do that just tend to be projecting an image of aggression by thinking of themselves as harbingers of truth to the world or something. Seems motivated by internal frustration to me. I don't deny that there are some radical SJWs who try to enforce ridiculous standards of political correctness onto others (radfems for example), but I see the former situation playing out more than the latter. I think EVERYONE would benefit from a healthy dose of respect for others.

That said I have noticed a trend with some Fi PoLR types rejecting the notion of political correctness entirely, and usually what works with them is not to reinforce the principle of respect (Fi approach), but to remind them that their actions and words are hurting people's feelings (Fe approach). Not to say that political correctness is the domain of Fi, but broad principles of morality and respect are Fi-based, and types with weak Fi tend to have issues understanding and enacting them, especially when they don't value Fi as well.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

Ixim said:


> Well, do you know who also acts like RED letters?
> 
> Well, I do. The only real difference being that my anger is acute instead of a slow burn -> eruption. I just tend to overreact to something that hurts me or whatever. And I do have strong beliefs etc.
> 
> ...


Well you guys are Americans, I''m Hungarian and I voted for Vriktor Orban (basically our Trump) twice now. Needless to say we have closed the borders quite literally. (tripple layer barbed wire wall & patrols) No migrant will be let into the country.

Its not about hate, its about reason, identity, culture and preserving civilization.

The constitution was also rewritten making the nation Christian and making Islamization illegal.

I have done my part here. Whatever happens in America is not my problem. If you guys aren't aware of global issues, it isn't really my place to correct that.



Stultum said:


> That was Martin Luther, not Martin Luther King. I'm a fan of both though.
> 
> (To add to that, I'm a fan of _most_ of Martin Luther's ideas. I'm patently against his antisemitism.)


Isn't that written on some German church somewhere? My mistake. I like King.



To_august said:


> I'm not too keen on labels and tbh not really interested in them. Not too concerned with where I politically stand even. Right, left, middle, all seem the same except for my own code, which is the only one that matters to me. It may coincide with people in general or may not, but I don't care.


Awesome.



> Anyways, what SJW means these days? I guess it's someone who brings up social issues in sanctimonious manner to glorify oneself without actually having deep seated convictions? I don't know if I should care or not about such people, but they just seem worthless.


They are kind of annoying, nothing more.



> For me issues of justice, discrimination and equality has always seemed to be the very basic needs and as clear-cut as they can be. Justice is bringing commensurate measure for the respective deed, equality has to do with... well, being equal and not with bringing someone down for the sake of advancing someone else (how equality can be understood as a disbalance escapes me). None of it has anything to do with public institutions or supporting some group of people, or wearing some label. It's not even ideological - unless one may call it personal ideology - but, anyways, it's perfectly case-by-case, concrete. Hypocrisy that covers real issues up is odious ofc.


Equality is a myth. No such thing in real life. Equality as we speak of it is mainly about equality in opportunity and before the law. For this you require a constitution at bare minimum. 



> People being scared is understandable. If you have something important to lose, you won't want to lose it, but one has to also have the courage to break the hushing up cycle and take responsibility. That's the question of counterbalances too. Part of the not caring about what others think for me was the realization that they actually don't. Nobody gives a shit about anybody, except for very few close people, and everybody are far more absorbed with their own problems rather then who I am or how I express myself.


Kind of true, yeah.



> I know I didn't answer your type concerns, but it's just my outlook on some points you mentioned.
> 
> 
> Thanks


 thx for sharing and you are welcome. I really like the art.

@Night Huntress This probably started, because I noticed that most SJWs are MBTI INFPs (almost all of them on PerC tbh). Op must have seen that and so this thread was made.

<.< sometimes I'm amazed how much aggro I can pull...


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

SJWs are Super-Id or Role SJWs. That's why they have the meme "SJW," because they're weak at it and people make fun of them for it.


----------



## FourLeafCloafer (Aug 5, 2014)

FreeBeer said:


> Isn't that written on some German church somewhere? My mistake. I like King.


Not really, although he's the same guy who is said to have nailed his 96 (or a number thereabouts) theses to the Wittenberg church door (he most likely didn't though, he just published them.)

Martin Luther was a heretic in the eyes of the Catholic church, founder of the Lutheran church (although he didn't want to - he wanted to reform the Catholic church.), and very influential in the teachings of almost every protestant church. He was called before a church council in Worms to discuss his ideas, the church wanting him to retract them. Then he said: 'I stand here and can't do otherwise, God help me, amen!'. It's a small miracle he managed to get away from there. The Catholic church sure didn't like it.

He was most certainly not politically correct in the sense that he said exactly what he meant, even calling the Pope the antichrist.


----------



## Ixim (Jun 19, 2013)

FreeBeer said:


> Well you guys are Americans, I''m Hungarian and I voted for Vriktor Orban (basically our Trump) twice now. Needless to say we have closed the borders quite literally. (tripple layer barbed wire wall & patrols) No migrant will be let into the country.
> 
> Its not about hate, its about reason, identity, culture and preserving civilization.
> 
> ...


Yeah, Hungary the christian state. You guys went down the drain, but that shouldn't surprise me seeing on what side you were in WWII. You were Huns lol. Since when were Huns christians? You just had to embrace it or you'd get pulverised by surrounding countries(Austria especially). But you have your heads wiped clean by someone not that different than Benito. You waste your potential on wires instead of building up economy-a country with the highest VAT in the world(28% IIRC) and a country that had to lease out its OWN PARLIAMENT. And what do you do? Instead of wrestling with economy and making it work for you...you turn to kissing flags...sure that is easier. I agree. Ignore problems, they will go away by themselves. owai...!

It's nice to be cosmopolitan :happy:


----------



## To_august (Oct 13, 2013)

FreeBeer said:


> Equality is a myth. No such thing in real life. Equality as we speak of it is mainly about equality in opportunity and before the law. For this you require a constitution at bare minimum.


It's just situational and as simple as not favouring Kerry over Mary, because Kerry's daddy is reach/handsome/influential/whatever. Pretty simple and concrete stuff. I didn't mean abstracted absolutes of course. We all be equal once in graves and turning to dust.


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

FreeBeer said:


> The constitution was also rewritten making the nation Christian


Yeah, that's something to be proud of...



FreeBeer said:


> I noticed that most SJWs are MBTI INFPs (almost all of them on PerC tbh). Op must have seen that and so this thread was made.


Most of the vocal ones are Beta quadra. 



Ixim said:


> Yeah, Hungary the christian state. You guys went down the drain, but that shouldn't surprise me seeing on what side you were in WWII.


Weren't Croats also on the Axis side?



Ixim said:


> You were Huns lol.


No they weren't.


----------



## Ixim (Jun 19, 2013)

The_Wanderer said:


> Yeah, that's something to be proud of...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


They were an offspring of that tribe, not of Huns, my bad. 9 tribes or something. Look, I know too much as is.

Yeah we were and look where that keeps dragging us to. Instead of looking up to Czech(ia) and such civilised countries, we end up in mud, time and time again. Tbh, we shouldn't object to Hungary seeing how actually alike we are. Still, the whole Europe owes us more than it lets on-if there weren't for Miklosz(right?)...you all would have felt the yataghan. :happy:

But I don't like talking about this. Look, I really hate the concept of nations. It brings nothing good except selfishness, foolish pride and divisions. Every last one of them being anti me, heh.

edit: this topic(history, nations etc) makes me feel VERY BAD, like rotten from inside. Like...ugh! Like something bad's going to happen.


----------



## leictreon (Jan 4, 2016)

To_august said:


> It's not the question about "what", but about "why". Only by having a profound reasoning explaining _why _any given person expresses themselves in a politically correct (or incorrect) manner, we can pinpoint the IEs that are working behind the scenes.
> 
> It's mostly useless to do so with politicians I think, because what they tell to the public is not the same thing they may truly support (if they care to support anything apart from their wallets at all). They just play to people's desires to take offices they want, and choose political agenda depending on the voting public they aim to get votes from.


My exact thoughts


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

To_august said:


> It's not the question about "what", but about "why". Only by having a profound reasoning explaining _why _any given person expresses themselves in a politically correct (or incorrect) manner, we can pinpoint the IEs that are working behind the scenes.


Good point, I think you are right. As with other viewpoints one might hold, it's not the viewpoint itself that could be type-related but the cognition behind forming that viewpoint. Me, I have thrown out the ideas of both political correctness and incorrectness. In normal interactions (especially IRL) I don't use either phrase at all, as I find them too ambiguous and effectively meaningless. Too imprecise. I simply disregard both terms as if they are semantically null.

I instead operate on a foundation of: Why shouldn't I say/do X? I have no reason (Ti) *to* do X _and_ X is likely to be offensive (Fe) to a given person or to people in general. This does mean if I had a good enough reason I'd do it anyway. But I simply do not see a reason to hurt people unnecessarily.



> It's mostly useless to do so with politicians I think, because what they tell to the public is not the same thing they may truly support (if they care to support anything apart from their wallets at all). They just play to people's desires to take offices they want, and choose political agenda depending on the voting public they aim to get votes from.


Right, well, I wasn't really thinking of typing politicians anyway - firstly because I couldn't care less about them xD, but secondly for this reason as well.



To_august said:


> (...) equality has to do with... well, being equal and not with bringing someone down for the sake of advancing someone else (how equality can be understood as a disbalance escapes me). None of it has anything to do with public institutions or supporting some group of people, or wearing some label. It's not even ideological - unless one may call it personal ideology - but, anyways, it's perfectly case-by-case, concrete. (...)


This is basically what I think as well. However, treating people consistently and impartially like this is widely considered politically correct, at least where I live. For example, a manager who would treat a female employee the same as a male employee, or a transgender employee the same as a cisgender employee, is viewed as politically correct - though in reality it is just basic consistency.




Verity said:


> I'd say that trying to match what is generally considered the primary ethical values in a society can be attributed to normative Fi, but it's not at all exclusive to political correctness, and "politically correct" is a very arbitrary term that gets used in countless different contexts, more often than not as a slanderous rethorical device.
> 
> For example: "I'm quite critical against Islam as an ideology, just like I am towards all religion." is something I could say(I'm going with the primary norm in my society by treating all religions equally, but I'm going against the dominant opinion of _one group_ in society by being critical against Islam) and it's like I always need to show that I'm not intentionally discriminating(because again, it's against the norm). While a 3D Fi type could say "I hate islam" while having a more nuanced view of the ethical values involved, or a 1D type could do the same... Because they felt like it or something.
> 
> Still, it's extremely context-dependent(as is everything in Socionics).


Interesting. Thanks. I tend to approach from a place of impartiality as well; usually, criticisms of the practices/teachings of one religion apply just as well to the practices/teachings of another religion.



> Came to think of it, I think an xLE can have such a bad conception of ethical values that they unintentionally understand them as rules(Ti is used instead), and therefore think that the people who holds the arbitrary properties of "Political Correctness" as a personal value are following a rule, which the xLE in turn may reject("they are all sheep!").


Aren't they rules, though? I always thought that political correctness (which is, yes, arbitrary) is a ruleset that one might choose to adhere to. It's like a "how not to offend people 101" manual. As a whole, I reject it, but I do apply parts of political correctness here and there.

The funny thing is my dad is an IEE and calls *me* a "sheep" because, for example, I would date anyone of any race. He sees this as "giving in to political correctness" and "you're only saying that because you've given in to political correctness" - when in reality, I say that because it's the null hypothesis and I have no reason to do otherwise.




Night Huntress said:


> Not related to type, imo. Everyone can be politically correct/incorrect for different reasons and motivations.
> 
> Tbh I feel like a lot of people use the term "political correctness" as though it is some sort of shackle holding them back. I simply see it as respect for different viewpoints and identities. I like to be honest, and I may not respect the soundness of your argument, but it's another thing entirely for me to not respect you as a person entitled to live a safe and happy life.


That's the aspect of political correctness I don't have any issue with, the multiple perspectives and identities. You won't see me bitching about _"Damn kids these days calling themselves pansexual"_ because I really couldn't care less. My first thought is probably _"Oh, cool, that's a new word; what's it mean?"_ and not _"Oh no, new identity, people have more words to describe their experiences, how awful!"_ Lol.



> *There's no real harm in making your comments more inclusive and less derogatory*... I think a respectful person would see that automatically and wouldn't need to tout the "MY FREE SPEECH IS BEING ENCROACHED UPON!!" argument. People who tend to do that just tend to be projecting an image of aggression by thinking of themselves as harbingers of truth to the world or something. Seems motivated by internal frustration to me. I don't deny that there are some radical SJWs who try to enforce ridiculous standards of political correctness onto others (radfems for example), but I see the former situation playing out more than the latter. I think EVERYONE would benefit from a healthy dose of respect for others.


Agree with bolded; it's easy for me to use more inclusive language etc. and not use slurs and such. I have no reason to do the latter, and the former is just a matter of using general (umbrella) terms instead of specific terms most of the time, e.g. "folks" instead of "guys", "people" (or whatever is relevant, e.g. "employees") instead of "men". I actually do this a lot and think it's important to use inclusive terms, I see this as part of nonassumption - not making assumptions/ sticking with the null hypothesis whenever possible.

TBH I see the former more than the latter too. Lol.



> That said I have noticed a trend with some Fi PoLR types rejecting the notion of political correctness entirely, and usually what works with them is not to reinforce the principle of respect (Fi approach), but to remind them that their actions and words are hurting people's feelings (Fe approach). Not to say that political correctness is the domain of Fi, but broad principles of morality and respect are Fi-based, and types with weak Fi tend to have issues understanding and enacting them, especially when they don't value Fi as well.


That's interesting about the Fe approach working, it seems like it would. Unfortunately I've noticed with many people (of all types) that if you tell them "X is offensive", they will go out of their way to do X when it otherwise wouldn't have been on their radar at all.

I even think a Ti approach (since low and unvalued Fi means Ti ego) could be effective here. What logical reason does one have to use racial slurs, for instance? *crickets* I certainly have no such reason, so I simply don't use them. Also, basics like applying the same Ti rules to everyone in a consistent manner (and not only normative rules but the Ti ego's own rules) - regardless of race, religion, etc. - should come pretty naturally to Ti egos.


@FreeBeer

Interesting viewpoints. Not going to get too in-depth here, but overall, going from what you've written, I arrive at my conclusions in quite a different manner, even where I agree with you. I don't see your Ti/Fe. I only mention your type because you mentioned it earlier, I won't mention it again if you don't want.



> This probably started, because I noticed that most SJWs are MBTI INFPs (almost all of them on PerC tbh). Op must have seen that and so this thread was made.


This thread was made based on IRL interactions, not PerC interactions. Lol.


----------



## Graveyard (Oct 23, 2015)

As our goddess @Night Huntress pointed out, there are plenty reasons why someone would be "politically correct". However, type wouldn't really determine who's PC and who's not. 

An SLE can be politically correct, should the SLE be insecure enough on the ethical regard (like, for example, being constantly exposed to Fi and ending up feeling bad about it). An IEI can be politically correct for the sake of other people's wellbeing or emotional state, and an EII could be politically correct because it feels like the right thing to be. Of course, these aren't the only reasons why these types (SLE, IEI and EII) can be PC, just an example.

It all depends. Your type isn't how you behave, nor who you are. It's the way you digest information.

I have been considered PC because I'm careful with my words, or because I put other's wellbeing before mine sometimes (not always, I'm not a martyr. ) But I'm not all that good, actually, as I strongly oppose the PC movement and SJWs. It reeks of spoiled children.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

SJW's:


> Unconsciously gets inspired by an idea or possibility to show his best when defendig some cause. He is flattered by being presented as a champion, standard-bearer or defender of a just cause, protector of dear persons or values.


----------



## Verity (Aug 2, 2014)

counterintuitive said:


> Aren't they rules, though? I always thought that political correctness (which is, yes, arbitrary) is a ruleset that one might choose to adhere to. It's like a "how not to offend people 101" manual. As a whole, I reject it, but I do apply parts of political correctness here and there.


No idea. Anecdotal evidence incoming, but none of my friends call themselves PC, and I've nearly exclusively heard the word in negative contexts by people who use it as a smokescreen to be disrespectful instead of questioning the validity of specific beliefs they disagree with. Usually because they *feel *as if their rights are infringed upon when someone has trouble with them calling immigrants disrespectful and derogatory names. 
I've been called both PC and racist by people from both ends of the spectrum for different reasons, but I don't give a shit as long as I deem the underlying accusation stupid, and if it doesn't impact my relationships to people I actually care about.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

PC has more than one connotation. One involves as we in the West use the term, that is: Don't use racial or gender slander or stereotypes of such. The other refers to, basically, manners and etiquette in speech on a more basic level: Taking turns talking, not being argumentative, watching "language," etc. The one referenced in Socionics is the latter. The former is a matter of culture, which is a sub-part taken into consideration in the latter.


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

Jeremy8419 said:


> PC has more than one connotation. One involves as we in the West use the term, that is: Don't use racial or gender slander or stereotypes of such. The other refers to, basically, *manners and etiquette in speech on a more basic level: Taking turns talking, not being argumentative, watching "language," etc.* The one referenced in Socionics is the latter. The former is a matter of culture, which is a sub-part taken into consideration in the latter.


That's politeness. I know people commonly conflate politeness with political correctness here in the US, but they aren't the same.

Now, I do think Socionics Fi is associated with politeness, so yes, that's the sense that might be type-related.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

counterintuitive said:


> That's politeness. I know people commonly conflate politeness with political correctness here in the US, but they aren't the same.
> 
> Now, I do think Socionics Fi is associated with politeness, so yes, that's the sense that might be type-related.


I'm saying, the OP is a translation issue.


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

Jeremy8419 said:


> I'm saying, the OP is a translation issue.


Oh. Yeah, I actually agree, heh.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

counterintuitive said:


> This thread was made based on IRL interactions, not PerC interactions. Lol.


So, I'm guessing you have Fi dom friends who are politically correct?

I guess Fi doms find social justice and all that jazz appealing, wouldn't be surprised. Tho if I have Fi preference, I certainly don't.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

FreeBeer said:


> So, I'm guessing you have Fi dom friends who are politically correct?
> 
> I guess Fi doms find social justice and all that jazz appealing, wouldn't be surprised. Tho if I have Fi preference, I certainly don't.


SJW is Fe.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

Ixim said:


> Yeah, Hungary the christian state. You guys went down the drain, but that shouldn't surprise me seeing on what side you were in WWII. You were Huns lol. Since when were Huns christians? You just had to embrace it or you'd get pulverised by surrounding countries(Austria especially). But you have your heads wiped clean by someone not that different than Benito. You waste your potential on wires instead of building up economy-a country with the highest VAT in the world(28% IIRC) and a country that had to lease out its OWN PARLIAMENT. And what do you do? Instead of wrestling with economy and making it work for you...you turn to kissing flags...sure that is easier. I agree. Ignore problems, they will go away by themselves. owai...!
> 
> It's nice to be cosmopolitan :happy:


I assume you aren't familiar with recent history, so let me fill you in. Your condescending post is not appreciated however. 

a) Hungarians have a proud history of being Catholic. It was necessary step to save the nation.
b) If you haven't heard, the social democrats here drove the country into debt, destroyed the economy, lied to the population and prepared the country to surrender land and sovereignty to the EU. We were on our way to become the second Greece.

In 2010 we had a small revolution. Ppl almost drove a tank into parliament, there was rioting, fighting in the streets.
At this point to calm ppl down the young democratic party (center right) held protests every day till the socialists surrendered power. The constitution was rewritten, we broke foreign monopolies on utilities, incentives were given to families in forms of tax breaks, further tax cuts were made, we made trade deals with non Eu nations & the Gorge Soros (now wanted for sedition) led leftist propaganda insurgent cells were thrown out from Hungary along with the IMP. We repaid the debt to the International monetary fund, the army was strengthened & policies implemented to promote a free market & the growth of local industries.

Right now the nation is on track, we have less taxes, free market, Brussels has been shown the finger & the economy is growing. We have our sovereignty and dignity back.

Also Poland & Austria is following in our footsteps. In eastern Europe the state & communism has always been opposed by the church. As a atheist I recognize the value it brings, I'd much rather have the church then the horrors of an atheist socialist state.

You will see this implemented across Europe rather soon, imo even in Germany. Center right conservative parties are on the rise Europe wide & anti EU sentiment is growing.

Whatever the western media spouts is propaganda garbage, because they are scared of what is happening in central-eastern Europe as well as the UK.



Stultum said:


> Not really, although he's the same guy who is said to have nailed his 96 (or a number thereabouts) theses to the Wittenberg church door (he most likely didn't though, he just published them.)
> 
> Martin Luther was a heretic in the eyes of the Catholic church, founder of the Lutheran church (although he didn't want to - he wanted to reform the Catholic church.), and very influential in the teachings of almost every protestant church. He was called before a church council in Worms to discuss his ideas, the church wanting him to retract them. Then he said: 'I stand here and can't do otherwise, God help me, amen!'. It's a small miracle he managed to get away from there. The Catholic church sure didn't like it.
> 
> He was most certainly not politically correct in the sense that he said exactly what he meant, even calling the Pope the antichrist.


Sincerely, the new pope can go fuck himself. Nobody here will listen to his garbage & the child molestation is sincerely shameful. The Hungarian church has been clear about that.

I'm protestant christian atheist.



Jeremy8419 said:


> SJW is Fe.


I agree. Imo it is yet another nail in the coffin of MBTI INFPs being real Fi doms. They are not. No real Fi dom would advocate against free speech.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Hadn't noticed that before. Let's try and not insult nationalities. It's common to just assume that everyone is American on an English forum, bit occasionally you'll end up legitimately offending someone unintentionally if you treat it as such.


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

FreeBeer said:


> I'm protestant christian atheist.


... yeah sorry bro, you're _really not_ a logical lead... shit, I think you have more ethics/feeling in your speech than I do.



FreeBeer said:


> No real Fi dom would advocate against free speech.


Apples and oranges.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

The_Wanderer said:


> ... yeah sorry bro, you're _really not_ a logical lead... shit, I think you have more ethics/feeling in your speech than I do.


Probably. ^^; I really like how this tread is growing too.

You should check out what libertarian and republican atheists have decided in the case of religion, regarding the issue of the majority of atheists being statist leftist. We basically chose the cultural church as the bulwark against encroaching state socialism.

Effort is focused now on enriching and modernizing religious institutions, expanding on the already existing stoic philosophies Christianity has. Primary focus on NAP and parenting.

Much like theists can't make me have faith by force, we can't make them lose theirs by force, so cooperation in the name of raising better ppl & communities seems to be the only sound answer. (look at post atheist-communist Russia and East-Europe, where atheism has failed)


----------



## Graveyard (Oct 23, 2015)

Jeremy8419 said:


> SJW is Fe.


The SJW movement cannot be pinned down on one IE, because it's incredibly disorganized and not focused on one thing. In fact, it's so messy, they end up fighting their own people.

If they actually had an agenda and tried to pursue an objective, perhaps we could. But seeing they just like to complain, nah man.


----------



## ninjahitsawall (Feb 1, 2013)

Fi in my experience (two EII/INFP family members for example) can be politically incorrect, just knows when to turn that off/tone it down based on social context. So they might do so more privately (especially INFP's). I think Fi/Ne types tend to be "social chameleons". They also seem to adjust what is "socially appropriate" to the situation. So they will laugh at some dark racist-sounding joke if a relative they know is harmless is making it, but if someone they don't know too well makes the same joke, might interpret it as unethical, inappropriate, and not funny.

From a more theoretical standpoint, it doesn't make sense for Fi to be concerned with political correctness for its own sake, as this is in essence a concern with outward (objective) social appropriateness and keeping the peace. more of an Fe concern.


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

... wait, wait, wait. You mean to tell me that having to forfeit my own PERSONAL beliefs in favour of not offending the values of a GROUP other than my own is Fi. WTF?!? 

*"I'd be willing to date and marry someone of any race; doesn't matter so long as we are in love."*

... skin colour doesn't matter but I do discriminate against personal values, culture and religious beliefs. If I think their beliefs are bullshit, or the beliefs of their relatives are bullshit, I'm going to find someone far more agreeable. Regardless of what my liberal indoctrination would have me believe, I wasn't born yesterday.

*"I ask my students to put only their student numbers on their papers. Names are often coded for gender or language, so I do not want to see their names. I do this to guard against possible unconscious bias."* - There's a large body of evidence that most people are unconsciously biased - even and perhaps especially those who insist they are not.

... answers are also coded for gender and language, it's possible to intuit much from how a person writes. More PC bullshit that doesn't amount to anything in reality. I question the validity of the evidence especially in the social sciences where statistics are cherry picked, over interpreted and arranged so they reflect the political ideologies of the institution and the people who fund them.

There is a high asshole per capita among outspoken moralists. I have also made this observation.

*"It is not fair that my wife can talk back to me but I cannot hit her."* - Fair would be that your wife can _talk_ back to you and you can likewise _talk_ back to her. I have had two acquaintences (both straight men) say this to me; one is probably an IEE and the other probably an SLE. Go figure.

... fairness includes using physical force when someone uses physical force against me regardless if they're male of female. If someone makes a habit of talking back, disrespecting and insulting me, they no longer exist in my mind and I'll do everything in power to get them out of my life. If we're going to play fair, we're going to play to the bitter end. I understand that relationships have arguments but I would start a relationship with someone who is a nag. 

*"I hate Islam."* - Politically incorrect in almost all contexts. Note, the hate is directed at Islam as a religion and not at Muslims as people. The expression of hate here doesn't seem consistent with superego Fi.

... if you hate something or someone or a culture, those are your feelings. I see no problem with that. I personally believe that Islam and SJWs are the scourge of today's world. And the more we continue to support identity politics and blind-faith multiculturalism in the west the more problems we're going to have with Islam and the more it's going to interfere with Arabs who want to reform Islam. 

How can politics be CORRECT by avoiding difficult issues? And why is it that the indoctrination of CORRECT applies to some people and not others. I'm not saying shit like KKK and fascism is the answer but it's about time we learn self respect and draw some healthy boundaries.

Then there's always the idiot who says he's an *"equal opportunity hater"* - Expressions of hate yet again not consistent with Fi in superego. (From my Fi-devaluing perspective, I ask, why hate on anyone, never mind a whole group of people?!)

... if the hatred is justified. It is a valid emotion. It's not an emotion that's favoured by society, but social convention is an Fe issue. It may not be a pretty emotion but it exists, sometimes the reasons for hatred might actually be valid. I'm comfortable hating people just like I'm comfortable in loving them. I'm an equal opportunity discriminator: meaning I discriminate between what I personally feel is good and what I personally feel is evil. If the object in question requires a different pair of adjectives, so be it: good/evil, appealing/appalling, constructive/destructive, love/hate. If I am to love everything and everyone equally I ... well, castrate my emotional judgement. 

*"I've had bad experiences with Christians."* - Focus on own personal experiences. No idea if this is even type-related.

... what's funny is that when I tell people of me being anti-Christian or a Satanist and explain my reasoning behind my complete rejection of Christianity, Judaism and Islam and my rejection of every political, social or spiritual ideology that has questionable demands and a questionable history, that requires me to accept a prescribed set of teachings where I find many of the postulates objectionable, I found more acceptance with the secular Christians and the agnostics than I did with anyone else. I did have some problems with my father when I came out of the closet about considering myself an apostate but he does understand and respect my decision.

I'm almost certain I'm an Fi type and have tested IEE-2Ne on socionics tests and have been typed as such on the 80 questions thread long ago.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

The_Wanderer said:


> Apples and oranges.


Could be, as I said. Regardless what type I am, I'm going to call it as I see it, I won't spare anyone's feelings and certainly won't stop...really hate coddling ppl.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Graveyard said:


> The SJW movement cannot be pinned down on one IE, because it's incredibly disorganized and not focused on one thing. In fact, it's so messy, they end up fighting their own people.
> 
> If they actually had an agenda and tried to pursue an objective, perhaps we could. But seeing they just like to complain, nah man.


That sounds like an IE lol.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

Jeremy8419 said:


> That sounds like an IE lol.


We could base this on quadra tbh.

SJWs are collectivist and define ppl by group, rely on their own subjective worldview. This means aristocratic & subjective. The only quadra fitting that is Beta.

If one could argue in favor of objectivism (which will be difficult considering), they would be Delta.

Either way, aristocratic for sure. *Such things rely mainly on ethics blocked with intuition.*

The reason I'd say this is more Fe-Ni, is because they seem to identify with the group or ideology, so when either is criticized, they take it as a personal insult. 

The competition for moral superiority within the group however hints at Ne-Fi characteristics. This would mean both quadras are to some degree involved. *The irony ofc is their lack of morality & reason.*

Might be that not very intelligent attention seeking narcissists just flock to the movement.

*To Betas and Deltas*

Don't take it personally, plenty of Betas and Deltas are different, for example Dave Rubin (delta IEE imo) & and Donald Trump (Beta SLE)


----------



## To_august (Oct 13, 2013)

counterintuitive said:


> Right, well, I wasn't really thinking of typing politicians anyway - firstly because I couldn't care less about them xD, but secondly for this reason as well.


That part was my reaction to videos with politicians and them supposedly representing not politically correct people.



> Good point, I think you are right. As with other viewpoints one might hold, it's not the viewpoint itself that could be type-related but the cognition behind forming that viewpoint. Me, I have thrown out the ideas of both political correctness and incorrectness. In normal interactions (especially IRL) I don't use either phrase at all, as I find them too ambiguous and effectively meaningless. Too imprecise. I simply disregard both terms as if they are semantically null.
> 
> I instead operate on a foundation of: Why shouldn't I say/do X? I have no reason (Ti) *to* do X _and_ X is likely to be offensive (Fe) to a given person or to people in general. This does mean if I had a good enough reason I'd do it anyway. But I simply do not see a reason to hurt people unnecessarily.


Yeah, that really bugs me when people attach surface behaviors to IEs, and simplify it to this-is-my-awesome-worldview vs stupid-other-people's-worldviews. Even if we take MBTI Fi, it's just stereotypical me-me-me and I'm-sooo-damn-attuned-to-my-values, and it's such a shallow and limited approach to functions that only reinforces pack mentality and gives rise to more useless stereotypes. 

Idk maybe it has something to do with side effect of ethics being blocked with intuition, and tendency to see people in terms of their general, archetypal forms, but that's such a foreign worldview to me. Even this thread is full of labels - I'm this and that and others belong to that other groups. Ugh. That's just pointless and has zero substance and sense.



> This is basically what I think as well. However, treating people consistently and impartially like this is widely considered politically correct, at least where I live. For example, a manager who would treat a female employee the same as a male employee, or a transgender employee the same as a cisgender employee, is viewed as politically correct - though in reality it is just basic consistency.


Probably majority of people in my close circle can be called politically incorrect on some issues, but I always thought it was just illogicality and inconsistency. It is not about being afraid of hurting someone else's feelings, but just making fucking null sense. Like, when I was a kid I was utterly bewildered when my grandparent was calling someone they've seen just once cunning and adaptive, and when I asked why they think so, the answer was: "He is Jew. They are like that".  It didn't make any sense then, neither it makes now. Consistency and impartiality are just default states unhindered by pointless labels.

Someone identifies himself as a Christian so he's a sheep. Really? What a bunch of stereotypical bullshit. Does calling someone Christian predict whether the person will get their job done? Does it tell if they will help you once you'll in trouble? Does it tell something about whether they are reliable, competent, honest, intrusive, corrupted etc.? No. It tells nothing. Fucking meaningless labels. I prefer to deal and judge concrete people in concrete situations.


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

FreeBeer said:


> So, I'm guessing you have Fi dom friends who are politically correct?
> 
> I guess Fi doms find social justice and all that jazz appealing, wouldn't be surprised. Tho if I have Fi preference, I certainly don't.


Nope. As I said, I don't use such terms irl.

Btw why do you keep assuming things about me? Lol. Aristocrats. 

Again. That seems Fe.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

counterintuitive said:


> Nope. As I said, I don't use such terms irl.
> 
> Btw why do you keep assuming things about me? Lol. Aristocrats.
> 
> Again. That seems Fe.


I keep assuming due to ethics blocked with intuition ;3, so ye.

I guess its futile to try and transfer socionics type into MBTI.... meh. Still I find it odd that sooo many MBTI INFPs are SJWs...










Join me on the dark side & vote for Trump... you know you want to.


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

FreeBeer said:


> I keep assuming due to ethics blocked with intuition ;3, so ye.




FWIW, to clarify, this thread was inspired by interactions with an IEE and an SLE IRL who seem to share virtually all of their worldviews, despite obviously sharing no valued functions. My view from the start of the thread is that there is no observable effect based on type (the null hypothesis), i.e. that political correctness or incorrectness is NTR.



> I guess its futile to try and transfer socionics type into MBTI.... meh. Still I find it odd that sooo many MBTI INFPs are SJWs...


Perhaps those who hold SJW values are more likely to identify with the INFP type. "Strong personal values and lots of ideas" is pretty much the MBTI INFP. And that's what an SJW will seem like, as they have strong personal values and lots of (unrealistic) ideas for improvement, regardless of their actual type.



FreeBeer said:


> Join me on the dark side & vote for Trump... you know you want to.


I can't vote in the US.


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

FreeBeer said:


> Could be, as I said. Regardless what type I am, I'm going to call it as I see it, I won't spare anyone's feelings and certainly won't stop...really hate coddling ppl.


Want a cookie? Yey, you can have one for being an IEE again. Not for having an opinion; they're like assholes, after all.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

counterintuitive said:


> FWIW, to clarify, this thread was inspired by interactions with an IEE and an SLE IRL who seem to share virtually all of their worldviews, despite obviously sharing no valued functions. My view from the start of the thread is that there is no observable effect based on type (the null hypothesis), i.e. that political correctness or incorrectness is NTR.


Imo this is still aristocracy related aka a NF thing. 



> Perhaps those who hold SJW values are more likely to identify with the INFP type. "Strong personal values and lots of ideas" is pretty much the MBTI INFP. And that's what an SJW will seem like, as they have strong personal values and lots of (unrealistic) ideas for improvement, regardless of their actual type.


Yeah, there seems to be a correlation, but you know what they say: correlation does not imply causation.

I mean... Look at me... I'm practically a "chaotic evil" conservative...



> I can't vote in the US.


^^; dang.



The_Wanderer said:


> Want a cookie? Yey, you can have one for being an IEE again. Not for having an opinion; they're like assholes, after all.


<.< careful... your lefty light side is showing...


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

Doc Dangerstein said:


> *"I ask my students to put only their student numbers on their papers. Names are often coded for gender or language, so I do not want to see their names. I do this to guard against possible unconscious bias."* - There's a large body of evidence that most people are unconsciously biased - even and perhaps especially those who insist they are not.
> 
> ... answers are also coded for gender and language, it's possible to intuit much from how a person writes.


In an academic context, I haven't seen this to be the case. (You can tell if someone struggles to write in whatever language, but poor grammar/spelling is a valid reason to lose marks anyway.) I'm not a professor, but I've graded quite a few papers and IME people guess the author's gender right about 50% of the time.



> More PC bullshit that doesn't amount to anything in reality. I question the validity of the evidence especially in the social sciences where statistics are cherry picked, over interpreted and arranged so they reflect the political ideologies of the institution and the people who fund them.


Decades of research has shown it does amount to something in reality. However, if you believe it doesn't make a difference (that you would observe no effect), then there's no harm in trying it. I did - the results surprised me.



> There is a high asshole per capita among outspoken moralists. I have also made this observation.


You don't say...



> *"It is not fair that my wife can talk back to me but I cannot hit her."* - Fair would be that your wife can _talk_ back to you and you can likewise _talk_ back to her. I have had two acquaintences (both straight men) say this to me; one is probably an IEE and the other probably an SLE. Go figure.
> 
> ... fairness includes using physical force when someone uses physical force against me regardless if they're male of female.


While I agree, someone *talking* back to you (as you quoted) is not the use of physical force against you.



> I'm almost certain I'm an Fi type and have tested IEE-2Ne on socionics tests and have been typed as such on the 80 questions thread long ago.


Well, thanks for your input. You and @FreeBeer both remind me of my dad btw, who I always typed IEE. Seems I was right


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

FreeBeer said:


> Imo this is still aristocracy related aka a NF thing.


STs are also aristocrats, tho.  Both the IEE and the SLE I mentioned are aristocrats.



> Yeah, there seems to be a correlation, but you know what they say: *correlation does not imply causation.
> *
> I mean... Look at me... I'm practically a chaotic evil conservative...


Yup.



> ^^; dang.


I'll be out of here within a few years, it's fine.




FreeBeer said:


> <.< careful... your lefty light side is showing...


"Opinions are like assholes; everyone has one" is a well-known quote and flies in the face of lefty "respect everyone's opinion" bullshit. I'm no lefty and I believe "Opinions are like assholes; everyone has one" as well. I respect hardly anyone's opinion; respecting the right to the opinion is not the same as respecting the opinion itself.

:crazy:


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

counterintuitive said:


> "Opinions are like assholes; everyone has one" is a well-known quote and flies in the face of lefty "respect everyone's opinion" bullshit.


Pretty much; being labelled as "the enemy" for potentially disagreeing with someone sounds like the very "SJW" shit he thinks he's arguing against.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

The_Wanderer said:


> Pretty much; being labelled as "the enemy" for potentially disagreeing with someone sounds like the very "SJW" shit he thinks he's arguing against.


(╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻) I'm teasing you damn it!

Plus...I like arguing :/ its my hobby over on the debate & current event forums. You should come and see the poo pile....its glorious...


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

FreeBeer said:


> (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻) I'm teasing you damn it!


It's honestly hard to tell when you're joking sometimes. Either or, maybe I don't get aristocratic humour?



FreeBeer said:


> Plus...I like arguing :/ its my hobby over on the debate & current event forums. You should come and see the poo pile....its glorious...


I like purposeful debate and I do it on a daily basis in my circle of friends and at university too. I sometimes pop in there, but most of the time it's just regurgitated shit.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

The_Wanderer said:


> It's honestly hard to tell when you're joking sometimes. Either or, maybe I don't get aristocratic humour?
> 
> I like purposeful debate and I do it on a daily basis in my circle of friends and at university too. I sometimes pop in there, but most of the time it's just regurgitated shit.


Sadly yeah. I usually post good content tho & do my research. Its annoying however when I post something and ppl gather like flies to a fresh shit in the summer heat... Sometimes it feels like talking to walls.


----------



## Ixim (Jun 19, 2013)

FreeBeer said:


> Could be, as I said. Regardless what type I am, I'm going to call it as I see it, I won't spare anyone's feelings and certainly won't stop...really hate coddling ppl.


You must have pretty low Aggreableness lol.

Anyhow, if I can ask anyone, I'll ask you seeing how you pretty much are a nationalist. What's the appeal in nationalism and nations as whole? I never understood it.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

Ixim said:


> You must have pretty low Aggreableness lol.


:/ yeah...



> Anyhow, if I can ask anyone, I'll ask you seeing how you pretty much are a nationalist. What's the appeal in nationalism and nations as whole? I never understood it


.

*Common values.*

Its mostly a reaction to the EU attempting to take away sovereignty and dictate how things run in member states. It wouldn't be a huge problem if the EU would be successful at the very least economically, but its not. We have a major sovereign debt bubble in Europe. Then the migrant crisis happened, there were bombings, Greece is in a major depression.

... soo everyone decided that the Eurocrats in Brussels are retarded, borders up, gave the EU the middle finger.

^^ and I ofc agree, because the economy is improving... and I don;t want any nazi Islam here ... they should go to Merkelreich or something.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

SJW:


> unconsciously gets inspired by an idea or possibility to show his best when defendig some cause. He is flattered by being presented as a champion, standard-bearer or defender of a just cause, protector of dear persons or values.


Is: http://en.socionicasys.org/teorija/dlja-novichkov/opisanie-modelej/eie


----------



## Ixim (Jun 19, 2013)

FreeBeer said:


> :/ yeah...
> 
> .
> 
> ...


So, let me get this straight:

Your initial inclination is not towards nationalism but EU failing at everything(pretty much) makes you do it? Why waste your potential this way lol...

Also, Trump is just a salesman, I sincirely doubt that he means 50% of things he says. Quite unlike Orban who is really into what he is speaking about. One is a world class act, the other is the real deal. He is also a logical bomb planted by Dems to destroy Republicans-one that could backfire, sure, but the odds are low. This also happened...1918(?) with Teddy and awkwardly reminiscent elections to this year's. All the polls(and not the single tv polls, but the RCP{metacritic of political poll worls} polls mind you!) show him losing flatout to Killary(ugh) so...yeah.


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

> ﻿While I agree, someone talking back to you (as you quoted) is not the use of physical force against you.


... @counterintuitive, I want to use this statement as a gateway to all conflict.

I don’t support or object to escalating force or the use of violence. Every situation is unique and is to be examined within the context of its own reality. Provocateurs are often given social and legal preference because people immediately assume they are victims without looking into the specifics of the case. We are also primed to make hasty assumptions. Media, society, upbringing, our peers and cultural affiliations. 

... a victim who is exceptionally vocal about his/her victimhood and is adamant about his/her identity as a victim is someone I am suspicious of and it would not bother me one bit to go against all social expectations and break the sanctity of the victim and claim they might be responsible for their fate. I see SJWs as nothing more than professional victims who tyrannize our society because we have been conditioned to give the underdog/victim preferential status. Albeit subconsciously. 

I have NO REGARD for social conventions and choose to assess situations and call things as I see them. I don’t care if they are popular or not. Always questioning the blind obedience to societal norms ... and yes, I can and do read them. So my choice to play along, veto or not play at all is strategic and a reflection of who I am or would like to be. On that note I make mistakes like everyone and I do get carried away by anger, or paralyzed by fear and anxiety or find myself motivated by jealousy.

At thread: 

... the appeal of the nation state is simple, it gives a home where I can be myself. Excessive nationalism leads to xenophobia, again a neutral descriptive label to which we have attached a negative connotation because it is a non-sequitur that someone who doesn’t welcome foreigners is also an ethnic cleanser. There’s nothing wrong with closing borders and saying “no” to people. 

Multiculturalism on the other hand, suffocates people in their own home. It demands that we accept others regardless of what their beliefs,what they represent and that we give them distinction in our home and forfeit our values. our power and our dignity to make them happy simply because they are not us.

... I’m cool with forming relationships with nations and people why RESPECT me and are willing to return the same courtesy, but enough is enough. Let’s just say I didn’t vote Trudeau and feel angry that Canada gave him a majority. I for one LOVE the SJW movement because it is that hyperbolic and it pushed Canadians to start questioning their own values. A critique of blind multiculturalism is not the same thing as fascism as many people would like you to believe.

... @FreeBeer, curious to know. Why INTP? We talked before and I never got the Ti vibe from you. Te, most definitely. I always see you pointing to the real world in your arguments and looking to find real evidence and real application for your thought. Te hidden agenda. About the MBTI INFPs, I think many are ISFJs who happen to be liberal. They’re also the ones to complain mostly about SJs because they are conservative. They’re both the same but differ in upbringing. 

The Poland situation is nasty. The Duda/Szydlo/Kaczynski/Ziobro combo is bad news. Definitely prefer living in Canada and have Trudeau talk his talk and Sajjan or someone else calling him on the practicality and the possible consequences of his projects. It’s still a headache and a half but it’s certainly better than living in a Roman Catholic equivalent of American McCarthyism. Saying “no” to Islamification is the only good thing the Poland is doing right about now. I see why you support Poland on this issue but the country has its problems. A lot actually. 

Shit ... that a lot from someone who was serious about moving back three years ago and considering Italy and Portugal as options.

I hope that America doesn’t collapse under the weight of its spoiled children and academia. I don’t know who I would vote for if I lived in the States. I don't think Trump is the monster the left [and many vocal Canadians] paint him out to be. Given a choice of the three main candidates I'm leaning towards the Donald. I considered Bernie in the beginning but I just can't see him winning on the international arena. America can't afford to be PC and submissive.

Also notice our enneagrams, 6/4/8s tell it like it is and are most likely to call bullshit on something. 7/4/8s are the most freedom loving, flamboyant/outspoken and can bite. Yeah, I can be dramatic. I can be annoying. So there.


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

If people could stop using this thread as a platform to publish their political ramblings, that would be great. Thanks. Most of the posts in this thread have fuck all to do with typology. Go start a thread in one of the non-type subforums, or start a blog, or go yell at the TV or something. JFC. Trying to talk about typology here, not listen to people argue about their latest political love affairs.

Oh well. As far as I'm concerned, this thread has served its purpose (as in, further discussion has revealed political in/correctness is not only arbitrary/ambiguous but also probably NTR) and as such I will be unsubscribing from it and abandoning it. Bye!


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

... on that note, the reaction alone is enough to conclude that Fi valuing types do not welcome political correctness or any form of social indoctrination and they flat out reject it when it trespasses on their personal beliefs. There’s politeness and diplomacy but for me that’s a matter of strategy. I am formal with people I don't like, it's diplomacy and strategy not hospitality.

However once I cross the threshold of tolerance, I have no problem leaving and forging my own path. I’m confident about finding allies. Why should I sell myself out by looking for approval from people who are detrimental to my being or from people who don't matter very much?

This is not a new thing for me, I have been vocal about political correctness, affirmative action and identity politics since the 1990s when I began to understand how this is compromising to my freedom and my future. From what I understand, Fe is the ENFP/IEE’s strongest unvalued function and it stands to reason that a thread full of ENFP/IEEs will be able to read and be critical of societal mandates in particularly those I/we find intrusive.

On that note, I am also an apostate. My desire for a nation state is to have a home where I can be all that I am, not as an expression of patriotism or culture, and I have little to no brand loyalty with regards to consumer goods, and socially never I thought of myself belonging to any movement, subculture or society. My people are my people and I choose them because I like their company. Aside from consciously leaving Catholicism because it's incompatible with what I believe in, I never sought out to identify myself with a particular group or movement. I experimented like every teenager but that's as far as I got.

... the part that I disagree with in the socionics IEE description is the need to keep the peace. Maybe when I was younger and less confident in my powers. I don't always pick fights but keeping the peace at all costs is not something that is dear to me.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

Ixim said:


> So, let me get this straight:
> 
> Your initial inclination is not towards nationalism but EU failing at everything(pretty much) makes you do it? Why waste your potential this way lol...
> 
> Also, Trump is just a salesman, I sincirely doubt that he means 50% of things he says. Quite unlike Orban who is really into what he is speaking about. One is a world class act, the other is the real deal. He is also a logical bomb planted by Dems to destroy Republicans-one that could backfire, sure, but the odds are low. This also happened...1918(?) with Teddy and awkwardly reminiscent elections to this year's. All the polls(and not the single tv polls, but the RCP{metacritic of political poll worls} polls mind you!) show him losing flatout to Killary(ugh) so...yeah.


I like Trump's foreign policy & as a libertarian I really hate the establishment  so as long as someone is destroying that and coming with awesome foreign policy like Trump, I'll like it.

For everything else our hopes ride with the FSP & the Christian church (as usual the bulwark against state socialism).... minus that idiot socialist Pope.










@Doc Dangerstein



> ... @FreeBeer, curious to know. Why INTP?


Not your typical extrovert and I'm substantially more cerebral & pragmatic then any NF I know, minus you ofc.



> We talked before and I never got the Ti vibe from you. Te, most definitely. I always see you pointing to the real world in your arguments and looking to find real evidence and real application for your thought. Te hidden agenda. About the MBTI INFPs, I think many are ISFJs who happen to be liberal. They’re also the ones to complain mostly about SJs because they are conservative. They’re both the same but differ in upbringing.


This is certainly a possibility, imo liberals are brainwashed idealists.


> The Poland situation is nasty. The Duda/Szydlo/Kaczynski/Ziobro combo is bad news. Definitely prefer living in Canada and have Trudeau talk his talk and Sajjan or someone else calling him on the practicality and the possible consequences of his projects. It’s still a headache and a half but it’s certainly better than living in a Roman Catholic equivalent of American McCarthyism. Saying “no” to Islamification is the only good thing the Poland is doing right about now. I see why you support Poland on this issue but the country has its problems. A lot actually.


Every country here has it's problems, but what can you do between Turkey & the migrants, the Russian bear (sincerely don't trust Putin), US interventionism & EU-Brussels state socialist bureaucratic garbage I'd rather chose patriotism & sovereignty. Its easier to deal with the church. 



> Shit ... that a lot from someone who was serious about moving back three years ago and considering Italy and Portugal as options.


Bad idea. The mob (mafiosi) has a turf war with migrant created criminal gangs in Italy & they are the next migrant hot spot come summer. Idk about Portugal.



> I hope that America doesn’t collapse under the weight of its spoiled children and academia. I don’t know who I would vote for if I lived in the States. I don't think Trump is the monster the left [and many vocal Canadians] paint him out to be. Given a choice of the three main candidates I'm leaning towards the Donald. I considered Bernie in the beginning but I just can't see him winning on the international arena. America can't afford to be PC and submissive.


Pretty much. Trump is a wild card. You guys will just have to see. If I may, I'd suggest looking into this: https://freestateproject.org/

I'm considering moving or at least as a second option. Going to do it legally tho.



> Also notice our enneagrams, 6/4/8s tell it like it is and are most likely to call bullshit on something. 7/4/8s are the most freedom loving, flamboyant/outspoken and can bite. Yeah, I can be dramatic. I can be annoying. So there.


 same here.

Polak, Węgier — dwa bratanki,
i do szabli, i do szklanki,
oba zuchy, oba żwawi,
niech im Pan Bóg błogosławi.


----------



## birdsintrees (Aug 20, 2012)

*Hi there.

Please keep this thread on-topic; which is Fi in relation to political correctness.

Please take political debates to the appropriate forum section. 

Thanks.
*


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

@_birdsintrees_ . My bad, we took it to PM-land. Back on topic

... my speculation is the problem lies in how the tests are written. Take into consideration all tests: Socionics, MBTI and cognitive function. Observe that many of the questions indicative of Fi are laced with words annexed by Marxist/Marceusian thought and placarded throughout the media by leftist politicians and media.

I read one description says ENFPs are for diversity and multiculturalism. 

Ugh, no. At least not according to today's definition. The modern definition as prescribed by the PC gestapo has no respect my boundaries, my self-love and self-respect. It demands that I violate my dignity and perpetually feel shame and guilt about who I am. Won't happen. However, forming relationships of mutual respect and mutual trust, sure.

... simply put, values are written into the test and the descriptions. What does liking indie rock have to do with Fi? It's one of the questions.


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

Doc Dangerstein said:


> My desire for a nation state is to have a home where I can be all that I am, not as an expression of patriotism or culture, and I have little to no brand loyalty with regards to consumer goods, and *socially never I thought of myself belonging to any movement, subculture or society.* *My people are my people and I choose them because I like their company.* Aside from consciously leaving Catholicism because it's incompatible with what I believe in, *I never sought out to identify myself with a particular group or movement.* I experimented like every teenager but that's as far as I got.


I'm not 100% on this, so a more knowledgeable member of the board should feel free to correct me, but this sounds like textbook democratic dichotomy to me. IEEs are aristocratic.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

The_Wanderer said:


> I'm not 100% on this, so a more knowledgeable member of the board should feel free to correct me, but this sounds like textbook democratic dichotomy to me. IEEs are aristocratic.


Sounds more like the social instinct in the enneagram. They very often identify with groups, ideas, causes.


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)




----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

Entropic said:


> Sounds more like the social instinct in the enneagram. They very often identify with groups, ideas, causes.


Still not convinced of your seemingly holistic view of personality typology. Either or. He's specifically noting that he's against the idea of groups, ideas and causes; does this appear to give him any leaning towards either of the other two enneagram instincts?


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

... groups exist, I cut my own cake. 

Political correctness requires me to adopt a socially sanctioned division of groups and a prescribed attitude towards those groups. Socially prescribed groups exists for the benefit of the other. Political parties and religions exists to profit a public figure. Subcultures have become a product of marketing especially since the emergence of lifestyle brands. Patriotism exists to repopulate the army.

In maturity people choose the groups they wish belong to in accordance to their values. I have no problem showing prejudice if a person chooses to identify with a group. He is there for a reason. I have no problem dismissing Marxists, SJWs altogether. I don’t pretend to be a fan of Islam either. The groups you choose are a reflection of your personal identity and the more ardent you are about the affiliation the more you accept the group’s values. If you are born into a group, say religion or a nation, the intensity of affiliation matters.

... I could see myself strategically forming alliances with groups on certain issues but I will make it known that I take the position of an independent such that I won’t be thought of as a member if there are issues with which I disagree. I’m just not a social instinct, group affiliation is not something I need or particularly want.

You might be on to something, @The_Wanderer. Part of my resistance to PC [other than being a blatant injection of thought police into your mind, much like original sin] is that it demands I take a democratic perspective. I did find this page is very clear:

Socionics Dichotomies: R2t3


----------



## Matt The Martian (Jul 19, 2014)

An immature person with Fi could definitely see this GS black and white enough to be a hardcore SJW. When you attach so much value to your...values, it can be easy to see the world in black and white, and you could decide to attack the black (that sounded better in mah head.) I can especially see a person overly in tune feeling that being so exteme is logical...for example.

All humans deserve respect 
Transgender people are human
Therefore, all transgender people deserve respect.

All people who don't believe all people don't deserve respect are evil.
There are alot of people who believe that transgender people don't deserve respect 
Therefore, alot of people are evil 

When a person has such strong moral values and that person feels so outnumbered, maybe that person will feel that a voice to speak reason is needed to eradicate this evil, and since that person is so outnumbered, that person NEEDS TO BE AS LOUD AS POSSIBLE. I mean, I was that way for the longest time. So yeah, I would say that a person who values Fi could certainly be susceptible to being a SJW. It can be frustrating to feel like your values aren't...valued. As touched on in this thread, though, it isn't something that I think is exclusive to Fi users, just that it would make a lot of sense if a Fi user was a SJW of some sort.


----------



## Verity (Aug 2, 2014)

Matt The Martian said:


> An immature person with Fi could definitely see this GS black and white enough to be a hardcore SJW. When you attach so much value to your...values, it can be easy to see the world in black and white, and you could decide to attack the black (that sounded better in mah head.) I can especially see a person overly in tune feeling that being so exteme is logical...for example.
> 
> All humans deserve respect
> Transgender people are human
> ...


That's still Ti reasoning, Fi-ego's tend to disregard deduction when it comes to ethics.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

The_Wanderer said:


> Still not convinced of your seemingly holistic view of personality typology. Either or. He's specifically noting that he's against the idea of groups, ideas and causes; does this appear to give him any leaning towards either of the other two enneagram instincts?


My opinion of aristocracy is more about how you understand social organization and structure but it doesn't mean that you identify with groups. Saying that you for example identify as a hipster or identify someone else as a hipster doesn't suggest aristocracy because it doesn't actually deal with social ideals and structures which aristocracy is a lot about. 

I mean, putting it this way, if we identify as being a type and being a part of a quadra, does that make us aristocratic?


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

Entropic said:


> My opinion of aristocracy is more about how you understand social organization and structure but it doesn't mean that you identify with groups. Saying that you for example identify as a hipster or identify someone else as a hipster doesn't suggest aristocracy because it doesn't actually deal with social ideals and structures which aristocracy is a lot about.
> 
> I mean, putting it this way, if we identify as being a type and being a part of a quadra, does that make us aristocratic?


 tbh how I kind of see the world is very akin to how Martin writes A game of Thrones. Its an overview of all these interconnected groups and power dynamics, but yeah identifying with one specific group...is very difficult for me at least.

I still consider it important to understand that groups do not act, individuals do & the actions of certain individuals determine group behavior.

I can't even attach myself to a socionics or MBTI group, much less anything else. My best guess is creative Fi, it makes me flighty due to Ne base programming. Whatever or whoever bores me has not sufficient subjective value for me to engage in.

In Fi's case PC depends entirely on what value I attribute to it and related abstract content. In my case it is a negative value.


----------

