# What is an 'internal value system'? and don't we all have one to an extent?



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

There are some things in my life which I consider important, friendships, family, education and freedom are four. I wondered why it seemed that ISFP and INFP types have an 'internal value system' and does it relate to the sentence I wrote above? I would imagine that most people have values or things that they find important, so why is it that on the Facebook MyType application, it specifically listed 'internal value system' for these two types?

If an introvert has an internal value system, then what does an extravert have? Surely they make choices based on what is a value to them? Or is it that introverts are less likely to conform to what society says is the RIGHT thing to do? Quote unquote.

Just start with what is an 'internal value system' first.


----------



## Alice in Wonderland (Sep 7, 2009)

Okay I'll give this a shot 

Well first off I think the reason IXFPs have such strong internal value systems is because of their Fi dominant and Te Inferior functions. They feel strongly about something, Fi, and then they use their TJ to make judgements on the such which causes them to have strongly held beliefs about the things they feel passionate about.

I think extraverted FPs also have internal value systems except that they are extraverted, Ne and Se dominant, so it's more likely if they see something they find upsetting they will feel offended but probably they won't dwell on it and reflect on it as much as an introvert would, and their Ne and Se would probably continue to propell them onward. 

Obviously for their shadow types, the TJs, their functions are same, but their F wouldn't be dominant so they might not have such strongly held internal value system that they are conciously aware of. Like with me, I already know which issues _get to me_ and it's alot. But I feel like an ESTJ would ironically be slower to make a judgement on one of these issues and instead make one more based on what appears to them as logical (Thinking) as opposed to how they would feel about the situation if it were them (Feeling).

I really have no clue though, as to the differences Fe and Ti would have upon a persons value system.


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Alice in Wonderland said:


> Like with me, I already know which issues _get to me_ and it's alot.


Thanks for that! though this ^^^^ is really what I was getting at more than all of the theory. What does an internal value system mean? You've given great reasons as to why we could have one, though I want to know what one is, and does this differ in anyway from me saying something like 'I value education, freedom, peace of mind, honesty, integrity' etc etc. Those are my values, and i'm sure people have theirs regardless of type, or not? This is the question I was asking. 

Does that make sense? 

Again thanks for your response. :happy: If I knew the theory a bit better I would comment on it, maybe Grey or someone will, he is good with that.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

Fi-doms tend to build a hierarchy of beliefs and principles which are independent from the people and culture around them. Jung refers to Fi-doms having "primordial images" which are sort of very basic, rudimentary, broad principles that the Fi-dom has an almost innate grasp of - Fi can almost be compared to a very strong, inborn conscience. Ti is similar in having basic ideas of truth which seem to come out of nowhere.

Yes, extroverted judging (Te and Fe) does evaluate based on _external sources_. This does not mean they do not discern for themselves and just follow the herd. It simply means they look _outside themselves_ for _criteria_ to determine their personal values - the values are not personally-based though. Fi-doms look within, and so their value system is referred to as "internal" because of its _source_, not because other people do not also ponder their beliefs in their mind. I would argue that Ti is actually more subjective than Fe in some ways for a similar reason - its evaluation is more removed from the external. Both Ti and Fi doms can be intolerant of inconsistencies with their environment and their ideas of what is True or Good.

It has surprised me in learning MBTI and talking to different types that not everyone has the kind of system within that I have; you do tend to think people think in the manner you think, and I took for granted that everyone has very personal value systems that have little connection to what is accepted by most other people. It made me understand why so often many people are in consensus on a matter and I want to rip my hair out because I see something else so clearly. 

I just checked out Gifts Differing again today, and while it's nothing earth-shattering, this comment kind of struck me: " [There is a] conflict that [introverted feelers] are likely to feel when they cannot agree with those whom they love or admire". 

No matter how much a Fi-dom may respect someone, love their family/friends, identify with an organization, etc, if something touted by those people cannot be brought into agreement with their internal feelings of right and wrong, they will probably reject it, or it will pain them to go against their feelings.


----------



## Alice in Wonderland (Sep 7, 2009)

cardinalfire said:


> Again thanks for your response. :happy: If I knew the theory a bit better I would comment on it, maybe Grey or someone will, he is good with that.


You're welcome. no problem :happy: And btw, you mean *she* is good with that. :shocked:roud:

Well for me, I guess with my Te (sorry enough with the functions already!) I could clearly define for you just what some of my 'values' are so . . . Here they are I guess::happy:
As an INFP, communication is extremley important to me, and I sort of grew up with the belief that there was no such things as bad intentions that people were ultimately good and that all "evil" in the world was cause by mistakes and misunderstandings. (Even if some one was "evil" it was their experiences that made them that way) So basically understanding has always been what's most important to me. (Part of why I find MBTI so appealling) To understand others and to be able to communicate with them has always been my ultimately goal, what I strive for above all else. At least, that what is I strive for with my "creative good" (see my two types of good and evil thread for more info ) There's also alot of "preventive" (or was it "destructive?") good that is a part of my internal value system as well, practically everything that so obviously appears to me as wrong and unfair, unjust.- These are my issues, and cuases that are a part of my internal vlue system.- How is it fair for those people in Haiti to be suffering while we here have _so_ much! so I have a lot of causes and I donate to a lot of charities . . . things like that. (Not nearly enough though :sad 
Also, other things issues like torture and war and idk practically anything horrible, you name it I'm against it. My feelings of injustice are fueled when I realise that their isn't even a "practicle" necessary reason for the behavior. -Initially, I was planning on bringing up how I've finally come to accept animal testing cause I truly can't think of any better solution other than dropping it testing all together which people do not see as an option. That is the sort of thing I'm reffering to when I say "practicle" reasons.- Like with torture for example, it doesn't even give you good information because if you are torturing an innocent person they will plead innocent until they can't take the pain anymore and just give you a random name so you finally stop. I mean their situation is so hopless and it ruins peoples lives, not just the person being tortued but on knowingly the one doing the torturing, and for what? absolutely nothing. That's why I'm so buggered about, plus I think it's the TJ in me, creating the most efficient and most effective systems possible for things because while I still believe evil is the product of mistakes, when people's carelessness and thoughtlessness and short sightedness (greedy CEOs of the world, I hate you!) is the cause of harm, their apathy basically (apathy is truely evil?), which truly upsets me. (I had to go back to the beginning to know how to finish that sentence properly. Longest sentence eveeerrr :tongue 
Soo . . . I think I've done enough ranting and rambling for now to give you a taste of what my internal value system is comprised of. :happy:
ps sorry my writing is such a mess. I'm trying to clean it up some but it feels as if my enitre post needs to be rewritten. =/


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Alice in Wonderland said:


> You're welcome. no problem :happy: And btw, you mean *she* is good with that. :shocked:roud:
> 
> Well for me, I guess with my Te (sorry enough with the functions already!) I could clearly define for you just what some of my 'values' are so . . . Here they are I guess::happy:
> As an INFP, communication is extremley important to me, and I sort of grew up with the belief that there was no such things as bad intentions that people were ultimately good and that all "evil" in the world was cause by mistakes and misunderstandings. (Even if some one was "evil" it was their experiences that made them that way) So basically understanding has always been what's most important to me. (Part of why I find MBTI so appealling) To understand others and to be able to communicate with them has always been my ultimately goal, what I strive for above all else. At least, that what is I strive for with my "creative good" (see my two types of good and evil thread for more info ) There's also alot of "preventive" (or was it "destructive?") good that is a part of my internal value system as well, practically everything that so obviously appears to me as wrong and unfair, unjust.- These are my issues, and cuases that are a part of my internal vlue system.- How is it fair for those people in Haiti to besuffering while we here have _so_ much! so I have a lot of causes and I donate to a lot of charities . . . things like that. (Not nearly enough though :sad And also, other things that are terrible like torture and war and idk practically anything horrible, you name it I'm against it, and my feeling of injustice are fueled when I realise that their isn't even a "practicle" necessary reason for this behavior. -edit, earlier on I was planning on bringing up how I've finally come to accept animal testing cause I truly can't think of any better solution other than dropping it testing all together which people do not see as an option- Like with torture for example, it doesn't even give you good information because if you are torturing an innocent person they will plead innocent until they can't take the pain anymore and just give you a random name so you finally stop. I mean their situation is so hopless and it ruins peoples lives, not just the person being tortued but on knowingly the one doing the torturing, and for what? absolutely nothing. That's why I'm so buggered about, plus I think it's the TJ in me, creating the most efficient and most effective systems possible for things because while I still believe evil is the product of mistakes, when people's carelessness and thoughtlessness and short sightedness (greedy CEOs of the world, I hate you!) is the cause of harm, their apathy basically (apathy is truely evil?), which truly upsets me. (I had to go back to the beginning to know how to finish that sentence properly. Longest sentence eveeerrr :tongue Soo . . . I think I've done enough ranting and rambling for now to give you a taste of what my internal value system is comprised of :happy:
> ps sorry my writing is such a mess. I'm trying to clean it up some but it's like the enitre post needs to be upheaved.


:happy: I read it all. Thanks. I never knew HE was a SHE, lol:shocked::blushed: Love you Grey:laughing:


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

OrangeAppled said:


> Fi-doms tend to build a hierarchy of beliefs and principles which are independent from the people and culture around them. Jung refers to Fi-doms having "primordial images" which are sort of very basic, rudimentary, broad principles that the Fi-dom has an almost innate grasp of - Fi can almost be compared to a very strong, inborn conscience. Ti is similar in having basic ideas of truth which seem to come out of nowhere.
> 
> Yes, extroverted judging (Te and Fe) does evaluate based on _external sources_. This does not mean they do not discern for themselves and just follow the herd. It simply means they look _outside themselves_ for _criteria_ to determine their personal values - the values are not personally-based though. Fi-doms look within, and so their value system is referred to as "internal" because of its _source_, not because other people do not also ponder their beliefs in their mind. I would argue that Ti is actually more subjective than Fe in some ways for a similar reason - its evaluation is more removed from the external. Both Ti and Fi doms can be intolerant of inconsistencies with their environment and their ideas of what is True or Good.
> 
> ...


This is an incredible post! I really would like to kiss your feet! (Bows down at the wisdom and insight..)

Phew where do I start? You've risen more questions lol I've been orangeappled upside the head. 

Primodial images? in what sense? Explain please.

The internal / external part is what I don't get. Aliceinwonderland for example was talking about how she didn't like torture etc etc, which is based in the world outside her, do what degree do values come internally? I'm assuming that everyone is born TABULA ROSA (if thats the correct latin). Ie we are blank slates when we are born. How can what is important to us be independent of the world we live in? Maybe I'm not getting something here, or missing the obvious.

Lets take the last bit you said, ' No matter how much a Fi-dom may respect someone, love their family/friends, identify with an organization, etc, if something touted by those people cannot be brought into agreement with their internal feelings of right and wrong, they will probably reject it, or it will pain them to go against their feelings'. 

For example, if my mum said 'capital punishment is fine' or 'If someone commits a murder, they should be killed as well', then that is her view. I can't change that, or let it affect me. I don't agree with her, though I don't feel so moved that I cannot live my life or feel heart broken. Might be a bad example, though do you follow what I am saying? 

I'm thinking of another example. hmm. (puts hand on chin and hums). GOT ONE! I don't like talking about people in a bad way behind their back and I have seen others do this. A friend even said to me once how another friend was annoying him, while he wasn't there. That I could not do, it would be a weakness of character and I would feel like I was betraying my friend by talking about him badly when he wasn't present. Talking well of him is another matter, I'm fine with that, though I don't like trash talk. Is that an internal value?

Perhaps you could give me some examples of your own Fi-dom and I may grasp this. You're doing well so far, i'm loving it. Keep it coming, it's just me you and aliceinwonderland doing this so far.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

Years ago, I questioned the difference between Fi types appreciating their internal value systems and Ti types valuing their ruling principles. What's the difference?


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

I can see Grey hasn't replied yet. SHE must be brewing something deep that is going to be a HUGE post full of useful knowledge for us to munch on! yum yum!

lol :happy:


----------



## Seymour (Oct 19, 2009)

The sense I get from some Te-doms (at least the fairly extraverted ones I know) is they embrace value systems, too, but their investment is partially based on proven utility and the system being "true" in a more practical sense. They can invest heavily in a system, but on some level they do it because the system works (and their definition of "working" may include the system being reasonably fair). This leads them to often select from the externally available value systems, whether they identify with the majority held ones or not.

I feel like Fi-doms really aren't concerned about external utility or whether their belief system has been proven or is provable in the external world (much like Ti-users with their logical models). What matters to Fi-dom about a belief/value/principle is that it is true and congruent with themselves and the rest of their belief system.

I think Fi-doms face a difficult task when defending their belief systems externally. First of all, the principles are not primarily logical or easily expressed verbally. Secondly, Fi (unlike Ti) does not have an external metric for comparing competing values/principles. Ti users can apply logical analysis to evaluate the models presented by others. Fi doesn't seem to have the same equivalent for impersonally evaluating principles/values (if one can express them clearly in the first place). Thirdly, since an Fi-user's belief system is intensely personal, attacks on beliefs feel like attack on one's person. This means one not only must defend one's beliefs, but also must cope with the internal emotional reactions of a perceived personal attack.




Functianalyst said:


> Years ago, I questioned the difference between Fi types appreciating their internal value systems and Ti types valuing their ruling principles. What's the difference?


I think they are closely related (Jung said that pretty much everything that applies to introverted Thinking applies to introverted Feeling, but substituting Feeling for Thinking). Both build systems whose ideas/images arise primarily from the unconscious (Jung might say from the collective unconscious in part). This leads their ideas to be more disconnected from their surrounding environment that the ideas that emerge from exercising Te and Fe. 

I think there is more personal identification between Fi users and their values than there is between Ti users and their models (just look at how upset Fi-users get when you attack a core principle). I think both feel restless until inconsistencies are corrected in their system, and feel a sense of rightness when everything fits together properly. Both are prone to hanging onto idiosyncratic systems despite external information to the contrary. It seems to me that Ti users are more invested in the correctness of their process and less invested in its output, relative to Fi users. I'm sure Ti-doms will feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken in that.


----------



## Functianalyst (Jul 23, 2009)

Seymour said:


> I think they are closely related (Jung said that pretty much everything that applies to introverted Thinking applies to introverted Feeling, but substituting Feeling for Thinking). Both build systems whose ideas/images arise primarily from the unconscious (Jung might say from the collective unconscious in part). This leads their ideas to be more disconnected from their surrounding environment that the ideas that emerge from exercising Te and Fe.


A very accurate statement of Jung's theory. However I think that Fi dominant types develop a greater foundation with their internal values, whereas Ti dominant types respect the principle as long as another principle does not come along that seems more logical.


Seymour said:


> I think there is more personal identification between Fi users and their values than there is between Ti users and their models (just look at how upset Fi-users get when you attack a core principle). I think both feel restless until inconsistencies are corrected in their system, and feel a sense of rightness when everything fits together properly. Both are prone to hanging onto idiosyncratic systems despite external information to the contrary. It seems to me that Ti users are more invested in the correctness of their process and less invested in its output, relative to Fi users. I'm sure Ti-doms will feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken in that.


Agreed as stated above, Fi types have a greater vested interest in maintaining their values than Ti types in maintaining a principle. However going back to your original response, a principle is different than a ruling principle, which comes closer to resembling or being equal to a Fi types core values. Great response.


----------



## Munchies (Jun 22, 2009)

everybody has a sense of right and wrong it has nothng to do with mbti functions. Some people choose to ignore what they know is right or notbut they continue to do it.


----------



## Dichotomy (Sep 5, 2009)

Munchies said:


> everybody has a sense of right and wrong it has nothng to do with mbti functions. Some people choose to ignore what they know is right or notbut they continue to do it.


I think the connection made between Fi and morality is a bit overdone, personally - Fi isn't _just_ about ethical values, because values are not necessarily anything to do with ethics.

Of all the functions, I find Fi the hardest to nail down. One day I'll think I understand it completely, then the next think I don't really understand it at all.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

cardinalfire said:


> This is an incredible post! I really would like to kiss your feet! (Bows down at the wisdom and insight..)
> 
> Primodial images? in what sense? Explain please.
> 
> The internal / external part is what I don't get. Aliceinwonderland for example was talking about how she didn't like torture etc etc, which is based in the world outside her, do what degree do values come internally? I'm assuming that everyone is born TABULA ROSA (if thats the correct latin). Ie we are blank slates when we are born. How can what is important to us be independent of the world we live in? Maybe I'm not getting something here, or missing the obvious.


No major wisdom and insight...just a copy of Psychological Types on hand and too much time spent mulling this stuff over :laughing:. But thanks :happy:

Below, Seymour hits on the primordial images coming from a "collective unconscious", collective meaning universal and not personal. It is a sort of basic, inherited, unconscious awareness of truth; the source of that unconcious awareness depends on whether you accept evolution or creation or are atheist or spiritual, etc*. However, the Feeling process of evaluation is a personal one, which keeps the interpretation of these vague, basic ideas very individual. At least that is _my_ basic understanding of Jungian theory....I won't lie and say it's all easy for me to grasp either....

*(_I think it was Plato whose philosophy was that before you are born, you know everything, and the process of being born traumatizes you so that you forget it all, and so when something rings true, it's simply that you're recalling it again - I probably butchered that really badly though :laughing_



> I'm thinking of another example. hmm. (puts hand on chin and hums). GOT ONE! I don't like talking about people in a bad way behind their back and I have seen others do this. A friend even said to me once how another friend was annoying him, while he wasn't there. That I could not do, it would be a weakness of character and I would feel like I was betraying my friend by talking about him badly when he wasn't present. Talking well of him is another matter, I'm fine with that, though I don't like trash talk. *Is that an internal value?*
> 
> Perhaps you could give me some examples of your own Fi-dom and I may grasp this. You're doing well so far, i'm loving it. Keep it coming, it's just me you and aliceinwonderland doing this so far.


Sure, that is a sense of what is right and wrong, whether it's totally internally based is hard to say. I don't think it's easy to pick out what is an internally based value and what has been adopted, as often smaller ideas are adopted when they relate to a base principle. It kind of feels like the "chicken and the egg" when trying to de-tangle this stuff. 

Like you, I don't usually go out of my way to disagree with people and am not much affected by their view as long as I am not being asked to adopt it or condone it. It doesn't mean I always shy away from voicing my beliefs, but I'm not usually the one to initiate discussion on them. Another poster in a thread described INFPs as being mostly reactive, not proactive, and that's very true for me. 

This also does not mean I never listen to other people or change my view though, as I am wrong sometimes (okay, a lot :laughing. However, I usually realize I am wrong when I see that my belief was actually incongruent with a larger principle I hold. If someone cannot appeal to that larger principle, they usually are not going to impact my view. The larger principles are hard to define, because they feel vague much of the time. They are pretty immovable because of that.

I'm linking you to this post, because PeacePassion really describes the "moral code" of an INFP really well, or at least _I_ relate to it. (I realize that things may be different for an ISFP, or they may see their Feeling differently.) 

http://personalitycafe.com/infp-forum-idealists/10418-infp-code-2.html#post223152

And I'm really, really not good at thinking of concrete examples.... I've racked my brain for 5 minutes and I'm giving up for now :crazy:...maybe something will come to me later.



Seymour said:


> The sense I get from some Te-doms (at least the fairly extraverted ones I know) is they embrace value systems, too, but their investment is partially based on proven utility and the system being "true" in a more practical sense. They can invest heavily in a system, but on some level they do it because the system works (and their definition of "working" may include the system being reasonably fair). This leads them to often select from the externally available value systems, whether they identify with the majority held ones or not.
> 
> *I feel like Fi-doms really aren't concerned about external utility or whether their belief system has been proven or is provable in the external world (much like Ti-users with their logical models). What matters to Fi-dom about a belief/value/principle is that it is true and congruent with themselves and the rest of their belief system.*
> 
> ...


The bolded describes very well how much Fi is an internal and very personal system, somewhat more so than the other judging functions. The difficulty in expressing it and connecting it to any object emphasizes how it is internally sourced, IMO.

I particularly like the distinction made between Ti and Fi, and explaining why Ti has a bit of an easier time in expressing itself. I never thought exactly _why_ that is, but this seems a good reason to me.




Dichotomy said:


> I think the connection made between Fi and morality is a bit overdone, personally - Fi isn't _just_ about ethical values, because values are not necessarily anything to do with ethics.
> 
> Of all the functions, I find Fi the hardest to nail down. One day I'll think I understand it completely, then the next think I don't really understand it at all.


You know, I agree with this, and I did not mean to imply that all Fi amounts to is a moral compass (I think I might have implied that mistakenly). I tend to associate "values" with "morals", but there are many things I personally value which are neither moral nor immoral, but belong in the big gray area of personal feeling. 
I personally think that Fi can be a source for creative ideas that have nothing to do with morality.


----------



## cardinalfire (Dec 10, 2009)

Thanks guys. I'm going to read through that post OA, thanks for posting that. It seems to me that Fi is as individual as the person with it.


----------

