What does moral development depend on? Why does a person's thinking, regardless of personality type, become complex and broad enough to encompass the needs and interests of others?
I ask this question because I don't quite understand how moral development can occur in T-types, who tend to suppress their own feelings and emotions because of the dominant / auxuliary Ti / Te function. Do they also suppress a rudimentary sense of fairness and the emotional empathy inherent in all people, because they see these feelings as a threat?
For whom are you asking and for what purpose? Follow the blog guidelines properly, otherwise abstract questions might get dismissed as unanswerable in a short post or receive generalized responses that won't necessarily apply to whatever real case/situation you're trying to navigate. I have already written a lot about morality, so also see previous posts.
You seem to be oversimplifying by equating F function development and moral development. You also seem to be misattributing ego development problems to personality type. While there are important relationships between these three concepts, they are separate, each complicated and requiring special attention in their own right.
Whether you use the F function successfully versus whether you make good moral decisions require different sets of criteria to determine. It is quite possible to use the F function successfully but end up making bad moral decisions. It is also possible to make good moral decisions without specifically leaning on the F function.
The difference between Ts and Fs isn't in how moral they are, rather, the main difference comes in how they go about defining and understanding morality. It is possible for both to reach the same moral conclusions but in very different ways. Your question seems to be biased by the F perspective because it assumes that "feelings" are the only important factor to take into consideration, but they aren't. Making moral decisions based only on feeling-related information often ends up being short-sighted.
Cognitive functions are morally neutral; their only purpose is to help you make sense of the world and achieve certain goals. However, since judging functions are used for making decisions, your personality type will inevitably intersect with your moral decision-making process. All the different aspects of your mind are related but it can be difficult to untangle and understand their relationships.
As the term implies, moral development is specifically about morality, which includes topics such as: what it means to make moral choices; how to determine the morality of actions; the nature of moral conscience; how to define and build good moral character; what it means to live a "good" life; etc.
Moral development often encompasses ethics as well, with topics such as: how to weigh and analyze ethical dilemmas; how to behave responsibly in relationships; how to be a good member of society; what society should do about unethical people; how to make relationships, groups, and society more fair and just; etc.
As you can see, nobody comes out of the womb a full-fledged moral philosopher with all the tools necessary for great moral judgment. Moral development isn't just about your feelings, emotions, intuitions, or uninformed opinions. To become a truly moral person isn't easy for anyone because it requires effort to develop deeper moral understanding, while the human mind trends toward laziness.
The reason moral development is very complicated is because there are many factors influencing the outcome. To analyze moral problems properly requires you to exercise the best of your intellect. To be a person of good moral character requires you to nurture your moral strengths and virtues. To be an ethical member of society requires you to take your duties and responsibilities to others seriously. To consistently make good moral decisions is much easier in a conducive social environment.
Most importantly, to care about morality in the first place often depends on your level of ego development and how egocentric you are. Whether you are T or F, egocentrism is one of the most significant barriers to moral development. Ego development is about whether you're growing and evolving as a person, whether you're consistently realizing more of your human potential.
Type aside, people at lower levels of ego development are too preoccupied with ego protection/aggrandization, which means their perspective is often too small to take anything else into consideration. (Just because Fs are inclined to care about morality, doesn't mean they automatically have good moral character. It is quite possible to care about morality for purely egotistical reasons, which constitutes immaturity of moral development.) People at higher levels of ego development are better able to transcend personal ego concerns to have a broader perspective, which makes it easier to take moral/ethical concerns into consideration.
It doesn't matter what your personality type is, all human beings have a universal need for growth. Unless your life is nothing but a constant unlucky struggle for survival, at some point it should matter to you whether you are being the best version of yourself you can be. Eventually, the notion of being your best self should also encompass the question of whether you're being your good-est self.
While writing my memoir a few years back, my writing coach and editor, Mathina, asked hard questions in every chapter of my life and wanted me to convince her as a reader why I did what I did. To answer her questions and write a compelling story of my life, I needed to learn the psychology behind my behavior and others in my life. I also needed to be vulnerable and bring out authenticity through…
Inferior functions, black/white thinking, and ego development
There is an interesting idea in MBTI system that we have an all-or-nothing attitude with our inferior function. Perhaps because we rely on our dominant function so much, and less so on the auxiliary and tertiary, leaving inferior largely neglected by habit or convenience.
And yet, all functions in our stack must be used (because it makes no sense to speak of intuition without sensing, and thinking without feeling). So pent up emotions surrounding the inferior function have to go somewhere eventually, often coming out in bursts. That’s what we call ‘in the grip’ experience.
Furthermore, when we speak of ‘grip’ experiences, we also seem to take them as something to be expected to happen to us: it’s a part of our identity, and that is what inferior function is. Or so some of us like to speak like this in MBTI communities.
But then some individuals come around that are seemingly impossible to type. They don’t seem to display ‘in the grip’ experiences, or any troublesome relationship with inferior function (no clear personality weaknesses); the way they act, speak and present themselves seems to fit multiple types. Why is that? Is the MBTI system incomplete because there are more types, as clearly demonstrated by the fact that some people just simply cannot be boxed in?
*Shrug*
Perhaps some people are difficult to type because we do not bother to pay attention to ego development? People at low ego developments will display more stereotypical version of their types, which is also why they are more likely to display an unhealthy relationship with their inferior function and propensity for black and white thinking. On the flip side, more developed ones will display better relationship with their lower cognitive functions. Which is why I think we need the community to focus a little more on exploring developed versions of the types, and move away from ‘16personalities’ profiles.
Do we have a post somewhere that discusses how lower-in-the-stack cognitive functions look like when properly developed?
Maybe some healthy growth would be encouraged, more trust in one’s type would be gained, and fewer people would use MBTI to rationalise their poor behaviour.
The funny thing that occurs with ego development is a sudden markedly reduced interest in MBTI. After all, the first half of ego development is identity seeking, whereas the second is about going beyond it. (These are neutral terms.)
Early Childhood: Analytical Psychology & Perspectives and Early Psychosocial Development
Early Childhood: Analytical Psychology & Perspectives and Early Psychosocial Development
During his lifetime, Erik Erikson produced a vitally important theory of psychological development. Psychosocial theory expanded on Freud’s concept of psychosexual development, explored the overall development of a person throughout the lifespan, and provided a means in which to understand normal versus arrested development during specific psychological stages. In this essay, I will explore Early…
Hey mbti, I am an infj and I'd like to ask you what exactly consists an spiritual need. I don't know how to explain it to you, but I am in search of a belief system greater than myself. You are a philosopher, right? Maybe I could find some answers in philosophy. If so, where do I start?
The etymology of "spirit" goes back to the word "breath", as related to the "energy" that imbues all living beings. The word "spirit" is invoked as a contrast to physical existence, so it refers to the nonphysical aspects of you and your existence that are presumed to be equally important to the physical aspects. Without one or the other, your existence never really feels right.
If you just live for physical survival, you will soon find that your existence feels somewhat empty or hollow. Why? Because you haven't addressed the question of what you're living for. Many people only come to realize that they have spiritual needs because they sense an inexplicable lack or absence of something important - much of human behavior is motivated by an unconscious desire to compensate for some intangible void within. This leads many people to use their cognitive functions egotistically, as though spiritual needs are just like physical needs like hunger or thirst, for example:
immature Si: only attaches to things for safety/security
immature Ni: only pursues goals that benefit oneself
immature Ti: only uses one's knowhow to cheat or exploit
immature Fi: only cares about one's own feelings
immature Se: only knows superficial pleasures
immature Ne: only wants to be entertained and distracted
immature Te: only wants power, control, or clout
immature Fe: only wants to possess or dominate
The concept of "spiritual need" is about formally acknowledging the necessity of meaning, actively engaging in meaning-making activities, and being in touch with something outside of yourself, beyond mere egotistical wants/desires. Spiritual needs are universal and include things such as:
to seek and apply the right knowledge
to develop one's potential
to put one's talents to good use
to set a constructive direction
to feel a sense of greater purpose
to earn respect and trust
to express care, support, and love
to have a sense of place and belonging
to participate fully in the world
to recognize the value in everything
to conduct oneself in the right way
to care about moral goals/outcomes
to devote oneself to worthy causes
to heal what is hurt or broken
to be present, whole, at peace
to experience beauty, wonder, awe
to have hope for the future
to have faith in a greater power
There are many ways to fulfill spiritual needs because there are many ways to generate a meaningful existence. Some spiritual needs are closely related to the functional stack. The process of learning how to use your functions maturely should naturally generate plenty of meaning for you. For example, observe the connection between these function applications and the needs listed above:
mature Si: use ritual to generate sacred significance
mature Ni: devote yourself to a better future
mature Ti: make the best use of your capabilities
mature Fi: honor what is good and virtuous
mature Se: bring out the beauty and wonder of the world
mature Ne: use possibility to create a better world
mature Te: build a world that works well for everyone
mature Fe: use harmony/gratitude to rebalance the world
Philosophers are not innately more spiritual nor do they automatically possess spiritual wisdom. Some of my classmates went through the entire canon of philosophers and didn't come out much wiser. You say you're looking for a belief system, but that's not really what philosophy is used for a lot of the time. Philosophers are more inclined to doubt and even take apart belief systems, which can be a dangerous activity, if it leaves you with no ground to stand on. Only a subset of philosophers are fully devoted to the concept of wisdom and learning the knowledge that one needs for living life well.
The advantages of being a philosopher come from: general open-mindedness; a willingness to deeply and thoroughly explore concepts; the ability to structure, extract, and evaluate ideas and arguments; the discernment to separate truth from falsity. In short, being a philosopher grants you certain mental tools, but how you choose to use them is what matters most.
You still have to set the right intentions, goals, and purpose. You still have to do the hard work of learning the right kinds of knowledge and then apply the knowledge in the right ways. You still have to keep examining yourself and whether your path continues to be viable and good. To be a philosopher is in some ways antithetical to the concept of a peaceful existence. Is inner peace not what people really want when they say they "want a belief system"?
Instead of getting lost in a sea of abstract philosophical ideas, it would be more fruitful for you to examine the reasons behind why you don't feel at peace and address them more directly. The above list should give you a better idea of what spiritual needs are and the importance of using healthy methods to fulfill them. Determine which spiritual needs are most pressing/important to you at this period of your life, set some concrete benchmarks and goals in relation to them, and come up with a feasible plan for fulfilling them.
Is there a book with more information about ego development? The type development page about the different phases of ego development was very useful, I would like to read more about it.
Hello! I would like to know your thougts on: What is the purpose of the ego? Why do we first have to develop it and not start the transcendence part right away? Can developing our ego be about getting to know the laws and reasons of its existence as an obstacle to master and get rid of, and thus become truly free and happy?
I don’t subscribe to the idea that the ego is “bad” and that one’s goal should be to “get rid of it”. I think this idea is misguided and does more harm than good. Ego is an essential part of who we are and it plays a critical role in psychological development. E.g. Your question seems to be making some problematic assumptions because it is a question that is spoken from the perspective of ego. You display a “bottom line” mentality that only cares about results. You display an “aggressive” mentality that thirsts for power to vanquish your feelings of powerlessness. You display an “escapist” mentality that wishes for destruction of the present in favor of a future ideal. You display a “fantasizing” mentality that wants to believe in utopian dreams of being always free and happy. Rather than try to get rid of ego, can you be aware of how it weaves into your thought processes?Ego activity is the path through which we discover the true self.
Is ego development covered in this blog is the same with graves model/spiral dynamic? As an ENFP i tend to combine theories, abstract concept. So i'm afraid i combine two different theories which will brings me trouble later on (1/2)
Not explicitly. There are many theories of ego development, most of them can be traced back to basic concepts in psychoanalytic theory, therefore, there is considerable overlap among them and they tend to cover the same general principles. My own understanding is a synthesis of several theories but also includes ideas from other fields that address human development. This is a personal blog, I’m not here to sell anything, so I simply share ideas and exchange information based on what I know or have studied/observed. I encourage people to use whatever ideas work well for them. If something resonates with you, then fine, if not, then keep searching.
