レイニンが書いたFi(内向倫理)

Subjective ethics. It is my attitude to people. It is the liking/disliking of people/things. It is the emotions I experience.

Objective ethics. It is the external relationship, the relationships between other people and their attitude towards me. It is the emotions of other people.

Function #1- subjective ethics ( ): the person’s attitude to something or somebody is in the area of confidence. In this area person’s relationships are of the least importance, often they do not concern him at all. His attitude is much more important here, and he would rather have it permanently fixed. If a Dreiser has formed a good opinion of someone, it would take some major factors to make it change. Even more so his bad attitude or opinion is hard to change.〔中略〕The attitude itself may change, but its realm is so deep, that can hardly be described with words. This realm of personal attitudes to other people and the external world is strongly felt but poorly verbalized.

Function #1— subjective ethics ( ): the zone of confidence is my attitude to others. The spectrum of emotional reactions of this type is peculiarly large. A Dostoevsky is more confident in the sphere of emotions than other types. People of this type feel and discern shades and nuances of emotions unthinkable for representatives of the other types. What could, say, a Zhukov understand in a Dostoyevsky’s emotional world when even the notion of such details is absent in the psyche of the former? People often live in parallel worlds that have nothing in common except for rather narrow area of conventional (formal) contacts.

Since this is the creative function, both negative and positive poles are easily accessible to him. A Napoleon can just look at his troops and say: “Soldiers, I love you!” There are ten thousand people; does he love them all? The fact is they know he really does love them, and they trust him, and they follow him.

Function #-4 - subjective ethics ( ): in a Robespierre's zone of fears is his/her own attitude. Why talk about it? What is there to say? They have a fear of expressing love, or their own attitude to a person/a thing/an event. “What is your opinion? What do you think about it?” these questions frighten a Robespierre. And when they are faced with a necessity to speak directly about their attitude they may put up a huge fuss. In general a Robespierre is inclined to a detached, constrained manner of dialogue. He/she tries to express opinions implicitly, hinting or joking. Frequently they are not understood, because they assume that others think in the same way as they do.

here the person is open for suggestions: “Other people should tell me about my attitude to something or to somebody. Do I like something or do I not – other people have a better idea what’s going on with me, and they should tell me about it. I do not know; I am not sure.” A Jack needs a firm foundation for the forming of her opinion. Therefore she needs objective data, reliable information and good sources of information outside of herself: “People know better”.

The principle of self-esteem: if I love somebody it is a good reason to have a good attitude to myself, i.e. if I love somebody, then I am a good person. A Balzac is distancing himself from the object, withdrawing into the realm of abstractions, when he needs to protect himself according to the third function. He would rather have his object of affection be some place far away, in an expedition, on a business trip abroad. It is always easier to love an ideal image in your mind than a real person with all their weaknesses. Real people are not perfect; they disappoint us. If I am disappointed, then I do not love. Therefore I am bad.

A Hamlet's attitude to people is not important in his/her own eyes; they put other people’s attitude higher than their own. Their relationships with other people always take the first place. 'My attitude to people' is somewhere in the background, often hidden even from myself.〔中略〕A Hamlet can easily express his feelings and emotions through acting as if on stage, while hiding his attitude well – unlike, for example, a Napoleon or a Huxley who express their attitudes through their creative second function. It is easier for a Hamlet to wear a mask.