- Type: NeFi
- Development: ll--
- Attitude: Seelie
Wow! So much good stuff has gone down here! I’ll just respond to a few bits.
I totally agree with four things:
1) There’s a sense of “the hero” that’s fundamentally human, not Fe or any one function.
It’s literally the mythic cast of “growth”: To Jung, it’s what individuation is. It’s the ego on its way to “the Self”.
2) Fe as Messiah is awesome!
That’s how I see it. And like @auburn, I find all the “strive on” preaching burdensome and irksome. It’s what grates me about JBP’s self-help stuff. It just feels like he has the right insight but the totally wrong prescription for it. I’m glad I knew about type before I knew about him because I’ve understood from the very beginning what exactly in his message irks me. It’d have been a mystery otherwise, especially considering I agree with so much of what he says. I think Je in general puts a certain emphasis on agency that I find burdensome and even unrealistic: Almost like they expect humans to be something more than human. I get that’s my revisor rebellion in full gear, though.
3) Different kinds of heroes- Yes!
The seelie princesses are heroes too, let’s not forget. Just not Fe heroes. All protagonists of stories are the heroes of their stories: just like every ego is the hero of every person’s life story, but the hero that’s still smack in the middle of the action (hasn’t “learned the lesson” yet). This I think is why the Fe=hero felt wrong to many. Because hero is another word for protagonist.
I’m glad we can find another word to give Fe so we don’t confuse it with all these other meanings embedded in “hero”, including the more saintly connotations. For example, to me, heroism is whatever involves sacrifice in the service/pursuit of some good. So there’s a heroism and ‘failure’ to every function or every type in whatever life-circumstances they are in. Someone who dies rather than violate their Fi values is a hero; someone who sacrifices to rule the people fairly (Te King) is a hero; etc. This is why the word was creating confusion. There’s lots of different meanings to it.
4) Harry Potter, again!
I agree that other people may think Harry has some kind of ‘destiny’ but I don’t see it in Harry or ‘God’ (JKRowling). Only in some characters in the story. Harry just is a boy who is true to his values and those he cares about, at the end of the day. All his heroism can be boiled down to that. When he gives his life in Deathly Hallows, it’s not because “he must step into his destiny”; it’s because Voldermort has to be defeated. And even defeating Voldermort is not “his destiny”; it’s just what is necessary in the moment. It must be done to protect the wizarding world and those in it. Period.