Are most of the people here insane?

[typus]

Are my puns destined to forever remain derstood by those who surround me?

 

[BigApplePi]

Almost completely so for some people. In real life, when folks don and doff different demeanors it's potentially more obvious, because you have a personality baseline and visual things to look at and compare; on a forum, however, it's a free for all where your imagination is in charge of how much you divulge, distort, or gloss over. So, yeah, contextual.

snafu. Could we say that if there are one, two, three, four, etc. requirements for a full representation, and we leave any of those out, the missing items become the context? -- by the definition of "context."

 

[Trebuchet]

In that respect its quite a universal human behavior that accompanies intellectual insecurity. When encountered with a situation that casts into doubt a person's mental ability they often retreat to incomprehensibility as a defense mechanism.

I think it is an INTP thing, and not all that universal. INTJs do it too, in my experience. Other types don't seem as worried that "they will find out I am just faking being smart." Not all INTPs become incomprehensible when threatened, of course.

On this forum, I have assumed that incomprehensible posts are due to someone being one or more of the following:

a) in one of those weird, philosophical, depressed moods
b) up way too late
c) too lazy to edit their post
d) drunk or stoned.

In the future, I shall add

e) insane

to my list of possibilities.

@typus: "derstood" is a great gift to the English language.

 

[Moocow]

I think it is an INTP thing, and not all that universal. INTJs do it too, in my experience. Other types don't seem as worried that "they will find out I am just faking being smart." Not all INTPs become incomprehensible when threatened, of course.

On this forum, I have assumed that incomprehensible posts are due to someone being one or more of the following:

a) in one of those weird, philosophical, depressed moods
b) up way too late
c) too lazy to edit their post
d) drunk or stoned.

In the future, I shall add

e) insane

to my list of possibilities.

I bolded my usual reasons for posting on INTP forum.

Most INTPs probably wish every single post they made could be a life changing monologue.

 

[Decaf]

I think it is an INTP thing, and not all that universal. INTJs do it too, in my experience. Other types don't seem as worried that "they will find out I am just faking being smart."

I disagree. While I will concede it would be far more likely in an introvert (especially a shy introvert) due to the conversation ending nature of incomprehensibility I have no trouble imagining an ISTP mechanic, INFP poet or an INTJ scientist doing the same thing. Yes, those are stereotypes, but neither of us have any actual data to work with. Any type that has a gift in a certain area of language would have the temptation to use that gift to extract themselves from uncomfortable positions. Its not as if INTPs have the corner on the market of wanting to appear intelligent.

Most INTPs probably wish every single post they made could be a life changing monologue.

Why do you think that is? I have certainly felt that compulsion so I agree its there, but why do you think we take such a hit and run approach to advice?

 

[BigApplePi]

I think it is an INTP thing, and not all that universal. INTJs do it too, in my experience. Other types don't seem as worried that "they will find out I am just faking being smart." Not all INTPs become incomprehensible when threatened, of course.

On this forum, I have assumed that incomprehensible posts are due to someone being one or more of the following:

a) in one of those weird, philosophical, depressed moods
b) up way too late
c) too lazy to edit their post
d) drunk or stoned.

In the future, I shall add

e) insane

to my list of possibilities.

This has me wondering. What if an INTP is confronted by an xxxJ who is so involved in his judgment that he has little or no comprehension of what the INTP is saying is another possibility? The xxxJ may attack causing the INTP to feel threatened who creates a poor defense offensive to the xxxJ. Such a thing happened to me on another set of bulletin boards where I stubbornly stuck to alternative views. I failed to be sensitive (undeveloped Fe) to the xxxJ's POV causing a great deal of trouble where the issue was never resolved. So I will add to the above:

f) Insensitivity to the sensitivities of others.

 

[Moocow]

Why do you think that is? I have certainly felt that compulsion so I agree its there, but why do you think we take such a hit and run approach to advice?

If not our precious words of wisdom what else do we have to offer?

 

[Trebuchet]

I disagree. While I will concede it would be far more likely in an introvert (especially a shy introvert) due to the conversation ending nature of incomprehensibility I have no trouble imagining an ISTP mechanic, INFP poet or an INTJ scientist doing the same thing. Yes, those are stereotypes, but neither of us have any actual data to work with. Any type that has a gift in a certain area of language would have the temptation to use that gift to extract themselves from uncomfortable positions. Its not as if INTPs have the corner on the market of wanting to appear intelligent.

I wouldn't say I have zero data to work with. All of mine is admittedly anecdotal, and I wouldn't claim it for scientific. All the INTxs that I know (around 20 people, mostly from college or work) say they worry that they are faking being smart. The xSxJs that I know (around 30 people, mostly from work or fellow moms) do worry that they are not smart enough, but they don't fear that they are faking being smart. They just say "I don't have a head for that."

Of course, these people mostly live where I do, have a similar cultural background to me, and are people I am in contact with. I am sure there is a selection bias. And I can't say being INTP causes someone to worry that they aren't as smart as they think they are, just that I personally have seen a correlation.

 

[Decaf]

I'm not surprised many other personality types wouldn't describe it as being "smart". Culture generally designates "smart" as abstractly talented. Ask an ISTP if its important that they feel capable. I suppose my loose definition of the term intelligence aids my side of the argument due to its inclusiveness, but in this case I think that's appropriate. I think when a person has knowledge about a subject (not just calculatable mental proficiency) they would be sorely tempted to throw jargon specifically at the uninitiated in order to reinforce their own self image.

The only argument I'm trying to make is that resorting to confusing your opposition is not a defense mechanism specific to INTPs. In fact, I think that concept flies in the face of what personality type is, but I suppose that may be up for debate.

 

[IfloatTHRUlife]

I agree that it is not a personality specific trait, and even that it contradicts my own personal principles. This doesnt mean that i dont give the impression that i want people to think i am smart though. People could easily mistake me just having fun, trying to share a thought with people, with trying to look intelligent.

Even on the rare occasion that i do take someones thoughts about me into consideration, i dont neccesarily care what they think of me specificly.

Causeless said it best in a discussion in what i think was his introduction thread, "I don't care what others think of me, but I DO care what I think of me from their perspective."

So its not even neccesarily a defense mechanism for me as much as it is just me entertaining myself with.. pretty much the only thing that truely makes me happy, interesting information. Its not like there is enough being passed around between everyday people, i have to mix it up sometimes.

Although that doesnt mean that if someone were to confront me about my intelligence that it wouldnt be one of the first reactions i would have, but its still more often for the fun funs than defending my self esteem.

 

[Dansk]

This place is weird.

 

[nexion]

.

Do you remember what question(s) you answered that gave you 84% Thinking rather than 100%?

 

[Cavallier]

Yes. Most of us are insane.

I have this weird deja vu feeling.

<----That guy is totally up to something.

 

[IfloatTHRUlife]

@xxpbdudexx - I have no clue, it has been years since i took that test. I actually dont like that graph, i more or less havent got rid of it because i am too lazy. The strengths dont truely mean anything, the questions in the tests become too situational leaving you with a mixed result. I suspect anyone who does get 100% on any part, either tried to answer the questions with a goal in mind instead of just looking for a honest result, or they have a little bit of problems. Everyone expresses both feeling and logic at some point but you can only have one true preferance.

Probably doesnt have anything to do with what you had in mind but i cant help it, you reminded me that i dont like the graph.

 

[snafupants]

Yes. Most of us are insane.

I have this weird deja vu feeling.

<----That guy is totally up to something.

Deja Vu supposedly involves frontal and temporal lobe brain damage and neuronal misfiring, so it is not as wonderful and cupcakes-for-everyone as it seems.

Spoiler

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=what-is-going-on-in-the-brain

 

[cheese]

So your point is that N's 'craziness' is only superficial? Isn't there a true tendency for N's to form mental instability? If the connection from observation and perception is thinner, doesn't the tendency for a 'break' become wider?

Not that it's superficial, just that it isn't necessarily craziness just because it comes from the same root (reality disconnect). Although if that root goes deep enough, it can lead to craziness. I do suspect there may be a stronger tendency to snap amongst Ns, which is why I said this:

Those of us who feel they sometimes can't tell what's real/if they're truly here/in a dream/hallucinating seem to be experiencing a significantly dimmer instinct; they may well be walking that notorious fine line.

I think mental stability runs along a spectrum, and though there is a point where that 'instinct' I talked about (dunno if there's any real basis for that idea) simply fails - past which you'd be genuinely insane, in some sense - the bits just before and just after that point may look fairly similar.

The main point of the post was to point out that N runs on the same rails madness does. (Perhaps.)

 

[Android]

I'm certainly not. I don't believe in the hallucinations I now have 24/7. Belief is the key. I met a man today who only introduced him as the Gatekeeper.. big ole tobacco stained beard, ragged voice, ragged farm. When returning to the truck after the hunt, there was a rainbow over his house with the sunset behind it. I'd picked some cyanescens during the hunt. I believed for awhile that I had met Heimdall.

 

[nexion]

@xxpbdudexx - I have no clue, it has been years since i took that test. I actually dont like that graph, i more or less havent got rid of it because i am too lazy. The strengths dont truely mean anything, the questions in the tests become too situational leaving you with a mixed result. I suspect anyone who does get 100% on any part, either tried to answer the questions with a goal in mind instead of just looking for a honest result, or they have a little bit of problems. Everyone expresses both feeling and logic at some point but you can only have one true preferance.

Probably doesnt have anything to do with what you had in mind but i cant help it, you reminded me that i dont like the graph.

I took it out for that reason. And because I constantly have doubts of whether I am really an INTP. But I fit in well enough here, so I suppose it's all right.

Anyway, I only posed the question because, while my scores on other axises frequently changed while I was taking the test up to four times per week, the T/F axis always stayed at 84%, and I believe it was because I answered that I value mercy higher than justice...

 

[IfloatTHRUlife]

Lol I always answered it with justice. I dont mind being merciful, but i value justice more. Most INTPs are probably the same way. Its fine to have mercy, but only if its the right thing to do, or if it is earned.

I have had doubts about being an INTP also though. The doubts were quickly extinguished though. I have an INFP and an ISTP friend, which would be the most likely personalities if i werent an INTP. And there are just farrrrrrrrr too many inconsistancies when i compare myself to them. Plus i am just so awkward compared to everyone else. The only other personality that i could really compare traits too would be INTJ, which is my brothers personality, and again, very similar end thoughts and social tendencies, but still a definate differance in our lifestyles and actual thought processes.

 

[nexion]

I think it is somewhat common for the INTP to sometimes portray INFP or ISTP characteristics. I know it happens to me every so often. Sometimes I'll have intense moments of Se out of nowhere. INTJ, however... far too different from me. They confound the hell out of me, and I wish I would one once of their motivation and structure...

I suppose I get stepped on often because I value mercy... actually, I'm pretty much a pacifist. Meh.

 

[The Gopher]

congratulations this appears to be the 900 thread in the lounge... and it's on sanity typical. But the faith forum has even more 924 to be exact. But anyway my brother is an ISTP and if you don't know them they seem to be INTP but the main difference is ISTPs tend to explode often(even more than we do[but we explode the other way]). But I would look like an INFP until you get to know me.

 

[nexion]

What do you mean by "explode?" As in, sudden outburst of typically negative emotion?

 

[The Gopher]

yeah get really angry really quickly...

 

[nexion]

Dude... I know barely any introverts in real life... and anyone that I do know who is an introvert HAS to be like either SJ or NJ. It's time to get some new friends... actually, many of my friends have probably thought the same thing.

Oh yes, about INFPs... I think I've spoken a good deal about it. If I'm not an INTP at times, I'm usually an INFP. It actually isn't that hard to get to an INFP, especially for me, since I use Te barely ever but use Fi often.

 

[Geminii]

I met a man today who only introduced him as the Gatekeeper

We should totally get him together with the Keymaster.

 

[Lobstrich]

I get that impression when reading threads on this forum. I'll come across about one in ten posts that are utterly incomprehensible.

There are people who offer up series of entirely unconnected thoughts that would be confusing enough on their own but end up sounding like Zen koans when strung together, there are people who speak only in metaphors about animals, people who take such a delight in using technical language that us mere mortals can't have a hope of figuring out what the hell they're rambling on about.

Is this an INTP thing? Do we delight in being the super-intelligent clairvoyants so far out in front of the rest of the pack that we can't tolerate anyone else knowing what's going on in our heads? Is this a reaction to the nagging suspicion that we're actually very average and not as extraordinary as we imagine ourselves to be?

Aaaaah.. I loved that post.
And no I'm not being sarcastic.

I find the overly 'I'm smart, so I have to sound alternative when I write' post tiresome as well.

I bet alot of people use 45 minutes on each post to make it sound as intelligent and eloquent as possible. But if you met them on the street they would probably speak just as generic as I am, at this moment.



Don't get me wrong though. I do believe that there are some people on this forum that actually are living vocabularies. Who can form the most beautiful sentences science has ever seen.

 

[Trebuchet]

We should totally get him together with the Keymaster.

I think that would be extraordinarily dangerous.

 

[Fallenman]

I prefer to think of myself as unique.

 

[Words]

That's odd, coming from you. While Ni is arbitrarily specific, Ne is specifically arbitrary. It's that easy.

I doubt the accuracy of this definition.

Regardless, my point is that iNtuition has a personal nature similar to iNtroversion. And that the combination of two personal functions results into lesser "contact" with the collective norms.

 

[Lobstrich]

Pseudo-intellectual? More than you can shake a stick at.

Glad I'm not the only one who sees that.

 

[Lobstrich]

This place is weird.

Come on! No it's not! =)

 

[The Gopher]

Aaaaah.. I loved that post.
And no I'm not being sarcastic.

I find the overly 'I'm smart, so I have to sound alternative when I write' post tiresome as well.

I bet alot of people use 45 minutes on each post to make it sound as intelligent and eloquent as possible. But if you met them on the street they would probably speak just as generic as I am, at this moment.



Don't get me wrong though. I do believe that there are some people on this forum that actually are living vocabularies. Who can form the most beautiful sentences science has ever seen.

Yeah well I don't spend much time on my posts...

 

[nexion]

Aaaaah.. I loved that post.
And no I'm not being sarcastic.

I find the overly 'I'm smart, so I have to sound alternative when I write' post tiresome as well.

I bet alot of people use 45 minutes on each post to make it sound as intelligent and eloquent as possible. But if you met them on the street they would probably speak just as generic as I am, at this moment.



Don't get me wrong though. I do believe that there are some people on this forum that actually are living vocabularies. Who can form the most beautiful sentences science has ever seen.

I do use an exorbitant amount of time on some posts, if it deals with deep subject matter or it is exceptionally long. I even sometimes search up the definition of a word I plan on using to make sure I get the context correct (as I just did with "exorbitant")

It is all about conciseness, the ability to make sentences that flow and impart the exact meaning that the author intended it to have. That is difficult sometimes, even impossible sometimes, at which point one must do the best he can.

English is an eloquent language. Why not take advantage of that? I'm not saying that one should just go around and go look in thesauruses for more complex words that mean the same thing (though, I have done that as well), but if one has a heightened or natural ability with the fluidity of the language, and it would require conscious effort to turn his thoughts into vernacular, why should he not write in such a way?

 

[BigApplePi]

This place is weird.

Does a fish think it's swimming in water? If it does, it soon forgets.
In the land of the weird, no weirdo is weird.

 

[cheese]

Aaaaah.. I loved that post.
And no I'm not being sarcastic.

I find the overly 'I'm smart, so I have to sound alternative when I write' post tiresome as well.

I bet alot of people use 45 minutes on each post to make it sound as intelligent and eloquent as possible. But if you met them on the street they would probably speak just as generic as I am, at this moment.



Don't get me wrong though. I do believe that there are some people on this forum that actually are living vocabularies. Who can form the most beautiful sentences science has ever seen.

I've never really understood the spirit behind this sort of criticism.

Or rather, I understand the spirit of the assumption behind the criticism, but not the fact that the assumption is made at all. Why do you assume the only reason people spend time on their posts, tidying them up to look nice, read pleasurably and easily and formatting them for greater comprehensive value is because they want to look smart? (Or indeed, that that's even a bad thing - although my instinctive reaction here is that yes, it's loathsome; but instincts aren't necessarily trustworthy.)

I find speaking irl such a momentous feat of strength most of the time that being able to write clearly and concisely is an overwhelming relief - free from the stress that real-time conversation brings. (And honestly, it barely takes more than a few seconds/minutes to write than to speak - sometimes I'm even faster writing. When totally unstressed irl I speak very fast and in roughly the same manner as here, except more disorganised.) It's not about looking clever, it's about the sheer joy of finally being able to find expression.

I'm also not the only one who appreciates a well laid-out reply. Frankly it's easier and more fun to read, most of the time. Not everyone is gifted with instant coherence, so obviously it's going to take more time, but you know what? It pays off. It reads better, it probably contributes more to the topic than something you just dash off, and it gives you time to address any needless errors in your position that would just waste everybody's time. Reflection's not a bad thing, right? And by the way, by 'reads better' I don't mean it makes the writer look better, or smart - I mean it makes it easier for everyone reading it to know what he's saying. And isn't that at least part of the purpose of communication? Especially on a forum, which is built around the assumption of time-lag in discussion - it's not a chat room. You've got the time, why not use it? There's no need to, but doing so doesn't necessarily imply you're trying to one-up everybody else, or show yourself off.

And can't joy be taken in the beauty of words themselves? Even if you're not particularly adept at them, you may enjoy trying to make something beautiful out of their patterns - you don't have to be successful at this to not be a pretentious twat. (Or perhaps not. This is an intrusive thought related to something else though, so I'll leave it for now.) You might just enjoy trying to put nice words together in a nice way, especially in a way that conveys what you're trying to say, and that might take, well, all day. [If you caught that, the intent was, ah, an emergent phenomenon.] Have a look at this link, graciously provided by darling Gopher: YouTube - Stephen Fry Kinetic Typography - Language
Not that anything in that is a definitive argument, but it is an ostensibly different motivation to the one you proposed.

And what about the simple possibility that some of these people are simply unable to express themselves any other way, at least if they wish to gain that elusive precision in expression, without resorting to overly convoluted or needlessly syllabled words? Perhaps a greater mind with more technical proficiency would be able to reduce it to a few simpler strands, but we can't all claim that skill for ourselves. So while it may perhaps reflect badly on our brains, it does not say anything definite about our intentions.

I mean god, is that really the only reason you can think up? That people only ever bother up to the point where their mouths open/hands hit the keyboard, and then let whatever comes out shit all over the air/screen? And that the only ones with the 'right' to beauty, clarity, and efficacy of expression are those to whom it comes instantly (a small number!)? What, I ask, is wrong with effort? Can't one do anything with skill and patience for oneself, without it turning into some implicit challenge for competition/display of pretense/falsity?

Although I should be careful here, and admit I can't know all experiences, and that it's entirely possible you have never done anything requiring effort simply for the sake of indulging yourself, and not in the eyes of others, so perhaps you didn't have that piece of personal knowledge to assess your position with.

Of course I'm not taking this as a personal attack, just pointing out, based on my own and others' experience, that there is more than one reason for doing things in a way different to your own - and they're not all negative. To be different to you is not necessarily a bad thing! The inverse of that is essentially what you assumed here - that people who did not act in the same way you did were unpleasantly motivated.

It just seems like more of the same unthinking, callous arrogance that will crush those not aware of its folly. But I will admit I could be sore here (not this topic specifically, but general lack of thought and crushing, narrow-minded arrogance).

This took me about 45 minutes to write. A third of the time I had to do something else, and the rest of it was devoted to getting this all out clearly. I had an immediate mental response but it wasn't verbal, so I had to start off by verbalising the beginnings of it, think it through, put it into words, attempt to organise it, make sure it made sense, type it, etc. My thoughts don't fall out in pretty, neat little chunks. A failing on my part, perhaps, but the attempt to rectify it isn't an additional failing, I hope.

(And yeah, I'm aware this is quite possibly a super over-response to a few little lines you just put up, which probably didn't reflect anything like the entirety of your worldview, and I don't mean to be hostile at all - at least where it's unfair - so I apologise if I have been. This is addressed more to the apparent general sentiment of the post that I've seen many times from many people.) (Or maybe it was you each time! )

Er, SparksNotes version:
There are many different reasons people take time with their posts. These include, but are not limited to, pretentious faggotry.

*edit
Just had a look at the size of this thang - my word (ahahah!!!). This definitely stinks of butthurt.

BUT SO WHAT?! WHAT'S SO WRONG WITH LIKING ANAL SEX?! DO YOU THINK THE ONLY REASON ONE MIGHT ENJOY BEING BUGGERED IS BECAUSE THEY'RE IN SOME WAY MORALLY OR MENTALLY DEFICIENT? - WELL LET ME TELL YOU A LITTLE SOMETHING ABOUT THE VARIETY OF MOTIVATIONS BEHIND THE, AHAHA, LOVE OF THE BEHIND...

 

[Oblivious]

cheese: Didn't read the whole thing but,

/signed

You horny yellow spotted green brontosaurus you.

 

[echoplex]

I get tired of the criticism of unspecified people here. People just love to complain about others but they never seem willing to actually engage others individually about whatever their beef is. I know people like to be kind and don't want to instigate a flame war or attack anyone personally, but it doesn't have to be that way. I mean, can't it just be constructive criticism? Something about someone annoys you, okay, well maybe they'd like to know? Don't assume everyone would rather be ignorant of how others perceive them. Some people actually value that knowledge and use it to express themselves better.

I'm sorry but it tends to strike me as cowardice disguised as politeness.*
* of which I'm sure I'm guilty, btw. I guess it's just the "you people..." variety of it that annoys me the most. People seem more courageous when they're criticizing a group of nameless 'people' whom they'd (presumably) be unwilling to address individually.

Note: Don't take any of this too seriously, as I'm not even sure why this annoys me, I just know it does and I tried (feebly) to articulate it just now. I realize people are just making observations with no ill intent.

(I think I'm being too idealistic, carry on)

 

[cheese]

^Name them individually! NAME THEM!

*edit
More seriously, I expect most of the time people don't remember individual names but just a general feeling of discontent that grows over time.

 

[echoplex]

^ Yep you're right. I guess mostly what I'm suggesting is catching people in the act (of whatever annoys them) and letting them know on the spot, in a respectful way of course. I'm not expecting people to actually type out a list of everyone who's ever annoyed them in threads like these. Goodness, the lists would be huge!

 

[Inappropriate Behavior]

Who cares if someone refuses to put up a post without consulting that book thingie that lists words followed by other words that mean the same thing? This is just a shared hiding place. I don't get half the shit posted here at least and suspect that at least half the shit I post is passed over because it doesn't make sense half the time.

^^Y'all probably just skimmed over that nonsense didn't you? Eh, so what if you did?

Just be here if and when you like being here and go somewhere else when you don't.

 

[The Gopher]

Have a look at this link, graciously provided by darling Gopher:

This and your edit kinda unsettles me

 

[cheese]

Put 2 and 2 together Gopher, put tool and poo together. Hang on! That's not what I said!

 

[Lobstrich]

I do use an exorbitant amount of time on some posts, if it deals with deep subject matter or it is exceptionally long. I even sometimes search up the definition of a word I plan on using to make sure I get the context correct (as I just did with &quot;exorbitant&quot

It is all about conciseness, the ability to make sentences that flow and impart the exact meaning that the author intended it to have. That is difficult sometimes, even impossible sometimes, at which point one must do the best he can.

English is an eloquent language. Why not take advantage of that? I'm not saying that one should just go around and go look in thesauruses for more complex words that mean the same thing (though, I have done that as well), but if one has a heightened or natural ability with the fluidity of the language, and it would require conscious effort to turn his thoughts into vernacular, why should he not write in such a way?

I do that myself somtimes. Search on the exact definition of words that I want to use. So I agree with you on that one.

 

[Lobstrich]

I find speaking irl such a momentous feat of strength most of the time that being able to write clearly and concisely is an overwhelming relief - free from the stress that real-time conversation brings. (And honestly, it barely takes more than a few seconds/minutes to write than to speak - sometimes I'm even faster writing. When totally unstressed irl I speak very fast and in roughly the same manner as here, except more disorganised.) It's not about looking clever, it's about the sheer joy of finally being able to find expression.

I admit. I haven't thought of it that way. But now you say it, I am VERY disorganized when I speak in 'real time' much more than I am here. I flail words and explainations all over the place and it does nothing but tire people listening to me.

So It's a good point. I'll consider that next time.


But I still think alot of people are pseudo-intellectual as Anthile so wonderfully explained.
Which annoys the crap out of me.

Pretentious people, just had their first few classes of psychology and philosophy, learned alot of cool words. And now they feel all sophisticated with these new words. And have conversations straight out of the book they read. God forbid they have an opinion.

But as you saw me write in my post. I'm not saying every person on this forum is a pseudo-intellectual. Maybe I'm just misanthropic towards my peers (the youth; seeing I'm 18)

In conclusion I agree with you on the quoted part. Yet I still fell as I originally explained.

(Didn't read your whole post. I'll get back with an edit when I do.. At some point)


EDIT: "To be different to you is not necessarily a bad thing!" This is actually kind of insulting though. Not in the sense that I think myself as better and being different from me is bad.. But because you think that I am so shallow that I hold this belief.

 

[BigApplePi]

cheese. Great post!

 

[Lobstrich]

cheese. Great post!

I agree on that as well.

 

[Words]

"To be different to you is not necessarily a bad thing!" This is actually kind of insulting though. Not in the sense that I think myself as better and being different from me is bad.. But because you think that I am so shallow that I hold this belief.

Do INTP's like ESFJ's?

I'd argue that as shallow it may seem [to you], it's an existing instinctual belief of many. To be different from someone [in a certain way] is to not relate to them [in a certain way] and simply that lack of connection can lead to 'twisted' relational judgements. I, myself, have been subconsciously moved by this belief. I don't think it's a purposely shallow thing, but rather a "built-in deficiency of people" thing.

 

[The Gopher]

Do INTP's like ESFJ's?

actually umm yeah.

 

[Lobstrich]

Do INTP's like ESFJ's?

I'd argue that as shallow it may seem [to you], it's an existing instinctual belief of many. To be different from someone [in a certain way] is to not relate to them [in a certain way] and simply that lack of connection can lead to 'twisted' relational judgements. I, myself, have been subconsciously moved by this belief. I don't think it's a purposely shallow thing, but rather a "built-in deficiency of people" thing.

I don't think you understood my reply..

I never said that people are not different.
And I never said I didn't like the opposite of myself?
What is said was that I was insulted by the way, he believed me to be so shallow to believe that being different is bad.

 

[Words]

I don't think you understood my reply..

I never said that people are not different.
And I never said I didn't like the opposite of myself?
What is said was that I was insulted by the way, he believed me to be so shallow to believe that being different is bad.

Why is believing that "being different is bad" necessarily shallow? Or ha, why is being shallow necessarily insulting? This is a matter of questioning values.

My point is: Being "shallow" is a common intermittent thing beneath human perception. Why do we care for how we look? Why do care for praises? Why do we care for winning? Why do we care for being the authority? These things are not just for utility. People instinctively care for these things, It's not necessarily something we consciously decide on. But it is something we can improve on.