'Emotional License'

[bananaphallus]

The behaviors and tendencies we generally associate with a particular emotional state (brusqueness and spitefulness with anger or possibly despondency/depression for example), do you think think these are deliberate and conscious choices on the part of the person experiencing these emotions made with the knowledge that these showings of frustration are more likely to be 'accepted' by others when in this sort of state - as they're expected, or are these tendencies compulsive/mostly not able to be helped?

How do you think these behaviors came to be associated with/induced by certain emotional states or reactions?

 

[WorkInProgress]

I'll take my best shot at this in what little time I've got before work-

Yes I do think that looking a certain way is thought to help others know how you're feeling. But that doesn't necessarily mean it's either all natural or all learned. I think smiling and acting excited while you're happy is natural, as you see monkeys etc. do it often and I certainly feel inspired to act that way when in a good mood.

Acting like a jerk is the exact opposite of being light hearted (some exceptions, but you know what I mean) and stems from having no inspiration to smile or go out of your way to be courteous. It's why depressed people have no energy and just want to sleep all day. When they are courteous it's obviously forced and comes from caring what people think and not wanting to be thought of as depressed (or they're reaching out in hopes that someone will recognize this and try to help, but I digress)

Now things like frowning fall more into the learned pile. It's an easy way to make a purposefully unaesthetically pleasing reaction to mimic what they think of something. A woman smiling to her boyfriend when they pass a jewelry store is a more obvious way of using faces to easily send a message.

 

[boradicus]

Emotional states occur often prior to reflection and at the visceral level; this being said, emotional states also are influenced by patterns of thought and reflection. There is a fine line between milking an emotional state for emotional 'license,' correcting newly perceived emotionally precipitated improprieties after due reflection according to a rational standard, and the emotionally honest self-expression to which we INTPs are altogether generally less inclined. I think in some sense that it is more difficult for an INTP to navigate these waters because of the inherent tendency to self-judge and restrain. On the other hand, I think that we are perhaps the most fair and judicious personality type with regard to self-correction. Therefore, risk-taking on our part could be increased perhaps to some moderate extent as long as we are conscientious of social improprieties that may potentially occur and are ready to deal with those adjustments arising from natural blind-spots on an internal level. We are all our own worst judges it seems, and this makes it difficult for us to take a stand anywhere on anything I believe - we are instead quite naturally predisposed to an tranquilly inquiring nature - not that this cannot be overcome to an extent.

 

[EditorOne]

I have found that it is extremely effective to avoid any loudness in communicating. People associate loud voices with anger and aggressiveness. Since I've got a penetrating voice, I've learned to speak only as loudly as necessary for people to hear me.

As some of you know, I do living history. Folks seem to be annoyed by those doing Civil War officer impressions if that person speaks more loudly than necessary to be heard, even in a formation where there are 200 men in line of battle. I figured out it is the difference between being loud enough to be heard, to get everyone moving or whatever, and being so loud that the only reason you're making all that noise is to broadcast that you're in charge.

Ditto firefighting. While one sometimes must shout to be heard in person over the noise from a fire, that's never the case with radio communications, and it's important to keep the excitement level down by speaking into the radio like a BBC news anchor, calm and quiet even if you're reporting the end of the world. Otherwise you spread excitement, not the best thing for firefighting where it's already exciting enough without any help. You don't want adrenaline pumping, you want blood going to the brain for thinking fast.

So yes, people make conclusions based on displays of noise and whatnot. The diffidence that an INTP can bring to a situation is sometimes useful, and can be described with an old-fashioned word: Aplomb. On the other hand, if you are calm or diffident when someone is urgently demanding your attention, it can have odd results (see Banana Mango's WTF? thread).

On the third hand, inappropriate diffidence could be seen as a variation on Kipling's "If": "If you can keep your head when all those about you are losing theirs, then ... you don't understand the problem."