I like this thread...
There were really a handful of interesting points. Somewhat like a sub Fe-analysis thread.
What makes normal people think people are cool, such that some people just happen to fall into that area by pure chance?
Just think about discrimination. Familiarity is the center idea in this system. And actually, "strangeness"[to a certain degree] is also a form of familiarity.
Familiarity lessens suspicion, suspicion lessens negative awareness, and of course, the lack of a possible negative or "more knowledge about the person" lessens doubt and boosts popularity.
Similarity can also translate to familiarity but only the first aspect of familiarity. It may lead to inclusion of the group but it does not necessarily make you the popular one or an idol of the group.
There are "common like-able traits" that may not exist within the group but may exist within the "common-value"(Fe) of the group. This idea of common-value is the second 1/2 of the idea of familiarity.
An important idea is that similarity and common value can be connected. Values can form similarities and similarity can be a value[which I think innately it is].
Ok, now let's look at the RL divisions:
1. Think of loners and freaks of society. Let's define them as (--). They do not possess the familiarity of similarity nor do they possess the familiarity of common value. To the group, they are an "unknown" and as a result they are immediately hated, or feared initially[which can result into hate], or can be viewed as "bugs" to the system[society] and[which can transform into societal perception of a virus].
2. Think of the ordinary and common members. Let's define them as (+-). They are mostly the same with everybody else but there is nothing special about them.
3. Think of the "commonly viewed special but can't relate to society"[I'm looking for a name. Geniuses? Eccentric Artists?] types. Let's define them as (-+). They are viewed as great but they don't necessarily flock with the group. The system(group) identifies them and consecrates their positions; they established a perception of them as a value of the group but and they regard them separately from the group because "that's how it is".
4. Think of the person in the group who shines and yet manages to integrate hirself as a member. [Empath Leaders? Humorists?] Let's define them as (++). Basically, they are balanced well.
Also, why aren't you guys full of yourselves, or at least act like you are? Maybe I've made that a habit because it gets positive responses, but I never consciously realized it?
It's a tiring process for me. I could go on and on insulting people but not being full of myself. Although those self-aggrandizements actually works well for humor and THAT I won't tire of. But I currently hesitate with an addition of low interest.
It's hardly anything more than a pecking order Yeti...
You're a big guy and you're cocksure, the fact is that's going to land you pretty high on the hierarchy in most places. It does not work here for you, because you don't have a physical presence and the forum doesn't value bodily and social clout a fraction as it does intellectual clout. If you want to be liked here, you have to prove yourself intellectually. Although there's also a fascination with the bizarre here, so if you pretended to be both cocksure, intelligent, and insane you'd get a lot of points. There are other methods as well and another route would be to convince the other forumers that you're superior to them in some form, or that you have something to teach them.
Sounds Te. The origin of value seems both evolutionary and, like in this case, a collection of value [which could originate from a similarity].
For example I'd wager over 90% of the forumers who know them, consider themselves to be emotionally inferior to Auburn and Snowqueen. While the facts don't necessarily lend themselves to such a conclusion, they present themselves as more emotionally competent/expressive and by and large are believed. Although it doesn't really take much to convince an INTP that s/he's emotionally retarded, regardless if they actually are or not.
But I thought the value of the forum is centered mainly on intellect[that I'd playfully give to the "wall of texters"]. How can one be emotionally inferior?
The ultimate point is that it doesn't really matter if you're liked or not, irl you naturally fall high enough that most people won't bother attacking you or they fear retribution. There are very few individuals who will brazenly disregard hierarchy, conscious of it or not. Although if you understand the mechanics of a particular hierarchy, it's very easy to manipulate and subvert. Of course here on the forum you're pretty far down on the totem pole, but true to your personality, I'm sure you could hardly care.
This is also why I avoid groups of more then 3-4 people, the more people you have together the more herd like and hierarchal they act.
(Te)Level of individual expression of values translates into hierarchy. Similarity is disregarded because it seems to belong in the "neutral zone".
- - -+ +- ++
I digress. I think portrayal of empathy(similarity) would result into a greater positively reacting environment. (Fe).
Also, who are those two people, here? Presumably they're popular. Did they disappear, or have I simply not been paying attention to details again?
Hm, I don't seem to sense this "popularity" as well..
Perhaps Adaire feels emotionally inferior to said two members?
Spaceyeti, you didn't have any particular attachment to your status as an INTP did you?
Because I'm just going to go ahead and...
*Rips the "Hello, I'm an INTP!" sticker from your shirt*
Yeeeeeeeaaaaaahhhh...
T
Also; I am humble. And if I think Im this awesome and I'm humble, imagine how awesome I really am!
Good for ye.
Also, you are real fun to observe.
I agree.
You do kind of fit the profile, you are slightly more critical than analytical, you focus on the practicality of things in peoples posts, your rather arrogant(which can go both ways), your posts are normally short and to the point as opposed to the others, who state their point and then babble on explaining themselves with examples/variables.
anyone have any waffles?
yep that was it