"You're Too Deep"

[Sophron]

Let me start off by saying, hello. I'm a new member, as of 30 seconds ago, and it has been therapeutic reading your posts.

I'm currently on the bullet train from Kyoto to Tokyo and, being the classic INTP that I am, I need to get a thought out.

How do you feel when someone you connect with says or iterates a message along the lines of "You're Too Deep"?

I'll start -

In a party setting I used to think, damn, I must be doing something wrong.. Better fix myself. Now I've realized there are only certain moments where I feel thoughtless or fluid - and it isn't because I'm trying to. I can't force it or recreate this feeling, especially if it is for someone else.

In conversation, I used to be utterly confused. The concept of another person being too deep (I'm not talking about nihilism of course), at an intellectual level, is a feeling that I've never had. My understanding of it is the equivalent of a blind (from birth) individual's knowledge of color. Now I only show my true self when I'm too stressed or tired to hide it. The difficult part being, that I'm quite proud of who I am and the priority I give to certain kinds of thoughts.

As a whole, I feel like saying, you don't know me at all do you? I am the definition of deep and I find it difficult to apologize for actualizing who I am (never ends well). Then, when I realize how isolating that is, I kind of fold into the variety of MBTI masks that are available to me. It's not fun, and I obviously have growth to do. Alas, friends, I'm curious how you feel - assuming it's something you encounter.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

You probably aren't that deep as you seem to think of yourself being. You haven't had the chance to meet intellects that dwarf you with their presence in that you can appreciate their brilliance long after they've left.

People complain you're deep when they're in casual conversation mode and you disturb their flow, if you're at a party for example people there expect to have fun or chat lightly, then if you come along with your petty unanswerable philosophical stuff (as an example) of course you will disturb their fun. Actually, it's your fault for being too shallow or egocentric and not realising the specifics of the social convention you've found yourself in and the requirements thereof.

On entirely another level, people don't get the deep/thing if their interests or preferences, or their patience for the other person isn't sufficient for what they were trying to do. There's bound to be people who can "get" what you're saying and those who you personally can't follow along.

In a professional setting "being too deep" is a criticism. It means you're flooding the brainstorming discussion or light briefing with overly technical or complex and pointless data, you're actually slowing the exchange of information and you're wasting everyone's time.

By no means comprehensive, but hopefully showing why "deep" isn't always a compliment or isn't always as deep or intelligent as you might've thought it was. Adaptability is a far more preferable trait, than simply being restricted to "depth".

 

[Brontosaurie]

It's a polite way of saying that you're slowing conversation down with boring technicalities or vague subjectivist poetics that would require a greater degree of common ground.

Personally i'm rather intolerant of "deep" conversations and i much prefer controversy over depth, as the former embraces the dynamic, unpredictable nature of interaction while the latter constitutes a vain attempt to control it. Whenever a "deep" conversation occurs in a casual setting, i know that it's contingent on some ideological set of assumptions enabling people to engage each other pseudo-intellectually by playing a a predefined game, and that it's either a poorly concealed mating ritual or an instance of reciprocal ego masturbation.

 

[Sophron]

Very interesting. I think a lot of what both you are saying holds true.

Thank you for taking the time to write that out.

I would qualify that deep can mean many things in many scenarios and does not necessarily have to be device of the ego for that reason. I'm not that self-conscious about my intelligence and am very open to the whole "to know is to know I know nothing" thing. Lastly, it is a part of the INTP stereotype to have a web of interconnected ideas and have a desire to test them in order that that web can grow. It's not just noise for the sake of control. It's a self indulgent impulse that should most likely only be engaged when others are ready and willing to participate.

 

[TBerg]

Read Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra. He was more profound and crazy and alienated than any of us, and yet he was against the merely intellectual. He will whip you into shape, you who hate the down-to-earth and the lighthearted. You have not yet earned the right to rule over them, as they would take out their pitchforks against you.

 

[EditorOne]

"Deep" might simply be different communications equipment. Those who understand through emotions more than we do may find you difficult to read. It is, I agree, a kind of compliment, but one intended to excuse the utterer (did I just make that word up?) from any responsibility of comprehension.

 

[Rook]

utterer

I also used it recently in the box of chatting : P
Makes sense, as a word.

 

[Tannhauser]

deepness must definitely be executed in a playful way. I don't think people have much against deep stuff, it's just that most people who try to engage in deep conversations do it in a very dry and pompous manner. It cannot be brute-forced into interactions, it needs to be done with style and finesse, like everything else with social interaction.

 

[Sophron]

More great posts! Thank you.

@Tberg - I've much admired Nietzsche and wondered about his alienation and how it related to this very dilemma. I'll be sure to check it out.

Within his Genealogy of Morality he picks at how weak intellectuals control the strong through "merely intellectual", "pompous", "shallow", reasoning. Thus came the religion as a device of control argument. Seeing some of the early interactions in this thread, I've noticed a justifiable fear against this.

I've never considered myself capable of that. My desire isn't to control but to connect. There's a reason I'm a "P" as well. The flow of thought is very important to me and my ability to disguise these interests comes from that care of connection to others.

Based on what I'm hearing I need to redefine connection and the level that I can go with people.

 

[redbaron]

Just pull out a little.

 

[Bad Itch]

Just pull out a little.

Just the tip...

https://youtu.be/-nZ_EZTmFxM

 

[TBerg]

Just pull out a little.

What's the safety word?

 

[Pyropyro]

What's the safety word?

Zarathustra

 

[Analyzer]

deepness must definitely be executed in a playful way. I don't think people have much against deep stuff, it's just that most people who try to engage in deep conversations do it in a very dry and pompous manner. It cannot be brute-forced into interactions, it needs to be done with style and finesse, like everything else with social interaction.

The quietly penetrating parable.

 

[Deleted member 1424]

and RB makes the joke that I diligently talked myself out of making for the greater good of the forum.

Zarathustra

You mean 'Zarathrusta'
It was right there, man, and you missed it.

@op
Philosophy sex puns go over way better at parties than just regular philosophy.

 

[Pyropyro]

You mean 'Zarathrusta'
It was right there, man, and you missed it.

Oh no!

*cries ubermenschically in shame*

 

[Perfectly Normal Beast]

Just the tip...

PIV is always rape, ok?

 

[Sinny91]

Yea, I'd maybe say what the other guys said.

As somebody who has a lot of strong opinions which are 98% outside of the status quo, I generally keep mine to myself when unprompted specifically (outside the internet, which is effectively my outlet).

I dont run particularly deep intellectually, in comparison to those who actually do; but I do run deep with the common sense , and deep common sense has a habit of shitting on everybody elses happy delusions.

So in day to day life, when general conversations are flowing, I'm usually the one watching and listening with her tongue stuck to the roof of her mouth.

More often than not, my silence is louder than my words and my friends arounde will either: 1) Volunteer that this stoner has something 'deep' to say on the matter, but they dont wanna go down that road, so they acknowledge the potential 'deepness' and move on. Or 2) Eagerly encourage me to share my enlightened stoner opinion .

A lot of my 'deep stuff' is attributed to me being a stoner, loner, bookworm. So..

That applies for the majority of people, but mostly not NTs. The only time NTs don't vibe with deep is when they are in party or avoid the hurtful truth mode.

 

[Pizzabeak]

Read Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra. He was more profound and crazy and alienated than any of us, and yet he was against the merely intellectual. He will whip you into shape, you who hate the down-to-earth and the lighthearted. You have not yet earned the right to rule over them, as they would take out their pitchforks against you.

Is there a preferred, authoritative translation?

 

[Sophron]

Haha you guys are awesome.

@Sinny91 - Definitely the mentality I'm gravitating towards. And... I clearly need to master my sexual Nietzsche puns.

 

[TBerg]

Is there a preferred, authoritative translation?

I like Walter Kaufmann.