How Risk averse are you?

[Zeke Johnson]

Everything in life is based on equal exchange, even the good things come at a price.

I've found through personal experience that taking risks is the only way to live your life. And the risk-averse people always end up in the dead-end jobs, hiding in their blanket of security, but what a price....

Isn't it better to shoot for the stars and miss, than to aim for the mud and make it?

I've found that with people with greater intelligence are more risk-averse, seeing this as the logical sensible thing to do. I know alot of introverts who have settled for less in relationships, and work, because they lack confidence.

Being an I-type means lack of confidence but is this the price your willing to pay?

I'm sick of seeing my I-type friends shooting for the mud, when they have so much to offer. Especially in their thinking that they have nothing to offer, and letting the E-types take centre-stage.


Zeke Johnson ( Ex-Captain )

 

[Ermine]

Introversion doesn't necessarily mean a lack of confidence. Even though I'm an INTP, I'm sure of myself and I will work for what I want. Not exactly a wired trait, just a realization that that's how I get to where I want to be. As an INTP, I usually let extroverts take center stage because I don't want it all the time, but I won't let them take it away from me when it's my turn to figuratively shine.

Must say, that's been quite the debate inside my head, deciding whether I should be comfortable but dissatisfied or taking the risks and maybe winning, maybe losing. But I decided that life is best when it's dynamic, both the good and the bad with the good ending up on top in the end.

I've been getting out of that introverted "dead end" with baby steps.

 

[hairlessbluetick]

I agree with the weasel. I have been told I am intimidateingly (sp?) confident at times.

 

[Ermine]

That reminds me of how extroverts are so careless to assume the words "introverted" and "shy" are synonyms. Closely associated, but different. For example, though I am introverted, I have no problem speaking or doing anything in front of an audience as long as I'm prepared, but I don't care for running my mouth in a conversation, just talking for the sake of talking.

A shy person would have a very hard time doing both of these things, but an introvert could do both, though they may not like to do the latter. Confidence is a nearly unrelated variable. I'm sure there's also plenty of shy, tentative, or insecure extroverts out there. They just end up talking more about it.

 

[Zeke Johnson]

In my research I found I-types to have high Self-Esteem, coming from inner values.

And E-types have confidence, coming from external triumphs etc.

The main problem I find as an introvert is I let E-types take the lime-light because although I have self-esteem, I lack confidence in dealing with issues externally, public speaking etc. Or I used to anyway.

I know alot of I-types who will defend their points vehemently, but they would be unwilling, to offer them in a public gathering, the E-types always over-voice them.

In public the E-type reigns supreme, given their better socializing skills. Although their confidence is generally just a show, as it stems from no inner values.

Getting back on topic, How risk averse are you?


Zeke Johnson ( Ex-Captain )

 

[Vrecknidj]

Everything in life is based on equal exchange, even the good things come at a price.

Perhaps. But, one must consider the odds of success when weighing the value of the sought-after payoff.

I've found through personal experience that taking risks is the only way to live your life. And the risk-averse people always end up in the dead-end jobs, hiding in their blanket of security, but what a price....

Isn't it better to shoot for the stars and miss, than to aim for the mud and make it?

That's a false dilemma. I suggest there are more alternatives than these two.

I've found that with people with greater intelligence are more risk-averse, seeing this as the logical sensible thing to do. I know alot of introverts who have settled for less in relationships, and work, because they lack confidence.

Two questions (both of which assume that you are correct in your assumption that greater confidence will result in a desire to not settle for less): (1) Is it that the lack of confidence results in the desire to settle for less, or is it that there's some third factor that results in both?; (2) Let's say that increased confidence would solve the problem, then the issue is to find out what the root of the lack of confidence is, because rarely does one acquire confidence simply through force of will.

Being an I-type means lack of confidence but is this the price your willing to pay?

I disagree that this is what it means to be an introvert.

I'm sick of seeing my I-type friends shooting for the mud, when they have so much to offer. Especially in their thinking that they have nothing to offer, and letting the E-types take centre-stage.

Perhaps your population sample is too small to have an accurate assessment of introverts.

Dave

 

[Zeke Johnson]

Perhaps. But, one must consider the odds of success when weighing the value of the sought-after payoff.

In terms of energy exchange I don't see this rule as being violated, hence 'Equal Exchange'. The 'success' as you call it, is merely judged as a 'success' or 'failure' by the Ego's definition. In reality the exchange remains equal whether or not your ego deems it to be so. By taking risks, means the risk to exchange energy, in some form or another, rather than low-risk, refusing to participate in life.

Isn't it better to shoot for the stars and miss, than to aim for the mud and make it? That's a false dilemma. I suggest there are more alternatives than these two.

Not really, your either 'get busy living, or get busy dieing', you have a third alternative?

Being an I-type means lack of confidence but is this the price your willing to pay? I disagree that this is what it means to be an introvert.

I still stand by Introverts having Self-Esteem coming from inner values, and Extroverts having Confidence stemming from External triumphs or the need to project an external confidence.

Perhaps your population sample is too small to have an accurate assessment of introverts.

Having worked in the games industry, a high-introverted area, (coders, designers etc).
I believe this to be true to the extent of my personal observations. Introverts lack of belief in themselves and their capabilities leads to them 'shooting for the mud' which I've seen countless times amongst a varied selection of I-type friends I am aquainted with.


I have found your posts informative though, more food for thought,


Zeke Johnson ( Ex-Captain )

 

[Zeke Johnson]

Update : Given your theories to be correct and my own personal theories to be correct lead me to thinking some further on this, it seems apparent to me that my research has been based on data taken from having worked in London, Edinburgh, and Ireland. It is a possibility that Introverts show some fundamental differences in America than here.

In my own experience I have always found Americans to be overtly confident, and loud. It could be possible that Introverts in America are more confident than here in the UK.

This would rise to an interesting new factor in personality typing on taking into account cultural fundamentals as well.


Zeke Johnson ( Ex-Captain )

 

[Vrecknidj]

In my own experience I have always found Americans to be overtly confident, and loud. It could be possible that Introverts in America are more confident than here in the UK.

Good point.

Dave

 

[Vrecknidj]

Isn't it better to shoot for the stars and miss, than to aim for the mud and make it? That's a false dilemma. I suggest there are more alternatives than these two.

Not really, your either 'get busy living, or get busy dieing', you have a third alternative?

Well, what I meant, was that there is something between shooting for the stars and aiming for mud. I mean, to continue the metaphor, in between mud and stars there is the sky, clouds, etc. In other words, one doesn't have to accept that there are two options in life: putting everything on the line, every time, or doing nothing. Just like in politics, there are often times when compromises end up netting great victories.

Dave

 

[tesseracter]

I've always thought being introverted means you prefer to be alone, you gain strength with alone-time. Whereas, being shy means you are afraid to speak up in certain circumstances. Shyness has more to do with inner fear, whereas introversion has more to do with your preference. For some of us, our preference could've been affected by a fear (shyness), but others of us are not shy, but simply love being by ourselves.

Oh, and I thought the lack of confidence had more to do with the P in intp. I thought the intj personality is a lot like us except they exhibit more confidence in their abilities. But I could be wrong.

As for me, I've had parents and a husband that have pushed me to do this or that. They are certain I can do anything I want, but *I* am certain I don't know enough in a particular field, therefore, I haven't pursued anything of real consequence. But, perhaps, I will after I finish being a teacher's aide! The perfectionist in me pushes me to know EVERYTHING in a particular area before I can apply for a job in it. I hate that I think that way.

 

[Ermine]

^ I wouldn't say so with the confidence. I am fairly confident, at least in my abilities. Confidence in other areas is another story, but overall, I have more confidence than most that I've seen. I think confidence is more of an acquired thing than a trait that you are born with.

 

[Zeke Johnson]

I think confidence is more of an acquired thing than a trait that you are born with.

I don't know I've studied and seen hundreds of E-types who display extreme confidence, which to me seems unfounded. Mainly from ESFJ (night-clubs).

It fascinates me where this confidence comes from, as it always seems to be more like showing-off to get attention. I'm guessing the fault lies in the english language, the term confidence should have more derivatives.

For Example->

Confidence from within,
Showing Off - confidence,
Immature confidence, (Bantum Rooster behaviour)
Divine confidence,
Self-esteem,

Etc

Zeke Johnson ( Ex-Captain )

 

[ectius]

I'll call myself Risk Averse, but most steps forward in life seem more like logical progressions than risky leaps. So being Risk Averse doesn't make me nonprogressing.

As far as confidence goes, it all depends on my Conflict (or more specifically, my opinion of that Conflict). Whether it be a manager, professor, officer, physical or emotional hurdle, or psychological fear itself, it all depends on what I think of it.
If I feel surpassed and superior in the 'field of battle' than I feel the opponent is, I will Wall Off and my confidence will not waver, not unless taken by some undeniable, logical blow.
If I respect that which I'm pitted against, I'll resign my steadfast certainty. I'll open up myself to potential change (assuming that it makes sense): learning a lesson, adopting a change in routine, or accepting that 400 lbs is simply too much for me to muscle alone.


I can be confident to the point of bullheadedness, if I'm in the right venue.
Usually, though, I'm just sitting back and taking things in.

 

[loveofreason]

Is the OP another way of asking "How resistant are you to change?" or is it more a question of "How willing are you to shape change?" Just trying to but it in familiar terms, as I don't think of myself as risk averse or otherwise.

I do consider myself open to change and prepared to take advantage of opportunities. I could even be considered opportunistic. Despite that I do have my habits and blind spots. I relate too to what ectius described. Isn't all perceived "risk" entirely situational?

 

[Cabbo Pearimo]

Deal with life as is forms around you. If you're smart enough, maybe you can see the point where the echoes start, and guess where they'll end. In the end, we die. Pure and simple. So, everything in between is a game. Knowing the rules of the game can stop it from falling in on you, but being to cautious will make it seem like more of a prison. Sort out situations in the way that will come back to you with the highest positive. Consider everything. Being kind to people will give them a higher perception of you. Being completely selfless will open you up to power-hungry pscychos who don't think about happiness, just success. Can't you fail and be happy?

 

[Yozuki]

Yozuki is a thinking the backing in corner is the risky best situation. Yozuki is also think many time planning before the risk activity. Muchly the override to behavior the personal and then the risk taking manner.

Best idea Yozuki is having in long time.

 

[Cabbo Pearimo]

Maybe yozuki would like a little translation there, to avoid being asked what the hell she's talking about;
Keep to yourself, avoid conflict, think about what you can do to get out of the confrontation, and eh... try to attack the person's personality, then their person? Is that it?

 

[Wisp]

I think that's it... and I believe yozuki's a he, unless I'm very much mistaken.

 

[Cabbo Pearimo]

I found that out afterwards. Sorry, man.

 

[Wisp]

Just thought it might have been a good thing to point out...

 

[Cabbo Pearimo]

I was apologising to yozuki.

 

[Wisp]

Yeah, I know...

 

[Cabbo Pearimo]

Aww, I don't mean any offence. Okay?

 

[Wisp]

Okay.

 

[Linsejko]

umm...

....I like risk? I think my intelligence gives me the ability to asses risk in a way that is far more realistic than average joe's conventional wisdom, and so I am more willing to do things generally considered risky.

Still, I go to great lengths to prevent long term & permanent injury, and am not senseless in my risk taking.

 

[EditorOne]

What Linsejko said. Sometimes it looks like a risk to others but actually isn't. Once you factor out "fear of failing" itself as a consideration, you can assess the consequences of failure with some degree of realism. A lot of people avoid risk simply to avoid failure, not because failure will lead to irremediable and devastating consequences. If failure means you wasted six months in a job that turned out badly, big whoop, you move on. If failure means you married the wrong person, bigger whoop, but still fixable. Deciding to drive at 120 mph in the Poconos, on the other hand, would probably be the final whoop.

 

[Linsejko]

I would consider marrying the wrong person a pretty large 'whoop', but I guess that's person per person basis.

Still you get the idea.

.L

 

[Cabbo Pearimo]

I once went to Big Whoop. Had a go on the rollercoaster.

 

[JediMindTricks]

I coldwater surf some of the most dangerous rips on the coast? Does that count? I'm fine with things like surfing and climbing, but social risks are a whole different kettle of fish. I guess it comes with the INTP-typical understanding that the body is finite and relatively unimportant.

 

[Linsejko]

Eh. I'd do that.

I've always wanted to surf. -_-

.L

 

[Ermine]

I have no trouble with physical risk, except to my hands and head. I've wanted to try hang gliding. It's just the social risk I can't stand. Telling my crush I like him? What?? No! Never! Why should I??? Aghh!! Run away!

 

[QueenHera]

i take what people perceive as risky but in my head i'd have quickly weighed the odds and realised it is not that dangerous afterall.

people tend to perceive "risky" as being "stupid" or senseless.

you can do something dangerous carefully and get away with it.

 

[Linsejko]

^exactly what I said.

.L