This thread http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...l-trouble.html has spurred me to think again about some of the situations that appear on the forum regarding advice threads.
I feel like this is a good thread because this a very concrete, specific, and somewhat contained situation in which I get a chance to see how much people really question people's motives. This thread isn't about that other thread, but I would like to use it as a starting point.
I hear so often that people on this forum question the motives of other's but when offered a situation that is ripe for motive speculation but is encased in a feel-good triumphant candy shell, those that do question are called negative. This happens to me regularly in real life, which is why I very much contain this type of talk to two people who I know won't think I'm a negative Nancy and to the forum where the stakes are pretty low and have nothing to do with my real life.
When you question someone else's motives (or your own for that matter), does that automatically translate into thinking the other person is lying or being deceptive? IOW, that one word people like to throw around so much here: WHY?!?!?!
I feel like that's just part of being aware of a person or a situation in 360° and seeing it from as many angles as possible. It's like to even wonder about someone's self-interest, personal agenda, or stake in a situation gets everyone upset. This makes people untouchable and that's really dangerous. Just because you have a self-interest or personal agenda does not automatically make you the second coming of Machiavelli. I feel like by asking people what their stake aids communication, openness, and transparency as in "how can I get what I want and how can you get what you want so we'll both be happy."
My experience has shown me speculating about why someone may be doing something for their own self-interest or shining light into the shadowy places of human behavior causes people to be very uneasy. I have some reasons as to why this is so but I'd like to hear some opinions first.