• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Two Perfect Addictions

Nadir

Enigma
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Messages
544
MBTI Type
INxJ
Enneagram
4
Which culture shows deference by talking down to people like they're unenlightened ignoramuses, exactly? Yours of Nadir's?

Eh -- I'm simply commenting... and that you perceive yourself to be treated as an unenlightened ignoramus (the phrase sounds impressive, I'll give you that) is not something that Victor's original post implied, but something you decided to take upon yourself, and that is what I'm wondering. Same deal with the "howling" -- what howling? What good is that characterization, seeing how it's fueled by a very subjective judgment?
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
I too, am from a different culture... this isn't about deference. It is about making blanket statements that are designed to have shock value and... more likely to create lack of respect.. the patronising suggestion that others don't understand what you believe you are (near) alone in doing. It's no wonder that people react in such a way to these sort of comments.

Classic examples are you stating the reasoning behind other people's comments - like "you say these things because you don't like me". Have you noticed how often people react and point out you misunderstand them, or their motives when you say such things? One learns by asking of others, not prescribing their own intentions and motives to them.

On the subject of deference... you pointed out earlier in the thread that you choose to talk down to others eg Edahn, to get a reaction. You will be hard pushed to find a culture, Australian or otherwise, where talking down to someone will elicit a worthwhile response.

Good heavens, here parents talk down to children.

So here when you are being spoken down to you are being loved and cared for.

In another country it is exactly the opposite way around.

No wonder we have constant misundersanding.

The answer is to learn about cultural difference.

And the best way to do that is to learn another language.

Imagine if all the narcissistic energy put into MBTI and therapy were put into learning another language.

Imagine if Paris Hilton learnt another language rather than sloping off with the "Power of Now".

And if Paris, why not us?

Victor.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
They tell me, dear Jennifer, that you know you have arrived when you have been parodied. And you have made a lovely parody.

Oh, nice save. :)

(Actually, since I wasn't expecting that response from you, it did make me smile.)


... meanwhile, I think I'll sit here and absorb the multi-cultural discussion, which I find interesting.

Actually Victor may have a point with reference to the self-perpetuating and circular nature of therapy. RD Laing had a view on conventional therapy back in the 60s which largely agreed with the view if you look for something wrong you'll find it.

Which actually isn't inaccurate to some degree. It's difficult to tell sometimes whether a problem truly exists or the act of labeling it actually ends up perpetuating it and strengthening it.

I'm reading an interesting book by Robert Oxnam right now, who claims to be a dissociative who is being / has been reintegrated. I honestly don't know what I think, because the style in which it is written does not give me the evidence I need to judge the veracity of the account. It's hard to tell whether the narrative actually did exist or whether it was woven by Oxnam and the therapist after the fact -- not as purposeful deceit, but because the diagnosis was made and so the patient conformed to the diagnosis.

But if you want an extreme case, we could discuss "repressed memories" of sexual abuse that were became part of a therapeutic epidemic in the late 80's and early/mid 90's. Just devastating... and it's probable that those, along with just about all the repressed memories of Satanic ritual abuse, were created by the therapists putting labels on things and the patient conforming.

Nowadays it is far more subtle, whether it's diagnoses of depression or bipolar (that's a popular one now). It doesn't mean the conditions don't exist. It's just hard to tell whether a particular patient has it or has it more strongly than they should because of the narrative attached.

What I don't quite understand is the affronted reactions that characterize most of Victor's threads. I don't necessarily agree with what he's saying but I don't know why it is that he's either ignored completely or shot down just because his opinions happen to be different.

Actually, my involuntary response is very similar to Edahn's, as he described it in his earlier posts. Sorry, but it simply is... for the same reasons he expressed.

However, when Victor continues the conversation, I find myself simultaneously amused (pleasantly) and a little endeared. His honesty was refreshing. So it does make his initial salvos seem to be more an attempt to get attention/response, after which a real conversation can occur.

But still, even knowing that, the initial post usually pisses me off, and I also want to rip off his name that he insists on signing at the end of his posts. Arg....

I have to admit, he might be one up on Bluewing as far as style goes.
 

ThatsWhatHeSaid

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
7,263
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
That's easy. For instance, if someone tells you that they are telling the truth, what is your reaction? Just as it is your choice to believe if someone is telling you the truth or telling you lies, independent of that statement, I would suggest that his saying that he talks down to people does not mean anything as long as people aren't offended.

You're right that the fact that he says he tries to put people down doesn't PROVE that he's offensive, but it does lend a lot of support to the idea that people perceive his comments as condescending. It certainly doesn't prove the opposite, that he's not condescending.

What you're saying is true about insults becoming insults upon receipt and not upon dispatch, but so what?

Even discarding this... what is it that I'm not reading carefully? We read the same words... but our interpretations differ.

The way he always tries to separate himself from the rest of us and give us advice as if he's some kind of guru who's not stoned off his ass. Pay attention to the pronouns and tone.

Eh -- I'm simply commenting... and that you perceive yourself to be treated as an unenlightened ignoramus (the phrase sounds impressive, I'll give you that) is not something that Victor's original post implied, but something you decided to take upon yourself, and that is what I'm wondering.

I don't perceive myself to be anything Victor says. It's HIS perception that causes friction between him and the site. He asserts himself as an outsider who has come to save us. If any religious fundamentalist came to this site to tell us that we're all fucked up and he's here to give us advice, I would tell him to fuck off and ban him without hesitation. It's the same deal with Victor, except his delivery is a bit more muted and he contributes in some other ways. (And he seems like he's got some other things going on, to me, anyway.) It's not that we would take the fundamentalists' words as gospel (ha), but it's annoying, which is exactly what I said up above.

Same deal with the "howling" -- what howling? What good is that characterization, seeing how it's fueled by a very subjective judgment?

It was intended to be a metaphor to help him understand his own behavior. The howling is a cry for attention because he can't stand the uncertainty of not knowing whether he'll be accepted into the community. I tried to tell him that he can give it a rest and that our community is pretty open.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
Oh, nice save. :)

(Actually, since I wasn't expecting that response from you, it did make me smile.)

It's interesting isn't it. First I stir a negative reaction in you, then I have a choice, I can respond in kind with another negative reaction or I can save myself and you from the abyss of negativity.

I am not quite sure why I do this. Two things come to mind. First, I am attention seeking and second I raise the emotional temperature.

I suspect it is because I fear I won't get what I want.

So what do I want?

I want to do a formal exercise called Empathy Practice.

However Empathy Practice requires some ego strength and some lack of ego defensiveness. Otherwise it is best not to continue.

So I think I am reacting to my perceived rejection.

Of course I should reality test my perceived rejection to see how true it is.

But in the meantime I limp along in my neurotic fashion.

Alternating, interestingly, between rejection and acceptance.

So you might say, Jennifer, I am exploring the edge of rejection and acceptance in my own mind.

And you are kind enough to lend me your mind for a while.
 

Geoff

Lallygag Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
5,584
MBTI Type
INXP
Good heavens, here parents talk down to children.

So here when you are being spoken down to you are being loved and cared for.

In another country it is exactly the opposite way around.

No wonder we have constant misundersanding.

Parents talk down to children only while they are not mature enough to hold their own opinion. As soon as they are, it is seen as patronising. Given that you aren't our parent, and that we are old enough to have an opinion, talking down is patronising. Do you know this, and just like to argue?
 

Geoff

Lallygag Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
5,584
MBTI Type
INXP
The admission of talking down to anyone does not mean anything in isolation. Someone needs to disapprove of it first. It's the perceiver's choice to be offended... at which point the concept of "talking down to people" rears its head. It was you, originally, that accused him of being didactic and condenscending, i.e. "talking down to others."

Well, he admitted to talking down to others, and why he does it.

See, it's an old argument, and a rather poor one, that an insult is only an insult if someone takes offence. I think the "man in the street" test is more appropriate here. if a typical person would find something offensive, then it probably is. Just because one person does, or does not take an insult, does not change how this is viewed in a public environment like this.

It's for just that reason that we don't allow members who would like to, to post and swap offensive images in a thread - there is a larger grouping than the individuals immediately involved - there is a wider audience, often a silent one.
 

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
Victor you ain't weird, quite the opposite for an INTJ really :thinking: Oh and if you're a troll then I want a forum full of trolls.

You've challenged the basis of the why behind the MBTI and that's a good thing in my book. It shows intelligence and an inquisitive mind.. I love it... please continue... even if you are wrong ;) (baiting INTJs 101 :rofl1: )

Oh and no matter how many times you write it you ain't the victor :D
Nice choice of name though... given or chosen it suits your personality well.

Btw, what part of the human condition is not addiction by your philosophy?
Even logic is an addiction. Hell living could be called an addiction as are we not so stubborn about giving it up?
 

Nadir

Enigma
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Messages
544
MBTI Type
INxJ
Enneagram
4
Well, he admitted to talking down to others, and why he does it.

See, it's an old argument, and a rather poor one, that an insult is only an insult if someone takes offence. I think the "man in the street" test is more appropriate here. if a typical person would find something offensive, then it probably is. Just because one person does, or does not take an insult, does not change how this is viewed in a public environment like this.

It's for just that reason that we don't allow members who would like to, to post and swap offensive images in a thread - there is a larger grouping than the individuals immediately involved - there is a wider audience, often a silent one.

I wasn't originally going to respond to Edahn's follow up post and this post (perhaps in private message) because there's a very identifiable difference in opinions and I can respect your and Edahn's thoughts on this matter. However, I would like to contest something -- my argument is not old, and it is not poor -- it's only one you disagree with... and that fact alone does not make it old and poor. I have a feeling that you'll agree with me on this matter, and I thought it was an important distinction to make.

Your post I quoted is more about forum dynamics than the validity of my arguments. I made another post about the necessity of "sweeping under the rug" where forum dynamics are concerned, recently -- and this is one of the things that's swept under to rug to help the forum function. The "man on the street" approach towards offensive matter is a simple shortcut, and it is not "better" and "more valid" than what I said, it's just streamlined -- like in the example you gave, the reason you remove those pictures is not because you're absolutely certain people would be offended even if the offense is unvoiced -- it's something you assume, with help from the man on the street, simply because taking any other way would be a lot less efficient way of handling things.
 

Geoff

Lallygag Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
5,584
MBTI Type
INXP
I wasn't originally going to respond to Edahn's follow up post and this post (perhaps in private message) because there's a very identifiable difference in opinions and I can respect your and Edahn's thoughts on this matter. However, I would like to contest something -- my argument is not old, and it is not poor -- it's only one you disagree with... and that fact alone does not make it old and poor. I have a feeling that you'll agree with me on this matter, and I thought it was an important distinction to make.

Your post I quoted is more about forum dynamics than the validity of my arguments. I made another post about the necessity of "sweeping under the rug" where forum dynamics are concerned, recently -- and this is one of the things that's swept under to rug to help the forum function. The "man on the street" approach towards offensive matter is a simple shortcut, and it is not "better" and "more valid" than what I said, it's just streamlined -- like in the example you gave, the reason you remove those pictures is not because you're absolutely certain people would be offended even if the offense is unvoiced -- it's something you assume, with help from the man on the street, simply because taking any other way would be a lot less efficient way of handling things.

Yes, I do agree. The man on the street is a shortcut to setting an acceptable level of conduct in a large public environment. In reality it's about the only viable way to a working system.

When i said that an insult is only an insult if insult is taken or meant is poor, I meant it is often used poorly. Those who fling insults around will often claim that "it's your fault for taking offense!".. and similarly, those who take offense will claim "it's your fault for not realising I'd take offense!". Both of these make for a good case for the man in the street (what is called in the UK "the man on the clapham omnibus") test. I'd describe this as :

-would the man in the street say the person flinging an insult ought to have known it is insulting? If so, it's an insult.
-would the man in the street say the recipient ought to have felt insulted? If not, they are being oversensitive.

Of course, one tries to flex this to individual circumstances, but I guess I have heard the "it's your fault for being offended" from trolls too many times to see it as anything other than poor and tired. Not, by the way, what I am implying to what you said, or indeed to Victor's style - this is (or was) a general segue down a side alley.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
What you're saying is true about insults becoming insults upon receipt and not upon dispatch, but so what?

Yes, in my mind one can make a case that if someone goes around calling everyone an a-hole all the time, it's everyone else's fault if they take it personally (because they could just 'ignore him')... but that is purely a theoretical outcome.

Realistically, someone who would do that would be disruptive to community and soon ostracized. It's the probable outcome. It's how people actually work (so in this case theory is unrealistic).

Communication means announcing your intentions ACCURATELY, and if you're going to purposefully and consistently use a particular vocabulary or style that others will react to in a way you didn't intend, then you're not communicating well.

(Sorry, I've deviated away from Victor here and am just making a general case about Nadir's comment.)


It's interesting isn't it. First I stir a negative reaction in you, then I have a choice, I can respond in kind with another negative reaction or I can save myself and you from the abyss of negativity.

It's rather interesting. Because I wonder why you just don't avoid the negativity to start with, rather than having to pull back. (When someone starts out negative, I eventually will push... and expect a push back since that's where the pattern seemed to go. This is like an odd two-step, where one person steps away when the other steps forward.)

I am not quite sure why I do this. Two things come to mind. First, I am attention seeking and second I raise the emotional temperature. I suspect it is because I fear I won't get what I want.

It's possible. Fear is a motivation for a lot of behavior...

So I think I am reacting to my perceived rejection. Of course I should reality test my perceived rejection to see how true it is. But in the meantime I limp along in my neurotic fashion. Alternating, interestingly, between rejection and acceptance.

As far as I go, if I feel someone is being honest, making an effort to communicate (speak and listen), then I will engage. (This is why I've ignored some things you've written, but when you become honest like this, about your motivations and concerns, I can't really help but talk to you.) Some other people might not operate that way, but I've figured out that I do.

In the meanwhile, I might push on your ideas, but there's no intended slight on you as a person if I challenge the things you've said.

Often coming in with an idea and explaining how it works, without operating from the "fear" base (which tends to make people defensive or aggressive), and accepting challenges if the idea is a little different from the norm, usually results in the better communication.

I can already tell that you're intelligent, so that is not an issue. I just want to see the underlying support for your ideas, which sometimes are presented in a way that seems needlessly antagonistic or aggressive. And if you're willing to take a little risk by just offering your ideas instead of pushing them (leaving it up to the listener to accept or reject), I know I'll meet you in the middle.
 

Nadir

Enigma
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Messages
544
MBTI Type
INxJ
Enneagram
4
Very well -- thanks for detailing your views on the matter, Geoff! As I've said, I've no interest in attempting to change anyone's beliefs, -- I might as well try to move mountains; and even I did, the difference long-term would be admittedly marginal, given that the "man on the street" system, for all its insufficiencies, seems to be the universally adopted one and does work adequately, except in some cases like this here -- so I hope you don't mind if I continue to watch this thread from the sidelines and see what comes up.

EDIT: Ah, Jennifer, you responded while I was posting this reply -- yes, what you say dovetails with my and Geoff's posts about forum dynamics. The only thing I'd argue against would be Victor calling everyone a-holes (I know that you meant this term generally; but still there's nothing directly lambasting other members in his posts, which is what calling others a-holes would accomplish.)
 
Last edited:

Dom

New member
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
458
MBTI Type
ENFP
Imagine if all the narcissistic energy put into MBTI and therapy were put into learning another language.

Why do you link MBTI and therapy?

And why are both to be considered narcissistic?

I've never considered that striving for self-actualistion may be considered narcissistic...

Mind you if it is, then there is very little that isn't narcissistic...
 

Emergency Exit

New member
Joined
May 17, 2008
Messages
1
MBTI Type
INXP
The very assumption of therapy is that there is something wrong with you. And guess what, therapy can fix you.Victor.
Yes, this is one way of looking at it....We can also look from the perspective that therapy looks for the mental habits that are not working for the benefit of a person, and tries to improve them/replace them with more effective habits.* So, in that sense, it's not trying to "fix" them, but rather, improve there daily quality of life.
Also, perhaps the reason that there are so many different types of therapy, and so many books available, is that there are just so many different types of people around. And different people will respond differently to each method?
 
Last edited:

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Seeing as this is becoming a question of responsibilities I'll change my tac.

Want a Tic-Tac?

America places the responsibility on the speaker more than the listener.
England place the responsibility on the listener more than the speaker.

E vs I.

Yes. Explain.

(Although I'm guessing you're saying it is "E" for the speaker to tailor things to fit a bulk crowd, and "I" for the solitary listener to subjectively pull info inside and evaluate it there, in relation to themselves. E's might try to take more responsibility for the listeners' reactions, I's are less inclined. I think that's quite a bit simplistic, although interesting.)

The reality is though that the responsibility is for both people to try to elevate the communication.

QFT
 

Jae Rae

Free-Rangin' Librarian
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
979
MBTI Type
INFJ
I'd like to play Devil's Advocate and say that it might not be a case of different books for different people, but different books for the same person, ie, someone who reads many books trying to figure out a solution to his/her problems. I wouldn't call it an addiction, more like a strategy that may not work very well.

Some people get stuck only reading books about self-improvement or awareness, just as some people get stuck only going to therapy or talking about themselves to friends or going to workshops.

Improving ones life should be a two-pronged approach - some reflection, some action. If your life isn't working, it makes sense to reflect on the whys. But trying new things and focusing on something other than your problems also makes sense. Improvement can come from stepping outside yourself and viewing things from a new perspective. Vacations, new friendships, volunteering, mentoring and taking up a challenge at work or in your community all can serve this function.

Jae Rae
 

Dom

New member
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
458
MBTI Type
ENFP
I'd like to play Devil's Advocate and say that it might not be a case of different books for different people, but different books for the same person, ie, someone who reads many books trying to figure out a solution to his/her problems. I wouldn't call it an addiction, more like a strategy that may not work very well.

Some people get stuck only reading books about self-improvement or awareness, just as some people get stuck only going to therapy or talking about themselves to friends or going to workshops.

Improving ones life should be a two-pronged approach - some reflection, some action. If your life isn't working, it makes sense to reflect on the whys. But trying new things and focusing on something other than your problems also makes sense. Improvement can come from stepping outside yourself and viewing things from a new perspective. Vacations, new friendships, volunteering, mentoring and taking up a challenge at work or in your community all can serve this function.

Jae Rae

I do agree with victor's implict suggestion, that self-help and thearpy can become an excuse to actually stop taking responsibilty for ones self. I want to improve my life; so i read these books. That is fine as long as some of the action you mention comes along, it is doesn't then it does become similar to an addiction; a cycle to distract or comfort the individual so they don't actually have to face what they need to do.
 

Geoff

Lallygag Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
5,584
MBTI Type
INXP
I do agree with victor's implict suggestion, that self-help and thearpy can become an excuse to actually stop taking responsibilty for ones self. I want to improve my life; so i read these books. That is fine as long as some of the action you mention comes along, it is doesn't then it does become similar to an addiction; a cycle to distract or comfort the individual so they don't actually have to face what they need to do.

It's a big step from there to "things about which people write books" being evidence for the invalidity of the subject matter.
 

Dom

New member
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
458
MBTI Type
ENFP
It's a big step from there to "things about which people write books" being evidence for the invalidity of the subject matter.

Oh yes, I quite agree, I didn't mean to reduce the significance of the subject, just suggest that Victor has described something I have noticed about some (not all) the people who have used or rather perhaps I should read and then didn't use, these types of books.
 

Tigerlily

unscannable
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
5,942
MBTI Type
TIGR
Enneagram
3w4
While I find Victor annoying and boring he’s not entirely wrong. We are accustomed to buying into what we’re fed. This is the very reason that I can’t stand Oprah. Whenever she recommends anything, people run right out and buy it. Watching her audience is like watching a herd of sheep.

As for therapy, it’s never worked out well for me but some really need it. I hate self help books now but went through a phase when I was younger where I read a lot of them. If you have serious mental issues and you don’t know what do to, then you really should find yourself a good therapist. A deeply depressed suicidal person doesn’t need to find a quiet place to figure out what to do with their life, they need help. I also believe that we rely more on therapy in the US, than they do in other countries.

I agree with bananatrombones about MBTI, take the good bits and toss the others aside. It’s a good indicator but should be canceled out when mental issues (bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, etc) are present. I also think you can somewhat change your type depending on your upbringing and surroundings.

As for Victor, I believe he's either seeking an outlet for his voice to be heard, trolling or both.
 
Top