[so] Are there so sp who arent capitalists?

[madhatter]

you just havent made the connection between the psychological theory and a group of people you dislike.

No. I know better than to make a connection between the psychological theory and a hypothetical group of people I like or dislike. I don't judge people based on whatever groups they belong to. I judge people on an individual, case-by-case basis, by their actions and their character.

i know exactly what im talking about, and am 100% certain of these thengs. sure its personal knowledge so theres nothing i can do to promote your knowledge to the level i am in, as its obviously too high for you currently.

LOL. It amuses me greatly that you pulled the "my-ideas-are-too-lofty-for-your-meagre-comprehension" card. Newsflash: There's nothing about your ideas that is original or "high". On the contrary, it's fairly derivative typism. So have fun in your mediocrity. This lowly Sensor/evil capitalist SO/SP certainly has.

 

[Vilku]

1) "You" would classify. Based, of course, on your ridiculous ideas. Other people don't agree with you. Theories don't agree with your assertions. And, most importantly, none of what you say is logical.


3) Assumption. Followed by a pathetic example.


5) No, I don't see how it works. I doubt I ever will.

YOu have also exhibited much inferior Ti. You are not INFJ.

for your information, im 100% certain im an infj.

"2) Uhuh, both view each other as evil, but there is another objective "evil" (which I assume you have defined and which also happens to be identical to the "evil" as defined by the "unselfish" instincts), but the "unselfish" ones are correct because you said so. Right."

its rather simple, who is more evil, the one who acts so or the one who thinks so? and thats where my point is, the good insticts dont tend to act evil, the most evil thing a healthy good sider does are their opinions which then imaginatively hurt others. so that does seem a fair objective judgment to me.

"You are not trying to accept all instincts. You are attempting to demonize."

demonize? you see, im trying to see good even in people who support such evil selfish causes like capitalism, how am i demonizing anyone if im just exposing their true nature?

theres a whole religion or two who agree with me in this matter, see christianity "dont try to be god" rule (which demonizes so sp behavior) and taoisms yin and yang. on top of that, on an objective judgment i can see that instincts too fall into evil and good categories, each side viewing their own as the good guys, which is the origin of yin and yang and christians battle against evil.

"4) So.. is it like.. a Christian thing?"

each instinct produces certain types of philosophies or religions, like for sx sp produces abrahamic religions, so sp produces capitalistic self promoting philosophies,(such as americas exaggerated pride philosophy of nationalism) sx so produces rationality and efficacy philosophies and so sx produces positivism movements/religions and philosophies such as the brony movement, hippy movement, new age, jediism and buddhism. and sp sx produces pessimistic thoughts they infect onto other people, see how that conflicts with everything so sx is about?

and inherently, theres an enemy instinct for every philosophy/religion or movement. cant you see it? =|

 

[garbage]

and for the record, i consider all of the evil instincts (so sp, sp sx and sx so) evil, but this is in a theoretical perspective, not my own opinions. as in my own opinion i dont consider sx so's intense rudeness as evil, although sp so's do so it makes them evil.

You realize that you just demonized every type stacking that isn't your own, right?

YOu have also exhibited much inferior Ti.

Hey, hey now; not everyone with inferior Ti does, uh .. ... whatever this thread is.

 

[Jaguar]

If there was a corporation named INFJ, and the public read the posts in this thread, its stock would be plummeting.

 

[Entropic]

cant you see it? =|

I don't. I'm sx/sp but I'm fairly sure I'm atheist last time I checked, although taoism and naturalistic pantheism aren't that bad as concepts. If someone forced me to become religious I think I'd convert to taoism though. It kind of makes sense metaphysically.

 

[Flatlander]

WTF

Seconded.

The whole concept of an evil stacking is hilarious..in a facepalm sort of way.

 

[Entropic]

Seconded.

The whole concept of an evil stacking is hilarious..in a facepalm sort of way.

I wish it was mine. Somehow the idea tickles me fancy. Also, thinking of sx/sp as evil makes more sense than so/sp due to the dark intensity sx/sp can take. Ah, one could wish... I don't care that [MENTION=5684]Elfboy[/MENTION] thinks sp/sx is more vampiric. Sx/sp is too evil for you!

 

[Nicki]

I wish it was mine. Somehow the idea tickles me fancy. Also, thinking of sx/sp as evil makes more sense than so/sp due to the dark intensity sx/sp can take. Ah, one could wish... I don't care that [MENTION=5684]Elfboy[/MENTION] thinks sp/sx is more vampiric. Sx/sp is too evil for you!

sx/sps will take over the world someday.

 

[Burger King]

its rather simple, who is more evil, the one who acts so or the one who thinks so? and thats where my point is, the good insticts dont tend to act evil, the most evil thing a healthy good sider does are their opinions which then imaginatively hurt others. so that does seem a fair objective judgment to me.

??


???!

?

Man RaptorWizard ain't got nothin' on you. Can't bring the intensity like you can OP.

 

[Vergil]

You realize that you just demonized every type stacking that isn't your own, right?


Hey, hey now; not everyone with inferior Ti does, uh .. ... whatever this thread is.

True..
I'm not saying all inferior Ti-s do whatever "this" is.. but, I don't see "this" coming out of any other function. Could be wrong, but I rather doubt that I'm off the mark.

 

[Elfboy]

i was just wondering, cause i like so sp's except for their selfish evil tendencies.

Ben Stiller: ENFJ 6w7 So/Sp
Nelson Mandella: 1w2 So/Sp
J.R.R. Tolkien: INFP 9w1 So/Sp
Andy Sandberg: ENFP 7w6 So/Sp
Mel Brooks: ENTP 7w6 So/Sp
Michael Cera: I?FP 6w7 So/Sp
Helen Palmer: INFJ 6w5 So/Sp

......I could go on

 

[Vergil]

for your information, im 100% certain im an infj.

uhuh..and your certainty about your type, fraught with misunderstandings, oversimplifications, gross misjudgement and good ol' irrationality, means a lot.

"2) Uhuh, both view each other as evil, but there is another objective "evil" (which I assume you have defined and which also happens to be identical to the "evil" as defined by the "unselfish" instincts), but the "unselfish" ones are correct because you said so. Right."

its rather simple, who is more evil, the one who acts so or the one who thinks so? and thats where my point is, the good insticts dont tend to act evil, the most evil thing a healthy good sider does are their opinions which then imaginatively hurt others. so that does seem a fair objective judgment to me.

One of the following is true. Take your pick.
(A)This is gibberish.

(B) The good don't do evil...they just think evil, only once in a while, and "imaginatively hurt" other people. And despite this they continue to be good, because...? Let me guess, because the handbook to good and evil instincts (which, I believe, you have authored) declared them good.
So, it's just you and your ridiculous notions waltzing about on this forum.

"You are not trying to accept all instincts. You are attempting to demonize."

demonize? you see, im trying to see good even in people who support such evil selfish causes like capitalism, how am i demonizing anyone if im just exposing their true nature?

theres a whole religion or two who agree with me in this matter, see christianity "dont try to be god" rule (which demonizes so sp behavior) and taoisms yin and yang. on top of that, on an objective judgment i can see that instincts too fall into evil and good categories, each side viewing their own as the good guys, which is the origin of yin and yang and christians battle against evil.

Yeah.. I see it.
It's like calling a black person "Charcoal" coz they're black and then saying, "Hey, I love the guy. He's my friend, but he is dark as charcoal...and Charcoal makes all my white sheets into sooty black sheets. I hate charcoal. But I still love my friend."

Also "Don't try to be good" from Christianity, eh?
Interesting you should bring this up. I don't know how valid that is because I wasn't raised Christian and I am currently agnostic. But...

im trying to see good even in people who support such evil selfish causes

^ what's this, I wonder?
You are trying to see "good" in "evil" people because you are "trying to be good"...? And you say Christianity supports your view?

Inconsistencies much? (not to mention that this is still illogical)

"4) So.. is it like.. a Christian thing?"

each instinct produces certain types of philosophies or religions, like for sx sp produces abrahamic religions, so sp produces capitalistic self promoting philosophies,(such as americas exaggerated pride philosophy of nationalism) sx so produces rationality and efficacy philosophies and so sx produces positivism movements/religions and philosophies such as the brony movement, hippy movement, new age, jediism and buddhism. and sp sx produces pessimistic thoughts they infect onto other people, see how that conflicts with everything so sx is about?

and inherently, theres an enemy instinct for every philosophy/religion or movement. cant you see it? =|

Let's just conclude it all by saying "You don't know what the hell you're talking about" and stop it at that. kthxbai.

 

[Vilku]

You realize that you just demonized every type stacking that isn't your own, right?


Hey, hey now; not everyone with inferior Ti does, uh .. ... whatever this thread is.

every? no, just the materialistic instincts.

and i think every instinct has two versions of being, the unhealthy, which is the dark side of said instinct and healthy, the good side of it. although the evil instincts have this reversed, they become good instead of evil when unhealthy, and the opposite when healthy.

I wish it was mine. Somehow the idea tickles me fancy. Ah, one could wish... I don't care that [MENTION=5684]Elfboy[/MENTION] thinks sp/sx is more vampiric. Sx/sp is too evil for you!

"Also, thinking of sx/sp as evil makes more sense than so/sp due to the dark intensity sx/sp can take."

well yeah, so sp's think its evil and so does unhealthy sx sp's. (they pretend to be so sp's in behaviour when unhealthy, although this always happens unintentionally.)

True..
I'm not saying all inferior Ti-s do whatever "this" is.. but, I don't see "this" coming out of any other function. Could be wrong, but I rather doubt that I'm off the mark.

yet again, im hundred percent certain im an infj.

"uhuh..and your certainty about your type, fraught with misunderstandings, oversimplifications, gross misjudgement and good ol' irrationality, means a lot. "

well, sure its impossible to present the deepest of findings in a clear way without using unconscious communication which just happens to be off limits here.

"(B) The good don't do evil...they just think evil, only once in a while, and "imaginatively hurt" other people. And despite this they continue to be good, because...? Let me guess, because the handbook to good and evil instincts (which, I believe, you have authored) declared them good.
So, it's just you and your ridiculous notions waltzing about on this forum."

its simple, the good siders are good from their heart and souls, we want to do the good thing even if we fail to do it. and the evil siders "good" side is that they are productive. just like yin yang described.

"Let's just conclude it all by saying "You don't know what the hell you're talking about" and stop it at that. kthxbai."

um really, like what is wrong with my theory? its perfect, realistic, acutely accurate and everything. ill stand by it.

i dont quite understand how you could not be convinced by it, its after all a deep truth about reality even if its impossible to fit so much information into mere words.

 

[Vergil]

yet again, im hundred percent certain im an infj.

Let me simplify this for you. Your certainty means squat when you clearly do everything an INFJ, or any other healthy type wouldn't. Your Ti is just off the charts on the unhealthy scale. You are not INFJ, no matter how much you think otherwise. I will agree to disagree at this point.

"uhuh..and your certainty about your type, fraught with misunderstandings, oversimplifications, gross misjudgement and good ol' irrationality, means a lot. "

well, sure its impossible to present the deepest of findings in a clear way without using unconscious communication which just happens to be off limits here.

See, that's where you're wrong. This is not a "deepest of findings" and you are conveying very clearly, without the need for unconscious communication, that you have no intelligible understanding of the instincts.

"(B) The good don't do evil...they just think evil, only once in a while, and "imaginatively hurt" other people. And despite this they continue to be good, because...? Let me guess, because the handbook to good and evil instincts (which, I believe, you have authored) declared them good.
So, it's just you and your ridiculous notions waltzing about on this forum."

its simple, the good siders are good from their heart and souls, we want to do the good thing even if we fail to do it. and the evil siders "good" side is that they are productive. just like yin yang described.

Nice try.

"Let's just conclude it all by saying "You don't know what the hell you're talking about" and stop it at that. kthxbai."

um really, like what is wrong with my theory? its perfect, realistic, acutely accurate and everything. ill stand by it.

i dont quite understand how you could not be convinced by it, its after all a deep truth about reality even if its impossible to fit so much information into mere words.

What's wrong with your theory?? How about.... everything.
It is not perfect (don't get me started on "perfection") and it is anything but accurate. But, you have a right to your opinion and as far as I know, no one here has said or even expressed that you are not entitled to your views, however harebrained they may be. Attempting to show you the error of your logic is futile.

There is no truth to your words. What you proclaim to be "realistic" is all but fanciful. This whole idea is dogmatic and venomous. To decidedly group people under "good" or "evil", both being relativistic and subjective constructs, and then proclaim such categorizations to be objectively discernible and factual is as illogical as illogical gets.

At first, I thought you were trolling with the idea and that this was all just a way to tick people off. But now, I see that you actually, seriously believe this stuff. I'm really sorry to have misjudged and I seriously hope you get better and improve/change that warped thinking of yours.

=/

 

[garbage]

every? no, just the materialistic instincts.

edit: I was wrong because I counted duplicates. You did, in fact, leave two stackings not-demonized.

There are six possible instinctual stacking combinations:

so/sx
so/sp
sx/so
sx/sp
sp/so
sp/sx​

You listed four of them as outright evil (or, in the case of sp/so, as tiptoeing the line):

so/sp
sp/sx
sx/so
sp/so
​

in

and for the record, i consider all of the evil instincts (so sp, sp sx and sx so) evil, but this is in a theoretical perspective, not my own opinions. as in my own opinion i dont consider sx so's intense rudeness as evil, although sp so's do so it makes them evil.

Of the two remaining, one is your own. That one is bolded.

so/sx
sx/sp​

 

[Infinite Bubble]

Don't argue with Vilku, feel sorry for him.

 

[Entropic]

Of the two remaining, one is your own. That one is bolded.

so/sx
sx/sp​

well yeah, so sp's think its evil and so does unhealthy sx sp's. (they pretend to be so sp's in behaviour when unhealthy, although this always happens unintentionally.)

In conclusion, sx/sp is only evil when unhealthy so you weren't entirely wrong.

 

[Burger King]

Don't argue with Vilku, feel sorry for him.

They used to laugh at Freud too.

 

[Entropic]

They used to laugh at Freud too.

But Freud came up with his own theories independent of known ideas. Vilku is using known ideas and twisting them in a way they are not intended to be applied. That's a big difference.

 

[Infinite Bubble]

They used to laugh at Freud too.

I only wish I were laughing.