User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 26

  1. #1
    Honor Thy Inferior Such Irony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INtp
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    5,091

    Default Types attitude towards controversial threads that offend

    On various forums online where there are controversial topics, I've noticed several different types of people:

    A. Those who avoid posting or replying to these sorts of threads.

    B. Those who don't get involved except to try to smooth over hard feelings or state how they find such threads offensive.

    C. Those who do participate in controversial threads but are careful to state things in a way as to minimize offense. They rarely cross the line but if they do offend, they will apologize and find ways to state their opinion that isn't quite so divisive.

    D. Those who participate in threads and often cross the line, often unintentionally. They may very passionate in their views or have what they think of as strong arguments. They don't intend to cause offense and will sincerely apologize for doing so, yet often can't help themselves from saying certain things.

    E. Those who participate in such threads and often cross the line. Unlike D though, they don't really care if they cause offense to others. Often its because they believe that someone has to say it. These people often think that the offended will just get over it and its not a big deal.

    F. Those who deliberately say things that offend other people. There are two subgroups I notice here: Those who are just testing to see how other people react and those who get a perverse pleasure of making people upset. I think people in this category probably have very weak F and are most likely psychologically unhealthy as well.

    I've been wondering which types are more prone to which of the above categories? If this sort of thing even is type related. I would guess on the whole that F types are more likely to be concerned about offending others and are more likely to be offended themselves, while T types are more likely to post controversial topics without as much concerning about offending. I think there's alot of variation though. I'm an INTP and I do care about how others will receive such threads. So I'm careful in how I state things. I fall mostly into category C and occasionally into B or D. There are some things others state in ways I feel that are uncalled for. I am closer in the middle on T/F than some of the other T's on here.

    How do the other letters come into play? Do you think it's an Fi/Fe thing? Fe might be more concerned with what's socially appropriate while Fi is more in touch with how they personally feel about something. I suppose an Fi type with poorly developed Fe might state something they feel strongly about without much concern for how others might feel about it, but I'm just speculating here.


    On a side note............ I just surpassed 3,000 posts!
    INtp
    5w6 or 9w1 sp/so/sx, I think
    Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff
    Neutral Good
    LII-Ne




  2. #2
    Away with the fairies Southern Kross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 so/sp
    Posts
    2,912

    Default

    I think it's hard to say for sure because people don't completely occupy a single position - I know I don't.

    For me, it does vary a great deal depending on the topic and the argument taking place. Some debate threads I read but don't post in because I don't feel compelled to get involved; either because I don't want the drama of a back and forth argument or I don't feel I have anything meaningful to add or object to. In a way this is contradictory: either there is too much drama or not enough to make me want to post. The problem being that Fi responds more to the negative (ie. what something isn't) rather than the positive (ie. what something is), but at the same time despises conflict. For the most part I like reasonable, rational discussion but I admit to having been obnoxious in the past when I became increasingly frustrated (and wasn't all that apologetic about it either).

    A lot of those that fall in your F category are the TPs (particularly EXTPs), who seem to be consistent culprits, inflicting all that Ti nastiness - not that all TPs fit within this mold (you don't SuchIrony, among many others) but it is a common trend. The TJs don't get off the hook either, with their, "My opinion is an entirely objective viewpoint. I can't help you're too stupid to see sense" sort of arguments - which fits more into your E category I suppose. Thinkers in general are often less concerned about feelings and Feelers in general are more concerned, but there are many examples that contradict this theory in reality. And there is value in both positions because if we're all too concerned about being nice and polite we don't get any progress, but if we aren't concerned enough, we also don't get progress.

    What I find very odd is that Thinkers believe feelings should be keep out of debates, and yet they are the most inclined to use emotionally provocative language; whereas Feelers believe feelings should be considered, and yet frequently attempt to base debates on calm, measured, rational argument. On the other hand I think Feelers can use passive aggressive remarks in the guise of rational argument, which seems to infuriate the Thinkers.

    So I suppose it has as much to do with Ti/Te as well as Fe/Fi.
    INFP 4w5 so/sp

    I've dreamt in my life dreams that have stayed with me ever after, and changed my ideas;
    they've gone through and through me, like wine through water, and altered the colour of my mind.

    - Emily Bronte

  3. #3
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,582

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Kross View Post
    What I find very odd is that Thinkers believe feelings should be keep out of debates, and yet they are the most inclined to use emotionally provocative language; whereas Feelers believe feelings should be considered, and yet frequently attempt to base debates on calm, measured, rational argument. On the other hand I think Feelers can use passive aggressive remarks in the guise of rational argument, which seems to infuriate the Thinkers.
    This observation was made on another forum I used to frequent. I find it odd, but have not done a systematic survey myself so have no evidence one way or another. OTOH, I have been told that I don't do this, and certainly I try not to.

    I don't really fit into any of the lettered paragraphs in the OP. I do not hesitate to engage on a controversial topic if I feel I have something worthwhile to add. I try to say my piece without unnecessarily giving offense. By that I mean I don't sugar coat things to make them palatable, but I don't insult, snipe, or gush verbal hyperbole either. I will criticize opinions, but not people. On the few occasions when I have "told someone off" I have done my best to stick to the facts and the actual content of what was posted. If my approach to all this is unpalatable to someone, though, I really don't care. I will apologize if I have based a comment, especially a criticism, on a misunderstanding, or stepped on an emotional landmine of which I was unaware (said something that brought up bad memories, etc.) I suppose all this is consistent with a TJ trying to be forthright but not obnoxious.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  4. #4
    Senior Member UniqueMixture's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    estj
    Enneagram
    378 sx/so
    Socionics
    esfp
    Posts
    3,036

    Default

    I just know that I personally get upset when people say or act as though pursuing some some end or goal is fundamentally bad or evil. I react strongly against this kind of talk because the basic implication is that everyone "should" live their life according to said person's ideals or values and it is usually a way of demonizing the other person or suppressing their own unstated basic needs because said person had a bad experience with x ever so long ago 9_9. I think a lot of people overvalue something in their life because they feel that is all they have (to offer?) or because they believe it is impossible to get something else they want. I think this is really damaging to the people who listen to it and then go on to live out the same patterns. This is partially why I find it hard to believe in universals. I think people who do are often "out of touxh" with the experience of individuals whose life experience is very different from their own.

  5. #5
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    I thought it was interesting that you seemed fairly unbiased in your analysis of the various groups of people, until you got to Group F, #2 group, and then felt the need to say that you thought they were psychologically unhealthy in contrast to all the other groups that you did not have a criticism for.

    Do you think any of the other groups you've listed might also possess some psychologically unhealthy traits, or do you think those other behaviors are all benign in nature?
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  6. #6
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    Chalk me up as a C on your lil' list there. There are greater truths buried deep within a sea of controversial statements, limited perspectives, and chaos; and it takes reconciling some supposed paradoxes to find them. If we're going to do that, we need some mediators.

    I won't participate in threads that have devolved into a shouting match between two people, because I value actual discussion of those topics. In that case, I'm an A, or sometimes an F if it's going to be fun.

    In general, I love controversial topics, because they're the most difficult to make any 'sense' out of. However, when they veer off topic (e.g. into personal attacks), it's pretty clear that further discussion or posting is pointless, because I likely won't learn anything or be heard.

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Kross View Post
    "My opinion is an entirely objective viewpoint. I can't help you're too stupid to see sense"
    This is the most hilarious argument in the entire world. I love coming across it, because it's such a great litmus test. It answers the question: do I pay attention to this person because they have something worthy to say, or because they're going to provide me with some entertainment value?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I thought it was interesting that you seemed fairly unbiased in your analysis of the various groups of people, until you got to Group F, #2 group, and then felt the need to say that you thought they were psychologically unhealthy in contrast to all the other groups that you did not have a criticism for.

    Do you think any of the other groups you've listed might also possess some psychologically unhealthy traits, or do you think those other behaviors are all benign in nature?
    Group B could be seen as sanctimonious and A as avoidant.. but that's all I could see.

  7. #7
    royal member Rasofy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,931

    Default

    I guess that would make me a D. I used to think I was more badass than that. You ruined it.

    Anyways, let me make a blatantly typist attempt:
    A. Those who avoid posting or replying to these sorts of threads.
    En 2s an En 9s.


    B. Those who don't get involved except to try to smooth over hard feelings or state how they find such threads offensive.
    En 4s


    C. Those who do participate in controversial threads but are careful to state things in a way as to minimize offense. They rarely cross the line but if they do offend, they will apologize and find ways to state their opinion that isn't quite so divisive.
    FJs


    D. Those who participate in threads and often cross the line, often unintentionally. They may very passionate in their views or have what they think of as strong arguments. They don't intend to cause offense and will sincerely apologize for doing so, yet often can't help themselves from saying certain things.
    FPs


    E. Those who participate in such threads and often cross the line. Unlike D though, they don't really care if they cause offense to others. Often its because they believe that someone has to say it. These people often think that the offended will just get over it and its not a big deal.
    INTJs


    F. Those who deliberately say things that offend other people. There are two subgroups I notice here: Those who are just testing to see how other people react and those who get a perverse pleasure of making people upset. I think people in this category probably have very weak F and are most likely psychologically unhealthy as well.
    sx first
    -----------------

    A man builds. A parasite asks 'Where is my share?'
    A man creates. A parasite says, 'What will the neighbors think?'
    A man invents. A parasite says, 'Watch out, or you might tread on the toes of God... '


    -----------------

  8. #8
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Don't F with the Fs!

    I redact everything I have written or will write on this forum prior to, subsequent with and or after the fact of its writing. For entertainment purposes only and not to be taken seriously nor literally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Spamtar - a strange combination of boorish drunkeness and erudite discussions, or what I call "an Irish academic"

  9. #9
    Away with the fairies Southern Kross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 so/sp
    Posts
    2,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    This observation was made on another forum I used to frequent. I find it odd, but have not done a systematic survey myself so have no evidence one way or another. OTOH, I have been told that I don't do this, and certainly I try not to.
    I think that Ts are less aware of when they are being emotionally provocative - it can be intentional or unintentional but not always totally conscious (if that makes sense). This is not to undermine Thinkers' self-awareness entirely though, or to assume that all behave obnoxiously and frequently so. I speak only in very general terms and I think maturity can be a factor in all this. I'm also aware of Feelers occasionally reading provocation in the words of Thinkers were there is none. And Feelers change with maturity too; often becoming less placative and more blunt as they age. So the issue is complicated.

    In my understanding the reason it happens is the Feelers are concerned about hurting others so they try to use a more detached and measured form of debate; they see the dangers of the minefield and therefore attempt tread carefully. Thinkers are less concerned about potentially hurting others (either because they don't see how the things they say could be hurtful or they don't see a problem with it) so they will use a wider range of methods to get their point across; they are more willing to march headlong into the minefield because if things blow up it will be more truthful and accurate (as with TPs) or it's just the natural course of things (as with TJs).

    Quote Originally Posted by bologna View Post
    This is the most hilarious argument in the entire world. I love coming across it, because it's such a great litmus test. It answers the question: do I pay attention to this person because they have something worthy to say, or because they're going to provide me with some entertainment value?
    I wish I was that at ease with it - it irritates the hell out of me. It's not enough for me to know someone's being ridiculous, I want them to see that they're being ridiculous.
    INFP 4w5 so/sp

    I've dreamt in my life dreams that have stayed with me ever after, and changed my ideas;
    they've gone through and through me, like wine through water, and altered the colour of my mind.

    - Emily Bronte

  10. #10
    Away with the fairies Southern Kross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 so/sp
    Posts
    2,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rasofy View Post
    En 4s
    C. Those who do participate in controversial threads but are careful to state things in a way as to minimize offense. They rarely cross the line but if they do offend, they will apologize and find ways to state their opinion that isn't quite so divisive.
    FPs
    E. Those who participate in such threads and often cross the line. Unlike D though, they don't really care if they cause offense to others. Often its because they believe that someone has to say it. These people often think that the offended will just get over it and its not a big deal.
    What about those that are both 4 and FP?
    INFP 4w5 so/sp

    I've dreamt in my life dreams that have stayed with me ever after, and changed my ideas;
    they've gone through and through me, like wine through water, and altered the colour of my mind.

    - Emily Bronte

Similar Threads

  1. Personality type and attitudes toward death and infinity
    By Kaveri in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 01-17-2011, 06:49 PM
  2. Replies: 38
    Last Post: 08-10-2010, 02:05 PM
  3. Understanding invisible threads that change how actions are judged.
    By Athenian200 in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 261
    Last Post: 04-11-2008, 05:52 AM
  4. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-26-2007, 07:23 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO