User Tag List

View Poll Results: In a certain light, wouldn't nuclear war be exciting?

Voters
40. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    21 52.50%
  • No

    19 47.50%
First 9171819202129 Last

Results 181 to 190 of 313

  1. #181
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    Let's all then be surprised there're types, some people even, whose opportunities for living expression dwindle the closer they are urged to this wretched past-staring literalness.
    awwwww

    Who knew, right? I'm here to claim that not many here did.
    Thanks for pointing it out of course; it's a valid comment.

    The only way you can get away with such an approach is to have some library of concrete facts that you treat as containing more of the substance of the world than the world itself displays from moment to moment.
    I can align with that. Yet is it not appropriate to have some parameters we agree on? It's not like a nuclear detonation is going to contain skittles or something. We can agree that devastation is the most probable outcome, no? And base our opinion of that which we see as the most probable? So, why is someone who comes in and says, "I can't see past the horror of this to even contemplate alternate outcomes" so stifling?

    And which changes, among other things, what elements of some internet question will strike you immediately as constituting the substance of that question.
    Basically you're saying our own personal wiring and context changes how we view the world, even down to the interpretation of any given question. But you're talking to the most subjective of the subjective types here; to me (Fi dom) such a thing is a given. Do you think that point is not obvious to all?
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt


    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  2. #182
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    I grew up with all these influences as well, but it didn't traumatize me, or impact my personality much. The reverse is more true, in that my personality shaped how I processed and viewed events. I suspect the same is true for you. We can see the same thing, but interpret and respond to it very differently.


    But there is also at least one INFP agreeing with Kalach. Not everyone with a given type will have the same opinion; we are not groups of paper dolls, cut on the same template.
    Yes, you're not saying anything I didn't say. He's the one saying it's about Si vs. Ni and I'm telling him, no, it's something more complex than that, and probably has mostly to do with my own Fi belief system.


    How about asteroid impacts? Global greenhouse effects rendering much of the earth inhabitable? New viruses that kill large segments of the population? Even alien invasions? All of these scenarios involve the destruction of many of the things you mention. Are they more acceptable fodder for fantasy, perhaps because they lack human agency?


    It is also called personal preference. Some people have no stomach for horror movies, and find fiction about individual killers, eg. serial killers, up-close-and-personal to be too creepy. It is silly to criticise people for what comes down to a matter of taste.
    Yes, it's called personal preference. It's called Fi. Why don't you tell Kalach that instead, since you agree with me and apparently don't realize it?


    I don't like the idea of senseless suffering any more than you, but no amount of hypothetical consideration of destructive events on my part is going to precipitate a nuclear war. Moreover, if one is unable to distance oneself from the emotional response produced in a crisis situation, it can be more difficult to respond constructively.


    It may be easier to think of Ni in terns of "if . . . then . . . ". As in: if we had a nuclear war, then this is what would happen. Ni envisions a single integrated answer to the Ne open-ended question, all of it hypothetical, impersonal, and separated from any moral considerations.
    If you read Jung, like I posted in this thread, the moral Ni type (that would be the Feeling type with Ni, whether NFJ or SFP) uses Ni to deconstruct the significance and meaning of the thing.

    That's why INFJs are stereotyped as psychiatrists and counselors and psychics.

    There is a moral consideration involved, just apparently not for the INTJ unless they have a strong Fi ethic about the subject matter.

  3. #183
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    5 sx
    Posts
    506

    Default

    I'm having a hard time understanding what's meant by "in a certain light." I think everyone would agree that there are perspectives in which that would be the case - the perspective of a sociopath, for example - so can someone clarify what this poll is asking? Is the question "Is there some part of you that would truly be excited to take part in it?"

    Sometimes I find conflict to be a relief because I know that underlying issues are being acknowledged and addressed. I guess that that would apply here, and that nuclear war would also heighten a person's sense of purpose & make them feel more alive.

    ...but nuclear war is the most destructive and horrific way of going about any of those 3 things, so I'd personally feel nothing but dread in response to news of nuclear war.

    edit: okay, after reading more of the thread, it really seems like most people agree with each other and that there's just a problem with language here. no one wants nuclear war, but most are able to see the possible benefits and thrill? some more willing to consider that side of it than others.

  4. #184
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    Yeah. I know. You and everyone else read the sentence wrong.

    Discussing how much less than perfect nuclear war is, is fine. In context though, point: missed. I know, right? How could that possibly happen? It's not like different priorities and perceptions exist, is it?


    There wasn't an argument, btw, about it being Si vs Ni. I didn't argue. I stated. Enthusiastically. And reasserted several times, while adding in suggestive explanatory outlines. IT"D BE STUPID TO ASSERT INDIVIDUAL FUNCTIONS CONTROLLING PEOPLE TO THAT EXTENT, WOULDN"T IT! It'd be alarmingly reductionist.

    However, I'd be willing to bet a dollar that heavy on the side of people who got outraged was a focus on "nuclear war" in its concrete image terms, with those terms understood to NOT admit division of images into any category other than the physical (the factual, the concrete, the holistically realistic). Those persons getting outraged without Si present in their mental clown suit were doing so for god only knows what reason, but if that proves Si people don't do Si, then perhaps we shouldn't believe typology after all.


    There's an intensity to the conservatism here.... it is both frustrating and uniquely exciting. If Jung was right, it should be nearly impossible for a person to see themselves from the outside. If everyone knew entirely how their own minds worked, Jung would be wrong.

    Meanwhile, gaah, you guys, grow your conceptual schemes a little.
    Except you're missing the point that Fi comes into play just as much as Si or Ni. You can't see past *your* own conceptual framework, that's the funny thing about Ni thinking its so open-minded that it too chooses one path and says this is best path; for example @Coriolis seems to be a big fan of saying that personal preferences should all be respected. This is *her* Fi talking. Her Fi says that every preference, no matter how gruesome or unrealistic, should be respected; this overlaps with her ethic against gun control. @Coriolis, even as an INTJ, has shown a dogged vision and moral consistency for giving people personal freedom, even making sure in another thread I don't think one culture is better than another. The irony of @Coriolis telling me not to criticize people for their personal preferences is that she is subtley criticizing me for mine. At the end of the day, INTJ has his or her own Ni vision and Fi morals.

    You have yours, and it has something to do with being right about Jungian functions, and how everything is about Ni and Si, to the absurd point of excluding Fi or Fe, Ne or Se. It's really absurd Kalach, and you don't even see how absurd it is, because Ni can have tunnel vision just like Si that way...you've been posting about Ni versus Si in threads for years to the point of ridiculousness. You have a weird one-track tunnel vision about it, you really do, and you're on a mission to convert people to it. It's not all that different from my own moral mission against nuclear war.

    It's so weird how INTJs lecture people about things they do themselves, it's just they're so convinced that their view is *correct* that they don't stop to consider how subjective they are also being; in that regard they aren't all that different from ISTJs, it's just that they tend to have these moral visions about Ni rather than Si concepts.

    Jung said that the Se type loves to embrace things as concrete and is suspicious of conjecture for conjecture's sake. Who does that sound like?

    Why it sounds an awful lot like me.

  5. #185
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ginkgo View Post
    I'm excited and surprised at the number of people who said "no".

    Is it due to pure pressure? A lack of imagination?

    Is there really any difference? Is peer pressure the stifling of creative imagination and constructive imagination, consequences be damned? We could talk about the very real consequences suffered in the wake of nuclear detonations all day, but all we can really rely on is our imagination as long as we're dicking around, bathing ourselves in the incandescence of our computer screens instead of the glow of an atom bomb. So who has the best control of their imagination? Or, rather, who has the best control over their misgivings about shredding away what they already know from the idea we discuss here?

    I think nuclear war, in some respects, is exciting for the same reason a widespread power outage is exciting: you gotta break out the candles and spend some quality time with each other.

    Who doesn't like quality time? And, for those of you who may comment about the ethical nature of my involuntary surge of emotion that is my excitement (lol), would you say that improving the quality of life in response to the threat of lethal nuclear rads is an ethical course of action - perhaps, an action equally susceptible to the impetus of peer pressure?

    At this point I'm rambling, but what can really be taken away from this? I think there were some who thoughtfully responded to the poll option, and others who didn't. Those who would disagree with me are probably moralizers.
    No. It's not due to peer pressure. If I was one to cave to peer pressure, I'd join everyone else in their fanciful nihilistic conjecture.

    You guys really should read more about how Se types do not like conjecture for conjectures sake; it's distasteful, since it can't (or at least probably won't) be applied to real life. The description of Jung's Si says nothing about this...

    To say that people lack imagination because they disagree with you on one very serious topic (but may have plenty of imagination for other ideas or subjects or activities) kind of makes the author of Gifts Differing weep.

    Shame on you typologists. I at least agree with Kalach on that.



    EDIT: And I know I criticized people for not sharing my moral framework, I'm not being hypocritical, I'm suggesting that other people here are hypocritical about their own valuing system and don't even realize it.

  6. #186
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    You can't see past *your* own conceptual framework, that's the funny thing about Ni thinking its so open-minded that it too chooses one path and says this is best path...
    The thing is, Ni can presume to think it sees ALL paths ...
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt


    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  7. #187
    morose bourgeoisie
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    3,860

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    The thing is, Ni can presume to think it sees ALL paths ...
    This is colloquially known as a delusion of grandeur...

  8. #188
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    The thing is, Ni can presume to think it sees ALL paths ...
    Which is exactly what my own less powerful Ni was doing, since it's not my preferred function, I was insisting things like "so what if you don't die, smart guy?" thinking I have it all scoped out, and none of this is good, not the dying, not the fall-out, not even it happening in more limited spaces because of the impact on the environment...I already thought of all those things, and any silliness about outer space or being happy about it happening in enemy countries didn't occur to me, because of my moral framework: I have Fi, and my Fi feels strongly about this. I don't even want it to happen in outer space or to mine enemies, because hey even if I would even theoretically hate those people, there are cats and cows and babies there.

    It's funny how everyone (including me) presumes nobody else thought it through. People saying I lack imagination or that others are giving in to peer pressure, me saying people have no inherent moral compass or simply haven't considered the real-world impact.

    Which is why our psychological lenses are so much more than Ni or Si, and sometimes I don't even know if Kalach is aware of how doggedly and persistently he harps on this concept he has, even in the face of clear examples to the contrary.

    I harp on my ethics and how I see them applied to reality. They're harping about peer pressure and imagination.

    It all amounts to the same thing: I don't understand your world view.

  9. #189
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    For once I'm totally following Kalach.

    Edit: except these days I mostly tune out when people talk about se/si/ne/ni/fe/fi/fo/fum. Just don't care anymore. But in terms of the concepts in the thread divorced from the type slapfighting (and concepts can indeed be divorced from one another)... yeah. I don't know how to end this edit.
    Here's the thing though: I usually follow Kalach. His posts are some of the most insightful and hilarious on the forum. Why would I be able to usually follow him better than you if I have Ne/Si and so do you?

    He doesn't take into account that I pretty easily follow most Ni doms, it's just that I sometimes don't agree with what they're saying, and in his case, it's a real over-saturation with him abusing this pet concept of his, I was making snide remarks about his Ni/Si obsession easily two years ago.

    This is totally off-topic, but then again so is most of this thread.

  10. #190
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    And I know I criticized people for not sharing my moral framework, I'm not being hypocritical [...]
    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    It all amounts to the same thing: I don't understand your world view.
    The conclusion to be drawn from these two statements is all I would really ask for (although I know that saying this will make it all the harder for you to do it): Tolerance towards differing perspectives and moral feelings.

    I think very few have ever tried to invalidate your feelings. It is only when you try to do it to others that the usual fights ensue.

    Please, try to take this at face value. Think of it as coming from someone else if that makes difference.

Similar Threads

  1. With the best will in the world, is will enough, can it be sustained?
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-16-2012, 07:39 AM
  2. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 04-28-2012, 05:26 PM
  3. Put your type in the best light
    By Laurie in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-08-2010, 07:26 PM
  4. So there's a nuclear war...
    By Langrenus in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-05-2007, 10:49 AM
  5. Pick up groups in MMORPGs (or just WoW and guild wars)
    By Zergling in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-09-2007, 01:02 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