User Tag List

View Poll Results: Are we over-assigning N to people here?

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

    50 73.53%
  • No

    18 26.47%
First 21011121314 Last

Results 111 to 120 of 150

  1. #111
    not to be trusted miss fortune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Enneagram
    827 sp/so
    Posts
    20,123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by digesthisickness View Post
    so true. i got over it by asking myself, "sooo, digest, do you plan on following every single post, 24 hours a day, for the rest of your life and then, of course, living forever? no? then let it go, girl." and, i replied, "*sigh* you are so right. once again!"
    I've taken to ignoring entire sections of the forum anymore unless I'm feeling snarky... the assurance that someone's going to use the MBTI to overgeneralize or all in all make an ass of themselves is WAY too high

    and like was mentioned... it's annoying that even threads asking for relationship advice all boil down to things like "well, yeah... he's an ISTP, he's probably emotionally closed off and just wants sex, nothing deeper"
    “Oh, we're always alright. You remember that. We happen to other people.” -Terry Pratchett

  2. #112
    veteran attention whore Jeffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    6,727

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Eyebrows View Post
    what the hell is going on in this thread
    The over-assigned Ns are arguing about stuff that has nothing to do with the original topic, as usual.
    Jeffster Illustrates the Artisan Temperament <---- click here

    "I like the sigs with quotes in them from other forum members." -- Oberon

    The SP Spazz Youtube Channel

  3. #113
    Senior Member Saslou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    4,915

    Default

    And an 'S' is going to derail the thread further

    Quote Originally Posted by Aurel View Post
    Apparently making any broad statement about a group of people is bad. I told him to read some victor threads but he hasn't jumped on that wagon yet, I guess.
    Making sweeping statements about a group of people is not bad, however it is close minded. I personally think the best one can do is use the word 'I' as opposed to 'We'.


    Quote Originally Posted by digesthisickness View Post
    actually, that used to be a small pet peeve of mine; one i've had to learn to just let go of. when so many entps speak for me and all other entps. so many times, i've gritted my teeth while reading something written by another 'entp' because it wasn't true at all, and now that 'information' is out there. false and throwing off everyone who follows later and reads it. and, if that's not bad enough, then later, after spreading all of those 'facts', they change their type.

    but, i can't go around saying, "stop speaking for all entps" every time, so i've had to let it go. to do anything else would be a losing battle.

    basically, it's made it to where telling anyone that i'm an entp doesn't do anything to bring us closer (and maybe even further apart) because god knows what they think they know about me based on something they read or was told.

    oh well.
    .. I need to let this go as at present am fighting a losing battle.
    Because heaven forbid an SF can think of infinite possibilities and be open to other theories. *sigh*
    “I made you take time to look at what I saw and when you took time to really notice my flower, you hung all your associations with flowers on my flower and you write about my flower as if I think and see what you think and see—and I don't.”
    ― Georgia O'Keeffe

  4. #114
    Glowy Goopy Goodness The_Liquid_Laser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,377

    Default

    Heh, a lot of tests that people take to determine their type will mistype people in the first place. Then they read a type description which includes a lot of stereotypes which may or may not apply to any given person of that type. When you consider all of the problems with the typing system to begin with, it's understandable how the typical joe on the internet can get the details wrong.

    So to make a long story short (too late), yeah we assign N to too many people.
    My wife and I made a game to teach kids about nutrition. Please try our game and vote for us to win. (Voting period: July 14 - August 14)
    http://www.revoltingvegetables.com

  5. #115
    psicobolche tcda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    Maybe MBTI statistics under-assign N to the general population.

    Especially considering that popular culture, the education system and the economy, discourage "N" pursuits for "teh plebs", and encourage us to think only pragmatically, and not theoretically.

    I cansee why in such a culture, people who look for more intelligent discussion than watching reality TV, may well be driven to online forums.
    "Of course we spent our money in the good times. That's what you're supposed to do in good times! You can't save money in the good times. Then they wouldn't be good times, they'd be 'preparation for the bad times' times."

    "Every country in the world owes money. Everyone. So heere's what I dont get: who do they all owe it to, and why don't we just kill the bastard and relax?"

    -Tommy Tiernan, Irish comedian.

  6. #116
    Senior Member the state i am in's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    infj
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by saslou View Post
    Making sweeping statements about a group of people is not bad, however it is close minded. I personally think the best one can do is use the word 'I' as opposed to 'We'.
    "i personally think" one would be wrong in saying that individuals would be "best" to do ______. you're still saying that you know what's best for everyone individually and collectively. you're still trying to universalize your values and your perspective for everyone else. isn't it close-minded to think you know what is "the best" for other people?

    in this universalizing way, i don't think you're actually trying to even avoid generalizations. it's just more of a victim stance (which is what this thread is really about, that the culture of N types on this forum (and this forum alone) excludes S types in most cases, is many times directly opposed to it). the forum is its own community with its own sense of social value, rank, status, etc. being a minority can be shitty when the majority starts ignoring you, assuming to know everything about you, and basically discarding you. this is why i usually hate groups.

    i think, in general, the common S objection is not with the theory in itself. it's more with thinking that your abstractions can really get you anywhere, that what is in front of you is far more significant than what you imagine. that objects are just objects, etc. i see SP types more specifically turned off by generalizations (all p types, really), just like SJ types often use generalizations (all j types, really). it's just a step in the process in how each type creates meaning.

  7. #117
    not to be trusted miss fortune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Enneagram
    827 sp/so
    Posts
    20,123

    Default

    ^ and that post generalizes types as well... *sigh*
    “Oh, we're always alright. You remember that. We happen to other people.” -Terry Pratchett

  8. #118
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by saslou View Post

    Making sweeping statements about a group of people is not bad, however it is close minded. I personally think the best one can do is use the word 'I' as opposed to 'We'.
    Since they have no identity of their own and can only find an identity by being part of a type group, they say: "We."
    Unhealthy, but true.

    Because heaven forbid an SF can think of infinite possibilities and be open to other theories. *sigh*
    We have a lot of ignorant people here, most of whom are alleged Ns. The operative word being, alleged.
    Jung's theory of bipolarity was tested years ago by June Singer and Mary Loomis. Jung's bipolarity claim, didn't hold up. It failed.
    99.9% of those in this forum either don't know it's true, or choose to ignore it.

    Hell, I've seen S's in this forum who have demonstrated better insight with people than alleged N's.
    I've also seen alleged N's take entire posts at face value, demonstrating no ability to understand metaphor, analogy, or any type of figurative language.

    A person's alleged type doesn't mean much, around here.

  9. #119
    Riva
    Guest

    Default

    Simple answer to the title is yes.

  10. #120
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    3,278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whatever View Post
    ^ and that post generalizes types as well... *sigh*
    Seems there is no escaping it..
    We are limited by our own perceptions (is that a generalization?)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 42
    Last Post: 08-30-2017, 03:44 AM
  2. Are we morally obligated to help other people?
    By meme duchess in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 07-06-2016, 04:57 PM
  3. [ENFP] Why am I nice to people who are not nice to me?
    By alcea rosea in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 12-05-2008, 11:12 PM
  4. [MBTItm] How intense are we talking about here??
    By Wild horses in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 10-30-2008, 03:14 PM
  5. Why are we so attracted to misfortune?
    By Geoff in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 05-16-2008, 11:44 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