User Tag List

First 13212223

Results 221 to 226 of 226

  1. #221
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    This doesn't make any sense. You can't expect other people to subscribe to your narrow understanding of what the internet is for. You may come simply to exchange ideas, but people come for all sorts of reasons, including relating to other people. You've previously displayed a proprietary notion of what the internet is and is not supposed to be, and it's puzzling to me. I'm sure it's puzzling to others as well, and this is why your descriptors "where you come from" and "where we come from" were not understood.
    I guess I just didn't like the situation being judged in the terms that people who don't use the Internet to exchange ideas would use, because it wasn't applicable to the perspectives of those participating in the situation.

  2. #222
    The High Priestess Amargith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Enfp
    Enneagram
    497 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEE Fi
    Posts
    14,657

    Default

    Ok, so now that we've established that we clearly have different priorities and that our approaches that come from those approaches can be rather offensive to the other side, how do we fix it?

    What effort are you willing to put into keeping a conversation going which is clearly important enough to get annoyed/heated over, yet unproductive.

    What compromises are you willing to make and where are the lines, when you are no longer authentic to yourself?

    And how do you deal with people who aren't on here and following this discussion, therefore aren't aware of the situation but will still respond to you in that fashion? How do you keep the conversation going with them?


    Edit: I'd also like to add that I personally think Udog's description of shadow sides is a good start. Maybe if we are more aware of not doing those things when in this kind of conversation, triggering those situations will diminish at least already a bit. Clearly it isn't smart to be intuiting someone's logic deny vehemently that you are in fact feeling-fueled, insisting your logic is sound when that isn't your strength, and likewise is it not productive to be calling out someone elses feelings and motivations when logic is what you do and interpreting feelings isn't your best quality.
    ★ڿڰۣ✿ℒoѵℯ✿ڿڰۣ★





    "Harm none, do as ye will”

  3. #223
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Hoo boy...

    Quote Originally Posted by Lauren Ashley View Post
    Where? Let's be clear, no T type in this thread (besides perhaps Tallulah in the very beginning) ever actually acknowledged that this is personally insulting. It's either been explaining why this statement is said or pointing out what is hurtful to the T type. You can go back and check if you'd like.
    Have we disputed your feelings? Of course not, they're your own, and we can't say they're invalid one way or another. In other words, I understand where you're coming from. It can come across as condescending. We don't mean to do this. It's wrong to hurt someone else's feelings, and I wouldn't ever want to intentionally.

    With that in mind, I'd like you to know what my intentions are in this situation.

    No one is saying that your point is invalid. I've said several times, I understand where you're coming from. I'm just presenting the fact that the reverse of such statements is just as hurtful. But I realize it's hard for you (seemingly) to put yourself in someone else's shoes.
    Umm... I'm just trying to give you my (and our, apparently) perspective. Is that not valid information? Is it necessary for me to argue from the other perspective, especially in the light of it being so well demonstrated and described by yourself and others in this very thread?

    What I'm asserting and arguing is irrelevant to my ability to consider things from others' perspective. In fact, it would likely distract me from the points I'm trying to make. I hate to make the reflexive argument, but there you go.

    With all due respect, I (can't speak for others) don't care how you address a situation. But likewise, another person has the right to consider the people in a situation as well as the situation.
    I never said that wasn't the case. You see your construction there, though? You don't care how I address the situation - implying that you do not approve of it, or its validity, in some sense. I'm not saying that's what you think, but that's the way it's coming across.

    Oh, and in regard to both of us:




    Quote Originally Posted by Amargith View Post
    Ok, so now that we've established that we clearly have different priorities and that our approaches that come from those approaches can be rather offensive to the other side, how do we fix it?

    What effort are you willing to put into keeping a conversation going which is clearly important enough to get annoyed/heated over, yet unproductive.

    What compromises are you willing to make and where are the lines, when you are no longer authentic to yourself?

    And how do you deal with people who aren't on here and following this discussion, therefore aren't aware of the situation but will still respond to you in that fashion? How do you keep the conversation going with them?


    Edit: I'd also like to add that I personally think Udog's description of shadow sides is a good start. Maybe if we are more aware of not doing those things when in this kind of conversation, triggering those situations will diminish at least already a bit. Clearly it isn't smart to be intuiting someone's logic deny vehemently that you are in fact feeling-fueled, insisting your logic is sound when that isn't your strength, and likewise is it not productive to be calling out someone elses feelings and motivations when logic is what you do and interpreting feelings isn't your best quality.
    Thank you for your consensus-building efforts. Sorry I've been one to derail that process over the entire thread, it's been counterproductive. This could really help.

    What I usually do in these situations is stop asserting things, and start asking questions. Why are you upset? Why is that? Is there anything else you'd like to say? Did I say something that upset you? You know I don't want to hurt your feelings, so why do you feel that way? If there's any reading between the lines to be done, it's just to stimulate more questions, rather than try to make any definitive questions. As you, LA and others have pointed out, often we do get closer to a deeper truth, either about the situations or the other person and their motivations, by exploring these emotions and understanding where they come into play.

    At that point, the conversation, from a T perspective, is temporarily done as we understand it anyway (like we've all pointed out), so there's no point in trying to keep it going in the same sense - that boat sailed away a long time ago, and it'll just bring more tension to grasp at strings. The job is to rebuild, rather than analyze (which as you all know, literally means "break apart") as before. Analysis of someone else's strong emotions will just figuratively break them apart, and potentially do the same to whatever relationship you have. It's more important to take a holistic perspective in these circumstances, which I'll admit isn't always my strong point - the holistic "big picture" is more of the endpoint that I'm usually trying to reach rather than the place where I start.

    Once the rebuilding process is complete, then the conversation restarts or it doesn't. There's no need for it to unless it needs to, tautological as that may be.

    To be 100% honest, I really don't have much concern when it comes to authenticity, except in one area - if you try to get me to agree to something that's factually untrue (and can be proven as such) just to make you feel better, then that's just something I can't do. I can talk in hypotheticals until I'm blue in the face, but I will not make a definitive statement supporting something I know isn't true. Yes, this is seemingly dishonest, but I do my best to be as honest in that process as I can. Then again, the flip side is that if I make a definitive statement in such a circumstance, you can be 100% certain that's what I mean and consider to be true.

    Re: your edit - that's a very insightful point. I think we go into autopilot sometimes, and when that stream is broken due to a change in circumstance, that makes us uncomfortable, leading to the shadow emergence. I'd do well to recognize that.

  4. #224
    RETIRED CzeCze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    GONE
    Posts
    9,051

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Udog View Post
    It's funny, in a way. I get hit with the exact opposite problem in my life. Anytime I expressed emotion as a kid I was very quickly 'put in my place'.
    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    Well, I just spent 15 typing out a detailed thought about the miscommunication, and Firefox crashed on me. v 3.5.x seems to be buggy as all hell.

    Anyway, the key points:

    1. Jenocyde is right. (Returning the favor )
    2. When Ts (or maybe just ENTPs) emote during a heated discussion, it's usually in response to self-centered desires, such as moral superiority or justification, a desire to punish the offending other, manipulation, or a need to feel better.
    3. This may just be a manifestation of shadow functions.
    4. Because we project our own functions onto others, when someone gets emotional during an argument, we're inclined to think its for a selfish purpose.
    5. Selfishness is associated with immaturity.
    6. Therefore, an emotional person during a discussion is seen as being immature.

    That was way better stated in the condensed form.
    Quote Originally Posted by jenocyde View Post
    That was very concise and well stated.

    I agree with the bolded parts, especially.

    Especially #1.

    EDIT: I've said this before, but I generally feel that people are usually faking their emotions, because that is what I used to do to make people feel better, or worse... I am slowly learning that this is not the case.
    Wow, you leave the interwebz for 24 hours and look what happens!I can't even follow all the different threads of conversation going right now in this thread but just wanted to make some quick comments.

    Onemoretime/Jenocyde - that is very illuminating! And honestly something I've suspected irl from/about other people. I'm very aware of how 'being emotional' and even 'being nice' can be read as being fake or weak or "manipulative" or 'less than' or even met with 'wtf are you so happy about?' distrust. LOL.

    Udog, I can identify with that! Um, I lost my train of thought (if there was one). I'll PM you when I remember.
    “If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.” ― Oscar Wilde

    "I'm outtie 5000" ― Romulux

    Johari/Nohari

  5. #225

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jenocyde View Post
    Oh my goodness, this has really gone on long enough... This has been fun, but I am unsubscribing.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lauren Ashley View Post
    ^I agree. Normally I get bored after a couple of pages. But I don't have anything else better to do right now than correct people on "teh interwebz." So sue me
    Lauren, you turned an ENTP off an internet debate. The world is... topsy turvy. (Of course the discussion was productive nonetheless imo.)

    However, I may have to find God again.
    "The purpose of life is to be defeated by greater and greater things." - Rainer Maria Rilke

  6. #226
    movin melodies kiddykat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4, 7
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    1,115

    Default

    Didn't read through the entire thread.. Don't mean to repeat, if I do.

    It's funny. When a person shouts "You're being overly emotional. I'll talk to you later when you're more less irrational." I'm thinking, all this time, their behavior isn't an indication that they're not being emotional? If they were to deal with frustrations constructively, talk it out without personally attacking the other parties involved, then I would have a reason to believe that they they say is justifiable.

    i think a lot of the times, when people shout in frustration at others, they also shout in frustration about themselves, even if they don't realize it.

    Also, the behavior stems from deep denial about something happening in their own lives, I think.

Similar Threads

  1. [NF] How should one deal with NF's that are being overly emotional?
    By ajblaise in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 135
    Last Post: 10-02-2011, 11:30 AM
  2. [ISFP] ISFPs do you ever feel like you are being treated like a doormat?
    By liYA in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 03-02-2011, 05:57 PM
  3. Ask an ESFJ, and be told how wrong you are
    By pure_mercury in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-12-2009, 07:50 AM
  4. Movies You Are PROUD to be Obsessed With
    By heart in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 116
    Last Post: 11-19-2008, 04:29 AM
  5. Movies You Are Embarassed to be Obsessed With
    By heart in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 02-12-2008, 10:19 AM

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