User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 93

  1. #21
    Entertaining Cracker five sounds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    729 sx/sp
    Socionics
    IEE Ne
    Posts
    5,634

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lyedecker View Post
    Yeah. I think Hitler was an NF gone evil. Look at how he motivated and influenced people and got them fired up about doing generally naughty and shitty things. Bad eggs exist in every type.
    Lol yes, Hitler was a very naughty NF.

    You hem me in -- behind and before;
    you have laid your hand upon me.
    Such knowledge is too wonderful for me,
    too lofty for me to attain.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Posts
    10,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nicolita View Post
    Lol yes, Hitler was a very naughty NF.


  3. #23
    Senior Member Forever_Jung's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Enneagram
    6
    Posts
    2,340

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    I agree, to an extent.

    I agree in that ressentiment can have its purposes.

    If that much inequality, that much injustice, is in existence, then the ressentiment should build up to such an extent, become such a pressure cooker, such a pot boiling over, that it forces those issues to be dealt with by those in power.

    At the same time, though, sometimes the "solutions" offered (i.e., extremely high taxation, eliminating profit, etc) are such complete and total crap that, really, the effect of taking those actions in order to appease that ressentiment would actually end up being worse off for the system as a whole (including, likely, in the end, those with the ressentiment).

    Not all inequality and not all injustice can feasibly be eliminated, and, at least with inequality, not all of it necessarily even should.

    (That being said, I do find the trend of increased inequality since the early 70s in America to be problematic.)

    (And universal healthcare is one prong amongst several [not all appeasing the same side of the equation - some go in the "opposite" direction, in order to increase competitiveness, and thus our economy/employment] that can be enacted to remedy our problems.)
    Z, put aside the political specifics. No one here is claiming that Russell Brand should be our new world leader, and that he has devised a flawless political system. I made it a point to say verbal fireworks, in hopes that people would understand that I wanted to focus on the effect of his words, not critique the content. That's what's important when listening to Russell Brand. To get bogged down in the political nitty-gritty of this interview is to miss the point, even outside the context of my OP.

    Brand did not go into that interview to espouse a specific solution to save the world, he was just defending himself against harshly framed questions. The exchange opens with Jeremy sneering at Russell for guesting-editing a political magazine. Russell kind of chuckles and straight-up admits he doesn't know very much about politics and that he accepted the job as editor out of sheer novelty. He really wasn't trying to cut a serious figure, and yet Paxton came after him pretty hard, and kept putting him down. No wonder Brand got so worked up, and vented his "ressentiment" (I don't like this word, unless I'm writing in French), Paxton was trivializing the validity of Brand's core values.

    The interview wouldn't have been forced to get all politically specific if Paxton didn't come out and say: all your political beliefs are invalid because you don't vote. You don't like the political system--explain why and now construct a model for your ideal government. If you can't do that, you have no business guest-editing a political magazine. Paxton backed him into a corner.

    I think Russell makes a good point when he says:

    “Jeremy darling, don't ask me to sit here in a bloody hotel room and devise a global utopian system.”
    I mean, most everyone would be hard-pressed to do so on the spot, especially if you didn't expect that to come up in the interview. And Russell, as he himself admitted, is not qualified to run the world and decide exactly how it's going to be run. He has no political experience and has no formal education beyond a high school diploma. He is merely giving a voice to the disillusioned, inarticulate masses, who don't have a platform to champion different leaders and alternative politics that might serve them better. And that is what ENFP's do best (Mostly the point of my OP). They aren't systems builders, they are powerful, captivating voices. As Jung put it, Ne-doms are "the natural champion of all minorities with a future".

    It's easy to make someone look stupid by asking them to work within your limits. Brand's not going to look good if you ask him to play world leader, and it's a bit nutty to ask of him in the first place. Russell was speaking from a place of values and experience, not political science. Brand didn't frame the interview like that, Paxton did. To me, it was a power move, an attempt to humiliate and dismiss Russell, by rigging the conversational game. But really, by being so tough on him, it just made Brand look more credible.

  4. #24
    The High Priestess Amargith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Enfp
    Enneagram
    497 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEE Fi
    Posts
    14,658

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lyedecker View Post
    NFs are on this planet to champion causes and passionately spread the word to increase awareness so more handy and practical NTs, SJs and SPs can implement change and progress via innovation and reform. Not offering a feasible alternative doesn't necessarily mean we shouldn't listen to them, even if we don't always agree with them. We need passionate people to champion causes, even if they don't always offer facts and statistics so much as they do a passionate argument. ENFPs are humanity's cheerleaders, in a way. I mean that in a completely positive way and not in the stereotypically ditzy and shallow way we often associate with the word cheerleader.

    It's true, many ENFPs are probably more informed and know more facts to back up his argument, but the fact that something gets him this emotionally fired up about something means he has every right to share that feeling with thw world, whether or not the world chooses to listen to him or shrug him off as another "childish" idealist ungrounded in reality.

    I want to be an ENFP when I grow up, btw.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lyedecker View Post
    Which is why I think ENFPs make better "vision leaders"

    They can get people passionate about something, because ENFPs' passion can be very infectious. Their ability to get people motivated and amped about a cause or task at hand is one of their best strengths, in my opinion.

    Just don't always expect them to know every little detail or have a solution immediately sketched out unless they've come prepared. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Obama might be ENFx. I'm not going to get political but I've noticed this in his leadership style. Sometimes in press conferences he stammers and takes time to process questions before he answers, leading and doesn't always have the most detailed or sketched out solution. I've noticed that he will then become very passionate and say something like, "look, I just want to make sure we can get insurance to as many people as possible..." or "I get letters every day from people like Ruth in Arkansas who lost her insurance when she got laid off and couldn't get new coverage because her diabetes was considered a preexisting condition yadda yadda etc"

    You can tell healthcare and certain issues really burn a fire inside of him.

    He typically leaves the details and planning to his cabinet, policy people, allies in congress, etc, so he can take the role of motivator and champion.

    Just an observation
    Quote Originally Posted by Forever_Jung View Post
    Z, put aside the political specifics. No one here is claiming that Russell Brand should be our new world leader, and that he has devised a flawless political system. I made it a point to say verbal fireworks, in hopes that people would understand that I wanted to focus on the effect of his words, not critique the content. That's what's important when listening to Russell Brand. To get bogged down in the political nitty-gritty of this interview is to miss the point, even outside the context of my OP.

    Brand did not go into that interview to espouse a specific solution to save the world, he was just defending himself against harshly framed questions. The exchange opens with Jeremy sneering at Russell for guesting-editing a political magazine. Russell kind of chuckles and straight-up admits he doesn't know very much about politics and that he accepted the job as editor out of sheer novelty. He really wasn't trying to cut a serious figure, and yet Paxton came after him pretty hard, and kept putting him down. No wonder Brand got so worked up, and vented his "ressentiment" (I don't like this word, unless I'm writing in French), Paxton was trivializing the validity of Brand's core values.

    The interview wouldn't have been forced to get all politically specific if Paxton didn't come out and say: all your political beliefs are invalid because you don't vote. You don't like the political system--explain why and now construct a model for your ideal government. If you can't do that, you have no business guest-editing a political magazine. Paxton backed him into a corner.

    I think Russell makes a good point when he says:



    I mean, most everyone would be hard-pressed to do so on the spot, especially if you didn't expect that to come up in the interview. And Russell, as he himself admitted, is not qualified to run the world and decide exactly how it's going to be run. He has no political experience and has no formal education beyond a high school diploma. He is merely giving a voice to the disillusioned, inarticulate masses, who don't have a platform to champion different leaders and alternative politics that might serve them better. And that is what ENFP's do best (Mostly the point of my OP). They aren't systems builders, they are powerful, captivating voices. As Jung put it, Ne-doms are "the natural champion of all minorities with a future".

    It's easy to make someone look stupid by asking them to work within your limits. Brand's not going to look good if you ask him to play world leader, and it's a bit nutty to ask of him in the first place. Russell was speaking from a place of values and experience, not political science. Brand didn't frame the interview like that, Paxton did. To me, it was a power move, an attempt to humiliate and dismiss Russell, by rigging the conversational game. But really, by being so tough on him, it just made Brand look more credible.


    You know, in the 5 years I've been here, I think this is the first time I've actually seen this part of the ENFP personality so eloquently explained.

    And not just that.

    It is the first time Ive known it to be genuinely appreciated and recognised as a useful skill in a general setting - instead of when it is used to comfort and prop up people who ve recently suffered some set backs and express appreciation for the fire bring lit under their ass.

    I personally don't do this anymore wrt bigger causes because you just get clobbered for supposedly not knowing your shit, not offering solutions and you should shut up already since you supposedly don't know what you re talking about.

    I honest to god did not know that people could actually appreciate it for what it was - addressing the fucking elephant in the room and rallying people to throw in their 2 cents and to actually *do* something *together*.

    You're right, we make for awesome professional cheerleaders. And yes, we don't hold all the answers - nor should we. It's about standing up together, as a group and coming together to fix *insert issue*. Not being a leader and telling people what to do and how to fix it. It's the ultimate cry for democracy.

    So thank you, for validating a part of the ENFP psyche I've been wondering about, struggling with and suppressing for a long time.
    ★ڿڰۣ✿ℒoѵℯ✿ڿڰۣ★





    "Harm none, do as ye will”

  5. #25
    mod love baby... Lady_X's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/so
    Posts
    18,086

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Forever_Jung View Post
    Z, put aside the political specifics. No one here is claiming that Russell Brand should be our new world leader, and that he has devised a flawless political system. I made it a point to say verbal fireworks, in hopes that people would understand that I wanted to focus on the effect of his words, not critique the content. That's what's important when listening to Russell Brand. To get bogged down in the political nitty-gritty of this interview is to miss the point, even outside the context of my OP.

    Brand did not go into that interview to espouse a specific solution to save the world, he was just defending himself against harshly framed questions. The exchange opens with Jeremy sneering at Russell for guesting-editing a political magazine. Russell kind of chuckles and straight-up admits he doesn't know very much about politics and that he accepted the job as editor out of sheer novelty. He really wasn't trying to cut a serious figure, and yet Paxton came after him pretty hard, and kept putting him down. No wonder Brand got so worked up, and vented his "ressentiment" (I don't like this word, unless I'm writing in French), Paxton was trivializing the validity of Brand's core values.

    The interview wouldn't have been forced to get all politically specific if Paxton didn't come out and say: all your political beliefs are invalid because you don't vote. You don't like the political system--explain why and now construct a model for your ideal government. If you can't do that, you have no business guest-editing a political magazine. Paxton backed him into a corner.

    I think Russell makes a good point when he says:



    I mean, most everyone would be hard-pressed to do so on the spot, especially if you didn't expect that to come up in the interview. And Russell, as he himself admitted, is not qualified to run the world and decide exactly how it's going to be run. He has no political experience and has no formal education beyond a high school diploma. He is merely giving a voice to the disillusioned, inarticulate masses, who don't have a platform to champion different leaders and alternative politics that might serve them better. And that is what ENFP's do best (Mostly the point of my OP). They aren't systems builders, they are powerful, captivating voices. As Jung put it, Ne-doms are "the natural champion of all minorities with a future".

    It's easy to make someone look stupid by asking them to work within your limits. Brand's not going to look good if you ask him to play world leader, and it's a bit nutty to ask of him in the first place. Russell was speaking from a place of values and experience, not political science. Brand didn't frame the interview like that, Paxton did. To me, it was a power move, an attempt to humiliate and dismiss Russell, by rigging the conversational game. But really, by being so tough on him, it just made Brand look more credible.
    I so agree and that whole thing is at the core of the issue. Creating established frameworks that one must work within. that is the very thing us enfps take issue with. There is not just one way to do it. There are not just certain people who should be allowed a voice. If the rules of the game were changed to be more inclusive than maybe its one more people like him would play. Then possibly some truly worthwhile change might occur.

    A fire has to be started somewhere. Ideas need spark. That is valid an true and the dismissal of that completely illustrates the core issue.

  6. #26
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Forever_Jung View Post
    Z, put aside the political specifics. No one here is claiming that Russell Brand should be our new world leader, and that he has devised a flawless political system. I made it a point to say verbal fireworks, in hopes that people would understand that I wanted to focus on the effect of his words, not critique the content. That's what's important when listening to Russell Brand. To get bogged down in the political nitty-gritty of this interview is to miss the point, even outside the context of my OP.

    Brand did not go into that interview to espouse a specific solution to save the world, he was just defending himself against harshly framed questions. The exchange opens with Jeremy sneering at Russell for guesting-editing a political magazine. Russell kind of chuckles and straight-up admits he doesn't know very much about politics and that he accepted the job as editor out of sheer novelty. He really wasn't trying to cut a serious figure, and yet Paxton came after him pretty hard, and kept putting him down. No wonder Brand got so worked up, and vented his "ressentiment" (I don't like this word, unless I'm writing in French), Paxton was trivializing the validity of Brand's core values.

    The interview wouldn't have been forced to get all politically specific if Paxton didn't come out and say: all your political beliefs are invalid because you don't vote. You don't like the political system--explain why and now construct a model for your ideal government. If you can't do that, you have no business guest-editing a political magazine. Paxton backed him into a corner.

    I think Russell makes a good point when he says:



    I mean, most everyone would be hard-pressed to do so on the spot, especially if you didn't expect that to come up in the interview. And Russell, as he himself admitted, is not qualified to run the world and decide exactly how it's going to be run. He has no political experience and has no formal education beyond a high school diploma. He is merely giving a voice to the disillusioned, inarticulate masses, who don't have a platform to champion different leaders and alternative politics that might serve them better. And that is what ENFP's do best (Mostly the point of my OP). They aren't systems builders, they are powerful, captivating voices. As Jung put it, Ne-doms are "the natural champion of all minorities with a future".

    It's easy to make someone look stupid by asking them to work within your limits. Brand's not going to look good if you ask him to play world leader, and it's a bit nutty to ask of him in the first place. Russell was speaking from a place of values and experience, not political science. Brand didn't frame the interview like that, Paxton did. To me, it was a power move, an attempt to humiliate and dismiss Russell, by rigging the conversational game. But really, by being so tough on him, it just made Brand look more credible.
    Look, I went to Berkeley.

    Do you know how many know-nothing firebrands I've seen in my day?

    I could really give a shit about whatever you're trying to defend him about: his need to let that ENFP fire out, or whatever.

    There are real political/economic issues in the world, and some persuasive know-nothing with an opinion doesn't mean shit to me.

    Nor should he.

    There's enough bullshit obfuscating the search for the truth (i.e., what really needs to be done), and that's despite the fact that lots of well-meaning, experienced, knowledgable people, who know a lot more than Russell Brand does, are trying to make this thing work the best they can. The world is complicated and difficult to get a grasp of: if Russell Brand can't deliver analysis and insights that cut through all that, then why should I give a fuck what he has to say about it?

    Quote Originally Posted by nicolita View Post
    An unchecked ENFP on the loose can be a scary thing
    Interestingly enough, when I searched my brain for "unchecked ENFP", the person who came to mind was Russell Brand.

    Quote Originally Posted by Amargith View Post


    You know, in the 5 years I've been here, I think this is the first time I've actually seen this part of the ENFP personality so eloquently explained.

    And not just that.

    It is the first time Ive known it to be genuinely appreciated and recognised as a useful skill in a general setting - instead of when it is used to comfort and prop up people who ve recently suffered some set backs and express appreciation for the fire bring lit under their ass.

    I personally don't do this anymore wrt bigger causes because you just get clobbered for supposedly not knowing your shit, not offering solutions and you should shut up already since you supposedly don't know what you re talking about.

    I honest to god did not know that people could actually appreciate it for what it was - addressing the fucking elephant in the room and rallying people to throw in their 2 cents and to actually *do* something *together*.

    You're right, we make for awesome professional cheerleaders. And yes, we don't hold all the answers - nor should we. It's about standing up together, as a group and coming together to fix *insert issue*. Not being a leader and telling people what to do and how to fix it. It's the ultimate cry for democracy.

    So thank you, for validating a part of the ENFP psyche I've been wondering about, struggling with and suppressing for a long time.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lady X View Post
    I so agree and that whole thing is at the core of the issue. Creating established frameworks that one must work within. that is the very thing us enfps take issue with. There is not just one way to do it. There are not just certain people who should be allowed a voice. If the rules of the game were changed to be more inclusive than maybe its one more people like him would play. Then possibly some truly worthwhile change might occur.

    A fire has to be started somewhere. Ideas need spark. That is valid an true and the dismissal of that completely illustrates the core issue.
    God, this is turning into one big, clueless ENFP circle jerk.

    "Screw being right, as long as something is CHANGING!!!"

    I'm sorry, I'll bow out now.

    Sober analysis never seems to be what's desired in these.

    *hears the sound of a thousand groundless revolutions*

  7. #27
    The High Priestess Amargith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Enfp
    Enneagram
    497 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEE Fi
    Posts
    14,658

    Default

    Being right is subjective, at best. And it is something to be worked out in dialogue. But that requires first pointing at the elephant and going:

    Let's discuss this shall we? I'll go first - insert opinion -

    Your turn. What do you think?

    Thats how team work can lead to a great change, informed, well executed and yes, ignited by someone who didn't know all the answers before spilling their guts. It's a group effort, imho. And if that person is 'wrong', open dialogue of their draft proposal will reflect this.
    ★ڿڰۣ✿ℒoѵℯ✿ڿڰۣ★





    "Harm none, do as ye will”

  8. #28
    mod love baby... Lady_X's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/so
    Posts
    18,086

    Default

    You're only allowing voice with your preferred tone tho. How is that inclusive or about the people?

  9. #29
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amargith View Post
    Being right is subjective, at best.
    No, actually, it's not.

    And it is something to be worked out in dialogue.
    That much, at least, is true.

    Without a collaborative process in which all the relevant voices are heard, one is unlikely to arrive at the right solution.

    But that requires first pointing at the elephant and going:

    Let's discuss this shall we? I'll go first - insert opinion -

    Your turn. What do you think?

    Thats how team work can lead to a great change, informed, well executed and yes, ignited by someone who didn't know all the answers before spilling their guts. It's a group effort, imho. And if that person is 'wrong', open dialogue of their draft proposal will reflect this.
    This dialogue has been going on long before Russell Brand joined it.

    And we are all already well aware of the elephant he is pointing at.

    Also, I have analyzed his policy proposals, and they are indeed wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lady X View Post
    You're only allowing voice with your preferred tone tho. How is that inclusive or about the people?
    Hey, he can say whatever the fuck he wants.

    And, frankly, I have conversations with all kinds of people, and try to incorporate everything I hear from all of them into my analysis.

    I'm just saying, he clearly demonstrated multiple times that he does no such thing, and has no fucking clue what he's talking about.

  10. #30
    The High Priestess Amargith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Enfp
    Enneagram
    497 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEE Fi
    Posts
    14,658

    Default

    Sigh. See, this is what I mean with the 'shut up and be quiet' - treatment. And it's why I don't bother with it anymore.
    ★ڿڰۣ✿ℒoѵℯ✿ڿڰۣ★





    "Harm none, do as ye will”

Similar Threads

  1. [ENFP] Variations of the ENFP Personality based on Astrology sign
    By Jetta in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-19-2017, 02:30 PM
  2. [ENFP] The most accurate description of an ENFP under stress (dysfunctional ENFP)
    By Lina Rose in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-04-2015, 12:19 PM
  3. [ENFP] Are any of the ENFP's on this site in a technologically based career?
    By The Great One in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-12-2013, 11:09 PM
  4. [ENFP] In the mind of an ENFP
    By jixmixfix in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 08-20-2009, 01:18 AM
  5. [ENFP] Under the Spell of an ENFP
    By seeker22 in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 06-12-2009, 06:35 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