User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 52

  1. #11
    Senior Member Qre:us's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    Recently, I've been metaphorically slapped across the face by people far more compassionate than myself. The context is essentially immaterial, although I think it would be ideal to just outline what I mean when I say I lack compassion. Take the current crisis in Gaza. I think that what the neutral governments like the UK and the US are doing is the rational thing to do. This is because while campaigners are saying various things like "stop the crisis in Gaza" (an overly-idealistic and -simplistic view), I see no rationality in said campaigners actions. They respond to my apparently heartless, cruel "but why should we help these people?" with completely arbitrary and subjective claims about aiding humanity. I feel they don't consider the practicality of doing so, nor do I feel they consider the rationality of choosing to remain neutral. I think they are too driven by their feelings. Nonetheless, either due to the moral guilt they place upon me (and I'm an amoralist!), or by some other phenomena of which I am almost completely unaware, I feel as if I should be doing or saying something differently.

    The problem is, I'm afraid of sacrificing my intellectual integrity, and I feel that in becoming more compassionate as a person, I will do just that.

    Is there any way I can avoid this, and still be compassionate? Or should I admit that these people are acting irrationally, and that I am not mistaken in my course of action (or non-action, as the case may be)?

    USA is a great player in the free market. USA has NOT been 'rationally' neutral to the Gaza conflict, vis a vis, their support (indirect, and, much so) of Israel. So, before you make a judgement on a topic by saying that it has reached its ceiling of rationality, you may want to be better informed. It helps to actually prove your case for rationality that you think you seem to have so much of in spades.

    First thing to know about logic, it is merely a thought-process. It is not an actual 'thought'. And most thoughts in this life is neither black nor white. Predisposition:
    Applying logic to it makes you a T.
    Applying value-based judgements to it makes you an F.

    However, the 'thought' (e.g., Gaza conflict) itself is neither T nor F. And, thus, neither is 'one side' a logical argument, while the other a value-based. It is how you PROVE your thought (the process) that will predict whether you're working with T or F. So, you can take either side, neither side, or, sit on the fence. Just prove it - accordingly. Be it logic or value-based.

    E.g., My close friends know my frustration when things are not 'logical'. When I was younger, it was a really big issue. I would get angry, frustrated, couldn't/wouldn't/refused to work with the world, when I felt that someone had committed a fallacy of logic. For me, it came down to, if it is not logical, I cannot do it/commit. So, one time, I challenged them, can you find 'logic' within values? Show me.

    And, I have been given many an example that finally showed me the limitations of 'cold', objective logic. And, thus, the merits of value-based 'logic'.

    Anecdote: Our driveway is long and narrow, and we got 3 cars parked there. Middle one, the person is not home yet so no key. Front car (my dad's). Last car, blocked in by the rest is mine. I needed to leave ASAP. So, I asked my dad to borrow his car, and when he goes out later, he could use mine. Makes logical sense. His is the in line. However...he refused, asking me to wait to get my car out. I was livid. It didn't make logical sense. Relay story to my F-disposed friend. Her response: Your dad knows you smoke and hates it, and he probably doesn't want to face it/inhale it, when he goes to sit in your car. Simple. Logical still. And, triumped me. That's value-based as you get. But, for some reason, it beats my logical reasoning. With a greater 'internal logic' of its own.

    There is a certain 'logic' to many value-based judgements. Which those of us with T, or, in praise of the T, are woefully blind to.

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,501

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qre:us View Post
    USA is a great player in the free market. USA has NOT been 'rationally' neutral to the Gaza conflict, vis a vis, their support (indirect, and, much so) of Israel. So, before you make a judgement on a topic by saying that it has reached its ceiling of rationality, you may want to be better informed. It helps to actually prove your case for rationality that you think you seem to have so much of in spades.

    First thing to know about logic, it is merely a thought-process. It is not an actual 'thought'. And most thoughts in this life is neither black nor white. Predisposition:
    Applying logic to it makes you a T.
    Applying value-based judgements to it makes you an F.

    However, the 'thought' (e.g., Gaza conflict) itself is neither T nor F. And, thus, neither is 'one side' a logical argument, while the other a value-based. It is how you PROVE your thought (the process) that will predict whether you're working with T or F. So, you can take either side, neither side, or, sit on the fence. Just prove it - accordingly. Be it logic or value-based.

    E.g., My close friends know my frustration when things are not 'logical'. When I was younger, it was a really big issue. I would get angry, frustrated, couldn't/wouldn't/refused to work with the world, when I felt that someone had committed a fallacy of logic. For me, it came down to, if it is not logical, I cannot do it/commit. So, one time, I challenged them, can you find 'logic' within values? Show me.

    And, I have been given many an example that finally showed me the limitations of 'cold', objective logic. And, thus, the merits of value-based 'logic'.

    Anecdote: Our driveway is long and narrow, and we got 3 cars parked there. Middle one, the person is not home yet so no key. Front car (my dad's). Last car, blocked in by the rest is mine. I needed to leave ASAP. So, I asked my dad to borrow his car, and when he goes out later, he could use mine. Makes logical sense. His is the in line. However...he refused, asking me to wait to get my car out. I was livid. It didn't make logical sense. Relay story to my F-disposed friend. Her response: Your dad knows you smoke and hates it, and he probably doesn't want to face it/inhale it, when he goes to sit in your car. Simple. Logical still. And, triumped me. That's value-based as you get. But, for some reason, it beats my logical reasoning. With a greater 'internal logic' of its own.

    There is a certain 'logic' to many value-based judgements. Which those of us with T, or, in praise of the T, are woefully blind to.
    What he said

  3. #13
    Shaman BlackCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    7,004

    Default

    Maybe deep down you're afraid of showing some sort of weakness, and maybe you unconsciously think that showing tenderness and consideration shows weakness?
    () 9w8-3w4-7w6 tritype.

    sCueI (primary Inquisition)

  4. #14
    Senior Member groovejet02's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCat View Post
    Maybe deep down you're afraid of showing some sort of weakness, and maybe you unconsciously think that showing tenderness and consideration shows weakness?
    I think so too (Ezra, correct us if we're mistaken). I think it probably has to do with her /him being an ENTJ 8w7. I notice this with my ENTJ friend too: the failure to care about suffering -- especially in the wider world --- and pointing to it with statements "That's stupid!" and "I am too tired to care", though I'm sure there are also ENTJs who are compassionate.

  5. #15
    Member SilentStream's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    Recently, I've been metaphorically slapped across the face by people far more compassionate than myself. The context is essentially immaterial, although I think it would be ideal to just outline what I mean when I say I lack compassion. Take the current crisis in Gaza. I think that what the neutral governments like the UK and the US are doing is the rational thing to do. This is because while campaigners are saying various things like "stop the crisis in Gaza" (an overly-idealistic and -simplistic view), I see no rationality in said campaigners actions. They respond to my apparently heartless, cruel "but why should we help these people?" with completely arbitrary and subjective claims about aiding humanity. I feel they don't consider the practicality of doing so, nor do I feel they consider the rationality of choosing to remain neutral. I think they are too driven by their feelings. Nonetheless, either due to the moral guilt they place upon me (and I'm an amoralist!), or by some other phenomena of which I am almost completely unaware, I feel as if I should be doing or saying something differently.

    The problem is, I'm afraid of sacrificing my intellectual integrity, and I feel that in becoming more compassionate as a person, I will do just that.

    Is there any way I can avoid this, and still be compassionate? Or should I admit that these people are acting irrationally, and that I am not mistaken in my course of action (or non-action, as the case may be)?
    I do believe in showing compassion as it is something logically beneficial to everyone including oneself. But when it comes to a situation like this I'm inclined to agree that one should remain neutral, it is someone else's conflict and battle, they can only stop and resolve it themselves. You can't force someone to stop a war, without creating conflict yourself.

  6. #16
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    Recently, I've been metaphorically slapped across the face by people far more compassionate than myself. The context is essentially immaterial, although I think it would be ideal to just outline what I mean when I say I lack compassion. Take the current crisis in Gaza. I think that what the neutral governments like the UK and the US are doing is the rational thing to do. This is because while campaigners are saying various things like "stop the crisis in Gaza" (an overly-idealistic and -simplistic view), I see no rationality in said campaigners actions. They respond to my apparently heartless, cruel "but why should we help these people?" with completely arbitrary and subjective claims about aiding humanity. I feel they don't consider the practicality of doing so, nor do I feel they consider the rationality of choosing to remain neutral. I think they are too driven by their feelings. Nonetheless, either due to the moral guilt they place upon me (and I'm an amoralist!), or by some other phenomena of which I am almost completely unaware, I feel as if I should be doing or saying something differently.

    The problem is, I'm afraid of sacrificing my intellectual integrity, and I feel that in becoming more compassionate as a person, I will do just that.

    Is there any way I can avoid this, and still be compassionate? Or should I admit that these people are acting irrationally, and that I am not mistaken in my course of action (or non-action, as the case may be)?
    What you call rationality is really getting lost in your personal value system, labeling everything as proper and improper, and trying to come up with something that sounds consistent. But while doing so, you completely forget the fact that real people are suffering. Suffering gets reduced to a mere variable in an equation and you do lose your humanity. To me, this isn't really rationality. Rationality involves how you see patterns in the world. But you need to be open to seeing and experiencing what's real on a personal, intimate basis, not just as a philosophical game you play with your college friends.

    Best

  7. #17
    half mystic, half skeksis jenocyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    6,387

    Default

    I get what you're saying, Ezra. It's not that you don't know that there's suffering, you just know that some suffering has to happen for anything to change. Compassion has nothing to do with sensitivity.

    You don't have to be anything that you're not. If you don't feel an emotion, you don't have to fake the funk. But realize that if you speak about any sensitive subject, you will have to defend yourself from people who don't understand you. It's our choice: speak on, knowing your principles are intact vs. keep quiet and pick your battles. I know it's tough. I've also had to learn to adapt to overly sensitive people, also, and it always feels like I've lost a part of myself. I don't feel that people ever meet me halfway, either.

  8. #18
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Is there an observer/participant distinction to draw?

    Compassion in an observer is one thing. It might well motive that observer to begin seeking better solutions across the board. If you see what I mean. They'd vote for different candidates based on those kinds of preferences, influence others over some beers, possibly promote different outcomes by exercise of their consumer choices.

    ENTJ might find more it compelling to be compassionate as a participant. Either by considering the emo-pleas of other observers and taking some actions they suggest, or by joining the UN or the military or the government, or by using their own likely position in business.

    Compassion is a fine thing, but perhaps disabling if there are no actions attached. And for something as big as, say, Gaza, perhaps the deal is not how much you can feel for the suffering of others, but how many meaningful actions you can attach to the emo-pleas of people you know.

    To reach a decision about which action will be meaningful, you'll need to exercise both rationality and compassion.

    Something like that, maybe.

  9. #19
    Senior Member Jeremy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Posts
    426

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    The problem is, I'm afraid of sacrificing my intellectual integrity, and I feel that in becoming more compassionate as a person, I will do just that.

    Is there any way I can avoid this, and still be compassionate? Or should I admit that these people are acting irrationally, and that I am not mistaken in my course of action (or non-action, as the case may be)?
    I think you need to get over yourself a little bit (not trying to be mean, but just saying). I mean, "sacrificing your intellectual integrity?" Are you saying it's impossible for an F type to be rational / intellectual? I consider myself both of those things. Being rational and being compassionate are two different spheres, but not necessarily opposites, and they can be blended together without sacrificing the integrity of each.

    You are a human, and humans are, regardless of what you may believe, inherently subjective. We ain't machines. Even your fear of losing your "intellectual integrity" is based off of feelings. You can't run away from them, they're always gonna be there. Yes, there is an objective standpoint which would say that, for instance, the Gaza crisis is unavoidable and cannot be "won". But most people have an opinion on it. And that objective standpoint that seems so "right" might just be wrong. Making your own opinion based on how you feel about things is not inherently irrational - you can blend them together.

    Being too "objective" often leads to people believe that there is actually a "right" answer to every question, and there just isn't. No one has sufficiently proven to me yet that 2+2=4. And your opinions are valid, regardless of whether they're based on feelings or facts (or, as is most likely the case, both), because both of those things are taken internally and processed based on how they make sense to you. Don't run away from either of them - embrace them both, and be who you want to be!
    "Can you set me free from this dark inner world? Save me now, last beats in the soul.."

    Fonewearl and proud of it!

    I (85%) - N (80%) - F (35%) - P (90%)
    O: 94% C: 18% E: 21% A: 94% N: 38%
    9w1 (SP, SX, SO)
    (9, 5, 4)
    RCUAI (Primary Calm)

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    Recently, I've been metaphorically slapped across the face by people far more compassionate than myself. The context is essentially immaterial, although I think it would be ideal to just outline what I mean when I say I lack compassion. Take the current crisis in Gaza. I think that what the neutral governments like the UK and the US are doing is the rational thing to do. This is because while campaigners are saying various things like "stop the crisis in Gaza" (an overly-idealistic and -simplistic view), I see no rationality in said campaigners actions. They respond to my apparently heartless, cruel "but why should we help these people?" with completely arbitrary and subjective claims about aiding humanity. I feel they don't consider the practicality of doing so, nor do I feel they consider the rationality of choosing to remain neutral. I think they are too driven by their feelings. Nonetheless, either due to the moral guilt they place upon me (and I'm an amoralist!), or by some other phenomena of which I am almost completely unaware, I feel as if I should be doing or saying something differently.

    The problem is, I'm afraid of sacrificing my intellectual integrity, and I feel that in becoming more compassionate as a person, I will do just that.

    Is there any way I can avoid this, and still be compassionate? Or should I admit that these people are acting irrationally, and that I am not mistaken in my course of action (or non-action, as the case may be)?
    First, at the basis of any rational thought lies assumptions which cannot be demontrasted. A rational thinking based on invalid assumptions may be perfectly logical but still invalid. As such, there is no such thing as perfectly rational thinking, but at best "logical" thinking that is more or less rational depending on the subjective evaluation of the basic assumptions.

    Philosophers such as Kant arrived at views of moral behavior that state that people should treat others as they would like to be treated and act with others in such a way that their actions could become a universal law. Following this view, it is logical to want to help those people because that is treating others in a way in which you would like to be treated and that could be made into a universal law at the benefit of all.

    Correct me if I'm wrong and if you would prefer not being helped if you were in Gaza.

Similar Threads

  1. [INFP] Helping an INFP to become more brave, confident, self - assured and determined
    By Elaine in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-10-2015, 03:30 PM
  2. [ENFP] NFP how to be more organized at work? Admin Asst.
    By hermeticdancer in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-26-2009, 08:24 PM
  3. Could someone please tell me how to become more "healthy"?
    By Queen Kat in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 07-22-2009, 11:43 AM
  4. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-27-2007, 10:02 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