User Tag List

First 3456715 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 290

  1. #41
    The elder Holmes Mycroft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sp
    Posts
    1,080

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    *sigh* That's the thing with INTJs. They know it, and they love it.
    The alternative is going about feeling guilty about the way our minds are wired. To Hell with that.

    More specifically, just because I've written a person off as, for example, a noisy blob of human-shaped biomass doesn't mean I have any contempt for them whatsoever. Contempt is too mentally taxing. I avoid it.

    ...also, aren't they called "limit breaks"?
    Dost thou love Life? Then do not squander Time; for that's the Stuff Life is made of.

    -- Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanack, June 1746 --

  2. #42
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post

    ...also, aren't they called "limit breaks"?
    Yes, but I didn't want to imply that INTJs lash out after taking damage, so I figured move would be more accurate

  3. #43
    only bites when provoked
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    2,127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
    More specifically, just because I've written a person off as, for example, a noisy blob of human-shaped biomass doesn't mean I have any contempt for them whatsoever. Contempt is too mentally taxing. I avoid it.
    I think this is where the link other people draw between INTJs and Psychopaths comes from - they've seen us write people off.
    I 100%, N 88%, T 88%, J 75%

    Disclaimer: The above is my opinion and mine alone, it does not mean I cannot change my mind, nor does it guarantee that my comments are related to any deep-seated convictions. Take everything I say with a whole snowplow worth of salt and call me in the morning, if you can.

  4. #44
    Dhampyr Economica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    2,054

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    Yes, but I didn't want to imply that INTJs lash out after taking damage
    *spits water at keyboard*

    I'm so glad to have you around, pt.

  5. #45
    Pareo cattus Natrushka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    1,213

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wolf View Post
    I think this is where the link other people draw between INTJs and Psychopaths comes from - they've seen us write people off.
    It's not like writing people off and buring bodies are similar. I can't believe the idea of writing someone off is that foreign to some that it would appear so.

    This signature left intentionally blank.

    Really.

  6. #46
    The elder Holmes Mycroft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sp
    Posts
    1,080

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Natrushka View Post
    It's not like writing people off and buring bodies are similar. I can't believe the idea of writing someone off is that foreign to some that it would appear so.
    This is where the democratic nature of language fails us. The vast majority of human beings will stay in relationships that are not beneficial or even destructive out of some sort of misguided notion of "obligation", however they dress this notion up. As a result, all terms that refer to removing someone from your life, once you've assessed their involvement to be of no benefit or detrimental, have negative connotations. Simply put, there's no way of phrasing the notion of "writing someone off" in a positive light even though doing so can be the best and most positive thing you could do.
    Dost thou love Life? Then do not squander Time; for that's the Stuff Life is made of.

    -- Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanack, June 1746 --

  7. #47
    only bites when provoked
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    2,127

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Natrushka View Post
    It's not like writing people off and buring bodies are similar. I can't believe the idea of writing someone off is that foreign to some that it would appear so.
    The problem is that others see it that way, just as Mycroft points out above.
    I 100%, N 88%, T 88%, J 75%

    Disclaimer: The above is my opinion and mine alone, it does not mean I cannot change my mind, nor does it guarantee that my comments are related to any deep-seated convictions. Take everything I say with a whole snowplow worth of salt and call me in the morning, if you can.

  8. #48
    Plumage and Moult proteanmix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Enneagram
    1w2
    Posts
    5,514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Natrushka View Post
    It's not like writing people off and buring bodies are similar. I can't believe the idea of writing someone off is that foreign to some that it would appear so.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
    This is where the democratic nature of language fails us. The vast majority of human beings will stay in relationships that are not beneficial or even destructive out of some sort of misguided notion of "obligation", however they dress this notion up. As a result, all terms that refer to removing someone from your life, once you've assessed their involvement to be of no benefit or detrimental, have negative connotations. Simply put, there's no way of phrasing the notion of "writing someone off" in a positive light even though doing so can be the best and most positive thing you could do.
    I think people get upset when they're written off because maybe they feel like the relationship is worth saving, they don't view you (general you) as just taking up space, and they're surprised when the other person doesn't feel similarly. Sometimes people stick out of obligation, but I find that's not as true as you think. If it's like Mycroft said, it's not destructive or beneficial, really not doing anything, what difference does it make for the relationship or person to still be there?

    I look at it like this: I have a lamp sitting in the corner of my room that's just been there for more than a year. I keep looking at it thinking I should throw it away but it's not obstructing my path so it just stays there. Maybe one day I'll need it, maybe I'll throw it away this weekend. I don't know how my relationship to the lamp will change over time, and it's not harming me so it's no problem for it to just be there.

    This is why I think people tend to react so strongly to INTJs. There is a mentality that people either need to serve a purpose and use or they should be removed. The INTJ thinks how do they relate to me, instead of asking how do I related to them. There's no joy of having people around just for them to be there. This can be (mis?)construed as misanthropy. Be useful or leave. Maybe they do serve a purpose, but you don't know what it is yet. IMO, to sever the relationship is foolish simply because you don't know what may develop (for your happiness or the other person's).

    I think INTJs think they're being thorough in the possibilities but they continually miss the people aspect. This is also related to PR, people may see an INTJ treat others like this and when approached by an unsuspecting INTJ they react without knowing what the nature of the transaction will be. This is part of the intimidating aspect, a person thinks, they'll just cut me loose when they're done with me, why should I help them? People sense this attitude and they react very strongly to it, often not in a good way, and even more often antagonistically to what you're trying to do. Combine this with the INTJ trait of being standoffish and cool and it's just a mess. This then becomes a vicious cycle between INTJs and the rest of the population. Maybe this is why I take particular pleasure in annoying INTJs . Some kind of convoluted ass-backwards notion of helping them see that people don't need to just be a tool for the implementation of goals.
    Relationships have normal ebbs and flows. They do not automatically get better and better when the participants learn more and more about each other. Instead, the participants have to work through the tensions of the relationship (the dialectic) while they learn and group themselves and a parties in a relationships. At times the relationships is very open and sharing. Other time, one or both parties to the relationship need their space, or have other concerns, and the relationship is less open. The theory posits that these cycles occur throughout the life of the relationship as the persons try to balance their needs for privacy and open relationship.
    Interpersonal Communication Theories and Concepts
    Social Penetration Theory 1
    Social Penetration Theory 2
    Social Penetration Theory 3

  9. #49
    Pareo cattus Natrushka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    1,213

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wolf View Post
    The problem is that others see it that way, just as Mycroft points out above.
    Oh I know they do. I've heard about it from them. I just can't (refuse to?) believe they don't understand. Scratch that. I've given up trying to explain.

    Proteanmix, at the risk of pointing out the obvious, people aren't lamps and lamps aren't people. Lamps don't let you down. Lamps don't lie to you. Insert "thing people do" and add "lamps don't do it". And while lamps also don't do the nice / warm fuzzy things people do - well sometimes the tradeoff isn't really a tradeoff. When I get to that point where I've had enough of something / someone then I've had enough - people aspect nothwithstanding.

    Of course it takes quite the event to cause this to happen. Not much really annoys me and consequently I don't often feel this way.

    This then becomes a vicious cycle between INTJs and the rest of the population.
    For whom? When I "write someone off" I don't suffer. I typically feel a lot better.

    I'd like to say more, but damn I'm late.

    This signature left intentionally blank.

    Really.

  10. #50
    Plumage and Moult proteanmix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Enneagram
    1w2
    Posts
    5,514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Natrushka View Post
    Proteanmix, at the risk of pointing out the obvious, people aren't lamps and lamps aren't people. Lamps don't let you down. Lamps don't lie to you. Insert "thing people do" and add "lamps don't do it". And while lamps also don't do the nice / warm fuzzy things people do - well sometimes the tradeoff isn't really a tradeoff. When I get to that point where I've had enough of something / someone then I've had enough - people aspect nothwithstanding.

    Of course it takes quite the event to cause this to happen. Not much really annoys me and consequently I don't often feel this way.
    I know lamps aren't people. It was an oversimplified example.

    My main point is that when a relationship is neither positive nor negative, INTJs (the ones I know and the ones I've seen responding on the forum) tend to axe the relationship. I interpreted the INTJ writing someone off in this context as something that is done when a person serves no apparent purpose, not really doing anything good or bad. My point is what difference does it make, they're not doing anything so they should be left as they are. To take the extra step to "write the person off" creates a tension that wasn't there in the before. This contributes to the INTJ being viewed as intimidating. That is what the thread is about right?

    If the person is dragging you down, by all means get rid of them. No one should have to put up with that and you're right to feel relieved.
    Relationships have normal ebbs and flows. They do not automatically get better and better when the participants learn more and more about each other. Instead, the participants have to work through the tensions of the relationship (the dialectic) while they learn and group themselves and a parties in a relationships. At times the relationships is very open and sharing. Other time, one or both parties to the relationship need their space, or have other concerns, and the relationship is less open. The theory posits that these cycles occur throughout the life of the relationship as the persons try to balance their needs for privacy and open relationship.
    Interpersonal Communication Theories and Concepts
    Social Penetration Theory 1
    Social Penetration Theory 2
    Social Penetration Theory 3

Similar Threads

  1. [INTJ] Ask an INTJ
    By logan235711 in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 870
    Last Post: 05-22-2015, 05:04 AM
  2. [INTJ] INTJ flirting
    By Usehername in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 101
    Last Post: 06-02-2010, 04:26 PM
  3. [INTJ] INTJ's Introverted Feeling - Child (Puer/Puella)
    By Zhash in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 01-04-2010, 09:06 AM
  4. [INTJ] INTJs and spelling
    By Natrushka in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 09-16-2007, 02:14 PM
  5. [INTJ] INTJ: Lack of Concentration?
    By Usehername in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 06-09-2007, 01:12 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