[MBTI General] Why people don't like this approach ?

[miss fortune]

I'm guessing that the fact that

a. you're not following the social norm in your reaction
b. you're showing no Fe, which is warm and squishy and makes people happy
c. you're acting like a computer, not a human (to reiterate the above point I guess) and humans are comfortable with humanity more than cyborgs


there's certain responses that people expect in certain situations- and they tend to expect you to at least show some shred of humanity at what are considered important life events- even to fake it is better for fitting in than sounding like a stats program that's developed the ability to speak... sound too mechanical and they'll fear that you'll start repeating "exterminate, exterminate" while walking towards them or something of the sort... it's just natural human reaction I guess

(I could go into more sociological detail, but my breakfast is ready...)

 

[phoenix13]

Statistics are useful for predicting population trends, not individual trends. Every individual could be an outlier in the normative curve.

Now, to answer your question: as an ENFP, I'm disturbed that it could easily lead you to underestimating me. To say that some roadblock 10 years ahead will most likely stop me from accomplishing X is insulting, because it assumes that I'm average (ie not an outlier).

 

[Kra]

I find that most people will take your analysis personally. They will assume that you do not afford them the proper respect.

I for one, think you'd be right mostly, but it's kind of a hard pill to swallow for most.

 

[cafe]

Do mine! Do mine!

Born: 1970
Gender: Female

No cheating!

 

[Poki]

I find that most people will take your analysis personally. They will assume that you do not afford them the proper respect.

I for one, think you'd be right mostly, but it's kind of a hard pill to swallow for most.

Do you offer them the proper respect? Or do you use statistics to assume that a person you just met will take it personally.

 

[phoenix13]

In this thread it can clearly seen how good I am in killiing fun actually.

How much unspontaneous is too unspontaneous?

Basicly this is how I operated beneath the skin. I can preted that I don't think like this by not acting like this. But this is who I am actually.

Hey, it's a useful skill in occupations like meteorologist, stock broker, etc. The key is knowing its limits, and it is extremely limited on the individual level.

Also, it helps to know how to phrase your conclusions to those who are easily offended. I can tell you from experience that blunt honesty with everyone all the time is not a good thing (try it, and you'll see what I mean).

 

[Kra]

Do you offer them the proper respect? Or do you use statistics to assume that a person you just met will take it personally.

Honestly, if I start think in a statistical manner about other people, I usually just keep it to myself.

Whether it's out of respect, or just staying out of trouble depends entirely upon the person. In the OP's case of a newborn, it's probably the latter. Thinking like AO's example is sometimes done simply as something to muse the time away, and not out of irreverence.

Edit: And to answer your question, no. This is one of the rare instances of my Si speaking up.

 

[Intricate Mystic]

To OP: using statistics to predict the course of a new-born's life reminds me very much of the way my ISTJ dad thinks.

 

[Virtual ghost]

I think that you guys should take the closer look at the end of the OP .

This is not at all about being correct or incorrect it is about looking at thing is purely analitical way. The fact that I have used the child example is irrelevant for the thread. I have used this only bacuse it shows how impersonal my aproach is and how long term oriented it is but there is no deeper reason.


Statistic as a staistic is irrelevant. The point is that I am limiting a person to a time span. So people usually feel traped when talking to me. Exactly since I give little flexibility. Since I usually start thinking about people from the stand point of when they are going to die and then I procede to what they could possibly do while they are alive.
So i am wondering why people feel uncomfortable thinking about their lives from this perspective.

 

[Asterion]

Is this all who you are, or is this how you see everything? The key to growth is to step outside your box, it's as simple and as difficult as that.

 

[phoenix13]

I think that you guys should take the closer look at the end of the OP .

This is not at all about being correct or incorrect it is about looking at thing is purely analitical way. The fact that I have used the cihild example is irrelevant for the thread. I have used unly bacuse it show how impersonal my arrpoach is and how long term it is but there is no deeper reason.


Statistic as staistic is irrelevant. The point is that I am limiting a person to a time span. So people usually feel traped when talking to me. Exactly since I give little flexibility. Since I usually start thinking about people from the stand point of when they are going to die and then I procede to what they could possibly do while they are alive.
So i am wondering why people feel uncomfortable thinking about their lives from this perspective.

You answered your own question.

Also, most people find the idea of their mortality unpleasant.

 

[Virtual ghost]

You answered your own question.

Yes, but why is this the case with people ?

Why people feel trapped talking to me because of this ?

 

[Kra]

Yes, but why is this the case with people ?

Why people feel trapped talking to me because of this ?

It's human to fear death, and speaking of a definite "lifespan" often reminds people of their own mortality in an unpleasant way.

That's my take on it at least.

 

[Virtual ghost]

It's human to fear death, and speaking of a definite "lifespan" often reminds people of their own mortality in an unpleasant way.

That's my take on it at least.

And you are probably right.


Well my problem is that I am using same approach on myself and I have so many times passed throught the concept of my own death and all possible ways I could die that I am not uncommfortable at all with my own mortality.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

This reply is just to OP, without having read the thread:
-I don't see much of anything offensive in your approach. Seems harmless.
-those kinds of statistics you use could apply to almost anyone, hence you don't need anyone to have born in the first place to tell all that.
-for a more advanced statistical approach, you could go for some specific background information that will predict a different outcome - this is fine-tuning the expectations for her, instead of looking just few attributes, like sex.
-you said you'll stop, so perhaps there's more depth to it.
-you expected average things to happen to her - well, quite probably true, but not necessarily any more true than it is for any other person. And, not everybody turns out average - some turn out exceptional.
-you didn't commit to any real guess about her.
-what you have done seems like an illusion of knowledge, or perhaps the dismissal of the other possible future events as minor details.

Ok, I'll put my ideas of your statistical arguments aside.

So why would people feel uncomfortable?

They most certainly want to see life much more interesting than that. Even though they knew to be just average, they are interested of the kind of average they'll be facing, the nuances, the details.. the mood and style of it. If average is good enough, it can't be just dismissed with the estimate of the lifespan and other statistical data.

They'd expect you to get interested - even though it would not directly mean much to you, the parents are expecting to experience lots of interesting things in their life with her, and they're expecting their daughter to live, to participate in life.

They are not expecting someone to seem so disinterested of individuals.

 

[phoenix13]

Yes, but why is this the case with people ?

Why people feel trapped talking to me because of this ?

Hmmm, instead of "trapped" I would say "limited." We are limited by death, and that's your starting point. A strong aversion to death is intrinsic to the survival instinct that allows us to live long enough to reproduce. That is why your analysis is immediately unpleasant.

You say this is an integral part of who you are. I don't see this particular line of speculation as such. Rather, I'll bet long-term strategy and contingency planning are more representative of who you are (Te and Ni). These thought processes can be expressed in many more ways than what you are describing, so you don't have to engage everyone in it to stay true to who you are.

 

[bcvcdc]

what is the journey?

a non-existant female approximately 6 years old.

 

[Poki]

Yes, but why is this the case with people ?

Why people feel trapped talking to me because of this ?

You are confusing me. Was your whole point of the thread in regard to why people dont like it when you limit their timespan of life? Or the analytical approach? Timespan is pretty definite and simple, while people not liking the analytical approach spans a much larger picture.

The backward approach to me seems like you want to help people figure out what they will accomplish in a certain time frame and you limit what they can do by the amount of time they have. Who is to say how much someone can actually accomplish in a given time frame?

The problem I see in starting with the end is you have just capped what you can accomplish.

 

[NewEra]

As a person I place almost no value on "the" journey. The only thing that matters to me in is the final outcome and everything else is technically irrelevant.
However my tendency to go after a defintive outcome scares other people and it makes them uncomfortable quite a bit.
So this thread will probably look like a joke but I am dead serious about this


I will give a picturesquely example of my behaviour.
A baby is born and people are happy. Except me, since I keep my head cool. So Instead of being happy I calculate.


Like this.

Born 3.12.2005

Gender female

Current average life-span of females - 76 years.
(if it stays the same)

Estimated time of death 3.12.2081.

Size of possible error 10%


Meaning- she will die somewhere between 2076 and 2086.
The chances that she will die a violent or somehow tragic death are less than 1% and should not be takes as a likely outcome. Even if probablility exists. Which is further reducing the a fact that she is from a stabile family.
If something special does not happen her first day at school will be in september of of 2010 or 2011.
Since childern don't usually fair at this stage of lofe it is likely that she will enter a highschool 8 years later form her first day in school.


Statistically the chances are that she will be of average intelligence and skills. Or at least somewhere near the average.
If enought time is invested it can be calculated how much money she can possibly earn in life. Also it is would be advisable to calculate possible minimum and maximum to add flexibility the calculation. The chances of strong deviations from standard are possbible but statistical observations of current population shows that they don't happen to that many individuals.


Education and talents - unkown at this stage
However it is unlikely that they will make the child to be that much special that the child wil be much more succesful than children of her age. Gender suggests that it is more likely that she will take a more people oriented carrer.

Sexual pertners during life -time between 3 and 6
Number of childern 2 plus 1or2 aborted if current social trends continue.
Maximum number of childern that she can give birth - Unknown.



This is where i will stop since I think that everybody got my point. In realty I would be much more concrete since I would have a concrete person to analyse. Also I would place much more variables which I didn't place here since I don't want my example to be too complicated. Plus I would make a few "simulations" as well.


Basicly I define all major traits and variables at the start. So the journey is something that siimply has to happen to prove me right or wrong. (and nothing more). But generally speaking I am often quite correct about things.
Since most things are nothing more than a continuation of events from past mixed with statistical odds.



NPs usually have the bigges problems with this since they can comprehend my logic. But they have a huge need to explore and need to wonder. I basicly kill them when I show them some barrier in their life that is like 10 years ahead. (especially NFPs) Since I place their entire exploring thing in the context of space and time and show them how much time they have left. (or something)

SJs - either think you are rude or feel uncomfortabe since they can see your J logic which they like at work. But they feel so naked around you. I tend to think that NFJ are similar to SJs when it comes to this.


While SPs just say "cool" and walk away or they will try to convince that you need profesional help.


I could say much more but I will leave that for a thread. Instead I will just get to the point.


Why my thought process / approach makes people so uncomfortabe ?
I mean because of this I often don't show people who I am. Since people seem to be uncomfortable with idea that things can be that well summarized.

Basicly this is not about being correct or not this is about approach towards reality.

The way you analyzed this information is a lot like how I would. Difference is...

Statistic as a staistic is irrelevant. The point is that I am limiting a person to a time span. So people usually feel traped when talking to me. Exactly since I give little flexibility. Since I usually start thinking about people from the stand point of when they are going to die and then I procede to what they could possibly do while they are alive.
So i am wondering why people feel uncomfortable thinking about their lives from this perspective.

Me personally, I don't like to look that far ahead in the future. I place more emphasis on the statistics part of the argument, but it seems you don't. You are not limiting a person to a timespan, you are just making an analytical guess as to how that person's life would turn out.

I am uncomfortable thinking about my life in this perspective because unfortunately (or fortunately) there are so many other variables to take into account that have not been mentioned yet. Also as I stated before, I don't like to look that far ahead in the future, perhaps because it takes my mind off my present responsibilities and activities.

 

[Poki]

The way you analyzed this information is a lot like how I would. Difference is...




Me personally, I don't like to look that far ahead in the future. I place more emphasis on the statistics part of the argument, but it seems you don't. You are not limiting a person to a timespan, you are just making an analytical guess as to how that person's life would turn out.

I am uncomfortable thinking about my life in this perspective because unfortunately (or fortunately) there are so many other variables to take into account that have not been mentioned yet. Also as I stated before, I don't like to look that far ahead in the future, perhaps because it takes my mind off my present responsibilities and activities.

I think this is the S/N devide. While SJ types plan heavily they plan more for the present. NJs plan more for the future.