User Tag List

First 3111213141523 Last

Results 121 to 130 of 237

  1. #121
    Glycerine
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    So strong I and N are the only functions that don't bother you?
    haha I forgot to mention them but it's just mostly extreme people. So pretty much unbalanced people...

  2. #122
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Leysing View Post
    I somehow just can't get along with INTJs, no matter how hard I try.
    I tend to think this is more their fault than yours. INTJs don't *want* to get along with most people; in fact, most social ritual you see them observing is a very rehearsed and methodical mask used for getting what they want out of people.

  3. #123
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ditz View Post
    Ugggh, ESFJs, or at least one particular ESFJ. Superficial, judgemental, controlling, and selfish. Oh and trying to teach them logic ... I was a logic tutor for a different ESFJ (I think) for a short time, and I might have well just rattled on at her in russian for an hour. She was a really nice lady though.

    I don't dislike ESFJs though. My mom is an ESFJ and I love her more than anyting. They can just be sooo frustrating sometimes.
    I can see where some ESFJs could get really annoying, but what always sets them apart from ESTJs for me is that they almost always seem to really have the best interest of others at heart. They may be merrily strolling straight down the road to Hell, but at least their intentions are typically good.

    ESFJs may continue to nag the shit out of you about things that they simply lack the Ti and Ni to really grasp fully, but to me, ESTJs are worse because they nag you about these things out of more selfish reasons. It genuinely pisses them off when you break tradition and they seem to have this sort of cathartic need to punish the wicked--not out of revenge for the people they've hurt emotionally (as is common for ESFJ), but out of simple, petty anger that you tried to fuck with the system, and as such you need to be taught a lesson.

    THAT shit pisses me off.
    Last edited by simulatedworld; 12-22-2008 at 09:23 AM.

  4. #124
    Glycerine
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    Actually, I wouldn't be so sure. INFJs would base their ethical standards on relating to others effectively, and would actually be more flexible than they seemed (since they're really Ni dominant, and Fe is only auxiliary). INFPs actually have much stronger ideas, that are based on their own subjective sense of what's right and wrong, which they constantly judge everything based on... but they try to change the angle they approach the situation with in order to seem flexible. Inside, they're far more rigid and unyielding. Don't be fooled. They may compromise and flex on the specific outward expression of something, but they are unwilling to really listen to anything that challenges their Fi values.

    I've seen an INFJ actually completely reverse their position on something soon after hearing an argument presented in just the right way, even if they had just condemned the person presenting it for behaving that way. The thing is, just because an INFJ condemns you outwardly right away based on an Fe value they've picked up doesn't mean they won't actually be forced to consider (with Ni+Ti) what you say and change their opinion if you do offer a valid argument. Remember, an INFJ is a dominant N... and an INFP is a dominant F.

    Of course, perhaps we just know different INFPs and INFJs. Or perhaps the INFPs I knew were just manifesting their shadow very strongly at the point I interacted with them.

    I'm totally like this. I will sometimes quickly pass my judgement on something and will argue with people about it. Then I will process all the information gained from it and will compromise about 95% of the time. Even if I quickly pass judgement, I'm just as quick to accept an opposing POV.

  5. #125
    Let's make this showy! raz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    LoLz
    Posts
    2,523

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Hmm, let's see....what type stifles people's playful nature and tends to automatically, outwardly and vocally dismiss anything that doesn't fit into their very singular worldview?

    You guessed it, ESTJ for the win. Seriously I'm starting to think we just need to round these people up and stick them all on an island somewhere, where they can all scream at each other until their little worlds collapse and their heads all explode from too much contact with other value systems.
    Ehh. ISTJs do the same. We just aren't as vocal as ESTJs. That's what bothers me about ESTJs. They're vocal about the things that I usually keep to myself.

    I dismiss playful nature. I only put up with the ENFPs because of the mounting sexual attraction.


  6. #126
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    the liking everyone equally if they're happy comment seems like a cop out to me. types each have certain general trends. obviously some types have general trends you prefer more than other types...
    I agree that it's kind of a cop out. The people here claiming that they don't have any biases whatsoever when it comes to behavioral trends in other types are just trying to be politically correct and avoid sounding like they're singling out any particular groups.

    I say, it's fine to single out a group if that group's general characteristics are the things that are annoying you. It's NOT fine to posit that those general group characteristics apply to EVERY member of the group--I'll talk all day about how much I hate ESTJs but I have a few ESTJ friends that I like and get along at least reasonably well with. So I can't reasonably say, "All people with the ESTJ type are complete assholes and I hate them", but it's perfectly reasonable to say, "I have noticed common threads of behavior between many (though clearly not ALL) ESTJ people that I have met and here are the things that annoy me about them..."

    I really think the political correctness movement has done a lot to neuter the effectiveness of generalizations in argumentation. Generalizing isn't inherently bad; it's just assumptions that generalizations automatically apply to every single member of a group that are bad.

    For instance, time to be a polemicist for a moment: Black people are better than white people at basketball.

    OH SHIT WHAT A RACIST HE'S CLEARLY SAYING THAT NOT ONLY IS IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANY WHITE PERSON TO EVER SUCCEED IN BASKETBALL, BUT THAT BLACK PEOPLE ARE STUPID AND IGNORANT AND CAN'T POSSIBLY EVER BE INTERESTED THINGS OTHER THAN BASKETBALL! RACIST PRICK!!!


    Well no, I'm just basing that on the fact that a great majority of professional basketball players are black. You can assume that my statement had genetic connotations, but it didn't. Of course there have been and will continue to be very successful white basketball players, so I don't need the Lifetime Special Inspirational Background of a white dude with Down's Syndrome who, through sheer perseverance, shattered racial stereotypes against all odds and became a great basketball player. (I also don't need the "my black father is horrible at basketball wtf are you talking about????")

    Thing is, a generalization doesn't need to apply to every single individual person in the group it represents to have any validity; it only needs to represent enough of them that it's useful in adding strength to one side or the other of an inductive reasoning problem. I really can't believe how many people don't get this concept--even if it's documented that 99% of troggles are snorfs, stating it as a general "troggles are often snorfs" will STILL elicit an angry response from some family member of a troggle who ISN'T actually a snorf, as if this one case study somehow devalues the rest of the data from the the other 99% of troggles.

    Seriously guys, cut the PC crap.

    I'm sure there's a variety of socioeconomic and cultural reasons that the average black man is better than the average white man at basketball, but I don't need to go into them. The fact still is that, for whatever reason, basketball is a sport that's still more dominated by blacks than by whites.

    Just pointing out that it's ok to generalize as long as you fully understand the inherent limitations of a generalization in general.

  7. #127
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Just pointing out that it's ok to generalize as long as you fully understand the inherent limitations of a generalization in general.
    Absolutely!!!

    Generalizing is a type or way of thinking that we *all* engage in.

    We observe the world and we make note of any patterns that emerge or inconsistencies.

    To categorize is essentially to generalize.

    I can't stand people who can't stand people who make generalizations.

    Women, in general, are shorter than men in any given population, and NO SHIT some women are taller than men, duh!!!

    But if you have a family consisting of both men and women, the men, on average, will be several inches taller than the women.
    `
    'Cause you can't handle me...

    "A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens

    "That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is."

    Veritatem dies aperit

    Ride si sapis

    Intelligentle sparkles

  8. #128
    EvanTheClown (ETC) Clownmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    2
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    965

    Default

    This topic, in the bonfire (instead of NT rationale) with a closed poll, would give better results imo.

    Because you can't spell "Slaughter" without "Laughter"

  9. #129
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    Yes, but we can't go and say "All ENFPs aren't annoying." Only "Most..."

  10. #130
    Senior Member BlahBlahNounBlah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    1,458

    Default

    ESTJ

    ESFJ

    ESTP

Similar Threads

  1. [JCF] What type do you think I am? Most likely IxFP.
    By DBPhenomE in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06-18-2017, 06:51 AM
  2. What type do you try to look like when you are obviously not?
    By Elfboy in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 09-13-2015, 04:26 AM
  3. What type do I seem like to you?
    By gromit in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-20-2014, 08:05 PM
  4. [MBTItm] xNFPs what types do you feel understand you like no other.
    By angelhair45 in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 07-05-2010, 09:17 AM
  5. [INTJ] INTJs which NT type do you least like?
    By Riva in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 04-27-2009, 07:31 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