User Tag List

First 678910 Last

Results 71 to 80 of 141

  1. #71
    Senior Member LeftKick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    5 sp
    Posts
    150

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffster View Post
    On forums about physical stuff - like sports, music, cars, porn, video games. Not as many on forums about psychological mumbo jumbo.
    +1

    I spend most of my time on my car related sites,or doing research on whatever project I'm wrapped up in that day.I don't usually have any great insight to add to the topic. Back on topic, there isn't a whole lot that gets me mad. If it's annoying, I don't read the thread. Is there a list somewhere that shows how many people from each type of personality are registered users?

    This is definitely not a mumbo jumbo site. I've finally realized I'm not alone in the world of ISTP's. What I am is what I am. I'm not supposed to try to be like Extroverts,and they aren't supposed to try to be like me. It's liberating.

  2. #72
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    No, this forum doesn't piss me off AT ALL, EVER!

    I mean, isn't it always fun when some self-appointed N (inevitably) insinuates that you're wrong in an argument because you're SP and therefore incapable of understanding what they, as beings with privileged access to truth, have to say? How can it not always be pleasant to be told that you're "limited" and "can't see past your nose" just purely because you're listed as an S? Honestly, who's bitter about that kind of thing? I just can't fathom it.

    It's also really fun when any artist with a smidgen of creativity or "difference" is deemed likelier to be an N. Oh, as is being told that all philosophers throughout time were N.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  3. #73
    veteran attention whore Jeffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    6,727

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by penny89 View Post
    Most of the S stereotypes I've seen here come from Keirsey's book. That's what happens when you say "Type X does behaviour Y all the time, without exception. Let's write a description about it!" You get people wrongly assuming, "I do behaviour Y so I must be type X."
    The problem with this assertion is that nowhere in any of Keirsey's books does he say "Type X does behaviour Y all the time, without exception." So your point about the validity of something ignorant rings a bit ironic to me.
    Jeffster Illustrates the Artisan Temperament <---- click here

    "I like the sigs with quotes in them from other forum members." -- Oberon

    The SP Spazz Youtube Channel

  4. #74
    All Natural! All Good!
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffster View Post
    The problem with this assertion is that nowhere in any of Keirsey's books does he say "Type X does behaviour Y all the time, without exception." So your point about the validity of something ignorant rings a bit ironic to me.
    It was an exaggeration. Reading it over again, I still don't see how it could reasonably be interpreted otherwise. Except, of course, by a fox with a Keirsey-pushing agenda.

    He does feed some stereotypes, though. For example, SJ = closeminded, religious, braindead moron who works for the government or some other large organization, without a single original thought.
    Strychnine is all-natural,
    So strychnine is all good.
    It's Godly and righteous,
    So eat it, you should.
    Who are you to refuse nature's will?


    Don't use the multiquote; it was planted by the devil to deceive us.

    Social Role: Asscrack/Piece of Shit/Public Defecator/Spiteful Urinator


    A different type everyday - so no need to type me anymore. But feel free to enjoy the sound of your own asscrack.

  5. #75
    veteran attention whore Jeffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    6,727

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strychnine View Post
    It was an exaggeration. Reading it over again, I still don't see how it could reasonably be interpreted otherwise. Except, of course, by a fox with a Keirsey-pushing agenda.

    He does feed some stereotypes, though. For example, SJ = closeminded, religious, braindead moron who works for the government or some other large organization, without a single original thought.
    Once again, something that's nowhere in the text. So, that's your interpretation, and a pretty silly one, considering the amount of time Keirsey spends talking about how SJs basically hold society together. So, it seems like you are the one with an agenda - to intentionally spread misinterpretations. I don't know why you have that purpose, but hey, whatever floats your boat. All I did was correct an obvious falsehood, I don't think that gives me a "Keirsey-pushing agenda."
    Jeffster Illustrates the Artisan Temperament <---- click here

    "I like the sigs with quotes in them from other forum members." -- Oberon

    The SP Spazz Youtube Channel

  6. #76
    Senior Member King sns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    6,748

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strychnine View Post
    It was an exaggeration. Reading it over again, I still don't see how it could reasonably be interpreted otherwise. Except, of course, by a fox with a Keirsey-pushing agenda.

    He does feed some stereotypes, though. For example, SJ = closeminded, religious, braindead moron who works for the government or some other large organization, without a single original thought.
    Really? I haven't seen that in the descriptions. I read the descriptions before coming here, and drew my own opinions and didn't learn all these negative stereotypes until I logged on here. I was like couldn't have drawn that from the descriptions. Though I do agree that the descriptions can be so... descriptive, that sometimes it looks like there's little room for guessing. It can appear from the descriptions that people do fit in little boxes. I didn't read very deep into the descriptions though. (Didn't buy the book.) So I can't say for sure that you're wrong.
    06/13 10:51:03 five sounds: you!!!
    06/13 10:51:08 shortnsweet: no you!!
    06/13 10:51:12 shortnsweet: go do your things and my things too!
    06/13 10:51:23 five sounds: oh hell naw
    06/13 10:51:55 shortnsweet: !!!!
    06/13 10:51:57 shortnsweet: (cries)
    06/13 10:52:19 RiftsWRX: You two are like furbies stuck in a shoe box

    My Nohari
    My Johari
    by sns.

  7. #77
    All Natural! All Good!
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffster View Post
    Once again, something that's nowhere in the text. So, that's your interpretation, and a pretty silly one, considering the amount of time Keirsey spends talking about how SJs basically hold society together. So, it seems like you are the one with an agenda - to intentionally spread misinterpretations. I don't know why you have that purpose, but hey, whatever floats your boat. All I did was correct an obvious falsehood, I don't think that gives me a "Keirsey-pushing agenda."
    I'm reading into the text, not just reading the surface and taking it at face value. I don't learn anything that way.

    I'm also not intentionally doing anything. I'm posting my opinions. If Keirsey is that wonderful, people should see that I'm wrong when they read his books for themselves.

    About your Keirsey-pushing agenda, I was basing that also on your past posts on this forum (which are available through your profile). I also used to read the pleaseunderstandme.org forum, where I noticed you are a member (Assuming your username is also Jeffster there).

    Good thing I have my book here: Please Understand Me 2. I'm going to open it at random and quote.

    pg. 222 about "The Guardian Helpmate":
    "SJs tend to regard premarital sex in moral terms, as if chastity were good and sexuality evil. They also speak of premarital sex as a matter of sanitation, referring to a virgin as someone 'pure', 'clean', or 'spotless', and picturing someone sexually active as 'dirty', 'trashy', or 'stained'."

    Next page:
    "And what Guardian father has not urged his daughter to get the marriage contract signed before giving away the goods -- warning, 'Why buy the cow when the milk's free?'"

    "Female Guardians, in particular, usually have only limited sexual experience before they marry, even in an age of sexual freedom. For SJs, there is always the unexpressed attitude that 'nice girls don't'. If they do, it is likely that peer pressure led them into sexual activity because it was the thing to do."

    i.e. Guardians, especially female ones, are so dumb that they succumb to peer pressure. i.e. they can't think for themselves long enough to make their own personal decisions about whether or not to have sex.

    Under "Guardian Married Life" (pg. 224):
    "And while Idealists and Rationals might consider sex a mutually pleasing activity, Guardians often view intercourse as a service to be delivered by the female, performed dutifully and on request, presumably in return for social and economic security. Because of this, an SJ female is likely to place the sexual needs of her mate over any she might have, perhaps seeing sex as a wifely duty rather than a pleasure, and concerning herself more with her husband's physical comfort and welfare than with her own sexual pleasure."

    Is he saying SJs advocate marital rape? I hope not. What if two SJ females are married or in a relationship with one another? Is he suggesting that neither one would initiate sex, ever? I mean, sure, it might be a non-sexual relationship. But that's rare. The book is also full of phrases like "members of the opposite sex", which is an incorrect and heteronormative assumption.

    So I opened the book at random and saw puke-worthy bullshit on the two pages I read. I'm sorry dude, I can't advocate such a book.

    (For context, this book was written in 1998. Not 1898!)


    Quote Originally Posted by shortnsweet View Post
    Really? I haven't seen that in the descriptions. I read the descriptions before coming here, and drew my own opinions and didn't learn all these negative stereotypes until I logged on here. I was like couldn't have drawn that from the descriptions. Though I do agree that the descriptions can be so... descriptive, that sometimes it looks like there's little room for guessing. It can appear from the descriptions that people do fit in little boxes. I didn't read very deep into the descriptions though. (Didn't buy the book.) So I can't say for sure that you're wrong.
    The internet Keirsey descriptions are much better than the ones in the book. They are also shorter. That said, whether I'm wrong or right is kind of irrelevant, to be honest. It does not sound like you guys are reading into the descriptions. I may be reading things that aren't there, but when I see other people here coming up with the same things independently, I have to think I'm not totally off base.
    Strychnine is all-natural,
    So strychnine is all good.
    It's Godly and righteous,
    So eat it, you should.
    Who are you to refuse nature's will?


    Don't use the multiquote; it was planted by the devil to deceive us.

    Social Role: Asscrack/Piece of Shit/Public Defecator/Spiteful Urinator


    A different type everyday - so no need to type me anymore. But feel free to enjoy the sound of your own asscrack.

  8. #78
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    You're bound to get gross generalizations of some types if one person does the research. Keirsey is an INTP. As well meaning as he might be, he's not going to understand SJs as well as others. Same goes for Model A/Aushra Augusta in Socionics. She was an ENTp, and had some faulty notions about types and functions outside her quadra... some of which she humbly corrected herself later. MBTI sprung from the research of an INFP, INFJ, and ENFP, but at least, on top of that, it's undergone decades of research from outsiders and committee, comprising many types. It still makes mistakes, but at least the process is democratic.

  9. #79
    All Natural! All Good!
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    You're bound to get gross generalizations of some types if one person does the research. Keirsey is an INTP. As well meaning as he might be, he's not going to understand SJs as well as others. Same goes for Model A/Aushra Augusta in Socionics. She was an ENTp, and had some faulty notions about types and functions outside her quadra... some of which she humbly corrected herself later. MBTI sprung from the research of an INFP, INFJ, and ENFP, but at least, on top of that, it's undergone decades of research from outsiders and committee, comprising many types. It still makes mistakes, but at least the process is democratic.
    I see your point. That said, Keirsey's generalizations (at least some of them. see my previous post for examples) don't fit ANY of the SJs I know. I'm guessing they don't fit the majority of SJs my age (20). Which means they're not applicable to SJs under a certain age, which means that as time passes, they will be more and more wrong.

    Yeah, MBTI seems more 'open-source', like everyone can take a look at what composes it and make/suggest/offer improvements. Plus there are studies done using it. Whereas Keirsey is less like that. I mean, there are many, many authors that have extrapolated on MBTI/JCF with their own ideas. Keirsey authors are pretty limited. I think there's only Keirsey himself and Stephen Montgomery (People Patterns). I'm not sure why that is? There's definitely less to 'play' with in Keirsey though, plus the accuracy issues, etc. MBTI seems self-correcting, even if the corrections are slow. It evolves. Whereas Keirsey seems stuck in some past era.
    Strychnine is all-natural,
    So strychnine is all good.
    It's Godly and righteous,
    So eat it, you should.
    Who are you to refuse nature's will?


    Don't use the multiquote; it was planted by the devil to deceive us.

    Social Role: Asscrack/Piece of Shit/Public Defecator/Spiteful Urinator


    A different type everyday - so no need to type me anymore. But feel free to enjoy the sound of your own asscrack.

  10. #80
    veteran attention whore Jeffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    6,727

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strychnine View Post
    I'm reading into the text, not just reading the surface and taking it at face value. I don't learn anything that way.
    Sounds like that's your problem right there. If it takes you making things up in your head to learn, you have a learning disability.

    I'm also not intentionally doing anything. I'm posting my opinions.
    Uhhh..so you're accidentally posting your opinions? Assigning your own alternate meanings to words that already have meanings isn't opinion. It's distortion.

    If Keirsey is that wonderful, people should see that I'm wrong when they read his books for themselves.
    True, but as long as people are going to post misinformation, there's nothing wrong with me posting corrections. Obviously, i too hope people will read the books for themselves. It's a pity there's so much re-writing of it by people online.

    About your Keirsey-pushing agenda, I was basing that also on your past posts on this forum (which are available through your profile). I also used to read the pleaseunderstandme.org forum, where I noticed you are a member (Assuming your username is also Jeffster there).
    Do the founders of Typology Central have a "Keirsey-pushing agenda" too? Since they set up these sections of the forum based on his temperament categories, it would seem that they at least grant his theories some validity. I didn't join this site with any agenda to "push" anything, I'm just posting my views just as anyone else does.

    Good thing I have my book here: Please Understand Me 2. I'm going to open it at random and quote.
    Thanks for the quotes, however none of them state anything about "SJ = closeminded, religious, braindead moron who works for the government or some other large organization, without a single original thought" as you asserted earlier.

    If you said that the norms of society have changed and Keirsey's specific assertions about the common views of SJs seem a bit outdated, then I would actually agree with you there. And there have been topics about that here as well as Keirsey's own forum. But it's a big leap from "societal standards have changed, and SJs remain the standard-bearers" to "This entire text loses all validity because some behaviors have changed."


    Is he saying SJs advocate marital rape? I hope not. What if two SJ females are married or in a relationship with one another? Is he suggesting that neither one would initiate sex, ever? I mean, sure, it might be a non-sexual relationship. But that's rare. The book is also full of phrases like "members of the opposite sex", which is an incorrect and heteronormative assumption.
    Oh COME ON now. You want to talk about "pukeworthy bullshit." "Heteronormative assumption?" So, do you advocate re-writing every book to include the phrase "...or a same-sex relationship" in it somewhere? Wow...that's pretty ridiculous. The fact remains that the overwhelming majority of romantic relationships are between members of the opposite sex, and not stopping to put an asterisk on texts about relationship in no way invalidates the millions of books written about such topics.

    So I opened the book at random and saw puke-worthy bullshit on the two pages I read. I'm sorry dude, I can't advocate such a book.
    Hey, no problem. I don't advocate The Feminazi Handbook to Relationships either, so there we are. Thing is, I don't think it's difficult for most people (including SJs) to realize that the overall concepts of a theory don't go out the window just because certain specific standards change over time.


    The internet Keirsey descriptions are much better than the ones in the book. They are also shorter. That said, whether I'm wrong or right is kind of irrelevant, to be honest. It does not sound like you guys are reading into the descriptions. I may be reading things that aren't there, but when I see other people here coming up with the same things independently, I have to think I'm not totally off base.
    Sounds like you might need to hand in your SP card. In another topic, you said you don't like to be touched and here you say you read into everything. The prognosis is grim.

    For the record, I am not in the employ of Keirsey nor do I worship him or consider him without flaws in his theories. I think my issue is with people who can't keep their critiques to what he has actually said. It's almost as if some here (and I'm not saying this about you specifically) feel like Keirsey is a threat to them somehow, because they seem to spend so much time trying to discredit him instead of simply advocating for what they think is a better system.
    Jeffster Illustrates the Artisan Temperament <---- click here

    "I like the sigs with quotes in them from other forum members." -- Oberon

    The SP Spazz Youtube Channel

Similar Threads

  1. [ENTP] So any other ENTPs get along with the SPs or feel more like them???
    By Chilichimichanga in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 10-05-2017, 11:57 AM
  2. [SP] Any other SPs like this game lol
    By Rainne in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-06-2010, 09:04 PM
  3. [INFP] Do any other INFP's feel like this?
    By Soar337 in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-02-2009, 07:08 PM
  4. [NT] Do any other NTs(INTPs) act this way?
    By Nizy in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 09-18-2009, 01:08 AM
  5. [MBTItm] Do any other N's replay events?
    By Matt22 in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-21-2007, 07:53 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