Fuckin' Js.
He'd wanted to post that for a week, but kept procrastinating.You're jealous.
He'd wanted to post that for a week, but kept procrastinating.
I've known FMWarner for longer than I've known any of you people, so I can greet him in your thread if I wish.
I probably am more numb than neutral. I feel quite unresponsive to the daily events that are going on around me. Things that evoke feeling in others, leave me feeling nothing. Not happy or sad. . . just nothing.
I was thinking as I read this, that I feel insulated from things going on around me. As though very little gets through to make a profound impact. That would be more like numb, because when it does affect me then I am rarely neutral.
Does that make sense?
Yes, I would say that I'm the same way, but I always like to think that I maintain my objectivity despite how profoundly affected I am by something. Whether that's true or not, I'm not sure.
That's an ideal I developed as an adolescent when facing some extreme emotional scenarios. It felt like I learned to think in two concurrent streams, one that experienced the pain, and one that observed it. I always had this second, observing self that would analyze my experiencing self. It has allowed me to have a very high emotional tolerance. I can experience rather extreme states of emotion and still function rationally and as needed. There are many scenarios that get to other people that do not phase me at all when I'm thinking primarily as an observer. It's why I rarely get offended or angry.
(It's actually a trait rather unlike the rest of my INF family. From what I can tell they don't have a concurrent observing self. Mine first developed clearly when I was away from home for the first time at school at age 16. When I try to help people who are depressed, it usually involves helping them hook into that objective self. Some, like my brother, can't do it.)
That's an ideal I developed as an adolescent when facing some extreme emotional scenarios. It felt like I learned to think in two concurrent streams, one that experienced the pain, and one that observed it. I always had this second, observing self that would analyze my experiencing self. It has allowed me to have a very high emotional tolerance. I can experience rather extreme states of emotion and still function rationally and as needed. There are many scenarios that get to other people that do not phase me at all when I'm thinking primarily as an observer. It's why I rarely get offended or angry.
I've known FMWarner for longer than I've known any of you people, so I can greet him in your thread if I wish.
How many cognitive processes are there?The tertiary cognitive process of the INTJ is Introverted Feeling (Fi). It is referred to by Jung as, "child" or "Puer" meaning "boy" in Latin; puella meaning "girl". Jung used these terms to represent the archetypal child in us all. In this context, it means that the third position Cognitive Process is accessed in a "childlike" way. That is, it's not as well-developed as the top two (Ni and Te), and is prone to shifts in perspective, in Beebe's terms, it can be "inflated" or "deflated". Not as dramatic as manic-depressive mood swings, but somewhat similar.
In the case of INTJ, it means that our deeply-held inner values are usually not as well developed as our Ni and Te. Consequently, it's possible that we can become alternatively petulant or grandiose depending on whether our values are being questioned or supported.
I'm curious as to how other INTJs on this forum view this statement. Have you ever thought about how you view these shifts in perspective, e.g., highs/lows? Have you worried that you may have Bipolar tendencies or have you simply recognized this as part of who you are?
Sorry that does not follow.
You knowing him well does not have anything to do with permissibility to derail a thread.
Ok, this sounds reasonable. Greeting users does not derail a thread because the content of your post does not inspire others to change the subject of discussion.
The problem that I had wasn't with a particular act on your part which may go against the rules...but seemingly an arbitrary premise you've declared as a justification for such act...
Now, after you've given it a proper explanation..I have no qualms...(Though it should also be said that you knowing him well has nothing to do with it being appropriate for you to wave at him, as we now see that waving at any user is appropriate under such circumstances as this isnt a derailment...I guess the part I took issue with wasnt the act of waving but that you said it is ok only because you know him well..)
Sorry about the minor derailment on my part...
An argument's task is to clarify or discover, not to appease your prejudices..
An argument's task is to clarify or discover, not to appease your prejudices..