Which do you value more;

[Earl Grey]

Which do you value more,

If you are seen and accepted as being multifaceted, deep, complex, and unique,
or if you are seen and accepted as being simple, predictable, stable, and direct/What You See Is What You Get?

Why?
And, what's your type?

Do you think people should be more open, as-is, and honest, or is it better (in any way) that they hide a part of themselves?

 

[Madboot]

One can be both complex and stable and direct all at the same time. I am an INTJ 5w6 sp/sx. I value individualism, and I don't of a person who knows me who would call me simple. As for predictable, I suppose I am not very predictable to people who only casually know me (i.e. most people). But those closest to me usually know where I stand on most matters, though I surprise even my wife sometimes. I think people should be mostly honest, but that doesn't mean they have to be an open book. I voted for valuing depth and complexity because those are the type of people I most enjoy knowing, but I also value the other side of the coin as well. I find its not about which is superior, for neither is. It's about finding the good in people. Admittedly I've had to look pretty damn hard with some people and still have yet to spot something, but most people have at least one admirable characteristic.

 

[/DG/]

I'm confused at why "predictable" is supposed to be a positive trait here. One can be predictable in good or bad ways, depending on said person. More often than not, it just reads as a synonym for "boring."

 

[Luminous]

I value being true to myself and how I feel more than how I am seen, which isn't to say I don't value how I am seen, but I don't do things to be seen any particular way. It's more that it hurts me if people see me in some way I don't see myself, or don't want to see myself.

I appreciate when people take the time to get to know me at more than a surface level, so to be more direct in answering your question: I would rather be seen as multifaceted, deep, and complex.

Do you think people should be more open, as-is, and honest, or is it better (in any way) that they hide a part of themselves?

I think people should do what they feel comfortable with, largely. I am a pretty private person and I don't think people need to know everything about me simply because it's none of their business and I do not need their judgments or opinions about many things. I do not refrain from sharing things for lack of honesty, but because I value myself and do not want to share deep parts of myself with everyone.

The question is complex. There are instances where people should attempt to be as honest as possible and instances where it isn't relevant, it doesn't matter, and it may only hurt things if they are overly as-is and honest (like how annoying do you find people who tell you everything they do and eat and think on social media? they are hurting themselves, or at least their relationship with you, by revealing so much).

 

[Coriolis]

One can be both complex and stable and direct all at the same time. I am an INTJ 5w6 sp/sx. I value individualism, and I don't of a person who knows me who would call me simple. As for predictable, I suppose I am not very predictable to people who only casually know me (i.e. most people). But those closest to me usually know where I stand on most matters, though I surprise even my wife sometimes. I think people should be mostly honest, but that doesn't mean they have to be an open book. I voted for valuing depth and complexity because those are the type of people I most enjoy knowing, but I also value the other side of the coin as well. I find its not about which is superior, for neither is. It's about finding the good in people. Admittedly I've had to look pretty damn hard with some people and still have yet to spot something, but most people have at least one admirable characteristic.

I agree with most of this, perhaps not surprising as I am very similar in type. I make a distinction between honesty and disclosure. If I tell you something, it will be the truth. I never lie. But I keep most things to myself, so what I do tell you will be only a small fraction of what there is to know, at least about me. What I choose to share will be based on the nature of our relationship, and what must be shared to accomplish whatever the purpose at hand is. If this looks like a cost/benefit analysis with "need to know" weighted heavily, it's because it is.

Which do you value more,

If you are seen and accepted as being multifaceted, deep, complex, and unique,
or if you are seen and accepted as being simple, predictable, stable, and direct/What You See Is What You Get?

I prefer to be stable but unpredictable, however contradictory that may seem. If someone can accurately predict what I will do in most situations, they know me too well. I have failed to hold my cards close enough to my chest. But if I tell you something, you can take me at my word. If I make a promise, I will keep it. If I say I will do it, I will do it and do it well.

 

[rav3n]

No preference for how others perceive me except that it's way beyond cool when someone really does understand me.

 

[Neal Caffreynated]

Deep and complex of course, it makes things more interesting

In my opinion the world isn't just black and white so even what seems direct has a deeper meaning or stable isn't 100% sure. That's what makes psychology more challenging because there is always an unpredictable part about people...even if some are an open book.
When you're good at reading people, there's a high chance they'll react like you guessed but nothing is that simple. It's like a card game because you can be the best at it but you won't be absolutely certain of the outcome

 

[Obfuscate]

the phrasing of the poll will lead to awnsers biased towards deep and complex... neither predictable or "as is" have positive associations...

 

[hurl3y4456]

Well, we are all unique, whether it be personality, interests, or chemical composition. Also, being deep, complex or multifaceted is all relative...The majority of people are clustered around the average and the minorities tend toward the extremes in terms of mental capacity....Therefore, there will exists those who will deem us as simplistic and/or predictable relative to them. Also, one may run into obstacles/resistance if they trek deeply down a particular path because their natural inclinations lie elsewhere. Yet, other paths may lead to a smooth ride...Thus, it is imperative not only to understand our strengths and weaknesses, but to accept our limitations. That is, not project our ego towards the abyss.

 

[Cellmold]

I always sensed that depth is a foolish aspect to lust after.

Since wanting it implies the opposite of depth in oneself.

Personally I prefer the stable and the predictable because people undervalue the kind of practical aptitude and calm-headedness that comes from being that way inclined. I do not consider myself deep or complex, as any complexity comes from an inability to manage my emotions effectively, which I then hide for fear of judgement and how it will affect my relationships with others, not some mysterious essence guarding the doors to my immortal soul.

Predictability is also synonymous with trust and reliability. Those who believe it is boring, however, I tend to suspect are those with easily bored dispositions, who need constant drama and excitement in order to provide momentary relief from their inundated brains, which are probably overly-stimulated and exposed to unhealthy levels of activity in order to feed the ever-growing cycle of dopamine hits.

The problem is people misinterpret such questions and take them too literally; they are about the nature of an individual, not the content of their actions. Is there any reason to assume that someone cannot be predictable and stable of character, yet still engage with new and interesting endeavours?
I don't trust what is hidden and complex, because I see it as a form of deception, a way for the arrogant and conceited to attempt to control the efforts of those who are more capable and useful.

The most narcissistic people I've ever met were those who hid their selfish & illogical, harmful actions, behind the wall of claiming it's because others 'don't understand me'.

 

[Lib]

My best-loved wickedness and art is it, that my silence hath learned not to betray itself by silence.
ON THE OLIVE-MOUNT, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

 

[Z Buck McFate]

No preference for how others perceive me except that it's way beyond cool when someone really does understand me.

Amen to this.

And it's difficult to know exactly how "predictable" is supposed to be understood here; my first thought was that I'd absolutely prefer it to duplicitous. But mostly I don't care, because "those who matter won't mind, and those who mind won't matter" and all that.

 

[Virtual ghost]

I am afraid that this is too simplistic question for me to just answer it.

 

[Jaguar]

Accepted? I don't care.

 

[rav3n]

Amen to this.

And it's difficult to know exactly how "predictable" is supposed to be understood here; my first thought was that I'd absolutely prefer it to duplicitous. But mostly I don't care, because "those who matter won't mind, and those who mind won't matter" and all that.

I've given up caring since people see what they want to see.

 

[Maou]

I'm not concerned with how others see me that often, unless I respect them, or become too aware of how much people dislike me. Which sometimes sends me into an existential depression lmao. I do value complexity and uniqueness. But am fully aware I probably am neither.

 

[Morpeko]

Which do you value more,

If you are seen and accepted as being multifaceted, deep, complex, and unique,
or if you are seen and accepted as being simple, predictable, stable, and direct/What You See Is What You Get?

Well, I voted for the first option, but there are qualities in the second option that I truly prefer.

I've never really met anyone who wants to be seen as "predictable," or even "stable." I can see why people value "simplicity," but I'm sure there's a better word for that.

I value depth and uniqueness for sure. More than most qualities. However, being direct is just as important, and I don't think that it's contradictory to those things.

One of my biggest values is authenticity. So while I voted for the first option, I'd much rather talk to a person who is simple but honest about it than a person who is "complex" but purposely hiding things, especially to make themselves appear better.

Do you think people should be more open, as-is, and honest, or is it better (in any way) that they hide a part of themselves?

Therefore, I generally think more people should be open, as-is, and honest. This is a hard question, though. It depends on why a person is hiding parts of themselves. If it turns out the reason why is they want to make themselves look better, I'll certainly be judging. But I understand need for privacy (which I have as well). I do understand that I'm never going to be able to see everything about a person in one glance or one meeting, and I love the mystery of seeing new layers of a multifaceted person.

 

[Lark]

Which do you value more,

If you are seen and accepted as being multifaceted, deep, complex, and unique,
or if you are seen and accepted as being simple, predictable, stable, and direct/What You See Is What You Get?

Why?
And, what's your type?

Do you think people should be more open, as-is, and honest, or is it better (in any way) that they hide a part of themselves?

Context matter a lot, at least I've learned this, I like to be as-is and honest but its not always safe to be that way and "holding your peace" or deciding not to be an "open book" can be recommended too, not because of any sort of propriety or manners, although maybe, but mainly because of whether or not its safe to do so.

There's a lot of unsafe people out there that thrive upon others being less wary or conducting themselves in a less wary manner around about them. I'm not saying we should all adopt that approach, nor even less that it is a natural one or should be validated. I'm just saying in dealing with those individuals and in those contexts its something to be mindful/aware of.

 

[Lark]

I've given up caring since people see what they want to see.

In some sense I understand what you mean and I think its also reflected in the posts of a few others in this thread, its one thing to stress about how others will see you but another to be unaware of, or give too little thought to, the fact that, objectively speaking, you are always being judged by others. I'm not saying that's how you act or that you are suggesting this is a good idea, just making the observation as it was prompted by your post and those of others in the thread.

 

[Lark]

Amen to this.

And it's difficult to know exactly how "predictable" is supposed to be understood here; my first thought was that I'd absolutely prefer it to duplicitous. But mostly I don't care, because "those who matter won't mind, and those who mind won't matter" and all that.

These are good sentiments and I definitely agree with them, on the other hand, I cant see that being a popular view at a job interview