Thalassa
Permabanned
- Joined
- May 3, 2009
- Messages
- 25,183
- MBTI Type
- ISFP
- Enneagram
- 6w7
- Instinctual Variant
- sx
"Advocator" isn't a word.
Yes it is.
"Advocator" isn't a word.
I was allowing for the possibility that maybe the statement was in reference to a non English language.Yes it is.
"Advocator" isn't a word.
"Advocator" isn't a word.
It's bad enough that this is a pointless comment to begin with, but to be dead wrong as well? Hahahaha.
WTF? So if one is a minority, one should automatically bow to others? Should African Americans and Mexican Americans be more accomodating of whites?
Should gays be more accomodating of straights then straights are of them?
I don't like your logic.
Oops missed this post.
I'm pretty sure we're missing on definitions here, but I think I may also disagree a bit --
Just acting in your own self-interest (excluding your interest in others' well being) obviously will have some consequences on the whole (other people may not be able to pursue their self-interest at the same time, for example). Just caring about other people obviously also has consequences on the whole, because people are on average best at knowing their own needs. So their needs to be some give and take between the two...
Someone devising methods regarding the looking out for others side should come up with strategies that work as efficiently as possible. The more overall benefit your moral strategy has per unit of effort, the better it is. In that sense, an N devising a social strategy would be making a mistake to develop an algorithm that benefits S types and N types equally, because they could better maximize efficiency catering slightly more to S types.
This is all assuming a perfectly equal world in every other way. Now, in real reality (ha), there are those that have been treated more unfairly than others. In other words, the marginal utility of helping them is much higher, so catering to them more than the less needy increases your ethical output.
So the more complex picture is that the best strategy is to cater to those that benefit most from your help (and keep marginal utility in mind), while at the same time catering to as high a percentage of people as possible. I didn't bring that up because it seemed kinda irrelevant, but yeah.
I havent understood a word of this and I had only 3 beer I swear
So their needs to be
Keirsey actually classifies types into Preemptive, Contending, Collaborating, and Accommodating. The "Accommodating" ones are ISFP, ISFJ, INTP, and INFP in Keirsey terms.
ISTJ would be contending and ESFP collaborating.
I can't find exact definitions right now but "contending" is more similar to "competitive" in this sense. It is more about interaction style I guess. This post on brainsandcareers mentions these terms briefly in breaking down the whole new Keirsey naming scheme where, for example, ENFP is a Diplomatic Collaborator / Advocator where the old term was "Champion." http://brainsandcareers.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=117
Keirsey's latest book uses all the new terms and I haven't read the whole thing yet and am still getting used to the terminology.
Those are the Role-Informatives, which are the most "responsive" (people rather than task-oriented) on the social level.Then ExFPs are Collaborative? I would think Collaborative and Accomodating would be the easiest to get along with.
The Accomodating ones make sense, too.
Yes. ("Accomodating" was "Responder". "Accomodating" is the name of the informative introvert in the Thomas Kilman Inventory as well). And Collaborator=Coworker=Get Things going, and Preemptive=Initiator=In Charge.So contending = chart the course, accomodating = behind the scenes, etc?
I thought the 'confusion' (though I was not confused) was because advocate is also a noun.
I can't find exact definitions right now but "contending" is more similar to "competitive" in this sense. It is more about interaction style I guess. This post on brainsandcareers mentions these terms briefly in breaking down the whole new Keirsey naming scheme where, for example, ENFP is a Diplomatic Collaborator / Advocator where the old term was "Champion." http://brainsandcareers.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=117
Keirsey's latest book uses all the new terms and I haven't read the whole thing yet and am still getting used to the terminology.
Marmie Dearest said:isn't learning fun?
advocator
latin advocare + ending "-r"
advocare = ad vocare
ad, to/towards/in favor of
vox, voice, vocare, to vocalize
ad vocare, to vocalize in favor of
vocat, third person present indicative
ad+vocat, (he) vocalizes in favor of
french avocat, pleader (as opposed to the avoué (who prepares the case))
english advocate, to speak in favor
-r ending, transforms verb into noun identified as that which performs verb
"that which vocalizes in favor of"
advocator
i like words
==
incidentally while i appreciate the attempt to find better words i think i am much more of a "champion" than a "diplomatic coworker". that makes me sound like i will not fight you. that would be an unfortunate misunderstanding.
Nice try.Haha, I made you look it up.:hi:
Haha, I made you look it up.:hi:
actually i'm a word nerd, i already knew all that which... if any of it's wrong, that'd be my fault, lol./QUOTE]
Drats! Foiled again...