[NF] NF General Discussion Thread

[Sniffles]

I also think that the American idea of freedom has transformed from its original meaning. I see the American revolution being based on a "freedom from..." Now people use it as a "freedom to..."

I think you have it backwards. The original context for American concepts of "freedom" was based the concept of "positive freedom"; wheras the common notion we have now is "negative freedom"(freedom from....).

Originally America was governed by the concept of Civic Republicanism, which meant that freedom was based upon the shared parcipitation in the community to help ensure the freedom of that community. Of course in order to achieve that, certain virtues had to taught to the people in order to cultivate the ability to implement self-government.

Of course that concept has been discarded over the past 40 years or so(actually longer, but it really takes off in this time frame).

In the 1920's, Carl Schmitt for one noted many of the flaws of the Liberal concept(which has replaced the Republican one). For one, as he noted, the long-term survival of any legitimate political system depends on its ability to call its citizens to self-sacrifice in times of need. This notion, however, violates the individualism of Liberal thought. You cannot force a person to fight unless he actually wants to. This in effect leaves the system dangerously exposed to danger and may ultimately lead to it being defenseless.

And Schmitt warned about the ultimate consequences of such:

"It would be ludicrous to believe that a defenseless people has nothing but friends, and it would be a deranged calculation to suppose that the enemy could perhaps be touched by the absence of a resistance. No one thinks it possible that the world could, for example, be transformed into a condition of pure morality by the renunciation of every aesthetic or economic productivity. Even less can a people hope to bring about a purely moral or purely economic condition of humanity by evading every political decision. If a people no longer possesses the energy or the will to maintain itself in the sphere of politics, the latter will not thereby vanish from the world. Only a weak people will disappear."
--Concept of the Political​

 

[wedekit]

Woops. I did have it backwards.

 

[Sniffles]

I must say I got a real laugh reading this over at the NT private forum.

Apparently they think they're so badass to rip on us NFs under the cover of their private forum, where we can't get them. Ohhhh dear, how fucking awful. :rolli:

 

[Atomic Fiend]

Meh, shit happens. It's there forum, let them talk about what they want.

 

[SuperFob]

"NF General Discussion Thread," eh? What's there to say about us except that we're awesome (besides the fact that we're > those pesky NT's)?

 

[Anja]

Smiling, smiling.

You know, I can see it presented both ways, wedekit and Peguy. Works for me either way and I think the end result we're dissatisfied with looks the same.

Yeah, damn, Super. Ain't we?

It's funny that you use the word "pesky" cuz sometimes when one of those guys is ripping on me for "logic" and "facts" the mental picture I get in my head is of a swarm of gnats. And I want to get a newspaper and go, "Shoo! You guys are annoying!"

That focus on debate as a method of social interaction seems an attempt to control the conversation.

And from my persective all the human qualities go down the toilet because they aren't "scientific." Don't count.

It's frustrating.

It feels to me like:

Me: Please come into my world and tell me who you are.

Tees: Either get into my world and follow my rules or go away.

Yeah, that's how I sometimes feel with that style of interaction.

 

[kyuuei]

LOL! Very well said?!! Anja.

LOL I had the awesome pirivilage of my first debate like that being with BlueWing. It was such a stalemate!

BW: Theoretically this makes perfect sense.
Me: The reality is human nature prevents this from working.
BW: Feelings aren't involved in this conversation!
Me: Well grr!!

It's all a bit funny looking back at it now. Infact, the argument I had last night was the male instinct V.S. The emotional instincts of a woman in a situation of fighting. The fight ended up as a stalemate of course.. But the logical "This is a more functional way of doing things.." majorly clashed with the "but it's morally right to do things this way..". I'm still not sure which side I agree with more.. I'm bias and have to think the way I do, but I very much so see the other point.

 

[Lady_X]

^^^ how funny i agree with both of you as well...haha
acceptance and understanding is the only way to go...cuz no ones's gonna win that one.

 

[Anja]

I sometimes think that people who are rigidly fixed in the "scientific" fail to notice all the obvious truths which play out in the world all around us. And being "big picture" people it seems to me that we can see both sides - the spiritual and the mental, whereas they only see the mental.

It's like some totally miss the human factor. Edit: Well, and are truly baffled by it. (Which is why they don't want to talk about it?) Puts them at a "win" disadvantage?

 

[Anja]

Peguy, you're kind of interesting because it seems to me that you straddle both worlds with some balance.

 

[Anja]

My new secret nickname for you - The Straddler!

 

[Sniffles]

Anja I agree with you, NTs have the bad habit of only seeing half the picture. If you bring up the other half, they often try desperately to avoid it, dismiss it, or shut down the discussion altogether.

Peguy, you're kind of interesting because it seems to me that you straddle both worlds with some balance.

Thank you.

 

[kyuuei]

Or maybe they figure they'll just leave all that nonsense up to the people that already grasp it better and stick to what they're good at? .. I get that sort of mindset occasionally.

 

[Anja]

But my question, then becomes - "So, if you love knowledge so much, why aren't you interested in finding out more about something you don't understand?"

There's so much of that intense need to prove they are "right." And discomfort with ambiguity.

 

[Anja]

Well, yeah. That's how it is.

So why does that disturb me so much?

Thinking. . .

 

[Sniffles]

Feeling. . .

Corrected.

 

[kyuuei]

Honestly, I wish I were more thinking. I could easily and readily accept things for the way they are, instead of getting this idealistic glimmer in my eye. I'm the sort of person that someone says "We need to move this." and I move it without ever realizing it's 3 times my size. In the negative side of things.. When something isn't the way I want it to be, I can be rather selfish and offended by it because my emotions tell me that that isn't right... instead of merely taking a neutral stance.

In the end, I wouldn't be as fiery and upbeat with a T... but I would be more managable and easier to deal with.

 

[Anja]

I've had to work quite a bit on acceptance and still have a lot of work in that area. But it does give me peace of mind.

It seems in some ways that Tees have it easier because once they decide what is correct they're home free.

 

[Sniffles]

That's true, you have to be willing to accept yourself. Thats a major key to life.

Heck I used to beat myself up for not being as skillful in terms of analyizing certain topics in the way that many Ts(especially INTPs) are able to. These thoughts still creep up, but now I accept the fact that I have my own unqiue INFJ way of approaching issues effecting the world.

 

[Anja]

And others, too, Peguy. And situations.

That doesn't mean liking it or not trying to change it. But ultimately developing a sense of reality, that, in the moment, things and people are what they are. That is soothing to me.

Common parlance would put it:

Suck it up!