User Tag List

First 12202122

Results 211 to 213 of 213

  1. #211
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011


    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    "if you watch the land, you'll see all this plant life, but the poison plants have no friends. look at all the friends here, they all coexist with one another, with the bees, with the birds, with the worms, with the snakes, preria dogs, everything, the antilopes, grasses, bushes, all coexist to help one another. you get to a poisonous plant and they have no friends, its bare around the poisonous plants. thats natural law; you can blend in with everything and everyone if you are friendly and you share and you sacrifice. thats what you can learn from just plant life and if you are a poisonous person, you are not going to have any friends. period. so why be that person?"
    -Russel Means

    people and their ways are poison to other life that doesent benefit them(and even to many that would benefit them).
    Fascinating. I will need to reflect on that I think. I occasionally walk through the woods as its a nice place to think and over time I came to see an immense crucible where life fought to survive and could not assert its will far. I came to see humanity as merely the animal which found a way around its limitation and asserted its will first over its immediate habitat and eventually its entire world, still forever an animal at heart. Had the roles been reversed then I believe it would merely have been another animal to have become a menace to its environment - increases in carrying capacity increases its population. I believe that all life exploits each other but the exploitation merely does not usually become heavy enough to break the exploitee's back. If humanity is like the nettles and the poison plants it is only because like the nettles it has grown strong enough to dominate so others cannot exploit it.

  2. #212
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    5w4 sx/sp


    ^That's an empty old chestnut.
    Man cannot triumph over nature, he is part of it, interdependent upon it, although, as a top predator, his loss from the earth would be non-catastrophic.
    Quote Originally Posted by Standuble View Post
    Fair enough. Note: My example was built around the assumption that it was a human-caused deforestation of said area and the notion of destruction as limited to the trees themselves (and not necessarily to the soil and land) with nature taking advantage of this new vacuum. Plus on a long enough timeline renewal can take root in slash and burn regions although with a different composition of flora and fauna by it gradually creeping in over the course of many years if not millennia.

    What if the species lost was a primary consumer/predator and carried considerable influence in the ecosystem e.g. humanity itself? Numerous species can come to exist in the future which otherwise may not of been possible. An ending creating a new beginning. Supposedly 99% of all species that have existed are extinct and yet new bio-diversity is created which otherwise could not have occurred. That's why I don't think it can be measured as future benefits cannot be predicted.
    I see where you are coming from. But your question was specifically about the "wrongness" of an action. Right and wrong are entirely human concepts. To the extent that harming biodiversity / destroying habit threatens the existence of the human species which depends on the interconnectedness of all things, it is wrong. And only in this sense. It has no meaning outside of this anthropocentric context, which is why you will struggle to give it one.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  3. #213
    Senior Member Lumpet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    6w5 sx/sp


    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I'll move it to the NT forum in a moment.

    EDIT: Or, uh, Night will move it.
    thanks dude!


    You're probably dealing with INTPs without a lot of relational experience.

    It's been mentioned before that the undeveloped feeling functions tend to be pure, simplistic, direct, sweet. Not a lot of nuance.

    For the negatives, you can easily get clingy, whiny, and paranoid. This would be technically labeled the "Fe inferior" at work, but it's basically saying that because INTPs focus so much and have gotten so skilled at their rational detached thinking that once they get ATTACHED, they have no experience nor any idea what to do with all the triggered emotion.

    So the positive emotion comes out purely and simply.
    But so does the negative.

    Ti coupled with Ne, if it is driven by feelings of abandonment and relational inexperience, can come up pretty neurotic in trying to draw conclusions from every little sign and piece of information that appears. ("Oh no, she did not answer the phone when I called this time -- but she always answers at this time -- is she dumping me, cheating on me, does she hate me? Augh!") INTP naturally tries to unpack information from a single piece of data; it has a rational framework to do this with impersonal (aka scientific or rational) info but it usually has little experience or intuitive understanding of RELATIONAL info.

    For example, you might just make assumptions about your bf because he is your bf, and you think your commitment is obvious -- in relationships people just assume the other person loves them, or thinks they're important to them, etc -- but INTPs by nature avoid assumptions, so sometimes they look for data to prove things to themselves that other people assume naturally. hence, they can seem more paranoid and demanding of unnecessary information in order to trust, if they start to have doubts. (INTPs usually have doubts about many things, all conclusions are open to challenge. Relationships are not rationally derived, they're more of personal commitments; hence the rational process doesn't work so well, and they are helpless until they get relational experience.)
    I can witness this kinda. From my own experience.
    When i was in my first relationship i was dragging rational conclusition like them and looking for evidence and proof of everything.
    And yeah i was often dragging conclusions from only one action. The typical was what you mentioned abotu phone calls. It's completely paranoid but i always have some consiperecy theory in my head.
    And my mind doesn't assume that being in a relationship with someone means someone really cares. For the reason, many people have been in a relationships when people stopper caring or any other of irregular reasons to enter a relationship. So honestly i do think, that is not be assumed.

    Later on i did learn to be more healthy about my emotions but ina way of controlling them. Paranodi approach doesn't pay off very well and i don't wanna suffocate anybody. Basically i tried to learn them things through my first serious relationships.
    Though, it's very hard for me to be aware of my own emotions it seems. It always looks like im thinking about things and in case of relationships i get emotional reactio and i don't pay attention that reaction and i continue thinking and being confused why i even have them reactions (or better say i do know i have them but i don't understand why are they suddenly interfering with my judging process).
    In mentioned some good examples here...but we all learn...i hope. And one more thing...i missed my cool and calmed self when i was in a relationship. I found my new emotional trait as a certain disturbance.

Similar Threads

  1. [INTP] INTPs and relationships
    By Tessertime in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-03-2014, 12:58 AM
  2. [INTP] INTP's and fear
    By chippinchunk in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 08-16-2010, 09:29 PM
  3. INTPs and relationships
    By King sns in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-06-2009, 10:44 AM
  4. [INTP] INTP profile... and mine..
    By Cality in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-03-2008, 02:06 PM

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