[ISTP] me: "i love you" istp: <<silence>>

[McRumi]

Everyone has potential self esteem issues when faced with a person whose strengths appear to be their vulnerabilities.

Potential does not equal real.

That can, and does make the person doubt themselves eventually.

Only for those who have self-esteem issues.

That can't be blamed on the person feeling inferior either.

Of course it can. The source of the inferior feeling is located within the mind of the person who feels inferior, unless we are talking about the intentional action of belittling someone, which i had previously ruled out.

Just as much as it could destroy a person's self esteem as a whole, its that feeling of inferiority which makes people strive to be better.

This is non-sensical to me. People strive to be better because they see an objective path to improve themselves in a supportive environment, not because they feel inferior. Low self-esteem does not feed ambition, only envy and resentment..or self-hatred.

If it is endured, the person can come to realize how they really want to be & come closer to that.

Again, this is nonsensical to me. In fact, I don't even know what this statement means.

But to say the other individual is "dumbing" themselves down to make things easier for the insecure partner doesn't really make sense to me.

It' s perfectly sensible. People do it all the time. My argument is that you can be understanding and supportive of another without sacrificing one's innate charisma, esp if the charisma is perceived as threatening by someone with low self-esteem. But the solution is not to dilute one's own energy but to find ways to help the other find their own energy and healthy self-esteem. To weaken oneself would only send a self-defeating message.

How is being understanding towards someone you care about make you less than you were?

It doesn't. That's not what I wrote (for the second time).

 

[JustHer]

That's not what I said at all. What I said was that no one should stifle themselves to accommodate someone else's lack of self-esteem. Does that mean one should make no effort to communicate with that person in a way that is meaningful and supportive to both parties? No. These are not mutually exclusive actions. Acting falsely is not caring about another. It is caring about how one's self is perceived.

You entirely just reiterated your original point, that someone shouldn't "stifle themselves" to accommodate someone's self esteem. If someone in your life had a weaker self esteem, you wouldn't think it necessary to adjust your communication style to not hurt this person?

 

[Poki]

Heinel, very well put. And it is actually invaluable to me that you wrote about the other side of it... That T needs resolution of the concepts, even after the emotions are put straight. It is really difficult for me to conceptualize an example of that though.

but... I would say that it is still more challenging to Fs in theory, because "stress", as you put it, to the T is easier suppressed than the irrational emotional reaction that the F would have. The reaction may be comparable, but it can't be completely subjective. How could seeking intellectual closure be as difficult as seeking emotional closure? Both will likely come eventually, but only T can really know that.



Everyone has potential self esteem issues when faced with a person whose strengths appear to be their vulnerabilities. That can, and does make the person doubt themselves eventually. That can't be blamed on the person feeling inferior either. Just as much as it could destroy a person's self esteem as a whole, its that feeling of inferiority which makes people strive to be better. If it is endured, the person can come to realize how they really want to be & come closer to that. But to say the other individual is "dumbing" themselves down to make things easier for the insecure partner doesn't really make sense to me. How is being understanding towards someone you care about make you less than you were?

Ok real life example. Lets say you are driving somewhere about an hour away and you have 2 hours to get their. You want to do something but dont know what. You ask your bf if there is anything he wants to do and he says no, but he will go wherever you want to go, just let him know where. Later on down the road you get mad at him because he never went anywhere and now you are gonna have to sit outside and wait because you didnt stop somewhere to kill time.

You eventually get over the frustration and he is still waiting for a logical answer for the emotion. What goes through the Ts head. I let you know to tell me if you see anywhere or think of anywhere you want to stop. I also dont see any problem with sitting in a car together for an hour.

In seeking intellectual closure we are finding out what needs to be done next time, what happened. The stress is not knowing or understanding what will cause that emotion again. We arent always good at reading into things.

 

[SillySapienne]

The first time I told my ISTP I loved him, I got a worse reply than mere silence. Hahahaha, true fucking story.

When he eventually caught up and fell in love with me, he told me so, which was loverly.



I think it takes them more time to process their emotions than it does us mushy NFs.

 

[Poki]

Just as much as it could destroy a person's self esteem as a whole, its that feeling of inferiority which makes people strive to be better.

This one statement stood out like a sore thumb. So would you purposely make someone feel inferior so they can strive to be better? Is this what works for you? Not judging, just asking as I have seen people use this tactic and it comes across exactly like you said. Like they are trying to make someone feel inferior hoping they will strive for better.

 

[Heinel]

You entirely just reiterated your original point, that someone shouldn't "stifle themselves" to accommodate someone's self esteem. If someone in your life had a weaker self esteem, you wouldn't think it necessary to adjust your communication style to not hurt this person?

You're missing a key concept. It is implied in his first post that there is a fundamental difference between changing your nature to accommodate someone (which, if I read him correctly, he thinks is impossible or unsustainable), and to find a happy medium between two less than perfectly compatible people (which is also what I think is the right thing to do).

 

[Poki]

But to say the other individual is "dumbing" themselves down to make things easier for the insecure partner doesn't really make sense to me.

It' s perfectly sensible. People do it all the time. My argument is that you can be understanding and supportive of another without sacrificing one's innate charisma, esp if the charisma is perceived as threatening by someone with low self-esteem. But the solution is not to dilute one's own energy but to find ways to help the other find their own energy and healthy self-esteem. To weaken oneself would only send a self-defeating message.

Charisma is a feeling that is exerted outward. So "dumbing" down your charisma is really not "dumbing" down. "dumbing" down is in an intellectual sense, making yourself seem not as good as others. In the way you described it charisma can actually lift someone up and I can see whyyou wouldnt want to get rid of that. But one way to dumb down is to bring out your struggles, your screw ups, your problems to make the person feel like they are not alone. You can also let the other person be better then you. To me feelings are neither dumb nor smart and cannot be "dumbed" down or "smartened" up.

Where I can see issues is if your charisma is based on you doing good or being good at something and in essence not doing good kills your charisma then I can see how "dumbing" down can be tied to charisma within you.

This makes me think about your post

Acting falsely is not caring about another. It is caring about how one's self is perceived.

When you say one's self is perceived are you speaking internal or externally? Do you care how other percieve you or how you percieve yourself?

I know with me I can see the charisma based on how certain people percieve me, but to me "dumbing" down requires a self confidence because you lose that charisma from what others think.

edit: sorry, you lose that charisma from not knowing that you are good also, not always from what others think. It could be both.

 

[JustHer]

You're missing a key concept. It is implied in his first post that there is a fundamental difference between changing your nature to accommodate someone (which, if I read him correctly, he thinks is impossible or unsustainable), and to find a happy medium between two less than perfectly compatible people (which is also what I think is the right thing to do).

Actually, the distinction that his first post presented was between purposely attacking someone, and having someone being offended by something you do. This is obviously not the same as the distinction you just presented.

Also, it seemed very much like he implied that the point at which you say "it is absolutely impossible for me to communicate with this person" can be taken lightly, which I think is a destructive attitude.

 

[Heinel]

Also, it seemed very much like he implied that the point at which you say "it is absolutely impossible for me to communicate with this person" can be taken lightly, which I think is a destructive attitude.

In what way is this destructive?

Actually, the distinction that his first post presented was between purposely attacking someone, and having someone being offended by something you do. This is obviously not the same as the distinction you just presented.

Bad wording on my part. It is implied that there is a fundamental difference between trying to change human nature (which is likely impossible or unsustainable) and to find a happy medium between two less than perfectly compatible people.

 

[McRumi]

You're missing a key concept. It is implied in his first post that there is a fundamental difference between changing your nature to accommodate someone (which, if I read him correctly, he thinks is impossible or unsustainable), and to find a happy medium between two less than perfectly compatible people (which is also what I think is the right thing to do).

Exactly. Well, almost exactly, but close enough. Thank you.

 

[JustHer]

In what way is this destructive?

It is destructive to go through your life not worrying about how your actions affect other people. Yes, you WILL be hurting other people when you cut them out of your life, even if they aren't close personal friends. You WILL be instilling confusion and doubt in others, and you will be closing yourself off from the people that care about you.

You will also also be hurting yourself by NOT working on your interpersonal skills, and instead just casting people aside. Because really, anybody can get along with anybody if they really try. I am not saying that you can;t give up on people, I am only saying that making that kind of decision lightly without any care for the consequences is a sign of weak inferior Fe, which is a hindrance to ISTP's development.

 

[McRumi]

It is destructive to go through your life not worrying about how your actions affect other people. Yes, you WILL be hurting other people when you cut them out of your life, even if they aren't close personal friends. You WILL be instilling confusion and doubt in others, and you will be closing yourself off from the people that care about you.

You will also also be hurting yourself by NOT working on your interpersonal skills, and instead just casting people aside. Because really, anybody can get along with anybody if they really try. I am not saying that you can;t give up on people, I am only saying that making that kind of decision lightly without any care for the consequences is a sign of weak inferior Fe, which is a hindrance to ISTP's development.

Lordy! You ENTJs so love dark hypercriticism and argumentation! You've missed all the subtlety of the discussion and exhausted the entire SP Arthouse. Luckily, we are by nature an understanding and forgiving bunch.

P.s., scolding others for their lack of inter-personal skills is rather an amusing stance for the ENTJ....esp since scolding is itself such a poor way to relate inter-personally.

But then, ENTJs are always right, n'cest pas?

 

[JustHer]

Lordy! You ENTJs so love dark hypercriticism and argumentation! You've missed all the subtlety of the discussion and exhausted the entire SP Arthouse. Luckily, we are by nature an understanding and forgiving bunch.

P.s., scolding others for their lack of inter-personal skills is rather an amusing stance for the ENTJ....esp since scolding is itself such a poor way to relate inter-personally.

But then, ENTJs are always right, n'cest pas?

If you can't tell the difference between answering a question and scolding someone, you should probably keep this problem to yourself.


Also, try to stick to the issue being discussed rather than attacking my type.

 

[McRumi]

If you can't tell the difference between answering a question and scolding someone, you should probably keep this problem to yourself.

Now, there you go with those poor inter-personal skills again!

 

[Amargith]

^^Actually, McRumi makes a good point, though I do support what you're trying to say. So hopefully, STPs will look past your forceful and direct use of language and grasp the content which is actually quite good.

 

[JustHer]

Now, there you go with those poor inter-personal skills again!

If you don't want to discuss the actual topic then you needn't reply to me.

 

[Amargith]

JJ, not to be annoying, but this could be considered on topic for you if you are to explain stuff to an ESTP and get it through to her...consider it target practice

 

[JustHer]

JJ, not to be annoying, but this could be considered on topic for you if you are to explain this to an ESTP and get it through to her...consider it target practice

But can't people just tell me exactly how to do it without me having to practise and think it through?!

 

[McRumi]

If you don't want to discuss the actual topic then you needn't reply to me.

You appear to have no understanding of ISTP or ESTP humor at all. Which unfortunately undercuts any effort on your part to truly communicate to STPs. If anything, STPs love nothing more than to discuss anything except the actual topic. You're in the wrong place if you expect anything different....unless you just like to upset yourself.

 

[Amargith]

She's ENTJ, she likes to get to the point

In order to get through to an STP though, you would need to learn what motivates them, what drives them and above all, how you can present your solution in a way that is in fact 'beneficial' to them as well.

So Rumi...spill
What drives you? And what could make an ESTP be interested in changing his point of view? Coz that's why JJ is asking this.