What type is Zarathustra? :)

[SillySapienne]

I wish I could say something, but alas, I cannot.

Bleh.

 

[PeaceBaby]

I would say I don't really need to, cuz I know I'm not.

I'm going to bed. G'nite, y'all!

Sometimes it helps to counter-argue a position, and I would be interested to hear how you would, is all.

Not up to the challenge, I see?

 

[Zarathustra]

Sometimes it helps to counter-argue a position, and I would be interested to hear how you would, is all.

Not up to the challenge, I see?

http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/converse.php?u=5475&u2=8413

 

[PeaceBaby]

Oh thank you.

You do have a very powerful extraversion of your Te, but since it is wiser to defer to self-typing, I shall say I am glad you feel comfortable in your INTJ apparel.

Ni sweaters for example are made from alpaca yarn, very cozy, and gentle.

 

[Chloe]

I think 8 only attacks people who are stronger than him (or on the same level) and counterphobic 6 can attack even weaker people. 8 tries to protect the weak. One of differences.
i can go sometimes to CP 6, veeery rarely (since i'm type 3 so it can go to 6), and then i become very aggressive and appear fearless, but i am actually freakin fearful beneath that... which 8 doesnt feel, fear. they feel safe most of the times.

 

[Metamorphosis]

In regards to the aggression issue, there are (at least) two kinds that I can see. The obvious one is the aggression that results from a feeling of weakness, a preemptive counter-attack to control one's environment. The other is an off handed aggression that results from a feeling of hierarchical superiority and it's maintenance...a dominance display. It is mostly the latter that I was talking about, which is why I asked the questions I asked. I'm not sure if females could really understand the latter as readily, though.

 

[yenom]

In regards to the aggression issue, there are (at least) two kinds that I can see. The obvious one is the aggression that results from a feeling of weakness, a preemptive counter-attack to control one's environment. The other is an off handed aggression that results from a feeling of hierarchical superiority and it's maintenance...a dominance display. It is mostly the latter that I was talking about, which is why I asked the questions I asked. I'm not sure if females could really understand the latter as readily, though.

5 out of 5 star analysis.

*claps hands*

 

[Zarathustra]

I think you'd have to look beyond these two very animalistic ideas about aggression in order to understand where "mine" comes from.

First question you'd need to ask yourself...

Am I aggressive at all times, or mostly in certain situations?

Second question: What are those situations?

Third question: Why do those situations bring out aggression in me?

I believe there are usually many causes for phenomena, and that we usually try to simplify it into fewer than are often the case, and while the two explanations offered thus far may be present to some extent at some moments in time, I really don't think they get to the crux of the issue. The latter slightly more so, but still off base...

 

[ragashree]

In regards to the aggression issue, there are (at least) two kinds that I can see. The obvious one is the aggression that results from a feeling of weakness, a preemptive counter-attack to control one's environment. The other is an off handed aggression that results from a feeling of hierarchical superiority and it's maintenance...a dominance display. It is mostly the latter that I was talking about, which is why I asked the questions I asked. I'm not sure if females could really understand the latter as readily, though.

Indeed. I'd associate the latter more with social dominance, which implies high status and a lack of self-questioning. Not really the impression I get with Z though. He's very into self-questioning, I think that's why when he puts his vision of the truth across he tends to do so more forcefully than many people, he perhaps feels that he's already looked at the issue carefully enough that he has a very strong position, and wants to test this out by debating it?

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

Maybe it's my NF idealism, but I agree with SS about aggression, and that it's basically an outdated testosterone-enriched behavior that has little basis in today's world. In fact, I like this quote by MLK:

“Mankind must evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method is love.”

 

[SillySapienne]

In regards to the aggression issue, there are (at least) two kinds that I can see. The obvious one is the aggression that results from a feeling of weakness, a preemptive counter-attack to control one's environment. The other is an off handed aggression that results from a feeling of hierarchical superiority and it's maintenance...a dominance display. It is mostly the latter that I was talking about, which is why I asked the questions I asked. I'm not sure if females could really understand the latter as readily, though.

Smart chickies can, and especially ones who have studied ethology.

Hell, one can even arise at this observation from patterns witnessed in the real world.

I'm thinking of two polarized things/events/situations, one in which involves an abused dog that my sister brought home, she was one nasty bitch, and it took a full day for my sister and her then bf to catch her, they both were bit and snapped at several times, but finally they got her and she, "Scruffy" became our dog until the day she died, she was one mean old crotchety, aggressive bitch, she only fully trusted my mom, but we all understood why, she must have been severely abused by someone or by quite a few people, her aggression was a tactic to ward off potential danger to herself, (she was quite small), so this kind of aggression, at least to me is more understandable, it is fear based, and trauma-based but once the victim gains your trust s/he will no longer be aggressive towards you, and that's a beautiful breakthrough!

The other situation I was thinking of was something I've seen my entire life, peacockery to the point of implicit bullying, acting in a way because you know you can, showing off, putting down, silencing the crowd so you can secure the stage, what's shocking is that women/girls can even do this, but it is usually done by boys/guys/"men", but, AHAHAHAHAHAAA, they're always dumb, tis true, they are.

Oh shit, there is intellectual peacockery too, oy vey this is the worst, it's when someone has an IQ in the 130 to 160 range so they're in between being a god and the masses and they love to look down at and put down their "intellectual inferiors".







The smartest people I've known my entire life have all been so intellectually dexterous and humble.

The more you know....

Anyhow.

This is a question I tend to ask all the people in my life, it is a defining question, and it's this:

Would you rather be the biggest fish in a small pond, or a small fish in a big pond. If they answer the latter, then they're my kind of people.

Maybe it's my NF idealism, but I agree with SS about aggression, and that it's basically an outdated testosterone-enriched behavior that has little basis in today's world. In fact, I like this quote by MLK:

“Mankind must evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method is love.”

God, I love MLK....

 

[SillySapienne]

Going back to the thread subject.

Zara does not exhibit any Ti, or a negligible amount.

Zara definitely has Ni, not nearly as much as my INFJ pianist friend, he and I can verbally play for DAYS, (hahahaha, he's such an intelligent freak, I could never come up with the shit he does.)

Zara exhibits a BUTTLOAD of Te when tired, frustrated, threatened, angry.

Zara exhibits Fi, or F-ness when he is comfortable, when he feels accepted, when things feel right, he'll let his guard down and there it will be this beautiful radiant heart!!!

Zara exhibits more Fe-like characteristics than I do, which is weird. . To clarify, I find that in social situations he will be/use more Fe, but that when it's just us, I will use more Fe, I often want to feel harmony with my SO, so I will do whatever it takes to find a common ground, to feel the love again.

Zara exhibits Se, he is very sensual, and he has a great sense for the aesthetic, I like this.

Zara exhibits a lot less Si than I do. He doesn't seem to like to go down memory lane nearly as much as I do. :sad:

Zara exhibits very little Ne.

 

[Metamorphosis]

I think you're right Z, and so after thinking about it for ~30 seconds before making this post:

Your aggression strikes me more as an attempt to preemptively cut out the bullshit. Are you routinely around people you have to do this with irl? Even if you aren't, I gather from SS's posts that you stay relatively busy and, speaking from personal experience, I imagine this exacerbates the above a lot. On top of this, I would venture a guess that you get something slightly different out of the forum (or try to) than other INTJs here.

 

[Kalach]

Something odd is happening with this "aggressive" discussion.

There's the grasping of objects and movement in the world to initiate projects, which has nothing to do with intellectual humility, sorry humbleness, and is routinely interpreted as aggressive--or if people like it and decide it was good they call it forceful. And if that is what's being tagged aggressive here, then INTJs take note, you should leave you testicles at the door, though you can be intellectual if you like.

Does no one see the role you've been cast in? Will no one think of the children?

 

[Metamorphosis]

I wasn't intending to use it with a negative connotation.

I think we are all thinking of the same idea, making the word choice relatively unimportant (although it is accurate as far as I can tell).

 

[Kalach]

I wasn't intending to use it with a negative connotation.

Nor I, bro. I was sniping at the NFPs.

One at some point wants to integrate to enneagram 8, to move from being a cranky intellectual to being a constructor of visions, and "aggression" is a sensitive issue. One will never be an ENTJ, but become effective in the world isn't such a bad thing.

 

[Zarathustra]

In regards to the aggression issue, there are (at least) two kinds that I can see. The obvious one is the aggression that results from a feeling of weakness, a preemptive counter-attack to control one's environment. The other is an off handed aggression that results from a feeling of hierarchical superiority and it's maintenance...a dominance display. It is mostly the latter that I was talking about, which is why I asked the questions I asked. I'm not sure if females could really understand the latter as readily, though.

Indeed. I'd associate the latter more with social dominance, which implies high status and a lack of self-questioning. Not really the impression I get with Z though. He's very into self-questioning, I think that's why when he puts his vision of the truth across he tends to do so more forcefully than many people, he perhaps feels that he's already looked at the issue carefully enough that he has a very strong position, and wants to test this out by debating it?

Like usual, Ragashree is right on.

I would say this is the number one reason.

I explained as much to Orobas either in a post or via PM a few weeks ago.

**

She asked me about why her 3-yr old INTJ son asks her questions and then responds in a certain way -- often dismissive.

I explained that often times we have thoroughly thought through an issue, and want to test to see whether others can add to the various perspectives we've already considered, weighed, and judged.

If the person provides a perspective which we've already considered, weighed and judged, and shows a lesser understanding of the subject at hand (via unawareness of alternate perspectives, lacking of depth of the perspectives they do possess, or lacking of a perspective that we have not already taken into consideration), then their opinion means little to us, as they will bring nothing to the table which we have not already considered, and/or considered more fully than they have.

On the other hand, if someone brings something new to light that we have not considered, or demonstrates a greater depth of understanding of a particular matter than we possess, or seems to have amassed, considered, and built a richer, more all-encompassing perspective of the matter that thoroughly and properly accommodates all the various perspectives that they've thoughtfully considered than we possess, then we are all ears and wish nothing more than to soak up all the knowledge that this wise spirit possesses and can hopefully bestow upon us.

I dunno about you folks, but that's how I look at it... and Orobas found it useful.

**

Also, I hold the truth extremely highly (I would say above all else, but I have had to learn to catch my tongue at times, in order to not ruin personal relationships, goals, et al), and when people are clearly blind to certain perspectives, and do not know it, yet are putting on a front (one unbeknownst to them) as if they have certain knowledge on a matter, or have more knowledge than they really do, then it offends me. They are demonstrating a lacking of proper intellectual humility, and I feel well within my rights to verbally smote them.

Especially considering...

I think you're right Z, and so after thinking about it for ~30 seconds before making this post:

Your aggression strikes me more as an attempt to preemptively cut out the bullshit. Are you routinely around people you have to do this with irl? Even if you aren't, I gather from SS's posts that you stay relatively busy and, speaking from personal experience, I imagine this exacerbates the above a lot. On top of this, I would venture a guess that you get something slightly different out of the forum (or try to) than other INTJs here.

The bolded is especially true.

I barely have time to check and/or post on the forum, and therefore, I cut the bullshit and go straight for the jugular.

I don't have time for fluff, I don't have time to post in threads that don't mean something to me, and I don't have time to beat around the bush.

Simple as that.

I don't necessarily feel surrounded by people who I need to cut through the bullshit, though.

For my job, I do need to be able to stay on point, so that matters, but the feeling of others taking things of course is not all that present in my mind on any regular basis.

As for my forum us, I think you're the third person who's said this to me in a week...

I guess so... I dunno... what do other INTJs use it for?

Ragashree, as one of the three, was accurate in saying that it seems like I use it to bounce around and explore certain ideas I find interesting.

This is true.

Something odd is happening with this "aggressive" discussion.

There's the grasping of objects and movement in the world to initiate projects, which has nothing to do with intellectual humility, sorry humbleness, and is routinely interpreted as aggressive--or if people like it and decide it was good they call it forceful. And if that is what's being tagged aggressive here, then INTJs take note, you should leave you testicles at the door, though you can be intellectual if you like.

Does no one see the role you've been cast in? Will no one think of the children?

Thank you for bringing this up.

I'm feeling more like Sim everyday, realizing the hardcore typological bias displayed in these threads.

Types prattle on about how this or that is wrong, or how they are superior in this or that regard because this or that is a lowly thing to do, and it wreaks of perceptual bias and blindness.

Of course an NF isn't going to be fond of aggression and/or competition (the two really go hand-in-hand): but guess what, a TJ probably is...

So :stop: the hate! :1377:

Not only is it typological bias, it has been repeatedly demonstrated in testing that competition pushes males to perform at higher levels than they otherwise would, and that the exact opposite holds true for women.

So not only is the assertion that aggression and competition are bad or lowly in some way typologically discriminatory, but it's even sexist...

And THEN there's the fact that competition (and largely concomitant aggression) has played a major part in driving mankind to many of its greatest heights and accomplishments...

Anyway... by no means did I dig deep enough into this discussion, as this post is getting epic enough, and I really don't have time to, but, needless to say, people need to check their biases a little bit better.

It's so patently obvious why it's occurring when one hates on a particular kind of behavior when that particular kind of behavior is by no means a strong suit of that person's character... all you have to do is call a weakness of yours an evil, and it makes everything all better...

One at some point wants to integrate to enneagram 8, to move from being a cranky intellectual to being a constructor of visions, and "aggression" is a sensitive issue. One will never be an ENTJ, but become effective in the world isn't such a bad thing.

Interesting to equate what I would call extraverting your Te, or, the even more advanced tactic, of engaging in what I'm gunna call the "auxiliary loop", or the Te-Se loop (i.e., the dominant loop of the ENTJ), with integrating the enneagram 8.

After all this talk about whether I'm an enneagram 6 or 8, I would have to say that elements of each description fit me.

There were some things about 6s that rang true, and some things that didn't.

I kinda prefer to look at it in the MBTI sense: as it seems that depending on which functional combination I'm using, I will manifest different qualities associated with either an 8 or a 6.

 

[SillySapienne]

Competition is potentially good, very good. It leads to both personal and human growth.

Aggression and aggressive behavior is bad, I'm sorry, in my biased NF mind, it just is.

I'm confused, when would aggression be a positive thing?

To be ambitious, passionate, persistent, and strong-willed is one thing, but to be aggressive?

First of all, can someone define aggression?

And, better yet, aggressive behavior?

And, please, try to explain to me how being/acting aggressive is a GOOD thing.

 

[Zarathustra]

Competition is potentially good, very good. It leads to both personal and human growth.

Aggression and aggressive behavior is bad, I'm sorry, in my biased NF mind, it just is.

I'm confused, when would aggression be a positive thing?

To be ambitious, passionate, persistent, and strong-willed is one thing, but to be aggressive?

First of all, can someone define aggression?

And, better yet, aggressive behavior?

And, please, try to explain to me how being/acting aggressive is a GOOD thing.

Read Kalach's post again.

Aggression is just a word.

The behavior that underlies it could be "good" or "bad".

What if one aggressively pursues a new lead in a sales job, and thus succeeds at opening a new account? (fyi: I'm not in sales)

What if one is rushing someone to the hospital because of an emergency, and needs to drive aggressively, in order to save that person's life?

What if some asshole is going around and being negatively aggressive, and someone needs to be positively aggressive and stand up against him?

What if one needs to make a rather aggressive move on a girl, or risk losing her to a more aggressive sexual competitor?

Or not gain her interest at all, and seem like a coward?

I could go on for days, but hopefully you get the point...

If you're going to a priori define aggression as bad, then it's pretty easy to determine what answer you're gunna get to the question, "Is aggression bad?"

 

[KDude]

A lot of people have aggression, I think.. Hell, I have aggression... uh, more in typical ISTP/ISFP fashion though: when aggression comes into my space. I end up conflicting 9 times out 10 with the other, proactive sort of aggression. I think that comes from people who might see themselves as having their "space" invaded as well, except they're thinking that way in some kind of longterm/Te way (just a guess), and act out aggression as a preventive measure. Takes a mature person (or rather, a perceptive one..more Se/Ne or something) to get it right.