substitute
New member
- Joined
- May 27, 2007
- Messages
- 4,601
- MBTI Type
- ENTP
Can you tell me how that hypothetical statement was sugar-coated or a "bullshit screen"?
No, I didn't mean that your suggested approach was a bullshit screen. The BS screen, that was something else... never mind.
I really don't know what to say if people perceive that approach as insincere but I would say it's more problematic for those who automatically interpret similar statements as insincere than the ones making them. I'd say if this seems to be the person's typical way of interacting with people then I'd assume it was sincere and honest and deal with it with that in mind.
Aha. But that goes both ways, you see? Why not flip that over and say well, is it problematic for the person who sees the other statement as offensive or malicious when it isn't? If it seems their typical way of speaking and interacting with people, why not assume that it's honest and sincere and backed by good motives, instead of assuming it's the opposite because it's the opposite of how you'd put it?
Do most people respond with you pointing out what they do wrong with grace, humility, and calm acceptance? If I'm going to do this (most people its not even worth it because I'm not invested enough in them to bother) I try to figure out their reactions first and work from those.
As I said, I don't talk to "most people" in that way. If I don't think they're ready to hear it candidly, I just don't say anything at all. If they're at that stage, then whatever you say to them, even the most tactful and sensitive approach, could still be misread either as an attack or an endorsement of how they already go about things.
There seems to be a lot of things read into the Fe-ish comments that weren't there so this really cuts both ways I suppose.
That's what I was saying: if it cuts both ways, why is it automatically the T who has to adapt and change their approach?
With whom? How they say things doesn't matter at all? If they're privy to personal and intimate knowledge about you I would view them as being in the greatest position to do the most harm and most good so I would be more sensitive to how they say things. Random Joe and Jane Blow on the street I wouldn't give two shits about but someone I care about cutting into me would be a. It all depends on the spirit and context in which it's done so in a frank and honest discussion I still expect respect and no low blows.
Most obviously, priests during confession. I was never one of your robotic, go to confession in the box with anonymous priest behind semi-opaque grille types. I spoke face to face with a confessor I was on close terms with, and chose him because I knew he'd give it to me, no punches pulled. But also amongst my friends we're very candid with each other all the time. Did you never hang out with a bunch of guys for a day and see how they interact with each other, typically? There isn't much sugar coating there at all, and yet fights don't seem to be breaking out all the time at your local garage...
I think you're forgetting the detachment factor as well... people can say what they like, whoever they are, however personal... it doesn't tend to bother me cos it's almost like we're talking about someone else; I objectify my very self by habit, so... the only things that irritate me are things like when a person starts to give their own value to my words, put words into my mouth, tell me what I think and feel, not listen to me... these are things that obscure and prevent clear communication, thereby causing unnecessary difficulty, which is extremely inefficient to everything and just about any purpose you might have. So they bother me on that level. I'd honestly get more het up about something happening that doesn't specifically target my own person, but more a symptom or cause of widespread social ills, than I would about an actual personal comment or even intended insult.
I question whether I'm dealing with reasonable people sometimes. A common scenario is that I disagree about how to solve a problem, and because I seem to be approaching it from a technical rather than a sympathetic angle, the determination is made that I am an unsympathetic person. From there, everything I say is adjudged through the lens that I'm evil incarnate and trying to make them aware of how cool I think this is when this is far from the truth.
E.g. one bleeding heart acquaintance was talking about a problem common to a certain part of the world, and very upset about it. I appreciated that she wanted to help, but thought her method wouldn't help and would probably hurt. I make an alternative suggestion. She promptly informs me I need to consider these poor people. how are hysterics any better? I eventually get somewhere by pointing out we both want to help but disagree on how to go about it. From then, everything I say is judged thru the lens that I'm a less caring person than she is.
The knack for reaching quick unfounded decisions about how much I do or don't care about something based on how the words and demeanor match up to their standards of appropriate feeliness means that to avoid this I do not engage in certain discussions with some people unless I know they'll take the effort to really go on a long nonjudgmental walk thru the woods on the issue. With people who know better (friends, e,g, quite a few of them feelers!), it's not as exhausting because there's less of a need to jump thru what strikes me as irrational hoops.
Yeah, just wanna say I relate to that a great deal. It's just being task oriented, task focused isn't it? If I say "you didn't do too well on that project, you need to spend longer looking up information", I'm not trying to say "you're stupid and useless and you can't look up information properly and you make a mess of everything". I'm trying to say exactly what I DID say! I'm thinking about the task at hand and I don't see why the other person can't lay their precious feelings aside for a moment to do the same and just talk about how to improve the project or whatever, without having to have their ego stroked all the time. My comment and intent is so impersonal in intent and content, it's not even funny, yet the other person sometimes takes it as the very opposite extreme!
Remember my P part. Good enough is enough. Not intended to be cruel, or you'd be crying like a stereotypical INFP by now.
Good point. If I intend to hurt, believe me, you'll know about it. It won't just be an average level of offence that you have a rant about to your friend to make you feel better. It'll be total obliteration, scorched earth, you'll be in therapy for years.
That's why I've adopted philosophies that minimize the possibility of me wanting or intending to hurt, however much a person pisses me off. That's why I repress and restrain my emotions - cos they're just too violent and intense to be allowed out to play without hurting the other boys and girls. Bit like a Vulcan
Sorry for the multiple posts guys, I was asleep whilst you were saying that stuff so I had to catch up in the morning