[INTJ] INTJ Intimidation

[Wolf]

Kickin' ass and pulling no punches. I see I'm not needed here.

 

[Park]

Yeah, this is generally the case. I had this very discussion with a friend of mine today (ENxP). He had no idea what I was talking about. What most people (who are friends with INTJs) don't understand, though, is that we act very different with close friends than we do when we are on our own.

Well, while granted I allways knew my INTX dad, I still remember when I meet my husband and friend and intimidating was not my first impression. Off course, my husband was redicurlessly drunk which may explain part of it .

 

[Economica]

Economica, I've bit my figurative tongue up until now,

No you haven't. This is the third time you're directly revealing that I am getting to you (first time, second time).

but your INTJ boddhisatva shtick is growing tremendously tiring. If your goal is to impress upon others your self-enlightenment by feeding into other types' negative stereotypes of INTJs, I know of other sites where your nonsense would be more appreciated.

Is pleading with me to take my crusade elsewhere really the best you can do to get me to stop? If so, then I'd say out of the two of us you're the one who does most to disparage our type.

Economica, as I have mentioned, isn't an INTJ. Too confusing to realize what they are, but they're certainly not. Such deprecation in agreement with an ISTP of such little intelligence isn't in our nature.

Thank you, Wolf, for this succinct illustration of how the oh-so-rational INTJ will evaluate a statement not on its merit but on subjective criteria such as the regard in which we hold the person making it.

...

Speaking of limit breaks...

I'm confused: You say that Blackwater is traumatized by you, but that he's correct about the INTJ behavior he's ranting about and was traumatized by... which you don't exhibit. How did you traumatize him then?

(Psst, Mendacity, if you want to feign calm objectivity under fire, you should 1) not rant and 2) not project your ranting onto the person who got to you. )

As I made clear in the thread about closed-minded certitude and as Usehername correctly points out, I believe I suffer from CC but I am working to overcome it.

I'm not sure why you think I was arguing that we don't suffer from this closed-minded certitude. It may certainly be true that we do.

(...)

I don't mean to offend you (don't you love when people start sentences that way?), but it seems like your anti-INTJ sympathies might be a perfect example of the closed-minded certitude you're talking about. You seem absolutely convinced that it is the case that we do this more than any other type, that the reasoning you've done based on your personal experiences is absolutely correct and pretty unwilling to consider any other possibilities. To the point that you're using an informal internet opinion poll of 16 people to back up your position. Again, I'm sorry if this offends you, but the opinions of 16 perfect strangers gathered in an unscientific manner just doesn't sway me.

You refuse to entertain the notion of CC as an INTJ problem area until it has been scientifically proven? How convenient, seeing as how MBTI isn't scientific.

Dismissing the poll completely due to its small sample size smacks of defensive rationalization...

Truly, what it means... in fact ALL it means, is that 12 out of 16 non-INXJs have answered that in their experience a majority of INTJs suffer from closed-minded certitude. Don't think that just because there are people who agree with you it makes you right, or that it makes your informal internet opinion poll amount to solid empirical data.

You seem to be saying, "12 non-INXJ people think we do, so therefore we must."

Ok, the majority of the people who answered your survey agree with you, but there are several reasons that might be. Could it be that's why they took the time to answer? Do you think that 12 out of 16 is truly a representative number of the population? Is it safe to say that if the majority of people think something is true then it is true?

Actually, this is all a bit academic, I'm not saying you're wrong about it, just that your argument seems to be based more on opinion than fact. Frankly, I think that perhaps the point is really a matter of opinion and cannot be argued about using facts, which is ok too. But please keep in mind that while you are certainly entitled to your opinion, I am not obligated to share it.

... But, my compliments on your stamina.

I'm sorry if my reply to your post seems harsh. It is your argument I take issue with, not you yourself. If you can provide more than opinions and what appears to be a prejudice against INTJs I will happily reconsider my position. And I will not give you a patronizing pat on the head and tell you "yes dear, anything you say" just to avoid bruising your ego.

... But when Blackwater tells it like it is, you take issue with his style?

 

[proteanmix]

This thread is very amusing. The OP asked:

What is it about us that causes people to think that we are stand-offish, aloof, intimidating, etc.?

IMO, Economica is one of the few INTJs (on this forum) who seems willing to acknowledge and challenge other INTJs to change this behavior.

When people have responded with reasons why (particularly non-INTJs), the answer is dismissed. Maybe people are intimidated because when they try to tell an INTJ about him or herself they get smacked down. I've experienced this IRL with a very dear friend of mine (and observed it in two other INTJs) and it's difficult to contend with. Do you INTJs realize how hard you are to deal with sometimes? I read a post somewhere that said investing time and energy in someone is a difficult thing for INTJs to do. Do you think it's any easier for other types? From my experience with INTJs, you all often have a prove that you're worthy of me attitude which does seem somewhat arbitrary. I really think that makes things harder for yall in the long run.

My two cents and please don't stone me.

 

[Mendacity]

Economica
This post is actually an edit. In the original version I say a lot of the same things, but I try to actually respond to some of your points and I think that's a mistake. Your points are based on your misconceptions and misunderstandings of what I was saying to begin with. I realize that I can be verbose and that my arguments and statements could probably be organized in a better way. So lets try this:

Our fight:

(From my perspective, of course)
1. You jumped down my throat for my response to Blackwater. You attributed to me an argument I never said and then responded to it with your own argument.
2. I responded with basically three points:
a) I didn't say that Blackwater was wrong.
b) While your theory may have merit, I think your argument is weak and here's why.
c) My criticisms are of your argument alone and should not be taken personally or offensively.
3. You were offended and responded with a lot of insults and general nastiness.

What's actually kind of funny about this, is that I wanted to have an actual discussion with you about your CC thing. I think you may be partially right about it, although as I said in another post later on in response to proteanmix:

I was thinking about your point and I think you're right in a way. My experience with INTJs is that we have to be convinced of almost everything. And our initial reaction to everything is one of, "oh yeah? Prove it!"

But it's not that we can't or refuse to be convinced. I see how this reaction can be supremely frustrating and can come off as an unwillingness to accept someone's point... and I think it's probably one of the reasons we're so difficult to deal with.

In addition to this reaction, which I'm sure is bad enough, you then have to argue the point (every point) with us. Arguing something is how I understand it and people often misunderstand my intentions when I do. I think this is what people mistake for this "closed minded certitude" thing. And I can see how most types would want to say, "you know what? screw this!' when we start in on this arguing-to-understand thing. And I can see how it can be misconstrued as just being difficult or being unwilling to listen to you.

I think this may be at least a part of it, although I agree with you that CC is also a part of it. How much of a role each behavior plays is not something I feel we can speculate on and may, in fact probably, varies from individual to individual.

Your argument:
1. Your poll is only of 16 people and that's a very small number to draw conclusions from that would be useful in a serious debate. Even if your poll was of 600 people, because it's an opinion poll, all it can prove are 600 people's opinions. I would hesitate to use opinions to back up an argument about what is widely acknowledged to be one of most misunderstood types.
2. You seem to have fallen in love with your theory and that's part of why it is (in my opinion) somewhat lacking. You're claiming subjective interpretation as empirical fact and instead of actually responding to someone's criticisms of your argument (or, god forbid, actually trying to improve it), you're closing your eyes, putting your fingers in your ears and saying "I'm right and you're wrong!" over and over again at the top of your voice. This is not convincing except that it seems to do a pretty good job of illustrating the kind of behavior you're talking about.

One thing you might do to strengthen your argument is to maybe use examples from your own life and your own experiences to illustrate your point. I don't think you can generalize about types quite so easily, but I think if you share with people the reasons why you have drawn the conclusions that you have, you might have greater success.

There is one point of yours that I responded to in my original reply that I will include:

... But when Blackwater tells it like it is, you take issue with his style?

"Telling it like it is" and being rude are two completely different things that people often confuse. It doesn't take any effort at all to say "Listen, this is my stance, I'm not trying to make you feel attacked and I don't mean to offend you" rather than being an ass about things and then hiding behind that whole "Well I'm just telling it like it is!" shtick because you (non-specific "you") skipped "the usual soothing disclaimers," as Blackwater puts it. "Soothing disclaimers" are like oil for the argument. It keeps it running smoothly and it (hopefully) keeps it civil. Also, they can make your intent more clear to the opposite party and help you make your point better understood. Besides, "telling it like it is" is pretty subjective.

I will also mention that you come off as being self-righteous and holier-than-thou about it. From your profile, other posts and arguments on this thread you seem to be saying "All INTJs suck except for me! I'm soooo superior to other INTJs!" and that's never going to be taken well by others. If you're not actually trying to say that, you may reconsider how you come across.
In my first response I made a point to apologize for offending you in my previous post. I want to include that point here as well. I am sorry, it wasn't my intent (as I said in that post) to hurt your feelings. Just to have a lively debate about your theory. I doubt I'll be having any debates with you in the future though, because your response yo my post and to others, in fact your general demeanor, has left me pretty cold.

That's really all I have to say to you on the subject, Economica. I'm sure you'll have some reply that's as snippy and insulting as your last one and I wish you the joy of it.

 

[Dark Razor]

Its the look...

Btw, I also have the same problem, in school I was often told I looked "evil" or "scary", or "insane". Also at my current job my supervisor becomes very visibly nervous when talking to me (stuttering, sweating, swallowing) and I dont know how to make him more at ease with the situation. Last week I actually had to bite my tongue several time to not laugh out loud at the ridiculousness of the situation,

 

[Wolf]

IMO, Economica is one of the few INTJs (on this forum) who seems willing to acknowledge and challenge other INTJs to change this behavior.

This is merely because Economica is not an INTJ. Reading the responses above further proves it to me. Maybe I, probably J, but there are no signs of any NT. SF is much more likely.

Do you INTJs realize how hard you are to deal with sometimes?

Sure.

From my experience with INTJs, you all often have a prove that you're worthy of me attitude which does seem somewhat arbitrary. I really think that makes things harder for yall in the long run.

Well, you're good at doing things that make us find you unworthy. I'll admit that I don't get along with anyone of your type (on either side of your fence).

My two cents and please don't stone me.

No worries; you've been written off for a long time.

 

[proteanmix]

This is merely because Economica is not an INTJ. Reading the responses above further proves it to me. Maybe I, probably J, but there are no signs of any NT. SF is much more likely.

Just like Usehername wasn't an INTJ because she didn't hate people like "regular" INTJs? Or was it because she disagreed with you?

Well, you're good at doing things that make us find you unworthy. I'll admit that I don't get along with anyone of your type (on either side of your fence).

I guess I pointed out some INTJ flaws and they hit a little too close to home for you. And I don't really care about you not getting along with EFJs, that's you're problem (seems you have a lot of those).

No worries; you've been written off for a long time.

Then I shouldn't have to worry about you responding to me in the future will I? If you have/had issue with me, it probably would've been better to resolve it then and there instead of trying (and a pitiful attempt at that) to be a smart ass now.

 

[Wolf]

Well, I guess I'll give you a response, since it does annoy me that you're so ignorant...

Just like Usehername wasn't an INTJ because she didn't hate people like "regular" INTJs? Or was it because she disagreed with you?

See, you don't recall anything. Baseless arguments are easy ways to get written off. UHN seems to be a weak-preference INTJ. I will admit that I have yet to see certain tell-tale signs (which, for instance, Nonpareil shows clearly).

I guess I pointed out some INTJ flaws and they hit a little too close to home for you. And I don't really care about you not getting along with EFJs, that's you're problem (seems you have a lot of those).

Actually, your vacuous straw men were disregarded. They weren't worthy of my time. The personal attack was appreciated, though; it's so classy.

Then I shouldn't have to worry about you responding to me in the future will I?

Usually I ignore you, but sometimes things are so slow that you annoy me enough for me to respond.

If you have/had issue with me, it probably would've been better to resolve it then and there instead of trying (and a pitiful attempt at that) to be a smart ass now.

Why bother? There was no reason for me to ever make an effort. It clearly bothers you, but it doesn't bother me in the least.

 

[proteanmix]

Dammit I thought I was written off!!!

 

[Mendacity]

When people have responded with reasons why (particularly non-INTJs), the answer is dismissed. Maybe people are intimidated because when they try to tell an INTJ about him or herself they get smacked down. I've experienced this IRL with a very dear friend of mine (and observed it in two other INTJs) and it's difficult to contend with. Do you INTJs realize how hard you are to deal with sometimes? I read a post somewhere that said investing time and energy in someone is a difficult thing for INTJs to do. Do you think it's any easier for other types? From my experience with INTJs, you all often have a prove that you're worthy of me attitude which does seem somewhat arbitrary. I really think that makes things harder for yall in the long run.

I was thinking about your point and I think you're right in a way. My experience with INTJs is that we have to be convinced of almost everything. And our initial reaction to everything is one of, "oh yeah? Prove it!"

But it's not that we can't or refuse to be convinced. I see how this reaction can be supremely frustrating and can come off as an unwillingness to accept someone's point... and I think it's probably one of the reasons we're so difficult to deal with.

In addition to this reaction, which I'm sure is bad enough, you then have to argue the point (every point) with us. Arguing something is how I understand it and people often misunderstand my intentions when I do. I think this is what people mistake for this "closed minded certitude" thing. And I can see how most types would want to say, "you know what? screw this!' when we start in on this arguing-to-understand thing. And I can see how it can be misconstrued as just being difficult or being unwilling to listen to you.

I would say that the trick to dealing with this kind of behavior on the part of an INTJ (and this is what my best friend does and I think he's the person who understands me best in the world... he's ISTJ, btw) is to not be phased by it. Make your point, tell us why you have come to that conclusion and be prepared to defend it. If your INTJ seems to be antagonistic about the argument don't take it personally, just point it out to them and they will probably apologize and try to be more civilized (assuming you're dealing with a reasonable INTJ). Then back your opinion up with examples. If they respect you they will consider your argument and may end up agreeing with you.

Obviously this won't work for all INTJs... there are members of every type who are unreasonable, antagonistic, rude or crazy... but I think it will work with most.

I realize that this post is basically "here's how you need to change your behavior to accommodate us" and that's not really a solution. There may be something we might do to work on it ourselves. I would welcome any suggestions. But don't ask us to just take your word for it... I think that goes against our nature.

 

[proteanmix]

Well, I guess I'll give you a response, since it does annoy me that you're so ignorant...

Thanks for humoring me. I decided to respond to you as well. I'm taking Mendacity's advice.

See, you don't recall anything. Baseless arguments are easy ways to get written off. UHN seems to be a weak-preference INTJ. I will admit that I have yet to see certain tell-tale signs (which, for instance, Nonpareil shows clearly).

So what you're saying is because Usehername may be a weak on her INTJ preferences, you're using that as proof for her not to be one? What's that about baseless arguments!? Anyone who is 100% anything on any scale is the very definition of unbalanced. That reminds me, don't you have a 100% something in your sig?

And what I've posted in this thread hasn't been baseless argument. I've made it clear that what I'm describing has been my experience with the INTJs in my life. At least I have the humility to say it's the INTJs I know, while you're the one making blanket statements about what is and isn't INTJ behavior.

Actually, your vacuous straw men were disregarded. They weren't worthy of my time. The personal attack was appreciated, though; it's so classy.

Yeah, I don't deal any of that logic stuff. Use it on another NT. I'm not coming on your territory to fight.

Usually I ignore you, but sometimes things are so slow that you annoy me enough for me to respond.

I won't go into the amount of times I've hit "cancel" in response to something you've said. I think my post count would be increased by about 100. You should thank your lucky stars for my Fe. Please continue ignoring me and we'll get along great.

Why bother? There was no reason for me to ever make an effort. It clearly bothers you, but it doesn't bother me in the least.

But...you just did. I'm not really bothered, I was at first, but I took a shower, relaxed a bit and now I'm chillin and about to go out with my friends.

I apologize to the other INTJs for derailing the thread. I'll only respond to reasonable INTJs as was suggested.

 

[Athenian200]

You know, that's interesting. I actually have a similar skepticism if someone says something that doesn't make sense to me, but I often don't voice it. Sometimes I'll ignore something I disagree with to get along with people, but not really believe it. What I do, though, is go back later and look for information about the point, see if there's any good reason to believe it, and depending on whether I think they can take it, I'll tell them if I still disagree, and why, and ask for clarification. (Although sometimes I'll just avoid the issue, and secretly think they're just deluded and confused.)

Note that on this message board, I give my self far more room to voice disagreement and criticism, because I don't feel there's as quite as much to lose from doing so, although if a person looks uncomfortable with my disagreement, then I'll revert to not voicing it, and talk about something else (or in more extreme cases, pretending to agree).

But the thing is, I'll pretty much believe anything, as long as you can explain it in a way that makes sense to me. If I see it, but it doesn't make sense to me, I won't believe it, although I might pretend to depending on the circumstances.

I'm also reluctant to argue at times, because I tend to believe that it's possible that everyone is correct according to their own views, and there's no reason mine are necessarily more true.

 

[Wolf]

Thanks for humoring me. I decided to respond to you as well. I'm taking Mendacity's advice.

Maybe there's hope for you after all...maybe.

So what you're saying is because Usehername may be a weak on her INTJ preferences, you're using that as proof for her not to be one? What's that about baseless arguments!? Anyone who is 100% anything on any scale is the very definition of unbalanced. That reminds me, don't you have a 100% something in your sig?

When did I flat claim it? I think you're delusional again, and it's so common for your type... Again with the arguments that attack the person in an attempt to discredit them. I certainly can't deny your type...

And what I've posted in this thread hasn't been baseless argument. I've made it clear that what I'm describing has been my experience with the INTJs in my life. At least I have the humility to say it's the INTJs I know, while you're the one making blanket statements about what is and isn't INTJ behavior.

I never made a blanket statement about what was and wasn't, I made a subjective assessment based on patterns you could not comprehend.

Yeah, I don't deal any of that logic stuff. Use it on another NT. I'm not coming on your territory to fight.

Yet you attempt to use it above, failing miserably. Curious.

I won't go into the amount of times I've hit "cancel" in response to something you've said. I think my post count would be increased by about 100. You should thank your lucky stars for my Fe. Please continue ignoring me and we'll get along great.

I appreciate your keeping those rushes of senseless, baseless feelings inside. You should learn to do it a bit more, because you seem to see slights outside yourself that you're terribly wrong about. No wonder I have such a hard time with my ENFJ sister-in-law, she must think I'm horrible just as you do.

I apologize to the other INTJs for derailing the thread. I'll only respond to reasonable INTJs as was suggested.

Wow, yet another low-grade insult. You're really chalking up the marks with someone, I'm sure. I'm so deeply hurt that I want to go hide in a corner and cry about it. You cut to my very soul, like a hot butter knife through a thick chunk of pork lard. Oh, the pain, it is unbearable.

 

[Usehername]

Maybe there's hope for you after all...maybe.


When did I flat claim it? I think you're delusional again, and it's so common for your type... Again with the arguments that attack the person in an attempt to discredit them. I certainly can't deny your type...


I never made a blanket statement about what was and wasn't, I made a subjective assessment based on patterns you could not comprehend.


Yet you attempt to use it above, failing miserably. Curious.


I appreciate your keeping those rushes of senseless, baseless feelings inside. You should learn to do it a bit more, because you seem to see slights outside yourself that you're terribly wrong about. No wonder I have such a hard time with my ENFJ sister-in-law, she must think I'm horrible just as you do.


Wow, yet another low-grade insult. You're really chalking up the marks with someone, I'm sure. I'm so deeply hurt that I want to go hide in a corner and cry about it. You cut to my very soul, like a hot butter knife through a thick chunk of pork lard. Oh, the pain, it is unbearable.

Wolf, I have outright claimed that I'm trying to balance myself and am not an "extreme" INTJ.

I have much success academically, socially, athletically, musically and in pretty much any domain that I can think of. (Noting that "success" is different than "pwning" b/c I'm no genius, I'm no world-class athlete, etc.). But I'm a balanced, likeable person.
I think it's desirable to become the best version of ourselves that we can be. This would include, for me as an INTJ, learning to value things that don't at first seem that important to me, but as I grow and learn in life, I recognize their value. (For instance, social interaction, making people feel wanted, valued, etc.)

I am a weak INTJ (excluding when I'm overtired) and that is something I consider a great accomplishment. I have the positive characteristics of the INTJ but have worked very hard to overcome my natural areas of weakness (such as I see Economica doing with CC and btw Mendacity, I encourage you to do some scouting on previous threads, b/c this is an issue that has been beaten to death and I think Economica's reaction is more than fair; people keep bringing it up).

Regardless, Wolf, I consider the fact that you see me as a "weak" INTJ due to my explicitly stated value and conscious consideration for others and desire to "pwn the human system" a positive thing.

I don't want to be the nerd who sits on their computer scoffing at the rest of the world for being unworthy and inferior of me, all the while upset at the fact that I can't seem to find happiness for some reason. (I do want to be a nerd. I don't want to be unhappy at my own undoing.)

 

[htb]

If anyone is looking for a silver lining, INTJs are quite capable of dramatics.

 

[Mendacity]

Proteanmix
... this isn't actually what I was talking about.. but I love it when people take my advice!... I think you guys' discussion has gone past the point of "friendly argument" and careened right around the bend into the territory of mud-flinging. In this kind of situation neither of you will successfully make a point because now there's a bunch of ego and insults involved. Maybe you guys should take a deep breath and start over without all the insults? I dunno, maybe its not worth your time. I probably should just stay out of it.

I should probably amend my previous post to mention that (as I'm sure I don't have to point out) any time you criticize someone for an aspect of their personality you should be very careful how you phrase things. Most people are sensitive about that kind of thing and it's easy to accidentally offend someone (and I'm no exception to this on either side of the coin). This problem may be compounded when dealing with INTJs for several reasons:
1. We're not very social and social interactions sometimes have a way of going awry with us.
2. The INTJs I know and my own experience of being an INTJ is that people often misunderstand you and everyone's kind of asking you why you can't just be normal and telling you how difficult and abnormal you are.
I know, I know: But I'm not trying to throw a pity-party, just illustrate that we may be hyper-sensitive at times.

If anyone is looking for a silver lining, INTJs are quite capable of dramatics.

lol! Welcome to INTJ theater.

You know, that's interesting. I actually have a similar skepticism if someone says something that doesn't make sense to me, but I often don't voice it. Sometimes I'll ignore something I disagree with to get along with people, but not really believe it. What I do, though, is go back later and look for information about the point, see if there's any good reason to believe it, and depending on whether I think they can take it, I'll tell them if I still disagree, and why, and ask for clarification. (Although sometimes I'll just avoid the issue, and secretly think they're just deluded and confused.)

Yes, I think that's a good way of describing it... although very rarely will I keep quiet about a subject just to preserve the relationship (it does occasionally happen though). And generally, when it does it's because I think the person is unreasonable and it's not worth an argument with them because they're not capable of making coherent points or listening to the same from another person. I think it's both a strength and a weakness that INTJs are usually so unwilling to just go along with someone to keep the peace. It certainly does make socializing difficult for us sometimes. Especially because most of the population view attacks on an argument or opinion of theirs as an attack on they themselves.

Usehername, I think your views on being a "weak INTJ" are pretty good. A "weak INTJ" may be a more balanced person overall. I think that many of us could learn something from this and it might make social situations in our own lives go more smoothly. I don't want to be scoffing at the rest of the world either. Although there are some who deserve it.

Mendacity, I encourage you to do some scouting on previous threads, b/c this is an issue that has been beaten to death and I think Economica's reaction is more than fair; people keep bringing it up).

You're probably right (and it's my own bad for not considering this possibility) that the issue has been beaten to death. I apologize for making a lengthy post on something that has already been covered.
However, my intention with my post to Economica (the first one) was to correct her falsely attributing to me an argument I never made and to tell her I didn't completely buy her argument and why I felt that way. I felt her response was a bit out of line. How is responding to a dissenting opinion with insults more than fair? Maybe I'm looking at it wrong or there's something I don't understand about the situation, but what Economica seemed to be saying to me was, "INTJs suck except for me because I'm so enlightened and so much better than all of these others." And that strikes me as just the kind of "siting on their computer scoffing at the rest of the world" behavior you mentioned. Please help me understand.
(This doesn't mean you're wrong, just that I don't understand your point of view on the matter and would like you to clarify it, if you wouldn't mind. I am well aware that I may be completely blind to how my argument may have come off or ignorant of another factor in the situation. The purpose of this response is to clarify to you my position and hope that you will elaborate for me on yours - as was my response to Economica's comment as well- not to insight a fight.... this parenthetical is a result of the back and forth between Economica and I and I'm considering making it my signature.)
Anyway, that's just my perspective on the matter. However, I am aware that every argument has two sides.
I do have two questions: There were many issues that went back and forth between Economica and I. Which do people keep bringing up? And what is your suggestion for a better way to have handled it?

 

[lastrailway]

If anyone is looking for a silver lining, INTJs are quite capable of dramatics.

Exactly what I was thinking

 

[Totenkindly]

No actual comments from me, I'm exhausted trying to read through it all.

But there were some concerns this thread was blowing out of control, but it looks to be settling down now; and I'd prefer to let it run (since there was some good stuff among the dung), if y'all got things back under control. We okay?

 

[Usehername]

You're probably right (and it's my own bad for not considering this possibility) that the issue has been beaten to death. I apologize for making a lengthy post on something that has already been covered.
However, my intention with my post to Economica (the first one) was to correct her falsely attributing to me an argument I never made and to tell her I didn't completely buy her argument and why I felt that way. I felt her response was a bit out of line. How is responding to a dissenting opinion with insults more than fair? Maybe I'm looking at it wrong or there's something I don't understand about the situation, but what Economica seemed to be saying to me was, "INTJs suck except for me because I'm so enlightened and so much better than all of these others." And that strikes me as just the kind of "siting on their computer scoffing at the rest of the world" behavior you mentioned. Please help me understand.
(This doesn't mean you're wrong, just that I don't understand your point of view on the matter and would like you to clarify it, if you wouldn't mind. I am well aware that I may be completely blind to how my argument may have come off or ignorant of another factor in the situation. The purpose of this response is to clarify to you my position and hope that you will elaborate for me on yours, not to insight a fight.)
Anyway, that's just my perspective on the matter. However, I am aware that every argument has two sides.
I do have two questions: There were many issues that went back and forth between Economica and I. Which do people keep bringing up? And what is your suggestion for a better way to have handled it?

I only skimmed the earlier stuff; I'll point this out and ask me to read more if it's necessary (i should be studying, which is why i'm nto re-reading now, but i don't mind clarifying if necessary).

Economica's CC arguments are more self-deprecating than self-serving. She's identified it as a major turning point in her life when she discovered just how much of a stubborn ass she was at points with her CCness. She doesn't want to be a stubborn ass, and so she works hard at discovering the ins and outs to everything CC-related. She wants to better herself.
I read her post as self-deprecating. Which I thought was intuitive, since she was an INTJ saying this about INTJs. But I see how you could be (what I perceive as) mistaken re: her being holier-than-thou.

I don't know about the rest of it. I only skimmed it so far.