[Ti] The Real Percentage

[nolla]

How many people are real? Being themselves, not fakes, etc...

 

[Totenkindly]

Define "fake."

 

[nolla]

I was hoping for everyone to define it for themselves. I have very strict rules for being real. I'm not sure if I fill the criteria myself. With the poll I am interested in seeing how you see it.

 

[Night]

I think those that are sincere to the letter of their impulses are usually cultural "fringe-dwellers". (It should be understood that this distinction, while distant from popular ethical approval, does not necessarily suggest a critique of the individual - simply that his behavior is noticeably disparate from his neighbor's.)

Extreme individualism; interesting concept.

Being "fake" is a necessity for successful communal living; our collective efficiency towards serving this adaptation is tied to our present problem of (among other things) overpopulation.

 

[Kiddo]

Real about who they are in the inside? Less than 1%.

It's why I try to be brutally honest, even on a forum like this one. The cost of doing so though is you always feel like you are defending yourself because you don't have the luxury of pretending it is just some internet persona. In real life, I freely display much of the real me as well, which is probably why I am still single.

I have met some extraordinarily fake people though. I'm sure I will get yelled at for saying it, but It seems to somehow be related to extrovertedness.

 

[Randomnity]

I think everyone is "real"....its just that some people's "real selves" are considered shallow/uninteresting/fake/etc by some people.

On a related note, it amuses me to see people who think everyone else is fake (not saying the OP is like this). Unlikely.

This does depend on the definition of fakeness though....in my eyes it doesn't make someone fake to avoid blurting out every retarded thought that pops into their head, for instance.

 

[WobblyStilettos]

I think everyone has times when they are really truly 'real', but pretty much everyone acts fake because... well, sometimes you just have to.

 

[nolla]

Oh, how nice. So many different perspectives on being real.

Being "fake" is a necessity for successful communal living; our collective efficiency towards serving this adaptation is tied to our present problem of (among other things) overpopulation.

I agree. The more people, the more strangers who you need to guard your real self from.

The cost of doing so though is you always feel like you are defending yourself because you don't have the luxury of pretending it is just some internet persona. In real life, I freely display much of the real me as well, which is probably why I am still single.

Love this comment. Very brave of you.

I think everyone is "real"....its just that some people's "real selves" are considered shallow/uninteresting/fake/etc by some people.

I don't really agree. There is a difference being fake and being shallow. The shallow and boring people are often more interesting than the fake ones.

 

[Randomnity]

I don't really agree. There is a difference being fake and being shallow. The shallow and boring people are often more interesting than the fake ones.

Can you define fake, then? Because I don't think I've ever met a fake person.

 

[nolla]

Really? Whoah... We live in very different worlds. I have to think about the definition for a while. I guess it's mostly a feeling that I get from someone.

 

[pokerzen]

I went the 90-100% route. Even though someone may be insincere (as an example adjective), they are still real and genuine in their insencerity. Much like the phantasms in a schizophrenic's mind aren't exactly what his perception would believe them to be, they are still real thoughts.

Another example would be to say:

POV1: George Bush was not real with the American People.
POV2: Actually, he was real. A real snake.

See?

If you mean real to be nothing hidden, or without ulterior motivethen I would vote 0-10%.

And then let's not forget solipsism, which might lead me to think that there is truly NO other real person but me. ;p

 

[Haphazard]

Fake? As in human? Do you believe aliens walk among us? What about angels?

Or, oh, is this the NF version of fake?

There seems to be this NF assumption that everyone is being fake because they don't act as you do. Being the same on the inside as you are on the outside seems to be only an NF concept of the only way to be 'authentic' and 'not fake.' And I'm starting to get sick of it.

If that's the definition we're working with, then being fake is a very, very good thing. If I was 'real' all the time, I'd probably be a violent, nervous wreck with a good few murders under my belt. And you know, I'd rather be a dreaded 'fake' person than executed. It is congruent with my value system that survival trumps a lot of things. Being 'fake' is not a problem at all.

Also it doesn't seem to go along with the fact that there are plenty of people who are *not* congruent with how they behave and how they feel, because that's what's most natural for them. Is it right to go against nature in striving to not be 'fake'?

 

[nolla]

Ok, the fake-factors

- Having many different faces for situations
- Thinking a lot about what people want to hear
- Do not have many opinions of their own
- Lying a lot
- Spending a lot of time and money building appearances

I might be adding some later on... As you can see they are all relative. Everybody obviously does these things to some degree, but some seem to be all about them.

I went the 90-100% route. Even though someone may be insincere (as an example adjective), they are still real and genuine in their insencerity.

Hmm... It would mean that it is impossible to be "fake in your insincerity". It would take away the meaning of the word "fake". That's weird.

 

[nolla]

Being the same on the inside as you are on the outside seems to be only an NF concept of the only way to be 'authentic' and 'not fake.' And I'm starting to get sick of it.

Yes. That's the definition I was looking for. Thank you.

If I was 'real' all the time, I'd probably be a violent, nervous wreck with a good few murders under my belt. And you know, I'd rather be a dreaded 'fake' person than executed.

I doubt that, but I'll admit there must be people who are most real when killing people.

Also it doesn't seem to go along with the fact that there are plenty of people who are *not* congruent with how they behave and how they feel, because that's what's most natural for them. Is it right to go against nature in striving to not be 'fake'?

If you change and try to behave as your old self, then you are not being real. Being real doesn't mean that you behave the same throughout your life. It is relative to the situation.

 

[Totenkindly]

I went the 90-100% route. Even though someone may be insincere (as an example adjective), they are still real and genuine in their insencerity. Much like the phantasms in a schizophrenic's mind aren't exactly what his perception would believe them to be, they are still real thoughts.

Another example would be to say:

POV1: George Bush was not real with the American People.
POV2: Actually, he was real. A real snake.

or even POV3: Someone who did what he felt was right... and made horrible terrible mistakes because of it. (I hate what he's done during his tenure -- but it doesn't mean I think he's 'fake.')

All right. Like many others have suggested, we're all 'fake' to a degree in that we usually minimize our weaknesses and maximize our good qualities. Because we want to be (1) accepted and liked and (2) successful in reaching our goals.

But I don't consider this "fake" even tho it's a manipulation of our public persona. Usually this persona is still pretty consistent, even if it's not truly representative of us in our human frailty.

I define "fake" as in real large inconsistency of persona, all based on crass manipulation of people and situations without any other concern but the gratification of the person involved. You're not dealing with a person at that point, you are dealing with various "snapshots" that are not tied at all to any particular human being -- just representative of an underlying rapacious hunger and will without true human characteristics.

Which leads me to this note: One can never underestimate the impact of religious belief on what one considers to be "real" vs. fake.

 

[Randomnity]

Hmm.

- Having many different faces for situations - you mean like, not swearing in front of your grandmother, or talking about all the pot you smoked last night with an acquaintance who happens to be a policeman? nobody could be that socially inept and be happy.
- Thinking a lot about what people want to hear - insecurity isn't the same as fakeness, though they might correlate
- Do not have many opinions of their own - this is shallowness, lack of curiosity, apathy about the subject, or lack of intelligence....none of these are "fake", just different from you (presumably)
- Lying a lot - for fun? I don't know many people who do this.
- Spending a lot of time and money building appearances - a lot of people value their appearance and it makes them happy to look good. I wouldn't call it fake, I'd call it following your desires - some people have different desires, that's all.

You see what I meant? People may have very different values and desires from you, and it doesn't automatically mean that they're fake.

 

[Haphazard]

Ok, the fake-factors

- Having many different faces for situations
- Thinking a lot about what people want to hear
- Do not have many opinions of their own
- Lying a lot
- Spending a lot of time and money building appearances

I might be adding some later on... As you can see they are all relative. Everybody obviously does these things to some degree, but some seem to be all about them.

Hmm, three out of five, not bad. I'd win a rock, paper, scissors tournament!

The second one is a big one for me. I've got to hone what I'm going to say to the general audience. I hone it to have its greatest effect, whether that effect be good or shocking or funny. And it's all absolutely natural.

I usually advise people to think before they speak. They might speak their true feelings in the heat of the moment, but really, is that what anybody will want to hear? Will they take to it kindly? What if what sounds perfectly clear to you is misinterpreted fatally? Speech is one of those matters of life and death -- of COURSE I'm going to consider a lot what people want to hear.

 

[nolla]

Hmm.

- Having many different faces for situations - you mean like, not swearing in front of your grandmother, or talking about all the pot you smoked last night with an acquaintance who happens to be a policeman? nobody could be that socially inept and be happy.
- Thinking a lot about what people want to hear - insecurity isn't the same as fakeness, though they might correlate
- Do not have many opinions of their own - this is shallowness, lack of curiosity, apathy about the subject, or lack of intelligence....none of these are "fake", just different from you (presumably)
- Lying a lot - for fun? I don't know many people who do this.
- Spending a lot of time and money building appearances - a lot of people value their appearance and it makes them happy to look good. I wouldn't call it fake, I'd call it following your desires - some people have different desires, that's all.

You see what I meant? People may have very different values and desires from you, and it doesn't automatically mean that they're fake.

Sure. It's not hard to crack those definitions like that. None of them is the same as being fake. I still do think that if you get "high points" from all of them, you are pretty surely fake in my eyes.

But the point for me to start the thread was to get the different definitions and point of views on being real. Not necessarily argue about what I see to be real.

 

[DigitalMethod]

Hmm, three out of five, not bad. I'd win a rock, paper, scissors tournament!

The second one is a big one for me. I've got to hone what I'm going to say to the general audience. I hone it to have its greatest effect, whether that effect be good or shocking or funny. And it's all absolutely natural.

I usually advise people to think before they speak. They might speak their true feelings in the heat of the moment, but really, is that what anybody will want to hear? Will they take to it kindly? What if what sounds perfectly clear to you is misinterpreted fatally? Speech is one of those matters of life and death -- of COURSE I'm going to consider a lot what people want to hear.

I think what he means is that the speaker will change his/her opinions and points of view to what the audience wants to hear. Perhaps?

 

[Haphazard]

I think what he means is that the speaker will change his/her opinions and points of view to what the audience wants to hear. Perhaps?

Oh, I wouldn't call that fake, I'd just call that annoying.

It's fun to trip people like that up.