Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 98

Thread: Are these two perspectives related to quadra values?

  1. #1
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Are these two perspectives related to quadra values?

    I'll post more information about the source of these descriptions as well as the unedited version of them after I get some feedback. For now I'm going to edit them though. In the meantime:


    Group A sees man in general as perfectly malleable. It sees every individual's problems as being caused by society as a whole. Criminal behavior under this theory is merely a response to injustice; poverty is a condition brought on by greed; depression, drunkenness and illness are all seen as a fault of the medical system or our general "awareness". Since individual problems are the fault of the whole of society, the solution must be to fix society by massive government intervention.

    Group B believes in individual responsibility. This means, if someone commits murder, he is bad. If someone is poor he has declined to take advantage of opportunities manifest within a free market system. If someone is uneducated, he has not worked hard enough to secure education for himself. This attitude among Group B means that the perceived solution is not to change society in a general way but to get government out of the business of regulating the people in mass and making them take responsibility for their actions in particular. Social man then is not malleable, but the individual can be guided by market force.



    What do you think? Are people's tendencies to lean one way or another in their stance on these subjects related to Ne/Si vs. Ni/Se? Fe/Ti vs. Fi/Te? Aristocracy vs. Democracy? Other? (I recognize that the description is written somewhat in favor of one of the Groups, but please try to think of which quadras the people you know who lean towards one group of the other are in.)
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Group A is Ti/Fe

    Group B is Fi/Te

  3. #3
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think both are rather simplistic and idealistic views, so I tend to straddle the two. The truth of such matters is more complicated than either view takes into account.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carla View Post
    I'm not sure it's that simple. I've seen this argued by two INTjs in real-life. One argued the first point and the other argued the second. I can't explain their respective motives.
    It's not that simple in that not everyone from Group A is going to be Fe/Ti, and not everyone from Group B is going to be Fi/Te.

    It is simple in that they both fit perfectly within the two sets of quadra values in the way I mentioned.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos View Post
    I think both are rather simplistic and idealistic views, so I tend to straddle the two. The truth of such matters is more complicated than either view takes into account.
    This has a lot to do with economics, though, and Group A are a bunch of society-crippling socialists, and Group B are the consumerists who understand how actual economic prosperity is achieved.

  6. #6
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Personally I think that Group B is Te/Fi, Se/Ni, and Democratic. As such, none of the other quadras values all three of its opposites.
    Last edited by Joy; 07-22-2008 at 05:30 PM.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  7. #7
    Suomea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    TIM
    ILE-Ti
    Posts
    1,054
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ...
    Last edited by Suomea; 09-28-2008 at 12:04 AM.
    Suomea

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Suomea View Post
    What does economic prosperity mean?
    Resources being allocated efficiently, which never, EVER happens in any sort of socialist endeavor.

  9. #9
    Suomea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    TIM
    ILE-Ti
    Posts
    1,054
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    Resources being allocated efficiently, which never, EVER happens in any sort of socialist endeavor.
    Nor does it occur in a perfect free market economy.
    Suomea

  10. #10
    Creepy-Diana

    Default

    .

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Suomea View Post
    Nor does it occur in a perfect free market economy.
    Well, if your definition of efficient is "100% efficient," then sure. But the problem with your argument is when you attempt to compare the relative efficiency between the two systems. Even communist China has learned that a capitalist economy is infinitely more stable and prosperous than a centrally controlled economy.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Diana View Post
    I see mostly deltas among the first group. More alphas than not as well. I don't know for sure about betas, as they seem to be either one.

    I personally fall squarely in the second group.
    Deltas in the first group? Huh? Why?

    The whole point of the first group is Fe seeing something and saying "No fair!", and Ti stepping in and saying "I know what to do!". Te is seen as irrelevant "greed" by these people.

  13. #13
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There is an aspect of Ne/Si to Group A as well though.

    Si: people's immediate needs aren't being met (this is where much of the shortsightedness of Group A comes from, imo)
    Ne: We could do this or this or this or this or this or this or this...

    The Fe/Ti in Group A is more along the lines of:

    Fe: people are unhappy
    Ti: let's create a system/structure to fix it


    Anyways, I also fall squarely into Group B, of course. I'm not sure how many people would say that they fall squarely into Group A (based on these descriptions). It's easy to understand why though, if I'm correct about the following:

    Alpha: Fe/Ti, Ne/Si, Demorcratic... two points for Group A, one point for Group B
    Beta: Fe/Ti, Se/Ni, Aristocratic... two points for Group A, one point for Group B
    Gamma: Te/Fi, Se/Ni, Democratic... zero points for Group A, three points for Group B
    Delta: Te/Fi, Ne/Si, Aristocratic... two points for Group A, one point for Group B
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  14. #14
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by implied View Post
    i think trying to split these into simple preferences is really underestimating the variety of responses you could receive based on many factors. i recently heard a rather well-agreed-upon Ti dominant from this forum express views that reflected group B MUCH more accurately.
    More accurately than what?

    i think kim is one user who would more likely lean towards the first group, as a delta.
    I was thinking the same, actually. If she was present with some of the information written by the author who describes these groups she may see a lot of the reasons why Group A's behavior isn't in anyone's best interests.

    I think Ne types generally tend to see it as "not being that simple" though.

    fwiw i don't relate with either that strongly. there are situations where group B fits and situations where group A fits my pov on things.
    Group A's ideas usually cause much more harm than good in the long run.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by implied View Post
    i think kim is one user who would more likely lean towards the first group, as a delta.
    Kim and me, both... until we get some Te. Then it's like, "Ohh!".

  16. #16
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Group B believes in individual responsibility. This means, if someone commits murder, he is bad. If someone is poor he has declined to take advantage of opportunities manifest within a free market system. If someone is uneducated, he has not worked hard enough to secure education for himself. This attitude among Group B means that the perceived solution is not to change society in a general way but to get government out of the business of regulating the people in mass and making them take responsibility for their actions in particular. Social man then is not malleable, but the individual can be guided by market force.
    I think it's not so clear-cut. Somebody always has the choice wether or not commit murder, so somebody that commits murder is definitely to be condemened. However there are many instances in which for somebody is extremely hard to get an education. The two instances can't be equated.

    More generally speaking: in most instances, a "bad" action can be avoided by free choice, unless the life of the person is at stake. However a potentially "good" action can't necessarily be achieved. I cannot see how somebody couldn't see how there are an enormous number of instances in which somebody just can't get an education, for example the simple fact that a person can be born in the middle of a desert or of a mountain valley where advanced schools are not present and survival is paramount. In fact, I would declare completely foolish somebody that really were to place such a responsibility on somebody else.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  17. #17
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by implied View Post
    more accurately than group A. this is an INTj fwiw.
    ?

    Was he arguing for Group A's ideas or Group B's ideas?

    try to imagine a situation in which group B's behaviour could be detrimental to you and your family. they exist. (;
    This is a very shortsighted way to look at it.

    i see it as considering neither extreme to be a good option because in the end it both extremes cause an incredible imbalance.
    Economically, no. A much higher standard of living would result. There will always be people who vote for politicians who offer to intervene with the natural flow of supply and demand (such as minimum wage, subsidized farming, rent control, etc.) though (which in turn causes surpluses and shortages), and as such there will always be policies/behaviors of both Groups A and B present.

    i don't think you're totally wrong. i may lean towards group B a bit, but i think you're failing to see why group B could have problems as well.
    You're right. I am.

    I think there should only be government intervention in an economy to prevent cartels/price fixing and that sort of thing.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    I think it's not so clear-cut. Somebody always has the choice wether or not commit murder, so somebody that commits murder is definitely to be condemened. However there are many instances in which for somebody is extremely hard to get an education. The two instances can't be equated.
    Sure, but that's missing the point, and the actual theory isn't so black and white.

  19. #19
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    This has a lot to do with economics, though, and Group A are a bunch of society-crippling socialists, and Group B are the consumerists who understand how actual economic prosperity is achieved.
    But it has nothing to do with Socionics.

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    Deltas in the first group? Huh? Why?

    The whole point of the first group is Fe seeing something and saying "No fair!", and Ti stepping in and saying "I know what to do!". Te is seen as irrelevant "greed" by these people.
    Probably because ambitions and free movement (/) is more possible in free market systems.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If you want to be even more specific, Group A is Beta and Group B is Gamma.

    In today's society, Ti/Fe and Fi/Te are the two sets of values currently most at odds, though most of us know the Fi/Te's as conservatives, and the Ti/Fe's as liberals.

    Here's a related quote I like:
    Years ago, Thomas Sowell wrote a column that I have never forgotten. He said that liberals field their A team, while conservatives field their B team. What did he mean by that? He meant that the “best and the brightest” of the liberals slaver to enter politics, or journalism, in order to control other people’s lives. But our best and brightest — the Right’s elite — are in the economy, inventing things, establishing businesses, and making the country grow.
    - Jay Nordlinger, "National Review"

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos View Post
    But it has nothing to do with Socionics.
    Wrong.

  22. #22
    Suomea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    TIM
    ILE-Ti
    Posts
    1,054
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    Well, if your definition of efficient is "100% efficient," then sure. But the problem with your argument is when you attempt to compare the relative efficiency between the two systems. Even communist China has learned that a capitalist economy is infinitely more stable and prosperous than a centrally controlled economy.
    And even "capitalist" America has a mixed economy.

    An over regulated market will eventually succumb to the "truth" of a free market. An under regulated market will lead to too much volatility, which will at least reduce efficiency when compared to the value of the currency to the individual, and almost certainly reduce overall efficiency as well.

    That aside, I'm morally opposed to allowing people to starve who want to work. If a government doesn't at least protect it's population against extreme volatility to some degree, and help it adapt to changing times more effectively, then I don't see much use for government at all.
    Suomea

  23. #23
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    Sure, but that's missing the point, and the actual theory isn't so black and white.
    There wasn't any theory enunciated in the original post, so I'm not sure what you're referring to.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  24. #24
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    This has a lot to do with economics, though, and Group A are a bunch of society-crippling socialists, and Group B are the consumerists who understand how actual economic prosperity is achieved.
    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    Wrong.
    Your thoughts do not relate to Socionics due to the evidence that indicates otherwise that Quadra X will lean towards one side or another. Of people whose political views I know, an ILE friend and an ILE economics professor of mine are both staunch free-market libertarians. Then there was an EIE "acquaintance" of mine who also sung praises to free market capitalism. My grandparents (LSI & ESE) would most likely fall in Group B as well. Two ESI and SEE friends of mine have views which are Democratic socialist. I could go on. In short, your views are simplistic, naiive, and clearly wrong in terms of evidence.

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    And even "capitalist" America has a mixed economy.
    Yes, even "capitalist" America has detrimental economic policies brought on by misguided political ambitions and lack of common sense.

    An over regulated market will eventually succumb to the "truth" of a free market. An under regulated market will lead to too much volatility, which will at least reduce efficiency when compared to the value of the currency to the individual, and almost certainly reduce overall efficiency as well.
    Personally, I support a laissez-faire economy, but if you think that any sort of economic supervision beyond that is beneficial, you are plain wrong. There simply isn't any way that bureaucrats, however smart, can know enough at any given time to justifiably supersede the plans of businesses and investors.

    That aside, I'm morally opposed to allowing people to starve who want to work. If a government doesn't at least protect it's population against extreme volatility to some degree, and help it adapt to changing times more effectively, then I don't see much use for government at all.
    I'm also morally opposed to letting people starve, as long as helping them leads to less poverty overall and isn't merely a subsidy of the poor. However, I don't confuse my moral opposition with having the right to supersede someone else's plans with their own money.

  26. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos View Post
    Your thoughts do not relate to Socionics due to the evidence that indicates otherwise that Quadra X will lean towards one side or another. Of people whose political views I know, an ILE friend and an ILE economics professor of mine are both staunch free-market libertarians. Then there was an EIE "acquaintance" of mine who also sung praises to free market capitalism. My grandparents (LSI & ESE) would most likely fall in Group B as well. Two ESI and SEE friends of mine have views which are Democratic socialist. I could go on. In short, your views are simplistic, naiive, and clearly wrong in terms of evidence.
    No, you're wrong because I have twice the sampling size as you, and they all conform to my views.

  27. #27
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    No, you're wrong because I have twice the sampling size as you, and they all conform to my views.
    lol

  28. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    There wasn't any theory enunciated in the original post, so I'm not sure what you're referring to.
    Look up Thomas Sowell's book, A Conflict of Visions.

  29. #29
    Creepy-Diana

    Default

    .

  30. #30
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Diana View Post
    Kim, and a lot of other ENFps is who I had in mind when I suggested delta. But the other types in the quadra seem to lean that way imo also, though perhaps not as strongly.
    Well, if I'm correct, and Group A is mainly Beta, and Group B is mainly Gamma, then it would make theoretical sense that Alphas and Deltas would tend to straddle the line between the two.

    Not that this proves anything at all, but my old ENFp teacher was a staunch free market libertarian, and my ISTp father is a conservative republican.

  31. #31
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    Personally, I support a laissez-faire economy, but if you think that any sort of economic supervision beyond that is beneficial, you are plain wrong. There simply isn't any way that bureaucrats, however smart, can know enough at any given time to justifiably supersede the plans of businesses and investors.
    That is not really the issue. The issue is not whether bureaucrats can more efficiently supervise the economy, which they can't, but the extent to which businesses control us - to what extent are their services unsafe, unfit, or detrimental to the long-term public health. Apart from the government income generated by trade tariffs, the comparatively much freer markets of the mid to late 19th centuries led to a Gilded Age in which wealth, power, and standard of living was grossly concentrated in the hands of the few at the vast expense of the many including poor working conditions and poor quality goods (Upton Sinclair's The Jungle).

    Also it is worth noting that the US president probably the most responsible for the development of big statist government, Franklin D Roosevelt, has recently been typed by Expat as being an SEE. And the president responsible for greatly lowering government trade tariffs, John F Kennedy, was an EIE.

  32. #32
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    So anyways, the unedited version of the descriptions:

    In "A Conflict of Visions", Thomas Sowell proposed that the fundamental difference between the policies of the left and the right derive from their respective views of human nature.

    The left sees man in general as perfectly malleable. It sees every individual's problems as being caused by society as a whole. Criminal behavior under this theory is merely a response to injustice; poverty is a condition brought on by greed; depression, drunkenness and illness are all seen as a fault of the medical system or our general "awareness". Since individual problems are the fault of the whole of society, the solution must be to fix society by massive government intervention.

    People on the right take an inverse view of the situation. Conservatives believe in individual responsibility. This means, if someone commits murder, he is bad. If someone is poor he has declined to take advantage of opportunities manifest within a free market system. If someone is uneducated, he has not worked hard enough to secure education for himself. This attitude among conservatives means that the perceived solution is not to change society in a general way but to get government out of the business of regulating the people in mass and making them take responsibility for their actions in particular. Social man then is not malleable, but the individual can be guided by market forces.

    Conservatives believe that the history of the last 40 years is stark evidence that the leftist view is complete bunk. The failure of the welfare system put in place during the Johnson administration, the price controls of the Nixon administration and the general malaise caused by the various programs implemented by the Carter administration provide more than sufficient evidence. Couple this with the success of welfare reform in the 1990s and it is hard to deny that Thomas Sowell was correct in his appraisal of the diametrically opposed views of the world espoused by the right and left.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  33. #33
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Johnson: SEE
    Nixon: ESI
    Carter: ESI

    As you can see, the evidence from Sowell's piece clearly indicates that the idiots who support government control in the economy are clearly of Ti/Fe Quadras.

  34. #34
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That is not really the issue. The issue is not whether bureaucrats can more efficiently supervise the economy, which they can't, but the extent to which businesses control us - to what extent are their services unsafe, unfit, or detrimental to the long-term public health.
    Companies must always find ways to work around various laws that affect the environment, public safety, etc., but attempts at "improving" working conditions often get out of hand and only damage the company's ability to stay competitive, which hurts the economy, because people who are willing to work (i.e., resources ready to be allocated) aren't getting hired, because it has become prohibitively expensive for the companies to hire on the additional employees because of the strict demands being made of them by people who feel entitled to easy living.

    Apart from the government income generated by trade tariffs, the comparatively much freer markets of the mid to late 19th centuries led to a Gilded Age in which wealth, power, and standard of living was grossly concentrated in the hands of the few at the vast expense of the many including poor working conditions and poor quality goods (Upton Sinclair's The Jungle).
    Yes, the poor conditions that people had to work in were tragic, but far more tragic would be to implement a series of laws that mandate that companies become less efficient, because that would hurt more people in the long term. If this had simply been left to the market, then competition would have stepped in and offered more favorable working conditions in order to attract workers away from the other companies. The resources needed to create these better conditions will go where the most demand for them is, and it is much more beneficial to leave this process to a free market, where business walk the line between profit and loss constantly, and have a very strong incentive to provide whatever conditions are needed for them to stay in business in the face of fierce competition.

    Competition creates prosperity, because it threatens loss, which creates ever-stronger incentives to excel.

    Also it is worth noting that the US president probably the most responsible for the development of big statist government, Franklin D Roosevelt, has recently been typed by Expat as being an SEE. And the president responsible for greatly lowering government trade tariffs, John F Kennedy, was an EIE.
    Actually, that wasn't worth mentioning, because I'm talking about quadra values here, not what individual politicians did in order to get reelected.

  35. #35
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Geez, economics. What a waste of time.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  36. #36
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,819
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm in group A.

    Among people I know, I think the Betas and Gammas are generally in group B, and the Deltas and Alphas are generally in group A. Group B might have something to do with Se valuing. Like, have the power and take care of yourself, or something like that. And group A might be kind of Ne-ish, like anything can be the cause of someone's problems, and you can't assume it's always due to someone's own fault - every person who is having problems has his/her own reason and we have to treat things individually.
    It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
    -Mark Twain


    You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

  37. #37
    Blaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,725
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    hmmmmm you know what? i'd argue this whole thing differently. i'd say that Group A and Group B are rational approaches to an irrational world. both are positions on how things "should be" or how we "should approach" the problems of crime and poverty.

    also, the Group to which i belong is largely dependent upon who i am talking to. if i am interacting with a criminal, then i am in Group B, since what the criminal has control over is his own behavior and regardless of what factors were involved in his crime, he needs to take responsibility for what he can.

    if i am talking to the criminal justice system or the government or to a judge, then i will take a Group A tactic, since the systems which we have put in place penalize many by not treating them as individuals with the associated multitude of factors specific to an individual's case. our systems need to not be systems more i think. they need to do more to rehabilitate people, encourage the solving of problems. meaning, the systems we have created need to take greater responsibility for really helping people instead of treating them like cattle.

    ILE

    those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often

  38. #38
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    For the record, I've read that book. Ages ago. Long before I had heard of socionics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy View Post
    There is an aspect of Ne/Si to Group A as well though.

    Si: people's immediate needs aren't being met (this is where much of the shortsightedness of Group A comes from, imo)
    Ne: We could do this or this or this or this or this or this or this...

    The Fe/Ti in Group A is more along the lines of:

    Fe: people are unhappy
    Ti: let's create a system/structure to fix it


    Anyways, I also fall squarely into Group B, of course. I'm not sure how many people would say that they fall squarely into Group A (based on these descriptions). It's easy to understand why though, if I'm correct about the following:

    Alpha: Fe/Ti, Ne/Si, Demorcratic... two points for Group A, one point for Group B
    Beta: Fe/Ti, Se/Ni, Aristocratic... two points for Group A, one point for Group B
    Gamma: Te/Fi, Se/Ni, Democratic... zero points for Group A, three points for Group B
    Delta: Te/Fi, Ne/Si, Aristocratic... two points for Group A, one point for Group B
    This is pretty much how I see it, I think Deltas - although more likely Delta NFs - will be in group A. Just like Diana said:

    Quote Originally Posted by Diana View Post
    Kim, and a lot of other ENFps is who I had in mind when I suggested delta. But the other types in the quadra seem to lean that way imo also, though perhaps not as strongly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker Mom View Post
    I'm in group A.

    Among people I know, I think the Betas and Gammas are generally in group B, and the Deltas and Alphas are generally in group A. Group B might have something to do with Se valuing. Like, have the power and take care of yourself, or something like that. And group A might be kind of Ne-ish, like anything can be the cause of someone's problems, and you can't assume it's always due to someone's own fault - every person who is having problems has his/her own reason and we have to treat things individually.
    I think group B is maybe best described as due to Se blocked with Fi.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  39. #39
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    Companies must always find ways to work around various laws that affect the environment, public safety, etc., but attempts at "improving" working conditions often get out of hand and only damage the company's ability to stay competitive, which hurts the economy, because people who are willing to work (i.e., resources ready to be allocated) aren't getting hired, because it has become prohibitively expensive for the companies to hire on the additional employees because of the strict demands being made of them by people who feel entitled to easy living.
    I agree. There are always limits. Many countries in Europe, IMO, have taken that limit a little too far. In the United States, due to the protected special interests of truckers' unions (i.e. Teamsters), the development of the higher efficiency railways has been rather impeded.

    Yes, the poor conditions that people had to work in were tragic, but far more tragic would be to implement a series of laws that mandate that companies become less efficient, because that would hurt more people in the long term. If this had simply been left to the market, then competition would have stepped in and offered more favorable working conditions in order to attract workers away from the other companies. The resources needed to create these better conditions will go where the most demand for them is, and it is much more beneficial to leave this process to a free market, where business walk the line between profit and loss constantly, and have a very strong incentive to provide whatever conditions are needed for them to stay in business in the face of fierce competition.
    In perfect systems everything would work, but reality scoffs at such 'perfect' and idealistic systems; reality does not work like the model and strict adherence to systems are a folly. Free-market philosophy and economics often rely heavily on the idea of the rational individual, which is realistically not always the case or in all circumstances. Biology, neurology, psychology, and some economics have shown that while individuals will usually act in their own self-interest, that does not mean that their choice is necessarily what would be assumed to be the rational one. In the cases listed, the reality of the free market system did not seem to entirely work well. In the long-term the free market might have fixed it, but in the long-term we also all be dead.

    Competition creates prosperity, because it threatens loss, which creates ever-stronger incentives to excel.
    Competition can also destroy prosperity.

    Actually, that wasn't worth mentioning, because I'm talking about quadra values here, not what individual politicians did in order to get reelected.
    But that is how various presidents of certain types attempted to solve various problems. While there is some pandering involved, reelection is often won by creating workable solutions, but mostly (with enormous amounts of statistical evidence) by just being the incumbent.

  40. #40
    Suomea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    TIM
    ILE-Ti
    Posts
    1,054
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos View Post
    That is not really the issue. The issue is not whether bureaucrats can more efficiently supervise the economy, which they can't, but the extent to which businesses control us - to what extent are their services unsafe, unfit, or detrimental to the long-term public health. Apart from the government income generated by trade tariffs, the comparatively much freer markets of the mid to late 19th centuries led to a Gilded Age in which wealth, power, and standard of living was grossly concentrated in the hands of the few at the vast expense of the many including poor working conditions and poor quality goods (Upton Sinclair's The Jungle).
    Quote Originally Posted by Logos View Post
    In perfect systems everything would work, but reality scoffs at such 'perfect' and idealistic systems; reality does not work like the model and strict adherence to systems are a folly. Free-market philosophy and economics often rely heavily on the idea of the rational individual, which is realistically not always the case or in all circumstances. Biology, neurology, psychology, and some economics have shown that while individuals will usually act in their own self-interest, that does not mean that their choice is necessarily what would be assumed to be the rational one. In the cases listed, the reality of the free market system did not seem to entirely work well. In the long-term the free market might have fixed it, but in the long-term we also all be dead.
    Was going to reply again.... but this is pretty good......: )
    Suomea

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •