Negative stereotypes and bias against LSIs/ISTjs

[Trevor]

anyway, i don't think there's any precise and soundproof method of determining whether or not cruelty is type-related, or if LSIs are the amongst the most cruel.

That can be done. Various typing methods do exist. There are also methods which can determine does one have the tendency towards cruelness and stuff like that (remember those questions like "do you enjoy torturing animals", etc). Apply these two diagnostic processes onto the same and large enough group of people and Voila..all of a sudden you'll say: "It is type related!"

Btw, your writing style in this thread reminds me of Bullets&Doves. Hope that helps in your typesearch.

[pluie]

okay-- tendencies. tendencies of course, but an exact determination that if you discover the "cruelest" person on the planet, they must be ISTj?

ten random people in a room, any person in that room could be technically the "cruelest"
ISTj or not



you can't define what it means to be cruel statically anyway. it's subjective.

like i said, the intentions of any person should always be taken into consideration.

i don't think i write anything like bulletsanddoves
maybe its my mood
my writing "style" changes
most likely with mood and state of mind

[Trevor]

okay-- tendencies. tendencies of course, but an exact determination that if you discover the "cruelest" person on the planet, they must be ISTj?

Hm, i have never said they must be ISTj.

ten random people in a room, any person in that room could be technically the "cruelest"
ISTj or not

So we agree on that. Good.

you can't define what it means to be cruel statically anyway. it's subjective.

Yes, it can be done. Do you agree with me that if you ask people "what is cruelness?" that you'll get more or less similar answers. If we were to do our little research, our operational definition of cruelness must revolve around that which is similar in people's answers, so to speak universal(?). Of course, you can give your very own, subjective, definition of cruelness, and you can do your own research which will probably also result in "it is type related"(chances are ,type related in a different way).

like i said, the intentions of any person should always be taken into consideration.

So you think that intentions play a role in determining whether some act is cruel or not. I could agree with you on that.

i don't think i write anything like bulletsanddoves
maybe its my mood
my writing "style" changes
most likely with mood and state of mind

I don't know. The feeling is there.

[pluie]

Hm, i have never said they must be ISTj.

Yes, it can be done. Do you agree with me that if you ask people "what is cruelness?" that you'll get more or less similar answers. If we were to do our little research, our operational definition of cruelness must revolve around that which is similar in people's answers, so to speak universal(?). Of course, you can give your very own, subjective, definition of cruelness, and you can do your own research which will probably also result in "it is type related"(chances are ,type related in a different way).

yeah, forgive my arrogance on that first part.

mk mk. more or less similar-- kay.
you're right. a universal definition of cruelty could probably be found.

i'd bet you'd be a fun person to discuss the philosophy of this idea with... the philosophy of language i guess! hehe.

but for now, to remain somewhat on topic, i'll say this. i don't think ISTjs are amongst the cruelest of the types, based on personal and real life experience. this is my personal perspective. this perspective is probably not the same to everyone else, especially of a different type.
when I see Ti in use, I value it without doubt... it's a high to discuss things with Ti and Ni. and Se sort of tickles, I think. others might see Ti conclusions as a lack of emotion--not valuing decided morals if they don't make sense through logical conclusion.
the reason i thought cruelty to be subjective is that when an LSI gives off an impression of harshness or coldness, or what have you, a beta would probably be less bothered or possibly not bothered at all...because they don't see this in a negative light; an INFj might feel great negativity from them, feeling them to be heartless aka cruel.

so, in this context, it's rather difficult to agree on a universal understanding of what a truly cruel person is like. (so now i'm discussing cruel impression vs. the definition of what we understand cruelty to be universally)

DISCLAIMER: I don't completely know what I'm talking about-- but hesitating would hinder this opportunity to develop my socionics skillzzz.

[1981slater]

Hard to tell.

On ISTjs: I know very well a lot of them. Some of them are extremely cruel and some of them are wonderful people.

[Trevor]

the reason i thought cruelty to be subjective is that when an LSI gives off an impression of harshness or coldness, or what have you, a beta would probably be less bothered or possibly not bothered at all...because they don't see this in a negative light; an INFj might feel great negativity from them, feeling them to be heartless aka cruel.

so, in this context, it's rather difficult to agree on a universal understanding of what a truly cruel person is like. (so now i'm discussing cruel impression vs. the definition of what we understand cruelty to be universally)

If we want to determine is some action cruel or not, I believe we have to give priority to intentions of cruelness-executor over INFj impression of cruelness. Can we always find out what was intended and what not. Not directly. Probably there is some way to do that indirectly. OTOH, if majority of people has impression of cruelness than given act is probably cruel. Why is that so?


Anyway, here are some INFj certified cruel individuals:

Joseph Stalin, ISTj:


Adolf ******, they say ENFj:
[IMG]http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2008/04/01/******_080401095910432_wideweb__300x375,1.jpg[/IMG]

Ratko Mladić, ESTp:


They're all Betas.

Btw Slobodan Milošević was cruel and ISTj I think.

[pluie]

If we want to determine is some action cruel or not, I believe we have to give priority to intentions of cruelness-executor over INFj impression of cruelness. Can we always find out what was intended and what not. Not directly. Probably there is some way to do that indirectly. OTOH, if majority of people has impression of cruelness than given act is probably cruel. Why is that so?


Anyway, here are some INFj certified cruel individuals:

Joseph Stalin, ISTj:


Adolf ******, they say ENFj:
[IMG]http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2008/04/01/******_080401095910432_wideweb__300x375,1.jpg[/IMG]

Ratko Mladić, ESTp:


They're all Betas.

Btw Slobodan Milošević was cruel and ISTj I think.

HAHAHA. all betas.


i always knew betas were evil by nature

mk mk. i'm not really sure what exactly you're getting at. INFj was just an example to explain how one person sees someone as cruel while another does not... I thought INFj would be appropriate since we're talkin LSI.

[Trevor]

I was using INFj label for the sake of witticism. You can pretend that it was never written. Those four were cruel by all possible means and at least 75% of them were betas. At the moment I can't remember any other cruel person which type is known to me, but some day, hopefully some day, i'll remember.

[pluie]

how poetic

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Maybe I am cruel? Perhaps that is the reason I don't make friends easily and I attract assholes and criminals and 'bad boys.'

If it's true then I see no reason to get offended over it.

So I'll work on my cruelty. Along with my putting a pretty bow on things, my victim playing, my ranting, my insecurity, my using homosexuality as an excuse for everything, my stubborn-ness, my ability not to forgive others, my laziness, my avoiding dealing with my problems by getting lost in video games, my lack of self-confidence, my straight male fetish and not giving gay men a chance at love, my attention-seeking, my thinking that I don't have to do anything because I'm naturally smart, my uppity-ness, my inhuman ability to not let things go and always point out to somebody when they were being unethical.

Or I could just have fun with my life instead, and have my best friend Robins say 'Oh he's just being Sammy?'

[pluie]

also poetic
ish

[shakealittle]

I guess some are? I don't know how we come across to other people but having experienced some good identical relations lately, I have to say that we are quite sensitive underneath it all....and I admire the sincerity I see in the other LSIs....and that we're quite fair (but I guess that has it's downfalls too).

[buckland]

I was reading Jane Eyre (i did not go too far into it due to boredom so I may have missed some crucial bits) and Jane seems INFp and Mr. Rochester is ISTj. In the first or second of their main conversations, there is a description there by Rochester about how his lack of propreity and manners could be confused with arrogance/cruelty (i have obviously paraphrased). Saying that, the stance that an ISTj takes in certain matters is very firm and in cases where a person is opposing them, they can be merciless.

[electric sheep]

A day in the life of an LSI

[shakealittle]

Saying that, the stance that an ISTj takes in certain matters is very firm and in cases where a person is opposing them, they can be merciless.

Oh yeah, I can see that happening for sure.

[07490]

A day in the life of an LSI
YouTube - NYPD Assault Cyclist In Times Square - 29 July 2008

Why can't the cop be an ESTj?

[JohnDo]

Many people on this forum believe that politicians like Stalin, Putin or Cheney are LSI. In my opinion many or most socionists (including Victor Gulenko himself) have a wrong conception of the Logical-Sensory-Introtim...

What I understand from socionics, the theory Gulenko describes in this article is obviously wrong. There are definitely a lot of influential INTj, ENFp and other politicians. I don't know if Gulenko still believes in his theory about those triads because he often changes his opinions...

A good example of an LSI politician is Heinrich Himmler who only became mighty because he was ******'s dual...

Just get to know more LSIs in real life and you will see that people like Stalin, Putin or Cheney do not belong to that type...

[consentingadult]

Many people on this forum believe that politicians like Stalin, Putin or Cheney are LSI. In my opinion many or most socionists (including Victor Gulenko himself) have a wrong conception of the Logical-Sensory-Introtim...

What I understand from socionics, the theory Gulenko describes in this article is obviously wrong. There are definitely a lot of influential INTj, ENFp and other politicians. I don't know if Gulenko still believes in his theory about those triads because he often changes his opinions...

A good example of an LSI politician is Heinrich Himmler who only became mighty because he was ******'s dual...

Just get to know more LSIs in real life and you will see that people like Stalin, Putin or Cheney do not belong to that type...

Why should I listen to you, when my central nervous system and my amygdala faultlessly type LSI's at a mile's distance each time?

[JohnDo]

Why should I listen to you, when my central nervous system and my amygdala faultlessly type LSI's at a mile's distance each time?

Then just tell me some celebrities you type as LSI...

[discojoe]

Putin and Stalin are both LSI. Cheney is SLE, imo.

[717495]

Not sure why you talk about these few people in referrence to Socionics often, but I do believe that Putin is an ISTj, and Stalin is an ENFj.

[discojoe]

Stalin is an ENFj.

[Galen]

oh boy more famous people typing arguments!

[sarinana]

Many people on this forum believe that politicians like Stalin, Putin or Cheney are LSI. In my opinion many or most socionists (including Victor Gulenko himself) have a wrong conception of the Logical-Sensory-Introtim...

What I understand from socionics, the theory Gulenko describes in this article is obviously wrong. There are definitely a lot of influential INTj, ENFp and other politicians. I don't know if Gulenko still believes in his theory about those triads because he often changes his opinions...

A good example of an LSI politician is Heinrich Himmler who only became mighty because he was ******'s dual...

Just get to know more LSIs in real life and you will see that people like Stalin, Putin or Cheney do not belong to that type...

Oh man! They do!
One LSI told me that he wouldn't mind eating humans meat.

[717495]

Stalin is an ENFj-Ni.



And he'll fuck you up with his rotten and cryptic charm.

[JohnDo]

It's getting funny. Some people believe Stalin is the same type as ******, others believe he is the same type as Himmler. You certainly noticed that ****** and Himmler are duals, completely different characters...

Stalin neither looks like ****** nor does he look like Himmler.
Stalin neither behaved like ****** nor did he behave like Himmler.
Completely different character...

Same goes for Putin. He has obviously nothing in common with ISTj-Himmler or ESTj-Stalin. His president Medvedew is SEI, his German friend Schröder is clearly ESE. Putin is clearly ALpha, LII...

Not sure why you talk about these few people in referrence to Socionics often, but I do believe that Putin is an ISTj, and Stalin is an ENFj.

Just because of 2 reasons:
1.) I'm interested in politics
2.) I detected a phenomenon which I call the "LSI-bias"...

[717495]

****** and Stalin VI similarly, if you pay heed to their expressions and analogous reactions. They might not "look" like each other though. But I'm not disagreeing with you, since I'm unsure that we're talking about the same thing here.

[JohnDo]

I don't know many ISTj celebrities because I think there are not many of them. Let's try to find some so that it becomes clear that Stalin (ESTj), Cheney (ESTj) and Putin (INTj) are not ISTj.

Te-ISTj: Christian Danner, German Formula One racer


Se-ISTj: Alexander Lukashenko, President of Belarus


Ti-ISTj: Heinrich Himmler


Si-ISTj: Hans Eichel, German politician

[Aiss]

The only LSI bias I see is that of considering this type a crackpot, which makes some people here call others LSI if they find them annoying.

[JohnDo]

The only LSI bias I see is that of considering this type a crackpot, which makes some people here call others LSI if they find them annoying.

In my opinion there are quite a lot LSI crackpots...
But not every LSI is a crackpot - and not every crackpot is an LSI

The bias occurs because Victor Gulenko (most important socionist) is LII and Rick DeLong (most important English-speaking socionist) is IEE...

[Aiss]

In my opinion there are quite a lot LSI crackpots - but some of same not that bad, of course...

The bias occurs because Victor Gulenko (most important socionist) is LII and Rick DeLong (most important English-speaking socionist) is IEE...

That's interesting - sounds a lot like intuitive/Ne/ILE bias due to Augusta having been one. I agree there's something to it - some part of LSI profile coincide with crackpot definition - but it's an oversimplification none the less.

[Absurd]

What type you think Stalin is ?

[JohnDo]

What type you think Stalin is ?

Te-ESTj

[Absurd]

Te-ESTj

And why is that ? Make it short and straight to the point.

[JohnDo]

And why is that ? Make it short and straight to the point.

1.) He was not the same type as ENFj-******...
2.) He was not the same type as ISTj-Himmler...
3.) He was not Beta because he worked with Alphas and Deltas...

[JohnDo]

JohnDo: do you have any idea of what's Fidel Castro's type?

Fidel Castro is pretty clearly ESFp. In the movie "Che" it is quite obvious that Che is INTj and Fidel ESFp. Conflicts occured later...

Edit: and again, although I didn't completely typed Himmler, he was an Irrational Intuitive. He was kinda living in his own world of ideas, LSI is one of the worst guesses, imo.
Possibly Rational, but Intuitive nevertheless.

No way. I studied his type long enough. He was clearly ISTj. Details, details, details, nothing else...

[JohnDo]

Typing celebrities is always difficult because we don't know them in person. Using subtypes is also difficult because there is not much English material available about subtypes...

I thought about Stalin again and came to the conclusion that he might actually be a very interesting example of an ESTj, a so-called Ni-ESTj in Gulenko's system with 8 subtypes...

1.) Many socionists type him as ISTj because he may seem to be more introverted than other ESTjs. That indicates an introverted subtype even though I thought of him as Te-ESTj...
2.) Stalin deluded the whole world concerning the events in the Soviet Union and created some sort of religion around himself. Ni-subtypes are known to be often spiritual leaders and the most manipulative people...
3.) Using my own method of face detection: Stalin's face is obviously roundish and not longish so it must be a subtype with strengthened conscious functions. Hard to tell, somewhere between round (base) and square (creative). Using the system with 8 subtypes Ni-ESTj seems plausible...

[Absurd]

1.) He was not the same type as ENFj-******...
2.) He was not the same type as ISTj-Himmler...

3.) He was not Beta because he worked with Alphas and Deltas...

Yeah, I remember you once typed Stalin's right-hand man ENFp. Actually, I've seen and heard of it too often to be true. Funny thing is, you come to the same conclusions as those Russian experts. Hmm. Well, to each his own.

EDIT: By the way. Which subtype you think I am ?

[JohnDo]

The difference between ISTj and ESTj is not merely the degree of Extroversion, but different/opposite views and values.

I'm aware of that. Nevertheless, an extravert with an introverted subtype (a so-called "introverted extravert" or "distant extravert" in DCNH) is likely to be typed as introvert by some people...

Funny thing is, you come to the same conclusions as those Russian experts.

Now that is interesting. Do you have a link?

By the way. Which subtype you think I am ?

I can't type or even subtype you because I've only seen one picture of you and most of your posts just consist of jokes. So I have no idea who or what you are...

[Absurd]

Now that is interesting. Do you have a link?

Nope, sorry, but, definitely, on some Russian socionics site.

I can't type or even subtype you because I've only seen one picture of you and most of your posts just consist of jokes. So I have no idea who or what you are...

Brilliant. Thanks.