Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 43

Thread: I want everyone on this forum to know: personality is emergent

  1. #1
    Large Member shorebreaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    humboldt, CA
    Posts
    42
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default I want everyone on this forum to know: personality is emergent

    Personality is not something we are born with, and it can change. The 16 best fit types describe behavior, not vice versa. Socionics and the MBTI were based on Jung's typology, and Jung's theories were often criticized because they could not be proven; they were based on observation.

    From About Psychotherapy : Home Page********,

    "Bennett Pologe, Ph.D. I am a clinical psychologist—have a look at credentials to see just what that means and why it’s important—licensed in New York state. Over the years, I’ve managed to work with just about every kind of patient there is. I’ve worked in city, state, and private hospitals, in community mental health centers, foster care agencies, schools, nursing homes, special education for the neurologically impaired, group private practice, the VA system, nursing homes, and in Head Start programs. I also did a stint on cable television as a relationship consultant, and I’ve published some clinical research.

    What’s a personality? What makes me, me?

    This question is really where both psychotherapy and psychology begin. Why do I do what I do, feel what I feel, think what I think, and how can I change it? Why does the bully bully, the blowhard blow hard, the flincher apologize so relentlessly, the control freak live at such a frenetic and uncomfortable level of tension? Is it a gene? Hardly. Genes provide the foundation of our personality, and some of the limits. The rest of who we are comes from what happens to us and what we learn from it.

    Imagine a one year old child reaching out for something that grabs his interest, as is the habit of a child that age. But his mother (or whoever is raising him) is anxious. Maybe she always is, maybe it's because this is her third child in as many years and she's getting fed up and stressed, maybe it's because her husband just left her, maybe she just left him, whatever. In any event, she barks anxiously at her child in a voice too loud and strident, then rushes over and whisks him into his high chair for safety.

    Now assume that this is not a single occasion of mom's bad mood, but a common occurrence, her usual reaction to her son's exploration of his environment. What happens to him? Does he say to himself, "Ah, well, Mom's uptight. I mustn't take this personally. I can explore the world later when she's calm or when she's not around." Not likely. He's barely a year old, remember; all he knows of the world, it's dangers, it's pleasures, its meanings, comes from this person.

    No, he does not put mother's behavior into this kind of adult perspective. Instead he learns that this is the way of the universe: Small actions lead to catastrophic reactions. (Bear in mind that mother’s outburst might be only a mild stressor to another adult, but to a small child who depends on this mother for all his physical and emotional sustenance it is a very frightening assault.) Always expecting a blow to fall, an explosion of anxiety and displeasure, a criticism, a censure, he could grow into a "flincher" -- one of those people who is endlessly apologizing, timid, and tense. In another scenario, he might learn to battle that same anxiety by blustering his way through the world, acting as if such feelings could never happen again. Such is the bully, the braggart, the bull in the china shop. Or he might become one of those super-competent, always-in-the-know people, in that way never again suffering the anxiety of doing the wrong thing. (Whether this "control freak" adaptation is successful or drives people away depends on a lot of other things -- intelligence, flexiblity of other defenses, etc..) In any case, he grows up focused to some large degree on coping with a world fraught with the danger of sudden chaos. This is especially likely if his genetic makeup is one of high sensitivity, making him particularly attuned to his mother's moods and fearful of her outbursts.

    As they mature, the flincher remains solitary, timid, constricted, while the bully loses most of his friends, learns nothing in school or elsewhere to give him a place in society, and eventually graduates to more serious antisocial activity. We on the outside look at their useless, counterproductive behavior and say that they are "maladjusted", "troubled", "in pain". We struggle with such terms because they have a judgmental sound, but we all roughly agree on what they mean. We recognize a lost soul, a person who behaves (or feels or thinks) irrationally, both from our point of view and in terms of what they themselves want. Psychotherapy is about understanding that irrationality. It is this understanding which enables patients to change their attitudes and behavior -- the whole point of the process. (see What’s the cure?)

    Important: These irrational patterns of feeling, perception, and behavior are not chosen or established on a conscious level! Clearly most of us would not persist with such silly behavior on purpose. But these habits develop outside of awareness (and nonverbally) where we can’t get at them. [Bully, Ed - II, Ron]

    This is clearly the barest thumbnail sketch of personality development, a subject that has filled many a weighty volume. But the consultant who helped me put this website together insists I should keep each "page" down to a couple of pages. So I’ll continue the discussion in the next section."

    I had a bad relationship toward the end of high school, and I had trouble dealing with it. Because my default persona could not deal with the outcome of said relationship, I tried to rationalize it by convincing myself that, "That's just the way I am; personality doesn't change." This was circular reasoning, and was an unhealthy form of dissonance reduction. Psychological defenses like this are very common (and this is no form of excuse; I accept what happened, now), and the cure is self awareness.

    -----------From the same website,

    "What’s the cure? What does psychotherapy do?

    If my answers here seem arbitrary, I encourage you again to read the earlier pages in this website before looking at this one. (Think of how strange it might be to someone who knows nothing of the human nervous system if you try to explain to him that the pain in his leg -- sciatica -- is caused by disc problems in his back. "My leg hurts, and you want to examine my back? What kind of quack are you?")

    The cure for psychological problems is increased awareness of the "other agendas" discussed in Why go. Psychotherapy is the process that accomplishes this. The less aware we are of our motives, feelings, thoughts, actions, perceptions, the more they control us and the more we stay stuck in old patterns that don’t work anymore. Relief from symptoms lies in discovering and incorporating into our constant, every-day consciousness that which is being masked, distracted from, or indirectly "acted out" in symptoms. (Take a look at the characters in Personality for examples of this process.) Virtually all psychotherapies work in this way, by expanding awareness (which is why the term "shrink" is so silly; psychotherapy is supposed to do the opposite). In fact, even when the focus of treatment is not symptom relief, when the goal is a general increase in contentment, power, freedom, happiness -- "self-actualization" it’s sometimes called -- the key is awareness.

    Before you say, "But I know what I feel, do, believe": If we were perfectly aware, we would have no symptoms. [Jim, Ed, Ed - II, Evan] We would experience reasonable emotional reactions to the ups and downs of life instead of sinking into incomprehensible panic, anxiety, depression. We would behave rationally, putting our talents, intelligence, and energy towards gratifying ends. We would learn from our mistakes; we would not hurt the ones we love nor be drawn to those who hurt us. Again, if this idea is hard to swallow, take a look at the earlier pages, especially Why Psychotherapy.

    Of what exactly do we need to become aware? No, not of some forgotten childhood memory; that’s too glib and rarely is the answer. Rather, we need to recontact the specific experiences -- wholly lived moments of perception and feeling, regardless of where they originated and even if not attached to specific events -- that are being both avoided and indirectly expressed via symptoms. The bully needs to become conscious not of who bullied him (if anyone did), but of his fears of humiliation and powerlessness. Only by such means can he cease the constant compensation for those fears -- the insistence on total control of people and situations, the self-imposed isolation when he isn’t assured of such control, even the phobias and panic attacks that such people can develop when they fear losing that control. The flincher, too, needs to recall that same original horror so he can stop fearing it around every corner. Think what this means: To get over his symptoms, a person must face exactly that which his defenses were created to protect him from; he must face his worst nightmare.

    The good news is that this awareness is the one magic psychotherapy has to offer. I have seen it again and again, in all kinds of patients, in friends, in myself: When you feel whatever it is you spend your energy trying not to feel, you feel better and you function better."

    --------Interestingly enough, the object of meditation is the same; psychotherapy is kind of like meditation for people who don't know how to ask themselves the right questions. This may all seem terribly cliche, but it's the truth.

  2. #2
    Crispy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,098
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm assuming you think you've experienced type change. What type were you and what type are you now?
    ILI (FINAL ANSWER)

  3. #3
    Haikus Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    22,740
    Mentioned
    531 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    What's the matter?

  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

    Get out.

  5. #5
    jughead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NC
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    883
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    snooze, basically an advertisement

  6. #6
    what is essential is invisible to the eye fox's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Space
    TIM
    Seer
    Posts
    12,808
    Mentioned
    367 Post(s)
    Tagged
    9 Thread(s)

    Default

    Okay
    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    betas should be kept in zoos for children to stare and throw pop corn at.

  7. #7
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,469
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The thread is a transparent advertisement, but it does contain some substance. It would be more mature to respond to the salient points in the OP than answer with collective cries of "spam".
    It was in the reign of George III that the aforesaid personages lived and quarrelled; good or bad, handsome or ugly, rich or poor, they are all equal now.

  8. #8
    redbaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    9,321
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    why is this post in the beta subforum?
    IEI-Fe 4w3

  9. #9
    jughead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NC
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    883
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Because its spam.

  10. #10
    Large Member shorebreaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    humboldt, CA
    Posts
    42
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by redbaron View Post
    why is this post in the beta subforum?
    yes i shouldn't have posted this here; realized that afterwards. and this post was no form of spam- i just want everyone to know that personality comes before this theory, and doesn't arise from it. i don't know if i have undergone type change, because i've never been sure of my best fit type, but i don't think personality changes according to theory anyways. socionics will only ever approach what someone's personality truly is- and that's defined by experience, not anything innate.

  11. #11
    Crispy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,098
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shorebreaker View Post
    not anything innate.
    Each type has noticeable similarities in the look and to some extent facial structure that can be seen when viewing many of the same type:
    SOCIONICS: Functions, Types, Tests
    How can this be explained without attributing both (type and look) to the same innate attribute? There also exists complete doubles that have no blood relation yet look almost identical and have the same type. When you change types, does your face change as well?
    ILI (FINAL ANSWER)

  12. #12
    CILi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    635
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crispy
    When you change types, does your face change as well?
    Yes?


  13. #13
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aixelsyd View Post
    Type and personality are not really the same thing.
    Yes, did anyone say they were then?

  14. #14
    redbaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    9,321
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aixelsyd View Post
    Type and personality are not really the same thing. And my personality has changed/developed in immense ways for better or for worse though I like to think the former.
    right, it's kind of a semantics thing here.
    IEI-Fe 4w3

  15. #15
    Darn Socks Director Abbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Southwest USA
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    6,724
    Mentioned
    237 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    *glances disinterestedly at a long-winded opinion*

    ESTj
    1w2 sp/so 1-2-6
    Brilliand's Younger Sister
    Squishy's Older Sister

    Johari Nohari

    Quote Originally Posted by Ritella View Post
    Over here, we'll put up with (almost) all of your crap. You just have to use the secret phrase: "I don't value it. It's related to <insert random element here>, which is not in my quadra."
    Quote Originally Posted by Aquagraph View Post
    Abbie is so boring and rigid it's awesome instead of boring and rigid. She seems so practical and down-to-the-ground.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shorebreaker View Post
    yes i shouldn't have posted this here; realized that afterwards. and this post was no form of spam- i just want everyone to know that personality comes before this theory, and doesn't arise from it. i don't know if i have undergone type change, because i've never been sure of my best fit type, but i don't think personality changes according to theory anyways. socionics will only ever approach what someone's personality truly is- and that's defined by experience, not anything innate.
    A finer specimen of conservative reformer discordancy you will not find.

  17. #17
    Rick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Former USSR (global nomad)
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    2,050
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The notion of emergent personality is not incompatible with the idea of psychological type, or some set of fixed physiological determinants within which life experience shapes specific behavioral patterns.
    It is easier for the eye of a camel to pass through a rich man than for a needle to enter the kingdom of heaven.

  18. #18
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There does not even need to be fixed type for the intertype relations to hold as a fluid pattern.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Think a little harder about that, lab.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rick View Post
    The notion of emergent personality is not incompatible with the idea of psychological type, or some set of fixed physiological determinants within which life experience shapes specific behavioral patterns.
    So are you suggesting that early experiences determine type?

  21. #21
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,938
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crispy View Post
    Each type has noticeable similarities in the look and to some extent facial structure that can be seen when viewing many of the same type:
    SOCIONICS: Functions, Types, Tests
    How can this be explained without attributing both (type and look) to the same innate attribute? There also exists complete doubles that have no blood relation yet look almost identical and have the same type. When you change types, does your face change as well?
    In the past, I've actually argued the extreme opposite - that it's possible to have an entirely different facial stucture and yet have the same brain.

  22. #22
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,938
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    So are you suggesting that early experiences determine type?
    I think he's possibly suggesting that such factors are not incompatible.

  23. #23
    Rick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Former USSR (global nomad)
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    2,050
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    So are you suggesting that early experiences determine type?
    I wasn't suggesting this, but I don't rule out the possibility. I tend to think type is either formed in the womb or 100% by genes. Women who give birth in a stress-filled environment may tend to give birth to a different set of types (better able to cope with extreme stress) than those who do not bathe their embryos in stress hormones. It's just an idea, but it seems like it might be a good evolutionary adaptation. I read something about a group of monkeys held in captivity that suggested that mothers' stress could shape the psychology of their young.
    It is easier for the eye of a camel to pass through a rich man than for a needle to enter the kingdom of heaven.

  24. #24
    Linas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    533
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Heh, you know it's silly, but my attention was havely coucht by some article, that stated the point that the atcual intesity of love making while the baby is being made, that intensity thing causes the quality of the kiddo. Like the more parents love/enjoys each other, the more kiddo is smart/talented ... And ...that influences the actual person, soo... things like, that are kind of strange and crazy, those things actually influences our well-being, human-being, that's crazy and strange, but that is possible. Just like the situation in which mother is then she's pregnant. Uhhh... And types... Well, that's even funkier, since it seemed to me that it shoud of have the sort of other kind of backgrounds... ohh, well though... think about this... let's the types are difficult to comprehende in their actual situation, like the types aren't very compatible... That means... the situation is pretty hard... so their kids... should be beta lol? sort of... actually in my case that would be very "o.k.", it'd make a lot of sense, lol. Me beta; parents gamma and delta, of prettty different backgrounds and also sort of similar. Yo, some rager is on the way, you know. Oky

  25. #25
    redbaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    9,321
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Linas View Post
    Heh, you know it's silly, but my attention was havely coucht by some article, that stated the point that the atcual intesity of love making while the baby is being made, that intensity thing causes the quality of the kiddo. Like the more parents love/enjoys each other, the more kiddo is smart/talented ... And ...that influences the actual person, soo... things like, that are kind of strange and crazy, those things actually influences our well-being, human-being, that's crazy and strange, but that is possible. Just like the situation in which mother is then she's pregnant. Uhhh... And types... Well, that's even funkier, since it seemed to me that it shoud of have the sort of other kind of backgrounds... ohh, well though... think about this... let's the types are difficult to comprehende in their actual situation, like the types aren't very compatible... That means... the situation is pretty hard... so their kids... should be beta lol? sort of... actually in my case that would be very "o.k.", it'd make a lot of sense, lol. Me beta; parents gamma and delta, of prettty different backgrounds and also sort of similar. Yo, some rager is on the way, you know. Oky
    that's ridiculous b.s.
    IEI-Fe 4w3

  26. #26
    Linas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    533
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    lol, why?

  27. #27
    redbaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    9,321
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    because my kids are obscenely smart and trust me, it had nothing to do with the passion with which they were conceived. Smarts are gene related.
    IEI-Fe 4w3

  28. #28
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by redbaron View Post
    because my kids are obscenely smart and trust me, it had nothing to do with the passion with which they were conceived. Smarts are gene related.
    you were raped?

  29. #29
    redbaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    9,321
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    you were raped?
    uh, NO. all I'm saying here is that intensity of lovemaking does not determine the "quality" of the children. It's one of the more ridiculous things I've heard on this forum.
    IEI-Fe 4w3

  30. #30
    The Looks stanprollyright's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    In your pants
    TIM
    IEE-Ne cp 6w7 sx/so
    Posts
    555
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rick View Post
    The notion of emergent personality is not incompatible with the idea of psychological type, or some set of fixed physiological determinants within which life experience shapes specific behavioral patterns.
    This ^ Type shapes personality, not the other way around.

    Quote Originally Posted by redbaron View Post
    Smarts are gene related.
    Well, yes, but there is also plenty of evidence to link intelligence and personality to development and other nongenetic causes. For example: siblings. Older siblings are usually smarter, while younger siblings have better social skills and are more likely to be gay.
    Stan is not my real name.

  31. #31
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Think a little harder about that, lab.
    I thought harder about it and found three new ways in which my initial statement made perfect sense.

  32. #32
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  33. #33
    Haikus Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    22,740
    Mentioned
    531 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    Genetics determines the set of behavioral traits you will acquire as a primary form of processing.

  34. #34
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pied Piper View Post
    It would be interesting tho know what determines the type, I feel that it's not determined genetically, but somewhere between conception and some months maybe 1-2 years old.
    Random recombination.

  35. #35
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  36. #36
    Haikus
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    MI
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    10,060
    Mentioned
    223 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think you're trolling, but I'm going to correct you anyway. Just for my own mental sanity.

    Imagine a one year old child reaching out for something that grabs his interest, as is the habit of a child that age. But his mother (or whoever is raising him) is anxious. Maybe she always is, maybe it's because this is her third child in as many years and she's getting fed up and stressed, maybe it's because her husband just left her, maybe she just left him, whatever. In any event, she barks anxiously at her child in a voice too loud and strident, then rushes over and whisks him into his high chair for safety.

    Now assume that this is not a single occasion of mom's bad mood, but a common occurrence, her usual reaction to her son's exploration of his environment. What happens to him? Does he say to himself, "Ah, well, Mom's uptight. I mustn't take this personally. I can explore the world later when she's calm or when she's not around." Not likely. He's barely a year old, remember; all he knows of the world, it's dangers, it's pleasures, its meanings, comes from this person.
    You're right, (sort of) but you're comparing apples with tire irons. The child would still have his natural inborn unchangeable type, but he would just be a more neurotic and uptight version of that specific type. He would still have the general quirks and 'romantic eyes' and other idiosyncrasies that make IEIs, IEIs- he would just be a less self-confident version.

    Willingness to take risks and general self-confidence comes from upbringing, but that has nothing to do with raw personality.

    Instead he learns that this is the way of the universe:
    BULLSHIT, BULLSHIT, BULLSHIT. People with anxiety disorders, social phobia etc. understand very well that their reactions to things are subjective and irrational. They do not objectify them AT ALL. Studies have proven this. They know that they're not being rational and are being 'emo' but they still can't help themselves. That's what makes overcoming their problems so difficult.

    In another scenario, he might learn to battle that same anxiety by blustering his way through the world, acting as if such feelings could never happen again. Such is the bully, the braggart, the bull in the china shop.
    Not bloody likely, bullies are much more likely to overrate themselves. They view themselves as innately stronger, not weaker. It's not to cover up an insecurity, people just think that because it helps them justify their existence better. Of course them being stronger is not rawly true, they aren't better or stronger for picking on others, but they think they are. People who act like that, 'like the king of the world' really do naturally think that, and aren't compensating for something. That's why the only way to stop a bully from hurting others is through external force, not faggy talk therapy. This behavior is just socially off putting to people, because most people are too busy looking within for the answers, they forgot how good it feels to get out of themselves and prick and prod at others.

    As they mature, the flincher remains solitary, timid, constricted, while the bully loses most of his friends, learns nothing in school or elsewhere to give him a place in society, and eventually graduates to more serious antisocial activity.
    Whoever wrote that is so wrong, and oh so naive. Bullies make friends very easily. It's the nice, empathetic guys who have a hard time finding real friends. Machismo and picking on others is extremely socially awarded, if it wasn't then we wouldn't have so many fucked up social problems and school shootings and gay male suicides. Bullies find ways to 'bully others' in socially acceptable ways. But this depends on the physical setting, though nice intelligent guys almost always have a harder time in high school/lower-class jobs than brutes with physical presence that just shove their way in life.

    But this also points to the bully's insecurity, though they themselves are unaware of it and no, you don't 'annoy them' by pointing this out to them to their face; the bully needs an 'audience' and a pack of male thugs around to feel like a man. Independent and celebrity-like straight males will not bully faggots, but the former type, will. The bully just knows that there's strength in numbers, that's why they form packs and gangs. It's the idiotic faggy therapist types that hurt males by 'fostering their independence.' The dude really just needs other male friends to walk with.

    I had a bad relationship toward the end of high school, and I had trouble dealing with it. Because my default persona could not deal with the outcome of said relationship, I tried to rationalize it by convincing myself that, "That's just the way I am; personality doesn't change." This was circular reasoning, and was an unhealthy form of dissonance reduction. Psychological defenses like this are very common (and this is no form of excuse; I accept what happened, now), and the cure is self awareness.
    Yeah well, this person shouldn't make himself feel better for pretending that these dudes were 'more insecure than him' or were deep down just as lost as he was. He was just unfortunately, intelligent and independent and probably very gay and around an environment where none of those traits were rewarded. The only way to stop a bully is to kick their fucking smug, homophobic macho ass. To wipe that fucking douche-y smirk off their face. Not talking about your fag feelings in faggy therapist offices and giving away your powers to other fags, who aren't quite as faggy as you , but are still pretty damn faggy. You get in that bully's face and you KNOCK HIS MOTHER FUCKING TEETH IN, YOU PANSY! That's the only way you get people to stop bullying you.

  37. #37
    Haikus
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    MI
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    10,060
    Mentioned
    223 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Like a lot of men, this person is also insecure about being insecure. Which is hilarious to me. Not only is he innately insecure, he's INSECURE about his insecurity. (And probably insecure about his insecurity over his insecurity) He's a hot tranny mess.

    There's nothing wrong with admitting that you are genetically, and naturally shyer than most males, and are more sensitive. And yes, even insecure. You don't just sit there and neurotically drive yourself insane by telling yourself that your insecurity was born, not made. Your mother was overbearing to you, dear, because of your homosexuality and your insecurity and sensitivity and not male-ness. She didn't cause it. She was the effect. It's time to face the music, faggot.

    Freud blamed the mother cause he was afraid to be weak. So he said 'all moms must cause weak insecure faggotry.' You were just born that way. Suck it up, fag.

    Then there is redemption power in that. You can, amazingly enough- be secure with your insecurity. You can be comfortable with uncomfortableness, and you can be calm with being anxious. That's true strength. And you don't have to pretend you're somebody you're not, to do it, either.

    Hehe that's enough for now. *mwah*

  38. #38
    Creepy-female

    Default

    mwah!

  39. #39
    Linas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    533
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by redbaron View Post
    because my kids are obscenely smart and trust me, it had nothing to do with the passion with which they were conceived. Smarts are gene related.
    that information broke my heart twice. :<

  40. #40
    Haikus Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    22,740
    Mentioned
    531 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shorebreaker View Post
    yes i shouldn't have posted this here; realized that afterwards. and this post was no form of spam- i just want everyone to know that personality comes before this theory, and doesn't arise from it. i don't know if i have undergone type change, because i've never been sure of my best fit type, but i don't think personality changes according to theory anyways. socionics will only ever approach what someone's personality truly is- and that's defined by experience, not anything innate.
    I find that personality is innate and that the reason why people are not able to identify with the functions that describe them is because of perception; this perception is inability to accurately associate your characteristics objectively. This changes as we get older. I find that most mid 30's and upwards individuals are better judge of which functions they associate with and are able to type themselves much more accurately. My observation is that functions develop within us and we associate with most functions other then our ego function up to estimated 25 years old. Also, the descriptions of the functions are not clear or at least not clear enough to explain (comparing and contrasting) how they relate to what the person thinks and acts.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •