ISTps only like the sound of their own voice?

[mustachio]

bye

[Smilingeyes]

seems to me istp is pretty much only concerned with their own agenda (no pun intended) and couldn't give a hoot about anybody else's. Then again could this only be my personal problem? i've known other istp beside myself and, at times, found them to be even more self-absorbed than i am.

could the whole live and let live attitude be a foil for a deep disregard for almost anyone else's fate? or is it just me?

see it goes like this: me, family, friends, and to hell with the rest. not that i wish ill will to anyone but...

i'll give you an example. if somebody does something which in my humble opinion is done the wrong way, i won't try to impose myself by showing them my more tried +proven method. because i wouldn't want them to monitor me either. even though my help would be highly beneficial, i'd rather they break their necks than have them think they can come and impose their methods on me...

That's a very nice and complete discreption of what being ISTp is all about.

[Slacker]

I have seen my husband watch people (usually my ENFj dad) do something the wrong way, and just sit and watch. Then we leave and I ask him why he didn't help, and he'll say, "I didn't want to get involved."

[Rocky]

I have seen my husband watch people (usually my ENFj dad) do something the wrong way, and just sit and watch. Then we leave and I ask him why he didn't help, and he'll say, "I didn't want to get involved."

I feel like that all the time!

[schrödinger's cat]

Not sure that it's down to a disregard for others. My experience is they'll gladly help you if they're actually asked for help. (Provided they have the time and ability to do something.) The ISTps I know (one Si and one Te subtype) are both of them very generous and unselfish. They help freely, without grumbling. hey generally do the best job they can; they're not likely to go "oh, I'll just pretend to help a little and then I'll go away as soon as no one pays attention." Afterwards, they just forget about it. You know how some people can make such a meal of ONE little thing they did for you, and even years afterwards whenever conversation gets anywhere near that subject they'll go "...and I helped you paint the wall, of course", and then you'd better be grateful and touched all over again, or else. ISTps don't pull such stunts, I'd say. They're more like "all for one and one for all".

They'll also help without being asked if the idiot they're watching is about to accidentally electrocute himself or to endanger someone else's life.

And even their sitting around without saying anything has its upsides. No one hovering behind you, breathing down your neck and going "you're doing it all wrong! Let me show you", and then instead of actually showing it they do it for you, and you have to wrest back control by brute force. ISTps make great driving instructors.

[schrödinger's cat]

Agree. IMO ISTps are great with toddlers. So many grown-ups make the mistake of "showing" a small child how to play "properly" with a toy. It totally defeats the whole point of playing. ISTps are capable of standing by, watching a toddler do hair-raising stuff, and they'll only act to avert disaster. It's very amusing to watch.

[Slacker]

My husband has always been really good with our daughter that way. I try to get invovled in what she's doing and he'll say, "She's doing fine. Just let her have fun." He is very relaxed about what she's doing and what might happen. It drives our ENFj neighbor crazy when the girls are playing with each other. My husband watches our daughter climb whatever or do whatever and just watches, while the neighbor acts as spotter every time his daughter climbs anything and is constantly warning her that she might get hurt.

[science as magic]

i think we naturally care about those closer to us first.

gross

[science as magic]

that is an inherent form of prejudice.

you should care about people because they are people not because they are "close to you" <3





more importantly, it is what keeps man from unifying more cohesively into a superorganism.

[science as magic]

that is precisely what I was referring to as well. there is nothing seperating you from anyone else except yourself






which is why i believe humans will develop beyond the constraints of individual consciousness as their capacity to process another person's sorrow as their own expands.

[science as magic]

unfortunately, that is not enough. imagine what you will be capable of when your bandwidth increases say 7 orders of magnitude.

[science as magic]

getting to understand people more and more as you "grow" or age (as a person)? (perhaps mature would be a better word?)

[science as magic]

to me the two are capable of being phrases of one another. also i do not advocate doing it as their own but as your own

[science as magic]

yes.

i hope my mind becomes a memetic plague in the mental internet that allows for a greater level of translation between thought phrases than currently exists though

[Park]

You know how some people can make such a meal of ONE little thing they did for you, and even years afterwards whenever conversation gets anywhere near that subject they'll go "...and I helped you paint the wall, of course", and then you'd better be grateful and touched all over again, or else. ISTps don't pull such stunts, I'd say. They're more like "all for one and one for all".

ISTps are capable of standing by, watching a toddler do hair-raising stuff, and they'll only act to avert disaster.

Yeah, that's precisely how I am.

[Park]

My husband has always been really good with our daughter that way. I try to get invovled in what she's doing and he'll say, "She's doing fine. Just let her have fun." He is very relaxed about what she's doing and what might happen. It drives our ENFj neighbor crazy when the girls are playing with each other. My husband watches our daughter climb whatever or do whatever and just watches, while the neighbor acts as spotter every time his daughter climbs anything and is constantly warning her that she might get hurt.

That's one of the biggest problems I 've had with my ENFj mother. She would always supervise my younger sister like that, watching her every step, and I 'll always argue against it, telling her to leave her alone. She would also constantly blame me for not carring about my sister which is so fucking untrue and which is why it hurts so much to hear it from her.

[duntee]

I wish I had an ISTp mom...she was very overprotective. As a teenager I hated that

[schrödinger's cat]

that is an inherent form of prejudice.

you should care about people because they are people not because they are "close to you" <3

Every one of us has only so much time and energy. Even our ability to talk to someone and really listen is limited. And we can only help others to a certain extent before we're burned out. The question is what to do with the resources you have. If you shower them over the whole of mankind, no one will actually get much. It makes sense to start with the people you've actually made some commitment to.

It also makes sense to commit yourself to a greater cause. Those are just choices. But you can't put your energy in a greater cause and then expect to have that same energy left to give to others (family, friends etc). It's expended and gone. Same thing if you give most of your energy to your family and friends - there won't be much strength left to go save the world with.

[meatburger]

Exactly i totally agree Cat but i couldnt be bothered writing a response.

I mean from a world point of view its wonderful to try to create the whole "world is a large tribe" atmosphere but the reality is if you give too much to random people you wont get much return. Still doesn't mean you shouldn't act kindly to others though.

[Topaz]

Well I cant add to SC or Meaty so I would just like to say HOOBASTANK!. ... uhm thank you.

[Rocky]

that is an inherent form of prejudice.

you should care about people because they are people not because they are "close to you" <3

Every one of us has only so much time and energy.

I don't know, I only thought --> and ignored it.

[anndelise]

that is an inherent form of prejudice.

you should care about people because they are people not because they are "close to you" <3

Every one of us has only so much time and energy. Even our ability to talk to someone and really listen is limited. And we can only help others to a certain extent before we're burned out. The question is what to do with the resources you have. If you shower them over the whole of mankind, no one will actually get much. It makes sense to start with the people you've actually made some commitment to.

It also makes sense to commit yourself to a greater cause. Those are just choices. But you can't put your energy in a greater cause and then expect to have that same energy left to give to others (family, friends etc). It's expended and gone. Same thing if you give most of your energy to your family and friends - there won't be much strength left to go save the world with.

Not only that, but if he's gonna talk superoraganisms, I'd like to point out that the bacteria in our stomache is not concerend with the neurons in the brain, nor the cells of the pumping heart, nor the cells of moving limbs. They go about their little business...which happens to help the digestive system etc, which in turn helps the individual human of which they are a part of.

Sometimes, a world (in this case a human) is far better off if each cell, bacteria, gene does it's job without trying to be all cells at once.

I can either spend my resources (monitarily, emotionally, mentally, etc) on trying to save every individual of mankind, or i can work with those individuals who are responsive to me in such a way as to encourage them to work with others who are responsive to them in such a way as to encourage those others to work with yet others who are responsive to them, and so on. In this way, I am "doing my job" in such a way as to create a wave of working togetherness.

And yet another way of looking at it is that the people I am in contact with regularly, when we work well together, we creat a "superorganism" or at least a system for a superorganism to use. If our group gets together with a few other groups, then an even "higher" "superorganism" is created, and so on.

[FDG]

you should care about people because they are people not because they are "close to you" <3

Should?

How do you decide? It's an arbitrary rule of yours, and thereby I can decide to do differently, and by the same token tell you that you should do my way.

[Slacker]

I don't understand, Pedro. Are you actually telling me you care about strangers as much as your own family members? Or that I should care about strangers as much as my daughter? That's just crazy. Of course I care for humanity as a whole, but my focus is my family. And I think anyone who claims to care about strangers as much as their own family members is, frankly, lying.

[Topaz]

I don't understand, Pedro. Are you actually telling me you care about strangers as much as your own family members? Or that I should care about strangers as much as my daughter? That's just crazy. Of course I care for humanity as a whole, but my focus is my family. And I think anyone who claims to care about strangers as much as their own family members is, frankly, lying.

Hes just pullin our chain.

[schrödinger's cat]

Ah. In that case, Hoobastank.

It helped us clarify our opinions. We'd neverrrr have done it otherwise. Left to our own devices, we usually all just loll about in the sunshine and go "...anyone else for another daiquiri?" and then after ten minutes someone will say "didn't you want to get a drink?" and the first person will say "...only if someone else wants one too", "well I'd want one but only if you're getting one for yourself", "hm, not sure", and so on. Delta moods.

[implied]

Makes me think of people who abandon their family to join the peace corp or something. Makes no sense at all to me that someone would do that. But people do things like that all the time. Not just the peace corp, but to "serve the church", or "the people" or whatever larger group they seem to think is more important.

what is the type that does this, aside from my ex.

[Gilly]

SEE or IEE.

[science as magic]

@cat: it is not something you have to do perpetually necessarily, but to lack the capacity at all seems an error.
@ann: bacteria are not conscious
@fdg: you charge at the cape not at the matador
@diana: caring for family and "caring for others" are not inherently in conflict.

I am honestly quite surprised at the response. i thought these were things that others had already "figured out." no wonder you people get all defensive when i "lash out." how horrible.

even if you view it from a totally selfish point of view "caring for others" is caring for yourself. it is sort of like how intelligent people create systems of education so that they do not have to be burdened with the stupidity of others as much as they would otherwise.

that however is a completely infantile way of viewing it. the scarcity of resources mindset leads to small minds and hollow thinking.

in the future i think the greatest threat to mankind will be suicide. individuals grow greater in power each and every year and it seems to me that the only way for the human race to survive in the long run would be for us to learn how to take the concerns of others as we do our own. if we do not renegades who have no part in the reality which we create by displacing other realities can and might destroy us all. we already "take care of our own" with regards to family and so forth and this is good but it is insufficient. i think this is the impetus for the greater organization of our composite members which will eventually culminate in a structure which will allow us to literally feel pain when others of our race do and also experience the joys of our constituent members. we will have to create a mind in which negation of terms does not exist but is still represented in contrasting mental overlaps. the ultimate reward being a race which does not do things for any particular reason at all not even the joy in the doing (for when things get tough then where will we find the will to continue?). No, it will do all. why? there is no why. once we as humanity have a sense of purpose or rather a sense of being that is not dependent upon circumstances or trying to get the most for our investment and so forth. when we do things for no reason (say it fast like one word, one thought) we will get all of these things and get them in a way that is simpler, less time consuming, more efficient, more poetic, more beautiful, more complex. i am not speaking double-talk be well.

[science as magic]

and i say it is best to choose based upon context. example: if i am forced to choose between helping a "stranger" while working at a suicide prevention hotline and having to pick up my kids from their baseball game in the rain i would choose the former.

[duntee]

yeah i understand what your saying Pedro.

I guess the misunderstanding is like you said the context in which you would have to choose who to care for.

[science as magic]

Great. Semantics.

please refrain. your examples all trivialized the needs of others as opposed to the needs of "your own"



The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. In other words the action that should be taken is that which improves the structure overall the most.

[science as magic]

You can still turn to someone else for help but not many people are that willing to take care of a sick old person for free.

one takes a relatively small amount of resources and time compared to the other.

There's a reason that I'm me and not you, and I'd like to keep it that way.

there is a reason why some people in the world can only speak one language or 2 or five and not all of them as well but it would be better to be able to speak all of them.

Also sometimes selfishness, caring for yourself and your needs benefits the larger society, and more than selflessness would. It's along the lines of the example that's given all the time, with the little air thingies the flight attendant tells you about when you're riding on an airplane, that if they happen to be needed you should first put your own on, and then you can help other people. Because you can't help anyone else if you're flopping around floundering for breath, right? Your immediates, those closest to you need to be taken care of first (and that includes yourself as the most immediate) and then will you be able to take care of others.

this line of reasoning implies that we should take care of those that are most able to take care of others first not necessarily "those close to us." that is born from the rationale that taking care of those who will care for ourselves so we can care for others will be better for all. this is a true statement however one should not confuse better with best as others who are more capable of caring should be sponsored before ourselves if the goal is to increase the total amount of practical, actual, and per capita care. sometimes our death is what is best for others. sometimes it is what is best for ourselves. this suicide is best when it is willing. we should learn to die in this manner. sometimes we should find self in (all) others.

[science as magic]

what? is ju krazzzy? it would be unnecessary but would it be worse? i think it would only be so if the host language was overburdened with detrimental concepts

[science as magic]

it is better because it allows you to create a much greater amount of new concepts by mixing and matching from a larger database. the more you learn the quicker you learn. also, learning goes a lot quicker under certain conditions (for example in childhood). if you were to grow up in a "country" where all languages were spoken you would learn a lot more of them more quickly. also, f you could learn really really fast your second point would be moot. this is what will happen once humans are upgraded where the "country" will be all human thoughts currently occuring and the "languages" being the possible forms of cognition. i have a new solution for you diana. you don't have to be "integrated" if you don't want to be. i will just intercept your "broadcast" and incorporate you into myself

[schrödinger's cat]

Pedro, are you really talking about practical every-day to-do-list stuff here, or are you on the level of theories? I'm beginning to think that this could be the problem.

And we'd better define what is meant by "someone who is close to us" and by "caring". People's concepts mismatch. I'll start...

People "close" to sb: -- the core meaning is "friends and family", but it's not limited to that. It's a set of priorities which is influenced by circumstances and context. Perhaps you won't even consciously know your priorities; you just realize how you would act in a given situation and you go from there.

Constructing theories about your priorities will usually lean heavily on examples: "If there was a cinema and everyone I ever saw was in it and it was on fire and I could just save ONE person..." etc. etc. BUT: such simple clean-cut scenarios don't exist. IRL it's possible that my child might be beyond saving, and that I could never hope to reach her in time, but I might save some others who are nearer the entrance and are just too hurt to get up. AND EVEN THAT is an unhelpful scenario. We don't know how we'd act until we've been there. That counts for many "extreme cases" scenarios.

Better to talk about everyday examples. We can all know what our priorities are there because we see how we generally act. And in everyday life, I guess most of us will give their friends and family priority over random strangers. I know I do, because I memorize their birthdays and bake them cakes with candles on top etc., and I don't do that with the postman, f.expl., selfish and prejudiced though that might make me.

[meatburger]

Haha. Cat + Stefana i was thinking exactly the same..

Im a little tired from work and not thinking clearly eeek POLR, so i have only kind of understood this thread.

Pedro, with that being said i enjoy your ideas. They are very and thats cool. I actually agree with you about the biggest threat to people soon will be suicide / depression, i also agree that what the world really needs is to become a tribe again. People feel lonlely, insignificant and seperated. Its enjoyable and enlightening to have your positive and expanding ideas.

That being said at this point in reality, they seem to be to be a pipe dream. Now i know a few people need to start the ball rolling but at this point its a mighty huge ask. The question is, are you already living your life the way your talking? Do you love everyone Equally? more than those closest to you?

I know your not lecturing us etc on how to care etc. As a perfect example of doing something for an unknown, about 2 weeks ago at 12:00am in the morning i saw a little old lady disorientated and walking in the dark. I ended up giving her a lift home(about 2 kms). She was confused and had an appointment to the hairdresser at 12:00pm the next day lol. It took me about an hour to get her home as she couldn't tell where it was. This is a true story

[schrödinger's cat]

With that theory he's probably just pulling the ISTps' chain. Think about it - the mere idea of being part of a superorganism.... Constantly being in close contact with drama queens... to-do-list fanatics... idiots...

[science as magic]

@cat: closeness is not defined by genetics. many people feel close to those who are not their friends and family or to those who are but are not such as the adopted feeling love for their adopted family but not even recognizing their biological parents on the street if they were to meet them. in every situation there will be a few "exceptions to the rule" people who do not feel particularly close to those they are "supposed to" feel close to or anyone at all particularly. these people show us the principle of care without bounds and once enough of them exist and they export that knowledge unto other people it becomes a general principle of society. eventually, one learns that care and object need not be related at all and this is a most beautiful thing indeed. i hope i have kept this "real" enough for you.

@stefana: i used to accuse people of doing the same to me as well. i find that we tend to accuse others of this when we are confronted with some idea that we find particularly disturbing. the power of the person to whom we are reacting is that they find the piece of information that you see as so powerful as something to be taken for granted, an insignificance. i reacted this way when being introduced to the concept that some killers find murder (for lack of a better word) fun. society tends to relegate these "disturbing ideas" to obscurity to try and brush them off by looking at them as ridiculous. then one day a soldier in a war gets a rush of adrenaline as he kills his foe on the field of combat. he has trouble rationalizing what he has always known as wrong with his newfound experience. this is they way that society advances, we discover that the things we have always taken for granted are false or not the only way. there are other ways, better ways, one of these is approaching all people regardless of their status or relation to you with kindness, respect, joy, etc

@meatburger: i have not attained perfection and i am still limited in my capacity to care. this does not negate what i have said. even were i a cruel man who wantonly destroyed everything he touched my words would still be true. if i tell you that you should eat healthy, excercise, and get good sleep and i myself eat only fried chicken and beer, never excercise, and sleep 2 hours a day my advice would still be good advice in spite of my hypocrisy.

@mustachio: discrepancies and conflict are at the heart of any sort of communication including that in the platform that i am suggesting. this conflict is good and it will create more individuality, not less. imagine being differentiated along lines such as those you have suggested capitalism vs. communism, individuality vs. society, and trillions more that are yet to be created because the amount of communication occuring is not sufficient to support all the variable concepts. then these interact with one another, in crude ways at first, such as individualist communists arising to counter societal oriented capitalists. then we come to realize that these concepts do not exist in static expressions but along variable "dimensions" we now have a broader range of description of humanity. then these new ranges interact with new ranges. an infinite series of integralization of concepts emerges that becomes ever more complex, descriptive, beautiful, and individualistic with each new leap of expansion. the infinite thought process is the only way we can continue to grow. the only way that new resources can be generated to keep us from falling into the inevitability of the scarce thoughtset that only leads to our stagnation and eventual extinction.

i do not suggest that the mental internet be forced upon anyone. i think it will "naturally" win supremacy as "the best way to do things" on it's own.

@stefana and the trying to teach types to "care" comment:

yes, i am. i do not view types as being or or what have you but as having relaitve functional development. so an type can be more "" than an type were he born into an "" atmosphere. this concept is more than that which you currently have only because you have not been exposed to this "other" yet. do i contain it? no. as meatburger pointed out i am unable to care infinitely. i am not as as this concept. in part i am relating that which i do not know. it is still better though, just hard to imagine when we live in such a small petty world full of fear and trembling.

[science as magic]

oh and mustachio the solution to the problem of language is not to get rid of the versatility of an infinite number of languages by replacing them with one standardized language for efficiency of communication but to create a way to translate between any # of languages so that you have the beauty of efficiency and the adaptability of versatility found in one :wink:

it is sweet that she is able to communicate so openly and honestly with people she's just met. I tell her that I kinda admire that quality in her. She is slightly comforted

<3

her sister's words are still causing her much confusion.