would you rather

[Joy]

Would you rather say or do something that could potentially upset someone but could also do them some good, or say or do something that will make someone happy or comfortable but won't do any good other than that?

[Joy]

Personally, I don't mind being the bad guy or upsetting people if I think there's something that should be said or done. I'd rather say something they need to hear than something they want to hear, even if it means they'll dislike me.

[XoX]

Would you rather say or do something that could potentially upset someone but could also do them some good, or say or do something that will make someone happy or comfortable but won't do any good other than that?

This is the most biased poll ever It spells out so clearly which is the "right answer".

[Joy]

I don't understand the other mindset so I didn't know how to write the question any better than that.

[XoX]

I don't understand the other mindset so I didn't know how to write the question any better than that.

Perhaps others see it differently but to me it reads like "would you rather do something useful or something useless?"

[Joy]

I don't understand the other mindset so I didn't know how to write the question any better than that.

Perhaps others see it differently but to me it reads like "would you rather do something useful or something useless?"

Like I said... I don't know how to write the question any better than that. I guess it's "feel good vs. useful", but I can see how some people wouldn't know what "useful" is in a situation and would automatically take the "feel good" approach and call those who don't cold or mean or whatever.

[Gilly]

[XoX]

I don't understand the other mindset so I didn't know how to write the question any better than that.

Perhaps others see it differently but to me it reads like "would you rather do something useful or something useless?"

Like I said... I don't know how to write the question any better than that. I guess it's "feel good vs. useful", but I can see how some people wouldn't know what "useful" is in a situation and would automatically take the "feel good" approach and call those who don't cold or mean or whatever.

Some people react better to "useful" and some to "feel good" (Te vs Fe). Those who are Te > Fe apparently need that "useful" advice slammed on their face even if it initially "hurts". They just get it better if it is said directly.

Those who are Fe > Te are more in need of right kind of encouragement and emotional support. These Fe>Te people can be totally emotionally devastated by this "useful" advice if it is given in a straightforward manner when they are at their weakest. To them this advice sounds like "you are a totally incapable loser and can't function properly without me commanding you exactly what to do" and it puts them down even more as it reinforces their feeling of being worthless.

So I would say some people need to be given concrete "hard" advice right up their face and some people need to be first given emotional support to get their spirits and self confidence up and then they are more prepared to face the "hard part" of the advice.

[Joy]

Yeah, I can usually tell if someone will respond better to being told flat out what's up or if they're more delicate. Sometimes the delicate people need to have someone upset them though.

[XoX]

Yeah, I can usually tell if someone will respond better to being told flat out what's up or if they're more delicate. Sometimes the delicate people need to have someone upset them though.

True. I think one great skill is if you can read the person well enough to know what is the best course of action in their particular case. If you can add there a capability to formulate "hard" solutions then you are a complete package. The perfect consultant

[Joy]

The problem is that sometimes the best course of action for them requires more effort on my part than I can commit to, and I've gotten in trouble like that in the past.

[UDP]

A lot of people have trouble understanding their polr. The matter is whether or not you challenge it or let it define who you are..

The problem is that sometimes the best course of action for them requires more effort on my part than I can commit to, and I've gotten in trouble like that in the past.

One believes one is entitled and that one's polr is something one are above and superior too in one's own mind, and therefore feel comfortable in not acknowledging it in other people's existences. One assume, or outrightly believes, that "this aspect of reality (or function) is icky! It is pathetic, unimportant, or (some other negative quality), so I feel comfortable with looking down on it!". This can even continue into building an identity off of this thought process, so that a person feels a significant part of who they are is how they deal with that undesirable issue. It can escalate into a large magnitude of self-serving biases.

In my experience these self serving biases are somewhat invisible, yet I do feel what these biases create is a false, or at least more tainted, interpretation of reality.


(I have tried to speak above my functions in this post, although I can see how this may be typical for an LII sort of post. I say this because I am sure all the types have a certain predisposition or bias, so what I tried to shoot for was a more common 'higher ground' that would be more universally realistic and less focused on one type of disposition. I do not know if that is legitimately possible or not, but it seemed worth trying to do.)

[UDP]

Having just now looked into the Anything goes section to see >20 pages in a certain thread (of which I read a few, only to get a gist of what was going on...)
The question is raised as to whether this thread is really a means of trying to justify actions and dispositions. I will let you explain this possible connection if you see fit to do so, Joy.

[FDG]

I don't understand the other mindset so I didn't know how to write the question any better than that.

Perhaps others see it differently but to me it reads like "would you rather do something useful or something useless?"

Like I said... I don't know how to write the question any better than that. I guess it's "feel good vs. useful", but I can see how some people wouldn't know what "useful" is in a situation and would automatically take the "feel good" approach and call those who don't cold or mean or whatever.

Some people react better to "useful" and some to "feel good" (Te vs Fe). Those who are Te > Fe apparently need that "useful" advice slammed on their face even if it initially "hurts". They just get it better if it is said directly.

Those who are Fe > Te are more in need of right kind of encouragement and emotional support. These Fe>Te people can be totally emotionally devastated by this "useful" advice if it is given in a straightforward manner when they are at their weakest. To them this advice sounds like "you are a totally incapable loser and can't function properly without me commanding you exactly what to do" and it puts them down even more as it reinforces their feeling of being worthless.

So I would say some people need to be given concrete "hard" advice right up their face and some people need to be first given emotional support to get their spirits and self confidence up and then they are more prepared to face the "hard part" of the advice.

I *think* that it's a matter of negativism/positivism more so than Te and Fe. The types that IME are the most sensitive to criticism are Negativist-IJs so INTj and ISFj. Hammer some Te as you define it in the face of a self-confident ENTp and he won't hear anything, really.

[Kristiina]

What mindset don't you understand here, Joy? Is this supposed to be Fe vs Te? You mean you actually spelled out that Te people say mean things that are good for others, but Fe people say nice things that result in a bad outcome. Or perhaps that Fe people just never do anything good in the world and all they do is make people smile, even if they should be telling the truth. IMHO, this kind of hinting crawls into people's subconscious undetected and this poll does so much more evil than just saying that Fe people are mean and useless.

[Kristiina]

And XoX, this goes for you too.

[FDG]

Anyway, my reply is "I'd rather say something upsetting and that doesn't make the other person better off"

[olduser]

I'd rather leave people to their own business in personal emotional matters. Say nothing. Don't care. Turn my back. It's hard, but the people will have second chances. I've been hurt and I didn't run around blabbing my head off about it. I've only once or twice brought up my personal life. Can't people take care of themselves?

I think David Byrne sums it up well in the Talking Heads song:

"So many people...have their problems
I'm not interested...in their problems
I guess I've...experienced some problems
But now I've...made some decisions"

ahaha
"They say 'compassion is a virtue' but I don't have the time."

[XoX]

ROFL

[Mea]

-I'd rather say or do something that could potentially upset someone but could also do them some good.
-I'd rather say or do something that will make someone happy or comfortable but won't do any good other than that.

The choices are kinda bad. I choose neither of the two. And it's not "it's all bullshit either".

Doing or saying something for someone else good could be done in a way where it may not harm the person.
The first choice sounds too aggressive. The second is just plain stupid.

[oyburger]

My rule of thumb is to not get involved as I usually don't care one way or the other.

[Slacker]

My opinion: If you need to say something potentially hurtful to to someone for their own good, you should have the kind of relationship where it'll hopefully be understood as being said out of kindness, and you should say it in as kind and gentle a way as possible. If you don't have that kind of relationship or you can't be very gentle and kind about it, you should keep your mouth shut.

[Joy]

What mindset don't you understand here, Joy? Is this supposed to be Fe vs Te? You mean you actually spelled out that Te people say mean things that are good for others, but Fe people say nice things that result in a bad outcome. Or perhaps that Fe people just never do anything good in the world and all they do is make people smile, even if they should be telling the truth. IMHO, this kind of hinting crawls into people's subconscious undetected and this poll does so much more evil than just saying that Fe people are mean and useless.

No, it's not Te vs. Fe. I know Fe types who have no problem saying things that upset people if they think those people need to hear them, and I know Te types who do.

Having just now looked into the Anything goes section to see >20 pages in a certain thread (of which I read a few, only to get a gist of what was going on...)
The question is raised as to whether this thread is really a means of trying to justify actions and dispositions. I will let you explain this possible connection if you see fit to do so, Joy.

I see no need to justify anything. I'm trying to understand people with Gilligan's point on view on the matter. I have known a lot of people with that mindset, to one extent or the other. A lot of them will understand if you explain your reasoning to them, but some, like Gilligan, insist on the same type of thing he was insisting on, that it's bad or wrong to say things to upset people even if they really ought to be upset.

[Mea]

My opinion: If you need to say something potentially hurtful to to someone for their own good, you should have the kind of relationship where it'll hopefully be understood as being said out of kindness, and you should say it in as kind and gentle a way as possible. If you don't have that kind of relationship or you can't be very gentle and kind about it, you should keep your mouth shut.

Exactly.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Slacker]

I do that too sometimes Diana - tell someone off to relieve a little internal pressure. People tell people off, but hopefully they don't delude themselves into thinking they're doing it for the other person's benefit. If it's truly for that person's benefit, in a lot of cases people would really keep their mouths shut.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[anndelise]

My opinion: .... If you don't have that kind of relationship or you can't be very gentle and kind about it, you should keep your mouth shut.

sometimes though, being gentle doesn't make the impact needed

i used to be friends with a single mother of two girls.
she was a good mother, a not so good friend, and an excellent manipulator.
at first i fell for her manipulations, gave her the sympathetic words, the kindness and gentleness, did things for her, helped her out with some things, etc etc.
but her needs kept going on and on....and on
and then i had a chance to observe her with other people, and realized she was doing with them the same kinds of things she was doing with me....and she got more from them than she'd ever gotten with me.
i started calling her on it.
she'd respond with further manipulative attempts
which i, of course, called her on yet again
then she began getting agitated with me because i wasn't responding "appropriately" (meaning I wasn't playing her games anymore)
finally things came to a head where she threatened suicide to me (I later learned that suicide threats were one of her common manipulative techniques)

being both sick of her crap AND knowing how seriously she took her role as a mother....
I told her, very calmly, to go for it, to teach her daughters that when life gets a little rough, that it's better to just give up life altogether and screw those who love and depend on you

as expected, the full blunt of her anger turned towards my direction as she bitched about how dare i suggest that she's a bad mother, how dare i be so mean and hateful, yadda yadda yadda

our "friendship" ended immediately after that
on the plus side, she began taking some responsibility for her actions, some of her friends found the courage to be more firm with her, and she never threatened suicide again...(some of her friends have contacted me thanking me for what I'd said to her)

so, imo, sometimes, gentle and kind just isn't going to cut it and can be more of an enabling thing than anything helpful
and sometimes, a person has to become the new bad guy so that positive results can occur

[Kristiina]

I think you know my answer on this, but I don't think I actually have in mind that it's for their own good when I say it - even if it might work out that way, and usually does. It's more often for my own good so I don't have to put up with their actions. And I'm not mean. It's just, come on, should we all dance around and pretend all's okay, or be honest and attack a problem head-on? Nothing gets solved by pussyfooting around.

Diana, I think I've fallen in love with you now! I'm gonna dump my man so we can live in blissful gay harmony 'til we die. What'ya say? :wink:

[XoX]

You might rephrase it like this:

Would you rather be blunt and attack a problem to get rid of it? or
Would you rather be sympathetic to the person with the problem?

People might like those choices better.

What do you see as the functional interpretation of these options?

[implied]

the ENFps are making more sense here to me than anyone else.

[Minde]

Anyway, my reply is "I'd rather say something upsetting and that doesn't make the other person better off"

That's pretty much the opposite of my preferred choice.

[Joy]

I like Diana's stance on this.

With me though, while I don't do what I do only because I want what's best for the other person, that is certainly a factor. I see treating people in a nice or sympathetic way when you don't want to as being disrespectful and potentially damaging. If I thought that telling people what I think could be bad for them in the long term I would seriously question whether or not I should.

However, this is only how I treat people in a social or family setting. In a professional setting it's different.