War Veterans
The last few days I've spent with a war veteran who nearly lost his life in Iraq due to a helicopter crash. This man can't find a job because he's Dx with PTSD and is considered unpredictable. He has no real "job experience" even though he risked his life for his country.
He tested INTJ.
Is he INTJ? Or does his "condition" make him INTJ?
is this entire theory crap?
what is the difference? How to tell?
The mind is restless and difficult to restrain, but it is subdued by practice
-Krishna
The condition does makes him INTJ, just liek having AIDS makes you dead.
Depends on what you want to do with it. For intertype relationships it doesn't matter if he IS intj or HAS BECOME intj.
I know they use MBTI for job coaching and stuff, in that case, well, it still doesn't really matter, he tests intj so the jobs the ascribe to him will fit him wether he is or has become intj.
If you want to use it for self knowledge the theory is fine too, just don't ascribe identity statements to it (a good tip in general) and use it only to clarify or as a reference frame.
So, ofc on deep theorethical level its probably crap, but do you need a valid theory really?
In a sense PTSD is crap theorethically as well. But to him it's real, to society it's real so you are combining two theories that are crap on conceptual level and ask wether one is crap compared to the other... I think your time would be spend better if you helped the Intj war veteran find a job, even people suffering from ptsd can learn, be retrained, be cured, be re-intergrated. A few hours of your time and expertise might be immensely valuable to such a person.
People who volunteer for military service should be treated as war criminals.. like any insurgent who volunteers to cause chaos and destruction.
the least you could do is admit the narcissism of your position...Originally Posted by xerx
That's a completely idiotic non-sequitur.
Your face is a completely idiotic non-sequitor!
Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.
ok; fun's over. sorry for the derail.
you can't relate the two. there really isn't anything in the ptsd diagnosis that's unique to one type.
Disagree.
Before the condition the vet may have been INTP and the condition changed him to INTJ.
Conditions can change people's personality, but a person's type is probably rather irrelevant in such circumstances.
"Or does his "condition" make him INTJ?"
...since when does PTSD make someone INTJ?...
And sounds like he has bigger fish to fry than figuring out his socionics type :/
fuck you, man. no wait, that's messed up. let me educate you first before you go fuck yourself. you're justifying the prosecution of military volunteers under a legal system that excludes military volunteers from prosecution as war criminals. some laws are legit. other laws aren't legit. so the basis for that legit/illegit distinction is your intrinsic values. your intrinsic values are relative. essentially, your position boils down to emotivism. It's narcissistic because you expect a legal system to reflect it. the part I don't get is why the fuck you can't just admit that its narcissistic. You act like it's some fucking insult. I'm willing to take it further than you are, and invalidate the legal system as a whole. Fuck the laws. Legal systems are based in bullshit. By consensus. I'm my own law, but in contrast to you, my position is selfish and egocentric...because I don't give a fuck whether the legal system reflects it. Yours is more narcissistic. Okay, done. Now go fuck yourself.
Seriously dude, you need to lighten up and learn to enjoy life. This sort of thinking just makes you bitter.
And now to state the obvious... No, I don't think common soldiers are war criminals and I don't think they should pay for their leaders' messed up decisions. So you fuck yourself.
fun is only over when the individual you're gettin' pawned by says it over. none of that "I quit, so it's over" crap.
Well, what is it about INTJs that you are saying is related to PTSD? Because if it's the PoLR, that's a superego function and would have little to do with forming someone's ego. You'd have to look at how he represses different aspects of his experiences in order to overcome them. But with PTSD you'd have a fracturing of the ego. So I suppose to really know this person's type, you'd have to see the many different aspects to his personality and see what he is when put back together. And so the process of being put back together can change someone's type; and then given that his ego is fractured, why would it be sensible to say he's INTJ?
What are you going on about? It was a joke which for some reason you took seriously and felt the need to rant about. It was "over" in the sense that I decided to give a serious answer to the OP.
But I digress,
fuck you, man. no wait, that's messed up. let me educate you first before you go fuck yourself. you're justifying the prosecution of military volunteers under a legal system that excludes military volunteers from prosecution as war criminals. some laws are legit. other laws aren't legit. so the basis for that legit/illegit distinction is your intrinsic values. your intrinsic values are relative. essentially, your position boils down to emotivism. It's narcissistic because you expect a legal system to reflect it. the part I don't get is why the fuck you can't just admit that its narcissistic. You act like it's some fucking insult. I'm willing to take it further than you are, and invalidate the legal system as a whole. Fuck the laws. Legal systems are based in bullshit. By consensus. I'm my own law, but in contrast to you, my position is selfish and egocentric...because I don't give a fuck whether the legal system reflects it. Yours is more narcissistic. Okay, done. Now go fuck yourself.
First of all, selfishness, egocentricity and narcissism are virtually the same thing. You should use more descriptive language if you want to draw a distinction between distinct concepts.
Second of all, your legal relativism is childish, inane, and ultimately counterproductive to your goal of personal freedom. Societies without a structured legal system devolve into anarchy. Anarchy isn't some fun thing where you get to do whatever you want; it's a psychologically taxing state where the overwhelming majority of the time is spent maintaining alliances.
Anarchies have implicit rules which can be just as tyrannical as, and often more tyrannical than, the explicit rules set by governments. Anarchy creates conditions for collectivism.
Consider this:
Abiding by social taboos is the primary activity in an anarchy. To survive for even a week without getting murdered and having your stuff stolen, you'll need to join a group of people to help watch your back, i.e. a tribe. In a tribe, it becomes harder to express your individuality because of the possibility of offending any shared collective morality. The fear of total social isolation is a stronger incentive to abide by social taboos than minor imprisonment. Incidentally, this shared collective morality is often religious in nature.
Don't like the chief? Better keep your mouth shut. He's the chief because he (or his family) has more political allies than you do. Politics, itself, takes on a personal dimension in tribal societies.
Blood feuds are a thing. Tribes go to war over homicides in order to maintain their high deterrence image. They risk appearing weak and vulnerable to attack when they don't.
Any normal gang provides a good facsimile of anarchy.
Hmm, so this is the thread, in which I do the "don't believe my bullshit" Aquagraph line, reading Bukowski and telling cosmos jokes all day, and after exploring the contents of black hole with Spock CPig, okay.
This thread is full of trolls.
"Maintaining alliances" as in paying half of what you own to the State?
Currently the police in Detroit stated that you enter Detroit on your own risk. It is obvious that Detroit isn't secured by the police. However, a private corporation called Threat Management Center stepped in and is doing an excellent job. Their profits are so good that they have started to provide service for even those that couldn't afford it. They also offer free services like urban survival training every week, security for victims of stalkers and domestic violence and they also escort elderly. No one working in TMC has had court date, no one who sought their help has been injured after the contact had been made although they are legally a lot more vulnerable than the police.To survive for even a week without getting murdered and having your stuff stolen, you'll need to join a group of people to help watch your back, i.e. a tribe. In a tribe, it becomes harder to express your individuality because of the possibility of offending any shared collective morality. The fear of total social isolation is a stronger incentive to abide by social taboos than minor imprisonment. Incidentally, this shared collective morality is often religious in nature.
And this is within a system that already forces you to pay for protection. Not to mention.. it's the most poorest and criminal place in the US. Why wouldn't these emerge in a stateless society?
Last edited by Aquagraph; 02-22-2014 at 05:42 PM.
“I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in — and the West in general — into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
Rather boorish to think that because the state takes half of what you own that must mean you somehow don't get something of equivalent value if not greater back.
But you wouldn't like if I would forcefully seize your assets and give you something in return that I (or something that is supposed to be the will of the majority) have evaluated as equivalent in value.
“I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in — and the West in general — into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
At best you are offering me the same deal as what I know; at worst, you are offering me an unstated threat of force and an unstated return.
You're not just paying for protection, but for other services as well. The website we're using runs on a clone of a database that was created for the American Department of Defense using research funded by taxpayers.
It took decades to make the internet reality. In all those years certain large corporations were given a virtual monopoly by the government to pursue long-term, blue sky research, most of which never made money and had zero application until much later.
In a hypothetical, pure free market, corporations would be forced to subordinate themselves to market discipline. Market forces don't usually incentivise long-term planning, and most research would have a difficult time getting funding without real evidence that it can generate money for investors within a reasonable timeline.
Ironically, it's corporations that depend on taxpayer money for infrastructure and get the most benefit out of it.
They could, but then they'd effectively be a form of explicit authority, i.e. a government.Currently the police in Detroit stated that you enter Detroit on your own risk. It is obvious that Detroit isn't secured by the police. However, a private corporation called Threat Management Center stepped in and is doing an excellent job. Their profits are so good that they have started to provide service for even those that couldn't afford it. They also offer free services like urban survival training every week, security for victims of stalkers and domestic violence and they also escort elderly. No one working in TMC has had court date, no one who sought their help has been injured after the contact had been made although they are legally a lot more vulnerable than the police.
And this is within a system that already forces you to pay for protection. Not to mention.. it's the most poorest and criminal place in the US. Why wouldn't these emerge in a stateless society?
People have this weird tendency to see government as some conspiracy that's foisted over our heads, but any concentration of power, esp. corporate power, is, de facto, a form of government... a possibly shitty one, depending on your perspective.
OP if you did some reading of the forum in addition to shitposting you would know that in so much that there is any consensus there is consensus that types don't change and test are unreliable.
Show me some evidence or I don't care. Shit poster ...
The mind is restless and difficult to restrain, but it is subdued by practice
-Krishna
An article called Sources of Economic Growth in OECD Countries 2003 shows us that the private funding of R&D correlates with economic growth whereas there were no correlation for public R&D funding and economic growth. The article consisted all the OECD countries for the previous 25 years.
There was no public funding for science before 1930s but yet there was has been marvelous things created, like the aeroplane.
Not to forget, there is already private spaceflight industry that is growing quickly.
Science doesn't need the states. People want the things science can give them and therefore there is an incentive.
I wasn't talking about the government but the state. I don't mind people governing their property.
I don't like corporations either. A class example of fascism as defined by Mussolini; merger of corporate power and state power.Ironically, it's corporations that depend on taxpayer money for infrastructure and get the most benefit out of it.
“I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in — and the West in general — into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
I have a very longILE signature, too.
You can find articles to "prove" any position in economics. It's a field with lots of competing interests. That said, to what extent were these corporations subsidized by the government? Did their suppliers use private roads or roads paved with taxpayer money? Were their scientists trained in publicly funded universities or did they supply training?
Go to any major university and you'll find corporations paying small amounts of grant money to use laboratories that cost more than that. There's a whole slew of necessary infrastructure that these corporations didn't pay for.
Even so, I wasn't just referring to R&D in terms of small inventions or gradual refinements of existing technologies. Not to dismiss their importance, but the aeroplane, fiberglass, leather and so on aren't exactly mega projects. The Atom bomb, Saturn V rockets, the Internet and the Large Hadron Collider are, never mind ancient mega projects like aqueducts and the pyramids of Giza.
I'm glad you brought up private spaceflight because that is one industry that couldn't have existed without the Apollo problem.
I wasn't talking about the government but the state.
I don't mind people governing their property.
I don't like corporations either. A class example of fascism as defined by Mussolini; merger of corporate power and state power.
Who said corporations couldn't become miniature competing statelets in the absence of government? How did government arise in the first place except organically? What makes a corporation different from any of the other concentrations of power that lead to state formation?
Well, types can change, if the ego is broken down. Ni, for example, is often associated with thinking in metaphors, symbols, mystical wanderings/understandings, shamanism, dissociative states (sensation is felt, but separated from the psyche, unlike with Si), etc. So trauma seems to have some relation to developing someone as an Ni ego. And so I suppose there are other relative associations one could infer as well for the other types.
Last edited by strangeling; 02-22-2014 at 11:02 PM.
...
You keep telling me that the businesses needed the tax-money funded infrastructure to conduct their business. Yes, they need the infrastructure and they use state provided services for that because those are the services that were forced on them in the first place. Would you still buy another brand of toilet paper if somebody stole your money on a regular basis and delivered his own brand to you? The other toilet paper brands would probably be unable to compete in the first place.
Okay, prove yours then. Why do we need to have a violence monopoly to fund roads?
There are no corporations without the State. I think you meant businesses. I am advocating a position where we hire the enforcers and let several options of them to be around so none of them won't try anything funny. Second Amendment helps too.
They were probably raiders who found out that raiding and pillaging farming communities won't let them replenish so they set out to rule over them with an extortion racket that brought them steadier income.
People generally let government initiate force and think it is a necessity. A business is based on voluntary transactions.
“I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in — and the West in general — into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
They already have a ton of options of not getting their money stolen. They can easily set up shop in Mogadishu where there are no taxes and no burden of government, where a regulation-free market can allegedly offer them a better deal. They choose not to pursue them.. I wonder why.
What makes you think this never existed? Mercenary companies have been around for centuries if not millennia and were drafted in countless wars (even against other mercenaries). People have always owned weapons. None of that has ever created the perfect balance of power needed to prevent one side from coming to power.There are no corporations without the State. I think you meant businesses. I am advocating a position where we hire the enforcers and let several options of them to be around so none of them won't try anything funny. Second Amendment helps too.
More than one way to rule. Mafias becoming governments, bankers usurping governments, growing farming communities establishing councils which become governments ...They were probably raiders who found out that raiding and pillaging farming communities won't let them replenish so they set out to rule over them with an extortion racket that brought them steadier income.
Yeah, voluntary transaction made possible because of the enforcement of laws.People generally let government initiate force and think it is a necessity. A business is based on voluntary transactions.
Thank you for engaging.
Sorry for if I was rude.
“I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in — and the West in general — into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden
Eh, no problem. Everyone has an opinion I guess.Thank you for engaging.
Sorry for if I was rude.
FWIW, knew an ex-marine with PTSD/CFS quite well. Tested SEI, was probably LSE but there was little benefit in trying to ascertain a type.
http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/psyc...-changes-brain
Read this...Now, explain to me why I should give your statement serious thought.
The mind is restless and difficult to restrain, but it is subdued by practice
-Krishna
I appreciate all the well thought out responses this thread received. Did anyone notice the man who loved his country so much he'd die for it and now can’t find a job as a direct result?
The mind is restless and difficult to restrain, but it is subdued by practice
-Krishna
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote