Printable View
Age limit? It's not like being a douche to someone when you are supposed to have a leg up on in maturity is illegal, it's just distasteful.Quote:
Originally Posted by lungs
I don't remember what I suggested previously. This conversation must have happened at least a month ago.
Why would I ban someone I disagree with? *insert lame Trump joke here*? That would also be bad taste.
true, I guess I could go on ignoring all her posts for fear the truth might hurtQuote:
Originally Posted by niffer
then I realize disabuse is the least hurtful thing you can do
Oh, you just wanted a special subforum for people who practiced socionics on a subpar level. You were pretty adamant about it because the Reputation of Socionics was at stake. It was one of the several petty demands that made me sick of modding. That's why your reaction here to an offhand comment about shallowness doesn't make a lot of sense to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by niffer
I don't know what you're talking about. Carry on though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
beta is inclined to value and promote conditions favorable to an ignorant mob, so I'm not surprised
It was probably just a joke or I was venting but you obviously weren't able to recognize it as what it was. Good riddance then for giving up the mod job.Quote:
Originally Posted by lungs
sounding a lot like trump right nowQuote:
Originally Posted by niffer
This makes absolutely zero sense considering what I was initially upset about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
yeah heaven forbid people bring up in good faith the facts as they see it in the hope it might lead somewhere productive. people need to be protected from such discussion, and we all know the sun revolves around the earth anywayQuote:
Originally Posted by niffer
Yeah, you deserve mods who will bear the brunt of your frustrations by just listening patiently to ridiculous complaints and demands. That's what they're there for.Quote:
Originally Posted by niffer
Go snuggle up to Adam while he jokes with uncomfortable women one third his age about how he wants them tied up in his basement.
its ok though niffers here to save us all from hurt feelings. nevermind that basement stuff. obviously fit for policymakerQuote:
Originally Posted by lungs
Wanna see it again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
Quote:
Originally Posted by niffer
Quote:
Originally Posted by niffer
:shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
Well, I'll take what I can get.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
niffer go pet a dog or something, you'll feel better
I do have some internal ambivalence about how much I should say about cass, because she is young and sensitive. I think if you position yourself as a teacher and leader and expect to be treated as such, then some criticism will always follow. I was probably too snide with the shallow comment.
am I the only one who feels like its massively paternal to assume she would even be hurt, and we all accept it would be stupid on some level to be hurt, but we imply of course she's stupid and thus of course would be hurt. and I don't assume thatQuote:
Originally Posted by lungs
anyway I feel like im the only one who thinks cass apparently isnt such an idiot as to be offended by the concept that other people will inevitably not see everything she posts as %100 pure gold, and thats ok
further its all an implied put down on SEIs to say that its somehow a step down and not a step up and this solipsistic notion that if she wants to be viewed as IEI the best thing for her, is for us to accept that 1) SEI is inferior and 2) it would be mean to suggest she could be SEI on the basis of 1, solely for the reason that she wants to be viewed as IEI as if going along with that is somehow helpful or the right thing to do (for anyone)
this whole thing is idiotic, because anything is shallow in someone's eyes, unless you seriously think your shit is on the level of the masters, which has other problems and you kind of deserve an ego check, so there's no reason to take offense, and second everyone doubts everyone's type and discussion revolving around it is how we collectively learn. and since socionics is a concept and not real the whole point is to further our understanding not claim some identity like its a currency. people act like you're taking money out of their pocket or something by suggesting they may be type x not y. get real
Including you I guess. I don't see the point of any of this pondering in circles when people have more or less been literally or in an implicative way been calling her shallow and stupid en masse in public for her contributions throughout her time on the forum. Saying that it would be patronizing to assume someone would be hurt by it both implies that it would be stupid to be hurt by it, and also seems like an optimistic afterthought where somebody just feels like they're being forced to apologize and doesn't want to. You were hardly involved anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
Anyway, I'm all for freedom of speech. Do what you want. But I'll be exercising mine too. Paper doesn't refuse print bitches.
uh no. the patronizing act is acting as if you know how theyll feel about it. I don't know how they'll feel about it, but I know that whether they're hurt or not, this is not justification for us to squelch discussion over the ideaQuote:
Originally Posted by niffer
all for using freedom of speech to moralize about how we're using our freedom of speech wrong, while attacking the implicit values inherent to freedom of speechQuote:
Originally Posted by niffer
low Fe is so cuteQuote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
its okay, I know what you really need right now :hug:Quote:
Originally Posted by niffer
She's expressed hurt in the past over criticism of her opinions which I think could be predictive of future responses. It's frustrating because her ideas are so confidently expressed and absorbed by many, while ALSO being above criticism because she's really nice and might feel bad. It puts anybody who disagrees with her in a bind. Maybe she can speak for herself though, lol.
down with Fe tyranny :red:Quote:
Originally Posted by lungs
Lol
with how onboard niffer is with being cucked by that useless Fe dynamic makes me think Cass really is IEIQuote:
Originally Posted by lungs
so maybe we all learned something
many feelings died to bring us these learns, i just hope it was worth it
...
Tests are only as reliable as your perception of yourself is, same goes with typing through relationships with others. It's funny that it's such a highly used way of typing when it's so prone to fallibility. I think the ILE suggestion is an interesting one for you, and actually explains some things that are irritating about you that I'm not sure is typical of LIE's. Lungs summed it up well here:Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Strange
LIE's typically do not do this sort of thing, and in the case they do engage a subject they don't know much about, it's very clear that they work within their domain of knowledge while approaching the subject. I believe I also read a post where you admitted to still being in the learning stages, so making comments in the way you do, on the topics that you do, make this all the more grating. You talk as if you are an authority on the subject, while making superficial and fallible connections that aren't backed up substantially. It's an overstepping of boundaries in an intellectual sense, that as lungs said, goes into the theory more than the practical and useful. I think that ILE isn't a bad typing at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by lungs
Also, there seems to be a clear division in that the people that seem to think Cassandra is IEI, in this thread, seem uninformed and unfamiliar with Cassandra's posts. The way that she processes information is not like that of other IEI's, whether or not she is immature. I don't even know what factor maturity would play here, as if maturity changes the structure of your thoughts. It doesn't. It may change how certain you are of yourself, but the way people generate thoughts tends to be fairly stable and Cassandra is out of the loop here in reference to other IEI's.
On another note, the more niffer posts the more obvious it becomes that she's not SLE. :lol:
I really like Slade right now
Oh yes they do. Have you ever heard of Ni creative? And Si polr, which suggests a lack of a strong handle on the domain of subjective experience? Have you not met any real LIEs or what are you basing this off of? This is more proof building up on how you are probably an LII Se polr, another version of spewing experience-lacking myopic bs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slade
And Adam is only admitting to not knowing everything because he's trying to be humble and reasonable, unlike some people here. You however are a fucking noob troll and don't even have the balls to admit it. Then hilariously, next you go on to talk about others who are "unfamiliar" with Cassandra's posts on here, as if you have been on here for fucking years yourself:
I agree with this though:Quote:
Also, there seems to be a clear division in that the people that seem to think Cassandra is IEI, in this thread, seem uninformed and unfamiliar with Cassandra's posts. The way that she processes information is not like that of other IEI's, whether or not she is immature. I don't even know what factor maturity would play here, as if maturity changes the structure of your thoughts. It doesn't. It may change how certain you are of yourself, but the way people generate thoughts tends to be fairly stable and Cassandra is out of the loop here in reference to other IEI's.
Quote:
Tests are only as reliable as your perception of yourself is, same goes with typing through relationships with others. It's funny that it's such a highly used way of typing when it's so prone to fallibility.
Sure, just enjoy the supervision hunty.Quote:
On another note, the more niffer posts the more obvious it becomes that she's not SLE. :lol:
I feel like there's a chicken or the egg thing going on here where its like Adam has come to define LIE so if you have internalized that, even in a small way, it is hard to get out from under; in that case, one would have to in some sense radically reconceptualize LIE to move forward, which people generally don't want to do... possibly because it is unhelpful to do so, or perhaps simply "untrue" in some metaphysical sense, but I like the idea of thinking about it, because its hard to reconcile all the data points as they stand.
Also while I do think of creative Ni as the bullshitting function, I think LIEs typically bullshit in regards to facts: like theyll spin out a plan that isn't manipulative in terms of like a narrative or theory they want you to accept, more like they're coming up with a "plan" to tie the facts together in a way that achieves an end with limited resources or information in the same way a "narrative" (EIE) would except directed at tangible things/ends. In other words, they're not selling a bullshit theory they want someone to buy. they're the "buyer" and they're using it to achieve a goal. they're not slinging bullshit and gauging its effectiveness by who's convinced (EIE), but rather by what achieves a tangible goal (LIE), i.e.: physics. So I don't buy LIE as bullshitter in the sense Niffer is getting at.
I feel like ILE is precisely that kind of "thinking" conceptual bullshitter, more equivalent to EIE, probably because of shared Fe
¯\_(ツ)_/¯Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
No, this is interpersonally fucked up btw. You would want to allow it on a forum, but knowingly hurting someone beyond what's necessary (like ganged up on by 5 different people at a time, not just a 1-1 conversation/argument) is wrong morally/interpersonally, and it's messed up if you can't see that, being so engaged with your morals supposedly.Quote:
uh no. the patronizing act is acting as if you know how theyll feel about it. I don't know how they'll feel about it, but I know that whether they're hurt or not, this is not justification for us to squelch discussion over the idea
No, see the thing is, I actually exit my house and meet other LIEs. :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
This is exactly the kind of LIE bullshitting I had in mind though. Also ILE is probably more similar in bullshit strategy to EIE due to the shared 4D Ne+, although that's in part interchangeable with shared valued Fe I guess (except for the part about the same dimensionality specifically).Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
yeah but its possible you're wrong about everything so all these LIEs you're meeting could just as well be ILEs if you think Adam is an LIE and he's really a ILEQuote:
Originally Posted by niffer
I don't even know if he is or not, but I disagree with your assertion that its somehow immoral to engage in this kind of discussion
I mean shit, if you've got a guilty conscience, don't do it; but I feel good about it. its possible its just a lot of projection
...You're not going to be neatly separating people into types like how it's described in Socionics. People are going to be having their own idiosyncrasies. I think that generally, people take this shit way too seriously. It's not as if types really "exist", in a sense. They're just models and theories. It's really just a fundamentalist way to think that as if there's this "type" at the core of people.
I would mostly agree with niffer's sentiment that it's a bit weird that a bunch of people are talking about someone so impersonally, when they're right in front of you so to speak. This is mostly just "battle typing" and "political" typing, anyway. I don't like this person, so therefore he or she must be this type. I don't like this type, so therefore this person must not be this type. I don't like this person and this person is getting along with this person, therefore they both must be from some sucky quadra that I don't like.
People should see people as people first, not as types that you arbitrarily separate into types that you like or don't like. If Socionics actually influence how you interact with people, then there's a problem. I'd say step back, and really think about what you're doing for a second...
Possible, but highly improbable, and now irrelevant especially considering we both agree on seeing the same tendency you described coming from LIEs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
Really? Interesting. I guess, suit yourself. Subjective ethics will subjective.Quote:
I don't even know if he is or not, but I disagree with your assertion that its somehow immoral to engage in this kind of discussion
I mean shit, if you've got a guilty conscience, don't do it; but I feel good about it. its possible its just a lot of projection
Quote:
Originally Posted by niffer
we don't agree though, I think you're over extending your understanding of creative Ni as instantiated in beta quadra onto LIE and on the basis of that illicit move misunderstanding ILE as LIE, because the "thinking mans" EIE (defined by selling "narratives") is ILE
I don't think LIE is in the business of that at all and I question whether you fully understand that and what it looks like
I agree with Slade that LIE doesn't do that nor should it really be close, which makes me think LIE is radically different than what a lot of people understand it to be, which is a kind of beta caricature of gamma and not the real thing
to get into the psyche of LIE as I see it would be a bit much but I would say they work first from the presupposition that an idea is never valid or invalid or worthwhile detached from its ability to accomplish some goal, hence they work backward from what something does in assessing the worth of anything, including "plans" and "narratives" and since they're not Fe valuing, "narratives" have almost no value, because they can't turn water into wine, etc. I think if you really understand that, you understand how either something is 1) not bullshit ("if its stupid and it works its not stupid") or 2) not worth it (and thus not engaged in). so LIEs are very much "no bullshit"
I feel like you think LIE does "speculate" in some sense because that's how you perceive Te as a Ti valuer, but its not Ni creative so much as Te (it seems like they're "laying a claim to whats going on"--the same way an EIE would with narratives, but they're not, they're simply doing what works and making no claims to the inner workings--thats Te over Ti, and Ni is just taking shots on how to proceed based off on what they know up until that time--at no point are they trying to "convince" anyone, but rather they will have "convinced" themselves when the plan comes together and works)
this is all subtleties on the distinction between Ne + Ti and Te + Ni, and how its different because of Fe and how both are out of quadra types to, presumably, a third quadra which creates all sorts of perceptual nuance
Really? So even though I said I agree with what you posted about LIE Ni creative and you have no basis for thinking why my understanding would be different (other than the fact that I am beta), you think I magically secretly disagree with you and something something you're sliding back into your typical removed-from-reality batshittery.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
@Singularity I agree with your last post (especially on how people will inevitably have their own idiosyncrasies and won't fit allllll the stereotypes of their type perfectly and so they shouldn't be typed just off of those one or two details about them that are different), but I do think that the types exist. I don't necessarily expect others to though. Also yeah, people inject weird personal sentiments into everything that's supposed to be theoretical and can let it influence their lives in an unproductively negative way.
No not at all. I have 4D Te demonstrative myself, remember. You I see as speculating a lot, especially right now though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertrand
I like to put a personal twist on it: "I like this person so they're not beta"Quote:
Originally Posted by Singularity
You know I know it's impossible to remove all personal bias in order to be objective, but jesus...
You actually don't, it's painfully obvious you are not Ti ego. You think that I don't respond to you because I don't want to back up my arguments, but the truth of the matter is that your understanding of Socionics is so perverted and incomprehensible that I have no idea where to even start untangling your thoughts. It's hilarious, on top of that you have a massive ego and your main form of argumentation is literally to pile on insults. The definition of a waste of time.Quote:
Originally Posted by niffer