Why Can't/Don't INTjs Just Get Over it Already?

[lefty]

I think you have Gamma and Alpha switched around completely.

ok raw theory is:

Alphas- (the victorians) - the creation of ideas within established social norms

powerful - primary function - mental perception
powerseeking - secondary function - taking in information
non-political - tertiary function = making decisions
political - 4th function - arrangement of their lives

Betas - - the heirarchy/systems - the coordination of those ideas resigned to believing change is needed

power seeking - primary function - mental perception
political - secondary function - taking in information
powerful - tertiary function - makind decisions
non-political - 4th function - arrangement of their lives

Gammas - Democratic - the corrector of ideas - believing in the power of individuals/seeking status

political - primary function - mental perception
powerseeking - secondary function - taking in information
non-political - tertiary function - making decisions
powerful - 4th function arrangement of their lives.

Deltas - Aristocrats - the finished product - the desire to be influential

non-political - primary function - mental perception
political - secondary function - taking in information
powerful - tertiary function - making decisions
power seeking - 4th function - arrangement of their lives


oh well whatever.

lefty

[Gilly]

Well, Aristocacy with Fi and Te just seems like a recipe for "caring" and having an opinion about everything.

ahh...but an aristocracy is not a democracy?

Please learn what "Aristocracy" means and implies within the context of Socionics before trying to correct me.

[lefty]

Well, Aristocacy with Fi and Te just seems like a recipe for "caring" and having an opinion about everything.

ahh...but an aristocracy is not a democracy?

Please learn what "Aristocracy" means and implies within the context of Socionics before trying to correct me.

oh boo hoo lefty is scolded. you're a drag.

lefty
enfj

[Gilly]

...right...

[lefty]

...right...

you know, really....you didn't add anything youre deconstructing and no im not well educated at all in deconstructionism either so dont ask any complicated questions about it. but i still tried to bring my own ideas to the table. and even now i can correct more of it, but youre a big fucking downer!

lefty

[lefty]

...right...

here this is from wikipedia:

autocracy - "rule by a single individual", such as a dictator or absolute monarch.
meritocracy - "rule by those who most deserve to rule". While this appears to be the same as the original meaning of "aristocracy", the term "meritocracy" has usually implied a much more fluid form of government in which one is, at most, considered "best" for life, but must continually prove one's "merit" in order to stay in power. This power is not passed on to descendants.
plutocracy - "rule by the wealthy". In actual practice, aristocrats are often just plutocrats whose wealth allows them to portray their own virtues as the "best" ones. Usually, this wealth is passed down through inheritance, and in countries like England may be kept intact through primogeniture, in which the oldest child (usually first male) inherits the bulk of the wealth and titles.
oligarchy - "rule by the few". Whether an aristocracy is also an oligarchy depends entirely upon one's idea of what is a "few".
monarchy - "rule by a single individual". Historically, the vast majority of monarchs have been aristocrats themselves. However, they have also been very often at odds with the rest of the aristocracy, since it was composed of their rivals. The struggle between a ruling dynastic family and the other aristocratic families in the same country has been a central theme of medieval history.
democracy - "rule by the people". Democracy and aristocracy are incompatible as forms of government due to the hereditary nature of power in an aristocratic system.


pull something great out your ass with that stuff and link it to socionics and tell me something i've never heard before

[FDG]

Alpha is power-seeking? You don't know many Alphas.

the idea was, and its all debateable, is that they taken in information through power seeking, the secondary function. taking in information.


so an inventor doesn't go around being like ....i shall rule the world!!! but he does walk around being mentally powerful, and looking around and saying ...wait if i did this it would create that which people could utilize in this way. which sort of is power seeking behavior. and because they are so well formed as people and so on alphas are then political with their time...i.e. in how they arrange their lives ... they can't alway be social, not to the extent that gammas are social, because their contributions are not so much based in networking in a social sense. again im saying also as i layed it out may be in complete so am not offering a perfect theory. im an expressive enfj and an E and we find hard, they say, and i agree, to know what they think until they express it.


lefty
enfj
4w5

AAAAhhh I understand this. I think it's good stuff but I don't know how to put it better. it's in my head too anyway

[Exodus]

Delta is probably the MOST political Quadra, if you ask me.

Really? I would say Beta >> Delta > Gamma >> Alpha.

i had tended to think of alphas as mentally powerful

sweeet.

I think one problem with this metaphor is that you're seeing everything as a power struggle.

[Blaze]

hate to say this but politics is everything. whether you agree with it or like it, it's everything. every quadra is prolly political then in their own way. power struggles are universal.

one surprise though is how socionics doesn't directly address the issue of power struggles - although it's clearly related to IM.

[Exodus]

hate to say this but politics is everything. whether you agree with it or like it, it's everything. every quadra is prolly political then in their own way. power struggles are universal.

one surprise though is how socionics doesn't directly address the issue of power struggles - although it's clearly related to IM.

Yeah, true. It's a lot harder to see Si quadras caring much about power struggles, though. We tend to use indirect means.

[Logos]

hate to say this but politics is everything. whether you agree with it or like it, it's everything. every quadra is prolly political then in their own way. power struggles are universal.

one surprise though is how socionics doesn't directly address the issue of power struggles - although it's clearly related to IM.

Yeah, true. It's a lot harder to see Si quadras caring much about power struggles, though. We tend to use indirect means.

Perhaps then it is more in the regards of political observation and theory as a method of creating a society that caters to their Si.

[Blaze]

hate to say this but politics is everything. whether you agree with it or like it, it's everything. every quadra is prolly political then in their own way. power struggles are universal.

one surprise though is how socionics doesn't directly address the issue of power struggles - although it's clearly related to IM.

Yeah, true. It's a lot harder to see Si quadras caring much about power struggles, though. We tend to use indirect means.

Perhaps then it is more in the regards of political observation and theory as a method of creating a society that caters to their Si.

huh....coool....expand please....:-)

[Enters Laughing]

A Si based society would probably involve everyone staying at home, basically. There wouldn't be a parliament building, and people would vote electronically on issues, perhaps on a minute-by-minute basis. Dare we venture outside? The world's a scary place...

Descartes or somebody said something like 'most of the world's problems are caused by the inability of people to stay at home' - that's prolly a Si philosophy .

[Logos]

hate to say this but politics is everything. whether you agree with it or like it, it's everything. every quadra is prolly political then in their own way. power struggles are universal.

one surprise though is how socionics doesn't directly address the issue of power struggles - although it's clearly related to IM.

Yeah, true. It's a lot harder to see Si quadras caring much about power struggles, though. We tend to use indirect means.

Perhaps then it is more in the regards of political observation and theory as a method of creating a society that caters to their Si.

huh....coool....expand please....:-)

In addition to what Subterranean said: universal health care. I would also take a look at Sweden for an example of a government that tries to cater to individualized Si.