how about a grapefruit?
how about a grapefruit?
SEE Unknown Subtype
6w7 sx/so
[21:29] hitta: idealism is just the gap between the thought of death
[21:29] hitta: and not dying
.
Originally Posted by Carla
not lots, but yes. lemon slices get sugar too, then the freezer. also, frozen grapes rule all.
SEE Unknown Subtype
6w7 sx/so
[21:29] hitta: idealism is just the gap between the thought of death
[21:29] hitta: and not dying
.
LOL, funny that I just thought to change it up
SEE Unknown Subtype
6w7 sx/so
[21:29] hitta: idealism is just the gap between the thought of death
[21:29] hitta: and not dying
.
Is it bad I've never truly eaten grapefruit?Khamelion, I just noticed your avatar recently as well, ahaha... the whole time I just glanced at it thinking it was just a very vibrant and pretty kiwi. Little did I know ...
Easily remedied. Go buy one at the store tomorrow, take it home, cut it in half, take a knife and slice and loosen up each peice, but don't take it out. Then sprinkle some sugar on it and get a spoon and dig in. Good times.
SEE Unknown Subtype
6w7 sx/so
[21:29] hitta: idealism is just the gap between the thought of death
[21:29] hitta: and not dying
.
yeah grapefruit are tasty... we've got a whole trees worth of those fuckers in the back yard
Oh my ~ Mail some to me! Wait, ... just realized that would be impractical
we have a shit load in our backyard too. huge ones. and tangerines. and cumquats and oranges at my girlfriends house.
SEE Unknown Subtype
6w7 sx/so
[21:29] hitta: idealism is just the gap between the thought of death
[21:29] hitta: and not dying
.
Where the heck do you guys live that you have grapefruit in your backyard? Florida? It's freezing up here! I love grapefruit and so does my 6-year old little guy. I like to broil them in the oven with cinnamon sugar on top. Mmmmmm
IEI-Fe 4w3
holy fuuuck, thanks for that brillant idea.
i live in florida atm, i think BG is in arizona.
i remember visiting an aunt in california one summer and she had a plum tree outside my room i stayed in. that was pretty awesome, minus the occasional worm
SEE Unknown Subtype
6w7 sx/so
[21:29] hitta: idealism is just the gap between the thought of death
[21:29] hitta: and not dying
.
Freeze um!
The green ones are the best frozen.
Concord grapes are my favorite kind of grapes, not sure if they are good frozen though. They usually have seeds.
I'm liking this thread more and more now.
SEE Unknown Subtype
6w7 sx/so
[21:29] hitta: idealism is just the gap between the thought of death
[21:29] hitta: and not dying
.
I see what you're saying. I guess what I was trying to get out there was that we have different needs, but the extent to which we coexist amongst each other in a positive (or at least non-negative) way depends on a mutual understanding of how other people need things other than we do or what comes most naturally to us. In many ways, I do think that expressing Fe is worthwhile and necessary, especially if you care about the person who needs it from you. It's an endless back and forth of compromise, trying to provide for each other while getting what it is that you need in return. Sure that's an ideal kind of situation and misunderstandings will pop up no matter what. It's just one of those things that requires constant effort and attention. You have to make sacrifices and do things that you don't want to. I think you've nailed things down quite accurately, and I think this is what you have to do to make it all work. Needless to say, this might come more easily for some and might be very hard for others. I think the point to draw from all this is that we have to settle down, take each other seriously, and be willing to work at it, which I think all this discussion shows is at least possible. I think there's hope in it all that we'll find some way to work together.So this is an endless debate. Nobody is right here, because no matter how we "acknowledge" our differences, it's only a two-sided coin, and we can't do things both ways every time.
Moonlight will fall
Winter will end
Harvest will come
Your heart will mend
Sooooommewwhheeerrrree ooooooover the raaiinboooow, waaaaaayyy uuuuup hiiiiiiigh...
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
I never really understood the concept of writing lyrics in a thread totally irrelevant to music.
My guess is that it's his response to what was previously written.
IEI-Fe 4w3
But in the past, niffweed has said many things which have no bearing on the conversation at hand whatsoever, and at least one of his posts has been song lyrics. I also recall that in my 100-page typing thread, at various intervals (mainly towards the last twenty pages), people began pasting song lyrics on the thread.
Doesn't niffweed do that all the time? I think that's just a thing with him. When people get bored, they have to insert music I guess.But in the past, niffweed has said many things which have no bearing on the conversation at hand whatsoever, and at least one of his posts has been song lyrics. I also recall that in my 100-page typing thread, at various intervals (mainly towards the last twenty pages), people began pasting song lyrics on the thread.
IEI-Fe 4w3
He doesn't always do it. Often, he'll contribute something valuable to the conversation.Doesn't niffweed do that all the time? I think that's just a thing with him. When people get bored, they have to insert music I guess.But in the past, niffweed has said many things which have no bearing on the conversation at hand whatsoever, and at least one of his posts has been song lyrics. I also recall that in my 100-page typing thread, at various intervals (mainly towards the last twenty pages), people began pasting song lyrics on the thread.
Oh I know. I just meant that it's not unusual for him.He doesn't always do it. Often, he'll contribute something valuable to the conversation.Doesn't niffweed do that all the time? I think that's just a thing with him. When people get bored, they have to insert music I guess.But in the past, niffweed has said many things which have no bearing on the conversation at hand whatsoever, and at least one of his posts has been song lyrics. I also recall that in my 100-page typing thread, at various intervals (mainly towards the last twenty pages), people began pasting song lyrics on the thread.
IEI-Fe 4w3
If you took it in context...
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
anndelise made good points.And yet, interestingly enough, socionics was created by a Ti creative (Fi polr) and heavily influenced by Ti base. Doesn't that tell you anything??
And yet, you are asking the Fi types to fake the genuineness of their own responses.
lol, can we say social rules? Coming from a Ti? A Ti who likes to say it's supposedly Fi?
As for the concepts of roles, etc. That's not an Fi thing to begin with, though Fi can be affected by it. As diana and danielle have tried to say, Fi is about personal connections, not objective nor defined connections (ex: social roles). When a person interprets an Fi's actions/motivations and use the concepts of social roles or any other defined connection that is not personalized to that Fi person, then you're talking Ti/Fe axis and not Fi/Te axis. If you want to actually understand the Fi's motivations/actions, ask yourself (or the Fi/Te person) questions like: "What about this did you not like? What about this did you like? Do you think other people could like this? Do you think that your opinion is or should be a universal rule?"
Beware interpreting Fi based on Ti's perception of "rules/connections".
Anytime you talk about the "rules" of something, you are talking about individual relationships that are being made explicit. As in, Ti. When you are talking about rules of etiquette, you are removing the implicit connections and making them explicit. When you make it into a rule, you are also removing the subjectiveness of it so to make it more objective. Beware interpreting Fi based on Ti's perception (need?) for explicit and nonpersonalized connections.
The times when an Fi might consider something should be a universal rule is generally due to impositions during their upbringing (rules their environment gave them that they internalized) or mostly because they can't think of an instance when someone might want the opposite.
(btw, I find it kind of humorous that a couple of Ti people here complain that Fi is about social expectations….yet expect the Fi to behave/respond in a way that doesn't come natural to the Fi..as in "can't you put in a little more effort? Just smile back, it won't kill you"… basically, the Ti/Fe's who are saying this are expecting the Fi's to fulfill some kind of social obligation.)
Still on the question of Fi and "social etiquette".
I want first to define what is understood by "social etiquette". Are we talking about things like, table manners? That a man is supposed to open a door to a lady, or let older people enter (or exit) first, this kind of thing?
Unlike most of you (I daresay), I have lived in countries of varying social etiquette according to that definition. In some countries, for instance, it is considered very bad manners to clean your nose in public, especially when eating at a table; in others, it's the precise opposite: it is considered far better to clean your nose (as in blowing it) as soon as possible rather than sound like you need to clean your nose.
In some countries, people are not squeamish about actually hanging a sign inside their bathrom asking the men to urinate sitting down, while in others the mere fact that the subject was "raised" would be seen as rude and vulgar.
Even within western Europe, these things vary immensely. I could write pages just on the difference between "social etiquettes" when driving in different countries. Someone who'd drive the Italian way, especially the Naples way, in a British town, even London, would be seen as a savage brute and a maniac.
If that kind of thing is what is meant by "social etiquette", then I really can't see how it is primarily connected to Fi. Those are all sets of rules of behavior, and as such their are more Ti related.
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Fi loves whatever it loves
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Mmm, I wantto love me.
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
Mmm, I wantI'm sure it does.
IEI-Fe 4w3
Posting this here as well as in the original thread this came from, simple because it has to do with Fi.
obviously you didn't read that Fi thread.
Fi at it's most basic is individualized attraction/repulsion.
Fi by definition is implicit and personal.
Rules are explicit and not necessarily personal.
An Fi person may be attracted to certain rules, but the rules themselves are NOT Fi.
An Fi person may push certain rules, but the pushing is NOT itself Fi.
A person may be attracted/repulsed from certain behaviors.
But those behaviors are NOT Fi.
The only thing that is Fi...is the attraction/repulsion....period.
In the case of etiquette...such as dinner table manners...
Fi would say "I really don't like it when you eat with your mouth open, and I would prefer it if you would keep your elbows off the table."
But it is not Fi itself that says "you must eat with your mouth closed and your elbows off the table".
In terms of "showing respect"....
Fi would say "I would prefer it if you would address me as 'sir'"; "I would prefer it if you would just call me 'John'"; "I don't like it when you ignore my greeting."
But it is not Fi itself that says "You must address your boss as 'sir'"; "You must refrain from calling people by their first name until they give you permission"; nor "You should at least smile at her when she greets you"
There are huge differences between saying "I like....I don't like" and saying "You have to...You should"
One set is Fi...the other is NOT.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
I do think that social etiquette may have partially derived from Fi (I like when you address me as "sir" so please continue), but I think that it is Ti which equally partially maintains it (some people would prefer to be called "sir" as a sign of respect to their station").
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
I like to be called sir by blondes who I've tied up :wink:
This is a silly discussion. Social etiquette is not tied to one function, and compartmentalizing etiquette into functions is only going to lead to more stereotyping. Just drop it.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
i'm not going to say much more about this issue except for a couple things.
when i say social etiquette i am not talking about table manners, i'm talking about how Fi people respond when Fi is violated. in other words social boundary setting and applying consequences to Fi violations. joy put this rather well on page 11 or so (i'm not going to dig back and re-post). social boundaries are also set by Fi people when they think an inappropriate level of Fe is being expressed.
at this point, i will own my limited point of view about Fi and say that this is a big piece of how i perceive it. not that etiquette is all that Fi is, more that this is what i see and understand about Fi.
i really don't perceive these complex relations that Fi types do. i can only see them if i spend a long time talking with an Fi person about a specific situation, or a long time thinking about a specific person, interaction, or situation.
when we talk about Fi as an information aspect then social etiquette clearly is Fi related. when we talk about Fi as an information element, that is, coming from a person's personality, then social etiquette may or may not come from Fi, depending on the intent of the Fi person.
we need to remember that anybody's polr will limit their ability to comprehend the information aspect and to be in control of information connected to that aspect. at the same time, when we over-value certain aspects of information, we tend to be blind to the negative aspects of said information.
an Ne example would be this: types who do not value Ne see Ne as vague, lacking in facts and detail, and depending on the idea, naive or manipulative. while it would never be my intention to use Ne to manipulate or to come across as naive, i can see how others might think this. i just think it's important that all perceptions about information elements and aspects be taken into account. just because an information element or aspect might be somebody's polr doesn't mean they don't have valid things to say about it from a certain point of view.
the topic is the nature of Fi...we need to remember that Fi is both an information aspect and an information element and for myself at least, perhaps i should have been clearer about this.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
From what I can tell based on my limited understanding of Fi, if everyone in the world began evaluating their relationships based on a person offered them or did not offer them, without regard to the others' emotional states, that would be a universal Fi atmosphere. Fi looks for need, what you need and what others need. Fi says, give person X what they need, not what they want.
Note that one person's want (what you think you need but may not actually need at all) can be another person's need.
Blaze, you and Joy both need to learn what those terms mean before you use them any more. Seriously.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
not sure what you mean?
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
I'm not going to comment on any of this fucking social bullshit (or anyone's posts in this thread) anymore, but I will post to say that, if the information on the wiki is accurate, I do understand information aspects vs. information elements. If you disagree, feel free to start a thread about them.
yeah man. what she said.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Much ado about shit.
George's vitriolic responses here have been humorous, to say the least. What's the point in learning so much about Socionics just to get offended by what is a very minor (and obvious) case of functional values clashing? It's no big deal. So when this brand of dilemma arises in the future, I suggest we just call it what it is and not waste our time bickering. We should examine this kind of issue with an air of scientific detachment, and not of infantile emotional involvement.
That said, I'll agree that I can be too distant and cold with people on occasion, but this being a big deal or something to become distraught over is nonsense. It's just a quirk, get over it. Grow some
Talk about much ado, I fail to recall the last time you contributed anything to this forum other than silly, brainless social criticism for you and Joy and occasionally Kelly sit and giggle at. You never do anything other than accuse people of responding too emotionally or being illogical. Unless someone says something about Jesus, evolution, or objectivism, all you can ever do is tell them to stop being a pussy. I've already said everything worthwhile that can be gotten from your post:
So take it somewhere else. This shit is boring.
That was actually a false accusation, Blaze; I went back and reread and what you said makes sense. Joy, I feel like I have seen you using them out of appropriate context multiple times.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Lol, chill out, ******. People can put me on ignore if they please, so I don't see the problem with my trolling, (and I openly admit that's what it is) and I think you're reading too far into it.
And thanks for noting the topics which I participate in. It makes me warm down there to think that you read my "serious" posts.
/giggle?
SEE Unknown Subtype
6w7 sx/so
[21:29] hitta: idealism is just the gap between the thought of death
[21:29] hitta: and not dying
.
Sorry, I just don't get how you can blatantly attack someone and then expect them to know that you meant it as a joke. You got me! Congrats!
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Reply With Quote
