Alright, what type am I?

[Phaedrus]

No, they DO have a right. An impression or an opinion might be a bad one or an unreasonable one or whatever, but everyone still has a right to make/have one.

No. Not in the sense I am talking about here, which is about morally justified scientific validation of statements. You can of course say whatever you want if you are only chatting, having a non-serious conversation, or something like that. But who cares about that in this context? No one should care about such trivial stuff when we are discussing types -- especially not if we are discussing a person's self-typing. If you form an opinion on someone's type without having made a serious analysis of the types in general and how that particular person describes him- or herself, you are not taking the types seriously. And that is both morally and scientifically wrong.

[munenori2]

No. Not in the sense I am talking about here, which is about morally justified scientific validation of statements. You can of course say whatever you want if you are only chatting, having a non-serious conversation, or something like that. But who cares about that in this context? No one should care about such trivial stuff when we are discussing types -- especially not if we are discussing a person's self-typing. If you form an opinion on someone's type without having made a serious analysis of the types in general and how that particular person describes him- or herself, you are not taking the types seriously. And that is both morally and scientifically wrong.

You do realize that you're enforcing a particular standard on everyone here they need not and do not all share. You demand Ti and will only accept Ti and that's only a very small part of everything. It can only explain a portion of what goes on. It will not solve all problems, even if that's what you want it to do. To say that nothing is serious that is not typed and double-spaced in Ti font is disingenuous, misses the mark, and, frankly, is quite a limited perspective. Anyone who makes up a diagnosis on a whim and thinks it wields the force of fact is retarded. Anyone who thinks that people can't think something without explaining it explicitly according to the satisfaction of everyone else is an idiot.

[Joy]

I'll offer my opinions or impressions whenever I damn well please. You're free, of course, to regard them however you please. You may say I'm illogical, unscientific, immoral... whatever you'd like. This does not, however, change the fact that I said what I wanted to say and will continue to say what I want to say.

(And you do know that everything you've said in this thread just comes off as you being overly guarded about your own self-typing, right?)

[Expat]

(And you do know that everything you've said in this thread just comes off as you being overly guarded about your own self-typing, right?)

I'd guess that's the whole point.

[Phaedrus]

I'll offer my opinions or impressions whenever I damn well please. You're free, of course, to regard them however you please. You may say I'm illogical, unscientific, immoral... whatever you'd like. This does not, however, change the fact that I said what I wanted to say and will continue to say what I want to say.

We seem to agree on everything here. You think that you are justified in dismissing justifications and a serious attitude when discussing scientific issues such as the types, and I claim that you are wrong about that. Only one of us can be right in this case. You believe that you are right and that I am wrong, whereas I believe that I am right and that you are wrong. A rather common phenomenon actually.

[krieger]

Instead of taking the above as an indication that tcaudilllg is an ENxj, we might ask ourselves how we can understand the pattern that tcaudilllg has a tendency to conflict with Si types as something other than a simple chance misfire.

If we did a thorough search of this forum, we would find a post in which tcaudilllg declares that he finds the Se emanated by ISTps like Rocky infinitely more frightening than that emanated by ESTps. Yet another indication to be placed amongst the ones I have already pointed out.

In fact, if we did a search of the forum, we would find several threads in which tcaudilllg and Rocky dispute eachother rather vehemently (unless these were all destroyed in the forum vandalism).

[tcaudilllg]

Instead of taking the above as an indication that tcaudilllg is an ENxj, we might ask ourselves how we can understand the pattern that tcaudilllg has a tendency to conflict with Si types as something other than a simple chance misfire.

If we did a thorough search of this forum, we would find a post in which tcaudilllg declares that he finds the Se emanated by ISTps like Rocky infinitely more frightening than that emanated by ESTps. Yet another indication to be placed amongst the ones I have already pointed out.

In fact, if we did a search of the forum, we would find several threads in which tcaudilllg and Rocky dispute eachother rather vehemently (unless these were all destroyed in the forum vandalism).

I don't think you understand the benefactor-beneficiary relationship that well. There are reasons the benefactor feels so pressed to give to the beneficiary; and let's not forget, the beneficiary can never give back to the benefactor no matter what, although this may frustrate them a great deal.

As for Jessica, she endorsed a terrible way of doing business that is making a lot of people uncomfortable not just here, but all over the globe. She did not just acknowledge it: she ENDORSED it and vouched for it. It's part of a larger trend that has been slowly gaining momentum over the past year: conservatives who had felt they could do nothing about the internet and freedoms it espoused, have now organized to pressure the now fully corporatized medium into compliance with that they believe correct. Thus, we're beginning to lose freedoms that we had been taking for granted, and the loss of our right to privacy (a new development) is just the latest causualty in this gradually intensifying war of right.

[Creepy-bg]

honestly, with the Jessica thing... I think you're taking her way too serriously. Her attitude to me said, "it's a job...". She isn't endorsing or defending it so much as saying she doesn't see the big deal. Perhaps you're projecting your own strong feelings on the issue onto her? She hasn't cruisaded for background checking so far as I've seen, and never really even mentioned it until it came up.

[Phaedrus]

You do realize that you're enforcing a particular standard on everyone here they need not and do not all share.

Yes, of course. And I say that this standard is objectively right. Everyone should follow it when discussing serious scientific problems.

You demand Ti and will only accept Ti and that's only a very small part of everything.

No, it's not Ti.