It doesn't matter how you analyze this tcauOriginally Posted by tcaudilllg
You fucked up
You got suspended
You did something wrong
Just accept it. It's not socionics' fault, its your own
It doesn't matter how you analyze this tcau
You fucked up
You got suspended
You did something wrong
Just accept it. It's not socionics' fault, its your own
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.
It doesn't fit in the system?
Well, good luck mate.
Maybe you can fit direct accountability into your system someday.
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.
it's the way you talk tcaud... you're too political and theoretical to not be seen as a threat by normal God fearing Uhhhmericans. try to just smile and nod more. not every interaction demands the exposure of raw truth.
Yup. Smiling and nodding can get you pretty far actually. No really.
IEI-Fe 4w3
this is America, it can make you president.
"I'd rather have a beer with GWB" - that is why people voted for him.
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.
tcaud, when Socionics explains that you will have a problem with certain types of people, explains the root of the problem and shows what can be done to diffuse it... why do you not make use of that? You are stubbornly incompatible with a large class of people who have no more impetus to change than you do. But so long as you are not willing to remedy this, you cannot complain that they refuse to.
LII-Ne
"Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
- Blair Houghton
Johari
Yah I think it's something along these lines too, academia these days is a stupid institutionalized circle jerk, the wisdom of the elders, so to speak, is fading as they die off, leaving the Baby Boomers in control of everything. Baby boomers are basically the most socially irresponsible, selfish, greedy, lazy generation this earth has ever seen. If the economy crashes and all their savings disappear it will be fucking hilarious.
INFp-Ni
Direct accountability to what?
Did I mention that this instructor is a woman? The previous arguement problem I had was with a woman, also.
I'm seeing a kind of silent double-standardizing in effect here, that is running below the radar of conscious reason. If I confronted a man like such, I would have been told, "disagree with me if you like. You can drop the class if you prefer." I highly suspect that the reason the instructor reported me is because she was a woman who felt victimized by a man.
If women can't stand the heat... then we should respect that openly and consider that in our rulemaking, to whatever effect comes of that. Barring what for men is a natural means of assessing another's position in situations of conflict just so that women can feel more at ease, is a step too far. They want equality, then they'll have to settle for the same.
I also warn you UDP: in your youth and ignorance of the transcendent experience, you are projecting. You aren't being fair to me at all.
equal =/= same
I don't agree that carrying on and insulting people is the "man" way to do it.
Then on a cultural level that distinction must be made clear. Feminists at least argue for both and treat them as equivalent.
And I would argue that "equal pay" for women does equate to "same pay". Do stop and consider your Te here, hmm?
What on earth is that supposed to prove?
Do you ever stop rationalizing things?I'm seeing a kind of silent double-standardizing in effect here, that is running below the radar of conscious reason. If I confronted a man like such, I would have been told, "disagree with me if you like. You can drop the class if you prefer." I highly suspect that the reason the instructor reported me is because she was a woman who felt victimized by a man.
If women can't stand the heat... then we should respect that openly and consider that in our rulemaking, to whatever effect comes of that. Barring what for men is a natural means of assessing another's position in situations of conflict just so that women can feel more at ease, is a step too far. They want equality, then they'll have to settle for the same.
So now it is not only a socionics matter, but a Male Female issue.
Come on now.
What are you going to say next, she is a lesbian?
She is from a different religious or ethnic background from you?
She doesn't like people with your hair color?
Well I'm glad I missed whatever experience that was. You trying to hold yourself as above my remarks, based on your knowledge of socionics? You keep squirming...I also warn you UDP: in your youth and ignorance of the transcendent experience, you are projecting. You aren't being fair to me at all.
I don't see how this has anything to do with being fair. I'm telling you (apparently) things you are not seeing, I'm not passing judgment on you.
So let me ask you a question,
do you, personally, have ANY fault what so ever in this situation?
If so, what is it?
Or is this all because that person is another type, and another gender - and thus the conflict is what it is. Is she just out to get you, and you have done nothing wrong nor had any part in this. IS that what it is?
I'll try to be fair, so tell me what you think.
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.
If I have any fault at all in this, it is that I didn't plan my next step before initiating the encounter. I remember thinking afterward, "well I would like to get this resolved... but I'm not sure that I left her any real window to do so". I certainly wasn't able to cognize any rationale under which I could apologize, because I felt convicted in my actions. I had planned to approach her about a voluntary withdraw (which I needed her signature for) this weekend, but she had already gone on the offensive.
Another thing I observed in retrospect, is that she may have baited me in the encounter through calculating manipulation, perhaps surmising that presenting me with a negative -Ne happening -- the failure of my exam -- would bring out the worst in my character. (that's how +Fi-Ne superego works, after all). When people bait me like that, I do usually take it simply because I see such manipulations as evil. Need to work on it, no doubt....
It's a habit of extreme professors to try to... sabotage up-and-coming leaders they believe dangerous. And rest assured, a lot of people think typology-aware thinking is very dangerous. (I did talk to her about this a bit, to my chagrin). Especially ISTjs, who see the +Ne substance of typology as an imminent threat.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
