rantedy rant rant wheeeeeeee
Absolutely yes. I don't even really care for "the rule" to begin with, because no single rule I've come across has ever really encompassed everything it tries to do, no matter how hard people try to bend it. What really pisses me off is when people try to assert how their own self-made "rules" actually work in the real world, then when I point out the discrepancies between how the world works and what their rule stipulates they weasel their way out of it. People can become so painfully attached to the rules that they create about the world, and it's like they can't bear to give them up and instead have to force data into it, straining their spider web so hard until it rips apart although the person never knows that it's broken.Originally Posted by octopuslove
What else annoys me about Ti valuers is that they like to build their own world in their head from the ground up, affixing their own basic starting points and situations to create an argument. This works fine so long as the system stays inside the individual's head, but when you try to apply it to the real world, there's always some way in which it doesn't quite fit. The issue then becomes that they don't even see how it doesn't fit: they just go along with the bias they have for their own head.
That's essentially how it works for me to be Ti PoLR: rejection of "the rules," whatever they may be. That's not to say rejection of law in general, but rejection of the existence of externally static laws under which the world is subjugated. I've always been under the impression that the outer world is really just a giant playground of chaos where each infinitesimally small little part does what it does, and these small parts compound into larger parts and everything just grows out of an extrinsically unstructured environment. An ENFp friend of mine one said "truth is temporary," which I think is a good summary of everything here.
Reply With Quote
