Removed at User Request
Removed at User Request
Boy: ENTp
Wolf: ESTp
Narrow minded villagers: ISFj
Removed at User Request
I think an Se-Ego, SLE or SEE, makes more sense for the boy. He can't foresee the long term consequences of his actions, indicating weak Ni, and he is amused by making the villagers do his bidding, which seems more like a frivolous use of Se. He's enjoying the power he's discovered he has over the villagers. Some equally immature Se-Egos commit petty crimes for the same reason (shoplifting, vandalism, etc.).
Quaero Veritas.
ftr: my post was satire. I don't have more than a shallow recollection of what the story is about and just established typings based on stereotypes.
I see it as more of a manifestation of unvalued Ni. The decisions was basically all about seeing potential in a radical "plan". It explicitly involved not caring about long term consequences. I also think "power" is a far more general thing than just Se and not really in any way incompatible with the ENxp mindset.I think an Se-Ego, SLE or SEE, makes more sense for the boy. He can't foresee the long term consequences of his actions, indicating weak Ni, and he is amused by making the villagers do his bidding, which seems more like a frivolous use of Se. He's enjoying the power he's discovered he has over the villagers.
Other than that, the character is fictional, not well fleshed out, and probably exists in a multitude of incarnations in the first place, so one could question the point of typing him.
Removed at User Request
Se egos have much more trouble seeing the future consequences of their actions than Ne egos. That's why so many of the frakked up celebrities who mess up their future lives by acting wildly in the present are Se egos; i.e. they can't maintain harmony with a single path through time.
ILEs have trouble maintaining harmony in the present but pretty thoroughly understand the results of their (in)actions for the future. It's certainly possible they may not care though.
I always understood the boy who cried wolf more like
This is why you should be upright and truthful
rather than
You shouldn't be a little attention whore and make up problems to feel like you have power over people
I mean I guess they are the same thing, but the first one tells you what the solution is for the boy, the second one just criticizes the boy. The first one is using it from the perspective of self-development and the second one is using it from the perspective of self-control.
Oh and on topic I don't think its socionics related
Seems to contradict whatand
are.... how is a sensor farsighted? and how is a type which has its base function in considering the potential of something shortsighted.
I would guess the ILE is more likely to see the potential use of something and therefore connect a particular solution with all solutions.
Feynman a famous ILE physicist (as I type him) had a quote....
"The same equations have the same solutions"
which means, if you encounter a problem that has the same equation, even in a different context or form, it has the same solution.
The SLE is more a in the moment pragmatist from what I understand.
The only ILE thing about the boy crying wolf is that ILE occasionally test people and experiment, poking their buttons to test their reactions. They do this to consider possible scenarios with people, and most of the time they don't take this seriously, but its not a good way to act around a tight assed ESI as they believe people need to be really ethical when dealing with people. ESIs are likely to take an ILE seriously when they say something offensive, then when the ILE explains "I'm not serious", they are likely to still remain offended, and then when the ILE explains "I was just experimenting with people", they are likely to claim the moral high ground and explain why you can't do this....... in which case they are attempting to transfer their Ne-PoLR to the ILE who obviously rejects this because leading Ne is the source of their awesomeness, however the ESI underappreciates this and is likely to go out in public and campaign against ILE-dom and convince the society to make laws to preserve the core ethics of the nation (once again without understanding the ILE was not serious and only joking). Eventually the ESI gets laws passed, and the clever ILE like a lawyer using Ne finds a loophole, and so the grand cycle continues. Eventually you'd expect the ESI to learn to tolerate the ILE's eventually, but new ESIs are always being born and educated to hate Ne and wear their PoLR proudly, so...... well....... thats the abundant joy of being ILE. Don't worry about the positive attributes of the ILE.... they are just manipulative and exploitive, that's what potentials, possibilities, and prospects are all about.
Last edited by male; 09-11-2010 at 05:29 PM.
I thought the boy (who cried wolf) did it because he thought it was funny. All he had to do was cry "Wolf!" and the entire village would spring into action, a spectacle that he found very amusing and entertaining. Although it did gather him attention because it puts him "in the thick of things" in his important role of calling them all into action. I suppose though that he could instead be a whiny little soul who wants people to protect him and so he always cries wolf so the villagers will rush over and be all "poor little you, are you okay." But I would probably agree that whatever it is, it's to get attention in some form.
But yes the moral is that after doing this again and again, no one trusts him as credible and they're tired of having to rush over every time he calls only to find it's a waste of their time. I sort of see this as also their fault though. I mean as soon as they realized they didn't consider the boy credible they should have removed him from his post and replaced him with someone they could believe... or had a very serious discussion with him to see if he could turn his behavior around, explaining why it's important that he not create false alarms like this (I mean he's a boy and they're adults, so it's automatically their fault). Also if they're not going to respond when the person in the field says there's a wolf then there's no point in having anyone in the field. So actually now that I've typed all of this I think I really do think it's basically entirely the fault of the villagers and that they were being a lot more irresponsible than the boy who was just being an obnoxious child as children are sometimes prone to do. (I mean it's boring sitting in a field all day or night or whatever... I can easily see why he might start acting out.)
Also maybe the boy never thought they would actually abandon him in the field because it's dangerous to do that, and he thought it was just a game. If the villagers were trying to "teach him a lesson" or trying not encourage him then they were basically leaving him there to die (a pretty harsh lesson) with no small loss to themselves (as in they would lose some of the livestock probably). If they were just tired of going out there and thinking "oh it's another false alarm, leave it" then they're just as careless as the boy is and not taking their own very serious thing very seriously (no wonder he learned to be equally careless). I mean if you can say "it's a false alarm" every time banking on the chances of a wolf actually showing up being so remote that it will just never happen, then again, why bother ever having anyone watching the field in the first place (since obviously no wolf is ever going to show up). The more I think about it, the more I think the villagers are just a bunch of morons (or whoever is calling the shots is a moron).
But anyway the boy could have considered consequences somewhat and just been wrong (e.g. not thinking they'd actually abandon him). Really it's a story of betrayal and possibly neglect. The villagers screwed the boy over.
Yea that's the basic gist that I got also, he was a trickster that found amusement in his power to make people do things for him out of their fear and concern for him.
However he didn't respect the power he had, and didn't realize every time he did so he was devaluing the fear and concern they had for him. He was making something important a joke, and when the wolf arrived he couldn't cash in the check he desperately needed because he had devalued it to nothing. He didn't respect his power, he made himself a joke and the villagers didn't take him seriously.
Lol yea they could have relieved him or told him to be serious, but it was really both of their faults. It was about the breakdown of trust between him and his village.
I kind of think if I was the boy, I wouldn't fucking cry wolf if they were actually around (wolves), and if I had devalued the trust of the village, I'd fucking make sure I had something that would help me fight off the wolf.
I think if I was the villagers, I wouldn't fucking put on immature boy to watch for wolves when I knew there were wolves around, I would put a fucking man in a tower with a bow and arrow or something.
But that's not the point of the story... its just about kids joking too much and not being serious about serious stuff when they need to.
Lol I don't think the story is about the villager purposefully teaching the boy a lesson, but just about the harshness of life. Like if you abuse people's trust, they won't be their when you really need that trust and help.
It's really just that simple... if you abuse trust, realize the consequences. If you encounter a wolf, you will need to take that shit on yourself. If you can't do that, then don't fucking abuse your trust.
People don't like having their trust abused like that, and eventually everyone has a breaking point where eventually they won't allow themselves to be tricked.
That in my opinion is the way you sort it out.... blaming the villagers is shortsighted because everyone has that breaking point.... blaming the boy is shortsighted because everyone likes to joke. The lesson is about knowing when to play tricks and jokes and when to be serious and why (because you'll fucking die if you do it wrong)... the wolf represents the predator which can be symbolized to represent any potential threat waiting in the shadows to strike and kill you.
that story is so lame. it's one of those stories people make up to try and discuss an issue or something. but people love having issues about other people rather than just living their own life. that's why tv is so popular.
Re: Lucid
Well I'm not trying to remove all responsibility from the boy (of course he shouldn't have done that) but I still feel the greater responsibility is on the adults who are supposed to be watching out for him so he can grow up into a strong young lad or whatever and not die because he made some mistakes (I mean that's what kids do--they often make mistakes). And I'm sensitive to the boy's character because he just didn't understand what he was doing and he didn't realize and that isn't his fault (you can't help what you don't realize) and they should have been looking out for him rather than allowing his mistakes to be fatal. Anyway, no matter what he did I just see their role as more significant just because they're the elders in the situation and his brain isn't even done developing yet and some people are just reckless and make bad decisions (like the boy) and they can't stop themselves in time (but they don't need to die for it).
And also it is the sort of thing that should go both ways... the village needs to "have the back" of the person in the field (even if that person is a lying nutcase, it's important to respond every time) just as the person in the field is supposed to warn them when a wolf is coming. So anyway, the boy failing in his responsibility doesn't remove their end of the arrangement (their responsibility). So anyway.
Removed at User Request
Well done.ESE = Farsighted
LIE = CarefreeThe ESE is quick to recognize and respond to passion and emotional involvement, stimulating it where there is none and fueling it where there is. He is well aware of his own and others' passions and tastes and likes to do and say things that stimulates and gives expression to these passions. The ESE likes to see people become lively and animated and show what they feel without thinking first. The ESE equally expects others to let out their negative emotions (despair, anger, sadness) in periods of distress, since he knows keeping them inside can only aggravate bitterness and discontent. His dual the LII finds this openness liberating, and appreciates someone who can positively guide and influence the emotions he communicates.
Yeah, rightLIEs have blocked with in their ego. That means that they are focused on the accuracy and usefulness of information and actions in a long-term perspective. They rarely think about the expedience of an action in the present without having longer-term consequences in their minds, and their view of reality is shaped by an understanding of the outside world making sense in terms of concrete results. If a decision or statement by a LIE seems to make no sense or lead to lack of comfort in the short term, the reason is that they're already thinking of longer-term gains. The LIEs always have one eye focused on the future to decide their actions.![]()