View Poll Results: what type was Adolf ******?

Voters
29. You may not vote on this poll
  • ILE (ENTp)

    0 0%
  • SEI (ISFp)

    0 0%
  • ESE (ESFj)

    0 0%
  • LII (INTj)

    0 0%
  • SLE (ESTp)

    0 0%
  • IEI (INFp)

    8 27.59%
  • EIE (ENFj)

    18 62.07%
  • LSI (ISTj)

    1 3.45%
  • SEE (ESFp)

    0 0%
  • ILI (INTp)

    0 0%
  • LIE (ENTj)

    0 0%
  • ESI (ISFj)

    0 0%
  • IEE (ENFp)

    0 0%
  • SLI (ISTp)

    1 3.45%
  • LSE (ESTj)

    0 0%
  • EII (INFj)

    1 3.45%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910
Results 361 to 379 of 379

Thread: Adolf ******

  1. #361
    Wavebury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    knowhere
    TIM
    LSI-C
    Posts
    5,787
    Mentioned
    223 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    @lynn @RBRS

    H!tler probably had a mix of N and H I would say. He probably had some D in there, hence his boldness in public speaking. I would say he had C last.
    Thunderbolt
    is the future

  2. #362
    Will we start over, or circle the drain crazymaisy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    SE USA
    TIM
    ILI-Ni GAMMA NH-c
    Posts
    616
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ipbanned View Post
    I think you're wrong. "The founders" were hardly "orthodox" in their belief in Christianity, if you can even call it that, from what I can tell.

    In any case, why does it even matter? The explicitly made an amendment to protect freedom of religion, so what does it matter if the god they believed in was "true" or "the one", or not? You and End are acting like what they believed was some kind of a standard to follow. Which is just stupid.
    A lot of them did believe in the One True God and Jesus Christ Our Lord and Savior -- Orthodox Christianity, but ... some didn't, and some of them had influence from other things while not Deists entirely, but all in all, they didn't believe that anyone should be persecuted for their beliefs. No government branding religions being forced on anyone.
    Maisy
    ILI-Ni (INTp)
    I think in pictures, moving pictures...

    Recommended Music - ILI-Ni



    "And one peculiar point I see,
    As one of the many ones of me.
    As truth is gathered, I rearrange,
    Inside out, outside in, inside out, outside in,
    Perpetual change"


    Yes - The Yes Album - from "Perpetual Change" (written by Howe and Squire)

  3. #363

    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    4,508
    Mentioned
    90 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazymaisy View Post
    A lot of them did believe in the One True God and Jesus Christ Our Lord and Savior -- Orthodox Christianity, but ... some didn't, and some of them had influence from other things while not Deists entirely, but all in all, they didn't believe that anyone should be persecuted for their beliefs. No government branding religions being forced on anyone.
    I think the US constitution authors (I think I'll stop even calling them "the founders" because the US as a country was around a long time before they were even born) did not believe Jesus was the Messiah, they were basically Jacobin Bolsheviks who believed in the Deist god and they believed that Jesus was a moral model for keeping the "Untermensch" in line essentially. I don't hate America either, I just think America needs to move past its civic idolatry which even leads people to romanticize (heh, that word) the past too much and not be able to see what's really agonizing the country.

    I'm not a big proponent of RationalWiki, but to be honest, they tend to be as unbiased as Wikipedia, just tonally different. Which is to say, in many cases extremely biased, but that's what we have our Aristotelean rhetorical triangle of ethos, logos, and pathos for. This page doesn't say everything I've said about the US constitution authors, but it does really make Jefferson look the way I said. Jefferson Bible - RationalWiki

  4. #364

    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    4,508
    Mentioned
    90 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    My opinion of the history of American politics now: the American constitution authors seem to have been mostly horrible people who believed in deism for them and pushing religion on the "Untermensch" like many other revolutionary types. However, it also seems to be the case that no one involved in the American Revolution really put politics at the center, culture was at the center, and no one really cared about the Constitution when most of the country was the lawless Wild West and most people were not literate anyways. Thinking of the history of the country as being centered around the cult of Washington, Jefferson, John Adams, and Alexander Hamilton seems to be an almost Hegelian later addition and the cause of all our present problems. I heard the neocons were Trotskyites anyways, so what can I say.

  5. #365
    End's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    TIM
    ILI-Ni sp/sx
    Posts
    1,674
    Mentioned
    276 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coeruleum Blue View Post
    I confess that Jesus is the Christ and God has risen him from the dead. I also think the Founding Fathers of the US were probably a bunch of deists and this probably contributes to the problems we have today. Now prove they weren't. Novalis used a bunch of Christian-sounding rhetoric, but he definitely didn't believe it. So let's look at the Founding Fathers.

    For the record, I don't think the US founders could pass your witch test. I think they would say something such as "If such a magnificent person as Jesus was Christ, we would have to confess he was raised from the dead." That is a rather different phrase and the kind of thing every sort of Jacobin seems to like to say.
    Praise be the lord for the graces of conversion! I think you might be the first person I've tested here that passed. Holy hell you have no idea how happy I am to be wrong about someone on this front. Finally, someone who isn't a total lost cause! I may yet see you in Heaven if I am granted enough grace.

    (Rifles through some stuff I read a few years back in) Ah! Found it: https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu...ntext=hist_fac

    Give that one a read would you? All the founders would have passed the test as you did (at least publicly) if only because their political careers depended on it and, end of the day, I doubt any of them were demonically obsessed or touched by said creatures at the times it mattered most. I found the parts about Jefferson and Washington especially interesting. Also, fun fact, Washington was a Freemason. That's a whole can of worms you can dive into at your leisure.

    Quote Originally Posted by ipbanned View Post
    The Christian god is the Abrhamic god, same as that of Islam, Judaism etc. You (as a Xtian) have the same god as the muslims.

    Also, are you lobotomized to the extent you forget freedom of religion is one of the pillars of your constitution?
    No, no we don't. For Muslims and Jews (save for the case of Messianic Jews) openly and ardently deny the divinity of Christ and the truth that he is the Son of God. I believe in the Trinity and thus accept God the Son as both fully human and fully divine. They openly and professedly do not. Their claims that my God and theirs are the same is malicious sophistry of the kind I, Socrates, and other seekers of undeniable truths rightly condemned in the harshest of manners.

    As for why "freedom of religion" is enshrined in our constitution well. Here's a hot take on how most Americans who happen upon Europe's 30-Years war see things...

    https://youtu.be/pj9Hzs-vBLE?t=14

    Far as I (and most other Americans are concerned) it should have just ended without the police brutality. Shit was just dumb man. That .001 Percent deviation from your dogma is a non-issue if we truly have full faith in our concvictions. After all "If God is with us, then who is against us?"

    Like I've said time and again I have the full faith of my convictions. I'm right, I know I'm right, and I am so certain I am right that, if I hazard a wager that you too are a rational being, that you will come around to my point of view in the future absent of any of my own actions save for the seed I've now planted in your mind.

    Force? Coercion? Thumping a bible/koran/torah/etc? Counterproductive efforts! Time itself will convince you as you continue to view my predictions and assertions ring true in your own life.

    All I need do is openly and proudly plant the seeds even if the current political/power structure would kill me for doing so. After all, the blood of martyrs is the seed of the Church. Christ on the Cross is the ultimate example of this. One "man" died and shed his blood. Billions now believe, in one form or another. Trillions more will in the coming centuries for I doubt we're gonna land upon the true "end times" before we've finished colonizing this galaxy and, well, that's a whole other lecture from me but suffice it to say that once we get this current Clown World BS sorted out it'll only have a chance of "trying again" once we've literally populated the Milky Way to a rather significant extent...
    Last edited by End; 07-28-2022 at 05:17 AM.

  6. #366
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    15,880
    Mentioned
    1504 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    Praise be the lord for the graces of conversion! I think you might be the first person I've tested here that passed. Holy hell you have no idea how happy I am to be wrong about someone on this front. Finally, someone who isn't a total lost cause! I may yet see you in Heaven if I am granted enough grace.

    (Rifles through some stuff I read a few years back in) Ah! Found it: https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu...ntext=hist_fac

    Give that one a read would you? All the founders would have passed the test as you did (at least publicly) if only because their political careers depended on it and, end of the day, I doubt any of them were demonically obsessed or touched by said creatures at the times it mattered most. I found the parts about Jefferson and Washington especially interesting. Also, fun fact, Washington was a Freemason. That's a whole can of worms you can dive into at your leisure.



    No, no we don't. For Muslims and Jews (save for the case of Messianic Jews) openly and ardently deny the divinity of Christ and the truth that he is the Son of God. I believe in the Trinity and thus accept God the Son as both fully human and fully divine. They openly and professedly do not. Their claims that my God and theirs are the same is malicious sophistry of the kind I, Socrates, and other seekers of undeniable truths rightly condemned in the harshest of manners.

    As for why "freedom of religion" is enshrined in our constitution well. Here's a hot take on how most Americans who happen upon Europe's 30-Years war see things...

    https://youtu.be/pj9Hzs-vBLE?t=14

    Far as I (and most other Americans are concerned) it should have just ended without the police brutality. Shit was just dumb man. That .001 Percent deviation from your dogma is a non-issue if we truly have full faith in our concvictions. After all "If God is with us, then who is against us?"

    Like I've said time and again I have the full faith of my convictions. I'm right, I know I'm right, and I am so certain I am right that, if I hazard a wager that you too are a rational being, that you will come around to my point of view in the future absent of any of my own actions save for the seed I've now planted in your mind.

    Force? Coercion? Thumping a bible/koran/torah/etc? Counterproductive efforts! Time itself will convince you as you continue to view my predictions and assertions ring true in your own life.

    All I need do is openly and proudly plant the seeds even if the current political/power structure would kill me for doing so. After all, the blood of martyrs is the seed of the Church. Christ on the Cross is the ultimate example of this. One "man" died and shed his blood. Billions now believe, in one form or another. Trillions more will in the coming centuries for I doubt we're gonna land upon the true "end times" before we've finished colonizing this galaxy and, well, that's a whole other lecture from me but suffice it to say that once we get this current Clown World BS sorted out it'll only have a chance of "trying again" once we've literally populated the Milky Way to a rather significant extent...

    ENFp vs ESFp. Maybe some strong similarities?

  7. #367
    get R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2022
    Location
    at a Beta nation >:((
    TIM
    LSI
    Posts
    351
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

  8. #368
    May look like an LSI, but Te. Metaphor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Location
    SEA
    TIM
    NH-ILI-Te
    Posts
    468
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    EIE-Fe: While he foresees further development of events, he doesn’t like to rush them, hesitates making a decision, wavers, weighing out all the “pros” and “cons”. Doesn’t like when he is hurried. Ignores the attempts of others to impose any other pace. In conversation, gives a lot of attention to details.

    Often takes the initiative in making acquaintances and contacts. Oriented at correct, appropriate, polite attitude towards himself. Needs sensitive, attentive, careful relation to his person, intolerant of familiarity in communication. Self-loving, sensitive and vulnerable, for a long remembers offenses and insults. Respects people not only for their personal qualities and achievements, but also for their position in society. Tries to understand the motives and predict future actions of people around him, to give them timely advice.

    A romantic in his soul, put feelings above reason. Emotional, with difficulty hides his sufferings and emotions, but in deeds usually demonstrates caution. Only after carefully weighting everything out can make a radical decision. After that, not inclined to make compromises. He would rather suffer a defeat than renounce his beliefs, as he has a tendency for self-suggestion. Distrustful by nature, skeptically oriented, critical towards the actions of others. Appreciates words, but prefers concrete evidence of affections and practical services. Nitpicking when it comes to his outward appearance, takes care of his looks and his manners of behavior.

    Values his authority and reputation of a serious person. Distrustful of unverified information. Afraid to make a mistake, prefers to share responsibility for some assignment or task with someone else. Proactive, operative, diligent, seriously considers work that was assigned to him. Does not like doing several things at once, but when he feels that he cannot delay any longer, can with much energy and vigor complete a significant bulk of work within a short period of time.
    Dominant Subtype
    Mentor — Leader
    Prototypes: Public figures, radical clerics, tactical commanders, charismatic leaders
    This subtype is emotional and eloquent. He is a good speaker who can speak with enthusiasm, expressing various shades of emotions from the sublime to intonations of irony and sarcasm. He knows how to captivate people with his ideas and leadership. He uses mass-audience suggestion techniques such as persistent repetition of slogans or repackaging the message in various ways. He can rally people against his opponents. He is skilled at psychological influencing techniques and is capable of seeking justice for victims and defending ideals such as law and order, as well as driving ideology, creating, destroying, or interpreting symbols, explaining perceptions of ideas.


    He is inclined to dramatize events and escalate tensions, warning others of impending danger. He always calls for decisive action. He is subject to constant inner emotional tension, and periodically needs to discharge such accumulated tension in a drastic way.


    He never resorts to compromises: it is easier for him to fail than to renounce his beliefs. He generally believes that concessions and appeasement do not contribute to restoring stability in society. He focuses on major, fundamental problems for humanity. Sensing impending danger, he’ll promptly take necessary measures to avoid it.


    He is impatient and does not like to wait. He’ll weigh ambiguity or uncertainty immediately when making decisions, going from bold and resolute to recklessness in extreme situations. He operates on the principle of “sink or swim.” He is not afraid to go ahead with “blitzkrieg” tactics; he is categorical and authoritarian, and does not accept criticism and objections.
    EIE-Fe-DN suits him.
    Arthur Schopenhauer (ILI-Ni):

    • “A man can be himself only so long as he is alone; and if he does not love solitude, he will not love freedom; for it is only when he is alone that he is really free.”


    Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (ILI-Te):


    • "The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom."



  9. #369
    lavos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    TIM
    LIE-Ni
    Posts
    1,044
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    EIE-Fe-DN suits him.
    I can see DC maybe. And Ni sub > Fe sub.

  10. #370
    Enlightened Hedonist
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    18,369
    Mentioned
    447 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Adjectives I associated with AH (out of all words considered):

    Not Respectful, not Timid, Rebellious, not Conventional, not Polite, not Traditional, Outspoken, Reckless, not Cautious, not Bashful, not Dependable, Disrespectful, not Modest, Uninhibited, not Meek, Aggressive, not Submissive, not Passive, Unconventional, not Responsible, not Reliable, not Cooperative, Impolite, not Humble, not Restrained, Conceited, Bold, not Unaggressive, Dominant, Forceful, Assertive, not Trustful, Domineering, Impulsive, not Peaceful, not Consistent, not Patient, not Discreet, not Reasonable, Boastful, not Steady, Bossy, not Cowardly, Rough, Independent, Distrustful, Clever, Magnetic, not Naive, Selfish, Quarrelsome, not Tolerant, not Helpful, Expressive, not Undemanding, Confident, Enterprising, Courageous, not Mature, Demanding, not Uncompetitive, not Gullible, Brave, not Pleasant, Assured, Competitive, Bitter, Cold, not Compassionate, Unstable, Energetic, not Affectionate, Knowledgeable, Cranky, Irritable, not Self-critical, not Friendly, not Relaxed, not Optimistic, not Indecisive, Moody, not Unexcitable, Excitable, Grumpy, Passionate, Negativistic, not Wise, not Unemotional, not Easy-going, not Amiable, Decisive, Alert, Insecure, Purposeful, Emotional, not Happy-go-lucky, Self-pitying, not Carefree, Self-disciplined.

    (I was unable to decide for: Analytical, Cheerful, Fearful, Firm, Genial, Industrious, Jovial, Logical, Mannerly, Masculine, Merry, Practical, Quiet, Rational, Reserved, Sensitive, Sentimental, Shy, Silent, Sociable, Social, Talkative, Unsociable, Warm).

    This makes me think ILE is most likely (I previously thought LIE), with EIE being unlikely (even SLE is more likely than EIE).

  11. #371
    RBRS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Shambala
    TIM
    Type me yourself
    Posts
    470
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    Adjectives I associated with AH (out of all words considered):

    Not Respectful, not Timid, Rebellious, not Conventional, not Polite, not Traditional, Outspoken, Reckless, not Cautious, not Bashful, not Dependable, Disrespectful, not Modest, Uninhibited, not Meek, Aggressive, not Submissive, not Passive, Unconventional, not Responsible, not Reliable, not Cooperative, Impolite, not Humble, not Restrained, Conceited, Bold, not Unaggressive, Dominant, Forceful, Assertive, not Trustful, Domineering, Impulsive, not Peaceful, not Consistent, not Patient, not Discreet, not Reasonable, Boastful, not Steady, Bossy, not Cowardly, Rough, Independent, Distrustful, Clever, Magnetic, not Naive, Selfish, Quarrelsome, not Tolerant, not Helpful, Expressive, not Undemanding, Confident, Enterprising, Courageous, not Mature, Demanding, not Uncompetitive, not Gullible, Brave, not Pleasant, Assured, Competitive, Bitter, Cold, not Compassionate, Unstable, Energetic, not Affectionate, Knowledgeable, Cranky, Irritable, not Self-critical, not Friendly, not Relaxed, not Optimistic, not Indecisive, Moody, not Unexcitable, Excitable, Grumpy, Passionate, Negativistic, not Wise, not Unemotional, not Easy-going, not Amiable, Decisive, Alert, Insecure, Purposeful, Emotional, not Happy-go-lucky, Self-pitying, not Carefree, Self-disciplined.

    (I was unable to decide for: Analytical, Cheerful, Fearful, Firm, Genial, Industrious, Jovial, Logical, Mannerly, Masculine, Merry, Practical, Quiet, Rational, Reserved, Sensitive, Sentimental, Shy, Silent, Sociable, Social, Talkative, Unsociable, Warm).

    This makes me think ILE is most likely (I previously thought LIE), with EIE being unlikely (even SLE is more likely than EIE).
    That's somewhat wrong.

    Hilter was respectful,, timid, obedient, polite, submissive, weak (although he had huge complexes over this), not agressive, not rough, delicate, helpful, somewhat compassionate, cheerful, firm, mannerly, reserved, sensitive, sentimental, shy, warm.

    What he really was above all of that is dramatic, unstable, and an extremist. Had a teenage crush for which he simped, so he severely stalked her, and eventually planned to kidnap her and kill her as he killed himself throwing themselves hugging down the danube river.

    And then you investigate and see things like Eva Braun getting envious of some british actress and regaining Mr.H attention through a suicide attempt, or all the things surrounding his cousin (Geli Raubal) and you can see the kind of world he built and lived in.

    Certainly the first EMO lol

    ****** was (evidently) EIE-N.

    main-qimg-c5b88b1ab6c5eb8cf80446881b033933-lq.jpeg
    If I'm not answering you, I'm either procrastinating a response, or I've judged the conversation as fruitless/already settled prior to the debate for me.

  12. #372
    Enlightened Hedonist
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    18,369
    Mentioned
    447 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RBRS View Post
    That's somewhat wrong.

    Hilter was respectful,, timid, obedient, polite, submissive, weak (although he had huge complexes over this), not agressive, not rough, delicate, helpful, somewhat compassionate, cheerful, firm, mannerly, reserved, sensitive, sentimental, shy, warm.

    What he really was above all of that is dramatic, unstable, and an extremist. Had a teenage crush for which he simped, so he severely stalked her, and eventually planned to kidnap her and kill her as he killed himself throwing themselves hugging down the danube river.

    And then you investigate and see things like Eva Braun getting envious of some british actress and regaining Mr.H attention through a suicide attempt, or all the things surrounding his cousin (Geli Raubal) and you can see the kind of world he built and lived in.

    Certainly the first EMO lol

    ****** was (evidently) EIE-N.

    main-qimg-c5b88b1ab6c5eb8cf80446881b033933-lq.jpeg
    He wanted the deaths of millions of people, and his actions resulted in the deaths of millions of people. I think he was the opposite of "respectful, timid, obedient, polite, submissive, weak, not aggressive, not rough". He may have given the illusion of being respectful in diplomatic interactions, but even in public speeches and private meetings, he was naturally disrespectful. I couldn't decide if he was sentimental or not - I couldn't decide what was meant the term generally. He had a sentimental appreciation of the culture and art he didn't consider degenerate, certainly. His natural attitude was to form Europe to his liking, even though though it meant the deaths of millions and large scale upheaval (not sentimental, compassionate, mannerly there). Not liking animals being killed and occasionally giving someone some sympathy doesn't make him on the whole a compassionate and helpful (as opposed to selfish) individual.

  13. #373
    RBRS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Shambala
    TIM
    Type me yourself
    Posts
    470
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    He wanted the deaths of millions of people, and his actions resulted in the deaths of millions of people. I think he was the opposite of "respectful, timid, obedient, polite, submissive, weak, not aggressive, not rough". He may have given the illusion of being respectful in diplomatic interactions, but even in public speeches and private meetings, he was naturally disrespectful. I couldn't decide if he was sentimental or not - I couldn't decide what was meant the term generally. He had a sentimental appreciation of the culture and art he didn't consider degenerate, certainly. His natural attitude was to form Europe to his liking, even though though it meant the deaths of millions and large scale upheaval (not sentimental, compassionate, mannerly there). Not liking animals being killed and occasionally giving someone some sympathy doesn't make him on the whole a compassionate and helpful (as opposed to selfish) individual.


    There's not even conclusive evidence that links ****** to the Holocaust (as there is for the Madagascar plan). ****** didn't intend to kill millions but to implement a new system alongside a new form of "ethnic cultural-spiritual" life, and well, all which is encompassed by ******ite national socialism. The intended deaths were either results of political maneuvering or often the "means" to the "end" of nazism which was not even archieved.

    His actions were born out of compassion for his own people on detriment on others, some analysts think he changed his care for his dying mother when she expired for caring and providing for his people, while protecting his people from jewish bankers, on which he might have projected his abusive father and his hate might have been fueled by that. I know he was responsible for motivating the german army to be atrocious on Poland but I think you should take things on their context (on this case, ****** was also dramatic and unstable). ****** was not as much convinced of his role in the Nazi party at the start, where (as he describes in Mein Kampf) he saw national socialism as a tool to help Germany and the Germans, but the more he progressed the more fanatical he became for his cause, essentially becoming an exhalted prophet of nazism. If you take a look at his speeches, you'll notice at the start they are more "calm" but as the time passes they turn more and more emotional and involved.

    Furthermore you cannot judge someone by ideological beliefs when comparing to his day-to-day life. He was generally respectful, kind, mannery, weak, languid, etc. He was also weak-willed, to the point of preferring to not eat than to work. For most of his life we was respectful, timid, obedient, polite, submissive, weak, not aggressive, not rough...

    An anecdote; When ****** was in love with certain noble woman I mentioned in the previous, he sent his only friend to stalk her. When he told ****** she loved dancing, he answered that in reality she hated dancing and only did it because society expected her to do so (****** hated dancing). When he was informed that she had romantic things with military officers, he demonized the officer class and the army. He even left her a love note where he told her to wait for him until he graduated from arts school to marry him (He was a nice guy by today's standards). Once she threw some roses from a car and one of them got to Mr.H's hands, he interpreted that as an evident sign that she loved him and became flamboyant.

    ****** had been denied from the Vienna Arts school, and when his only friend Kubizek was admitted into music school, H stopped talking to him.

    ******'s speeches seem to me to be sincere transcripts of his emotional state, and lots of them are almost anxiety attacks.

    All of this reveals certain character traits, such as dramatism, deep-felt emotionality, dreamyness and imaginativeness... as well as fantasizing, categorical judgement and intolerance as tools to maintain mental integrity.

    I honestly would avoid to judge sociotype by the results of his politics or his/her opinions, but rather type by Info metabolism and real-life traits.
    Last edited by RBRS; Today at 12:29 AM.
    If I'm not answering you, I'm either procrastinating a response, or I've judged the conversation as fruitless/already settled prior to the debate for me.

  14. #374
    Seed my wickedness Sanguine Miasma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    7,562
    Mentioned
    321 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    BTW it is not right to equate agreeableness with "subjective karma score" (it even conflicts with inborn trait assumption). I have heard that English speakers are blind to this (hence they created HEXACO which seems to address agreeable machiavellianism but I view it only as a beginning) .
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

    NO Private messages, please. Use Discord instead.

  15. #375

    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    4,508
    Mentioned
    90 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RBRS View Post
    I honestly would avoid to judge sociotype by the results of his politics or his/her opinions, but rather type by Info metabolism and real-life traits.
    The problem with this is the political is just as real as the personal. All that is is in reality.

  16. #376
    WinnieW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    TIM
    alpha NT
    Posts
    1,643
    Mentioned
    47 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ok, an other observation, I read somewhere on the internet.
    His table manners.
    People who had watched him eating reported: He ate fast, mechanical and without any expression of relish.
    Does that fit Si PoLR?

  17. #377
    Seed my wickedness Sanguine Miasma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    7,562
    Mentioned
    321 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WinnieW View Post
    Ok, an other observation, I read somewhere on the internet.
    His table manners.
    People who had watched him eating reported: He ate fast, mechanical and without any expression of relish.
    Does that fit Si PoLR?
    Fast eating? Yes. Mechanical? He had issues.
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

    NO Private messages, please. Use Discord instead.

  18. #378
    Enlightened Hedonist
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    18,369
    Mentioned
    447 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RBRS View Post
    There's not even conclusive evidence that links ****** to the Holocaust (as there is for the Madagascar plan). ****** didn't intend to kill millions but to implement a new system alongside a new form of "ethnic cultural-spiritual" life, and well, all which is encompassed by ******ite national socialism. The intended deaths were either results of political maneuvering or often the "means" to the "end" of nazism which was not even archieved.

    His actions were born out of compassion for his own people on detriment on others, some analysts think he changed his care for his dying mother when she expired for caring and providing for his people, while protecting his people from jewish bankers, on which he might have projected his abusive father and his hate might have been fueled by that. I know he was responsible for motivating the german army to be atrocious on Poland but I think you should take things on their context (on this case, ****** was also dramatic and unstable). ****** was not as much convinced of his role in the Nazi party at the start, where (as he describes in Mein Kampf) he saw national socialism as a tool to help Germany and the Germans, but the more he progressed the more fanatical he became for his cause, essentially becoming an exhalted prophet of nazism. If you take a look at his speeches, you'll notice at the start they are more "calm" but as the time passes they turn more and more emotional and involved.

    Furthermore you cannot judge someone by ideological beliefs when comparing to his day-to-day life. He was generally respectful, kind, mannery, weak, languid, etc. He was also weak-willed, to the point of preferring to not eat than to work. For most of his life we was respectful, timid, obedient, polite, submissive, weak, not aggressive, not rough...

    An anecdote; When ****** was in love with certain noble woman I mentioned in the previous, he sent his only friend to stalk her. When he told ****** she loved dancing, he answered that in reality she hated dancing and only did it because society expected her to do so (****** hated dancing). When he was informed that she had romantic things with military officers, he demonized the officer class and the army. He even left her a love note where he told her to wait for him until he graduated from arts school to marry him (He was a nice guy by today's standards). Once she threw some roses from a car and one of them got to Mr.H's hands, he interpreted that as an evident sign that she loved him and became flamboyant.

    ****** had been denied from the Vienna Arts school, and when his only friend Kubizek was admitted into music school, H stopped talking to him.

    ******'s speeches seem to me to be sincere transcripts of his emotional state, and lots of them are almost anxiety attacks.

    All of this reveals certain character traits, such as dramatism, deep-felt emotionality, dreamyness and imaginativeness... as well as fantasizing, categorical judgement and intolerance as tools to maintain mental integrity.

    I honestly would avoid to judge sociotype by the results of his politics or his/her opinions, but rather type by Info metabolism and real-life traits.
    Mein Kampf and his speeches are good sources of evidence that he was the architect of the Holocaust. It was decades in the making.

    Having launched the deportation program precipitately in the autumn of 1941 on ******’s orders, Heydrich found it necessary to call a conference to discuss the large-scale problems of organization involved in carrying out “a total solution of the Jewish question in Europe.” Known as the Wannsee Conference, it met in Berlin on January 20, 1942. On the agenda were questions of selection (How was a Jew to be defined?) and possible exceptions (for example, Jews employed in the war economy, the Mischlinge, i.e., half and quarter Jews). The most difficult problems were how to remove hundreds of thousands of terrified people from their homes, to transport them hundreds of miles in the middle of a war, and then to provide for their reception in the occupied territories before they were put to death.

    The minutes of the conference were written by Eichmann. Later he testified that the discussions took place “in very blunt terms—the talk was of killing, elimination, and annihilation.”88 But the circulated record is all the more horrifying because of the official, businesslike, and objective way in which it records such points as,

    Around 11 million Jews come into consideration for this final solution of the European Jewish question, who are distributed among the individual countries as follows. [Among those listed were the 330,000 Jews in England and the 4,000 in Ireland.]

    In the process of carrying out the final solution, Europe will be combed through from west to east.89

    A year later Himmler had a report prepared for ****** on the progress made with the Final Solution during 1942. The total number of Jews who had received “special treatment”—altered to read “who had passed through camps in the Government-General”—was 1,873,539. Retyped on the special Führer typewriter with large letters for ****** to read, it was eventually returned to Eichmann with Himmler’s instruction: “The Führer has taken note: destroy. HH.”90

    THERE WAS ONLY one man among the Nazi leaders who could have conceived of carrying out literally so grandiose and bizarre a plan. Not the bureaucrats who attended the Wannsee Conference and were concerned with the practical problems it presented. Nor the SS and party bosses in the Government-General, the Warthegau, and the Ostland, who wanted to find ways—and were quite prepared to consider mass killings—to relieve the overcrowding in the ghettoes and camps for which they were responsible. They had no interest at all in bringing large additional numbers of Jews into their territories and seeing these used as killing grounds for the extermination of the whole of European Jewry.

    ****** alone had the imagination—however twisted—to come up with such a plan. How long he may have nursed it, no one can say, but it was entirely in keeping with the importance he had attached to “the Jewish question” since he made his first speech at the end of the First World War, and if there was one year in which he was capable of making the leap from imagining such a “solution” as fantasy to imagining it as fact, it was 1941.

    This was the year in which he had shown his terrifying capacity to turn into fact another part of his “world view,” the fantasy of Lebensraum in the east, by launching the German army against the Soviet Union in an unprovoked act of aggression. As in the case of Operation Barbarossa, ****** himself had neither the ability nor the interest to organize the execution of his Final Solution himself: That he left to Himmler and Heydrich, to the Eichmanns and Hösses, as he had left organizing the invasion of Russia to the army General Staff. But if there had not been a ****** to conceive of such projects and to convince others that they could actually take place, neither would have occurred. This was ******’s unique gift, already demonstrated in bringing the obscure Nazi party to power, in making a defeated Germany again the most powerful state in Europe, in defeating the French. As he said in his “prophecy” speech about the destruction of the Jews, at every stage he had been laughed at and not taken seriously; the Final Solution was to prove one more example of his claim that those who had mocked him as a prophet would end choking on their words.

    ******’s second contribution to the Final Solution was to legitimize it. Those involved in carrying it out knew very well that it was a state secret which could never be admitted in public. They understood why there was no signed ****** order. ******’s references to his “prophecy speech”—to which he referred six times in major speeches, each broadcast between January 1942 and March 1943—were enough to convince them when Himmler and Heydrich said they were carrying out the Führer’s orders. As Führer, he combined all the principal offices in the state, party, and armed forces, giving him a unique authority with which to reassure them that, however disturbing the job they were called upon to do, they were acting in the interest of the German Volk. As Himmler told his SS commanders: “This is a page of glory in our history which has never been written and is never to be written…. We had the moral right, we had the duty to destroy this people which wanted to destroy us.”91 ****** was the guarantee of this.

    ******’s final contribution was to supply the will not only to launch such an operation but to insist that it would continue up to the end of the war, long after everyone knew it was lost. The search for Jews continued all over Europe: in France, Holland, Italy, Greece. The transport was found to move them to Poland at a time when the railways were under constant attack from the air and hard-pressed by the demands of war. As late as July 1944, Eichmann despatched another 50,000 Hungarian Jews to Auschwitz. Once there they were put through the same ghastly routine. White-coated doctors—with a gesture of the hand—selected those fit enough to be worked to death. The rest were required to give up all their clothing and possessions and then, in a terrified column of naked men and women, carrying their children or holding their hands and trying to comfort them, were herded into the gas chambers. When the screaming died down and the doors were opened, they were still standing upright, so tightly packed that they could not fall. But where there had been human beings, there were now corpses, which were removed to the ovens for burning. This was the daily spectacle which ****** took good care never to see and which haunts the imagination of anyone who has studied the evidence.

    Hopes of being liberated from the camps as the Red Army advanced were crushed by the SS, who organized death marches to the west, the horrors of which few survived. Those who did were shot in concentration camps in Germany. The last death march of the war, from Mauthausen in Austria to Günskirchen, took place in the first week of May 1945, after ****** had committed suicide.

    Continuity is not a conclusive argument in proving ******’s responsibility for the Final Solution, but neither can it be ignored. Sitting amid the ruin of his hopes in the Berlin bunker, the man who had first appeared in history twenty-five years before ranting against the Jews found consolation in the thought: “Well, we have lanced the Jewish abscess; and the world of the future will be eternally grateful to us.”
    ****** and Stalin: Parallel Lives by Alan Bullock

  19. #379
    Seed my wickedness Sanguine Miasma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    7,562
    Mentioned
    321 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Agreeableness indeed allows that it can (or not) be rather twisted behind the scenes. Anyway he agreed with the "science" that was contemporary but it went very far and formed a dogmatic belief (I advice to be non dogmatic even when it comes to Big5!). These sort of deeds do not reveal nothing new in humanity.
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

    NO Private messages, please. Use Discord instead.

Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •