Confidence

[Rocky]

Do you ever think that you act confident about something (belief, etc...), but are really like pudding on the inside? For me, sometimes I act like I know something as a fact, that I never doubt it's truth, but that's only sort of a surface-level quality. I blame it on . In reality, I doubt myself constantly, and to be honest, am not really sure about something when I say it, even though I pretend to be sure of it. I'm wondering if this is related to dynamic types.

[Phaedrus]

I'm not sure that it is directly related to dynamic types. I discussed almost exactly this phenomenon with an ENTj and an ESFp yesterday, and the ESFp and I seemed to be more alike in that respect. I'm not sure that the word "pretend" describes it most accurately in my case, though. It's not that I consciously pretend, maybe it is more like a feeling. Why do you think it is due to ?

[Rocky]

Because rarely doubts itself, so when I transition to -mode, it appears like a strong confidence/conviction about a certain issue, and I may say something along the lines of I'm "absolutely sure". Of course this goes away, and I continue to re-evaluate my opinion on the matter, but don't let anyone else see it. If overcomes, then starts to criticize anything that disagrees with it, which is why it's best to "losen" it up sometimes.

[Rocky]

I also noticed something different from + and -. For someone like me ( +), I can sometimes act similar to the way Ganin described the ISTP in his uncovered profile (knowing how to do everything, practical logic, etc...). My Dad ( -) on the other hand likes to force his beliefs onto people (how we should live our lives, knows what's best for everyone, etc...).

[FDG]

Of course it depends on the degree of confindence I have on the discussed subject in comparison to the person I'm arguing with.

I behave as you mention only when I have some system that I have not fully compreheded yet that I must "test" in order to see if it survives logical attacks. However, usually not.

@Chibi: there are facts that ARE necessarily right or wrong. For example, it's right that you have just posted that there is no right or wrong, and it's wrong if I said that you think that there is right or wrong

[Kristiina]

Something similar to what FDG said. Because when I know the entire topic, I'll fight very fiercely (for a girl) and I'll prove the others I'm right. Then it's like a game and I know I'll win (I can't lose if I know I'm right and it's a fair game).

The rest of the time, I sometimes pretend to be more sure of myself than I really am. But for me it's pretty easy to admit I was wrong (if I wasn't sure in the first place). I don't think it's about being dynamic. It's pretty ISTp to be "confident and right" all the time. Plus I think it's a female vs male sort of thing. And it depends who I'm talking with.


Chibikeba, I used to think about this and I've reached a conclusion.
1. the world is too complex, if you think that everything that everyone does contributes to a general huge time line, sometimes called Fate.
2. the world has too many errors, which aren't getting much better. If I was the author of a creation like that, I'd keep making it better.
3. if the world had been made with the subconscious thoughts of everyone, then the average person is almost always right about everything. But do you really believe that such a big proportion of the world thinks there should be so many starving people around? :wink: Besides, on the contrary, you're giving the average person too much credit. The average person couldn't possibly create a world with so much balance - what animal lives, when is the water level too low for the plants, etc.
4. If the world isn't something that just exists, we must look at the possibility of it being manufactured (Matrix). Someone made it. No system can be so inconsistent. Each animal, each person is so unique, that I just can't believe someone could go through such trouble.

So... the world most possibly exists. It has right and wrong answers and ideas, and some questions that have many right answers.

[Phaedrus]

I've always maintained the outlook that all of reality is just based on perception so I've never been extremely confident in being right about anything, because honestly I don't believe there really is a right or wrong, just what exists in each person's mind.

There are two separate questions here. The first is your degree of confidence in the validity (truth and/or rightness) of your own ideas/beliefs. The second is whether anyone can be objectively right or wrong about anything, i.e whether the world exists and has a structure in itself that is independent of our beliefs about that structure.

From a typological perspective I am very interested in the question of whether there might be a pattern in people's attitude toward the second question. I defend what has been called an objectivistic position against what has been called a subjectivistic or relativistic position. And it seems that you and I have different attitudes here, ChibiKeba, even though we both are probably dominant. One of my hypothesis is that INTjs tend to embrace subjectivistic/relativistic views more than INTps, and I have seen the same relativistic attitude clearly accentuated in some INFjs.

there are facts that ARE necessarily right or wrong.

But I have not seen that much of relativistic tendencies in ENTjs (was that your type, FDG, or what was it?), so it might have something to do with . I don't know.

There's no way to know for sure what's real and what isn't.

You could be right about this, ChibiKeba, but this is not the same question as whether the world exists in itself and whether one can be objectively right or wrong about it. We must separate the two concepts truth (or rightness) - which are related to the existence of facts - and knowledge. It is very common among subjectivists/relativists to be confused about truth and knowledge, and they are often unwilling or unable to see or make a clear distinction between them.

Plus I think it's a female vs male sort of thing.

The tendency to embrace, or not to embrace, relativistic attitudes might have something to do with F and T, i.e whether you are an ethical or a logical type. In that case we might find more relativists among females, since there are more F types among females and more T types among males (probably somewhere aroung 60-70 % dominance in both directions), and I think that relativistic attitudes could be related to being an F type, because F types have a tendency not to see the world from an impersonal, objective, "cold" perspective, but rather focus more on the individuals and their subjective perspectives.

[Kristiina]

3. if the world had been made with the subconscious thoughts of everyone, then the average person is almost always right about everything. But do you really believe that such a big proportion of the world thinks there should be so many starving people around? :wink: Besides, on the contrary, you're giving the average person too much credit. The average person couldn't possibly create a world with so much balance - what animal lives, when is the water level too low for the plants, etc.

This is just one of my theories, I don't have any real set views of the way things really are because I'm just a human and my way of thinking is far too limited as with every human being.

You have to consider free will when it comes to why people suffer the way they do, when a soul comes into a physical body it loses some of it's ability to rationalize because the chemicals and hormones override the true nature of a person's real being. The brain chemistry (the typology) of the person also has an effect on the real essence of a person. I don't think that the universe was created by the thoughts of human beings but rather by souls or concious energy.

This is just one of my theories so you can feel free to pick it apart if you'd like. I don't buy stock into any one way of thinking and I like to hear other people's view points.

I won't pick it apart. I have had very similar ideas, but just the other side of the same coin... A bit different. In my version the world exists and the souls play a very important part there...