Originally Posted by Taknamay
Wrong. Experience speaking here. Not theory.
Wrong. Experience speaking here. Not theory.
If we're the type that's supposed to know that fine morals, than what's moral about an immoral EII acting in such a manner? (Philosophical but very interesting never the less.)
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
maybe you aren't
It was interesting trying to engage you in a philosophical discussion where you aren't engaged.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
My understanding from Rick's site: EIIs perceive societal ethics, which is basically what a bunch of people do or don't like. It doesn't mean that EIIs have a perfect moral compass; and who decides what constitutes said perfection anyway? One EII's view of morality =/= the next one's view of morality. They can be mean, vengeful, irrational, etc, just like everyone else.
You're not frigging engaged in philosophical discussion Anal Trevor, you hear that?
So your societal ethics dictated that you could pick at people, hitting or kicking them when they irritated you?
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
You won't get my humor.
My idea of an INFj gone wrong: A tortured soul, gaining no Te support from the environment, lots of external demands and hence Se PoLR hits, has a love-hate relationship with humanity. Touched with realism, understands constraints and the limits of compassion. Smashed ideals, understands the gray, the difficulties of the white, tasting the evils of the black, yet stubbornly persisting in aligning with the ideals of the white.
An evil INFj is evil mostly to himself. He suffers in silence. Nobody knows.
ETA: Except that a person who suffers, even silently never suffers alone. People who care for them suffer along with them.
Last edited by InkStrider; 10-09-2011 at 10:55 PM.
Isn't that what I'm trying to do here?
I don't get your humor now, maybe, because I'm in a bit of pain. Sorry, forgive me. It might be kind of hard to judge humor for an EII over the net too, please make obvious emotional reactions after a joke, likeor
or a silly goofy symbol. I can be oblivious to things around me....I'm a bit on the serious side.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Did you stop to feel the person? To think of the consequences of your actions? To think of what may result out of Ni process if you should kick the person, or did you react at the moment? If you just react physically at aggression, than you're not using Fi first, obviously.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
No. You lack a sense of resignation: the mark of a defeated soul. You are still young.
Correction. You are much of a pain.
ETA: Oops, got you wrong. Hope your pain eases soon.
Don't be silly. It's not like I'm the most typical LSE either. Just go by your instincts and don't let anybody tell you who you are, nor who you are to be.
it doesn't need to be explained. i suppose the socionics crowd would say that either 1) the behavior you exhibited then and now was not type-related so it doesn't matter, or 2) at one point you weren't being your "true" self.
anyway for those who see me as EII i've had bad behavior but its all relative blah blah. nothing i'd want to go into here lol.
All types have the potential for good or evil. I think an Fi style of meanness is the Mean Girls social exclusion thing, befriending someone and then getting everyone to shun them.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
This is perfect; does your type have the potential for that, and do you?
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Haha! You hear the bells ring InkStrider?make obvious emotional reactions after a joke, like
I've never done that to anyone and I don't think I personally could, but that doesn't mean other IEEs couldn't.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
Comeback lines are such silly ways to hurt people.
You're right, I'll get it some day.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
<br />
<br />
Societal ethics are the ethics of the group. Who knows what they would have thought of me? It did not go against my personal morality at the time. I generally avoid such gestures now, unless it is online (and no one truly gets injured there). If I want to really hurt someone, I'm probably feeling very cornered and desperate. Or I'm dealing with my little brother. Or both. *grinds teeth* I actually had a friend once who wanted me to hurt him for provoking me, but I preferred to keep that part of me in check. He might've been happier to have known me in high school.
BS, you're my mirror relations and you're the closest look a like to me and you're the one who harbors the same humanistic and moral sentiments as I do and you very well know that you can't and won't and neither of anyone of our types. Bottom line. But, you never state anything conclusively at the fear that you're judging a possible perceive situation, which makes you not say things like I would. I'll say it anyway...NO WE CAN'T.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Everyone is the good guy in their own story @Arsal
Both EII and IEE are HEAVY Humanists and Humanitarians and by heavy it's meant exactly as that. We're serious about the way we treat other individuals based on a formed moral code of ethics partly adapted by society but mostly formed by us when we are young. This is all I have to say to conclude this.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Yup, that's possible.
Uhh, actually I was being serious.Comeback lines are such silly ways to hurt people.
This thread has turned into a hilarious NF quibbling thread. Thanks, Arsal. Lol.
And cooks, and brilliant psychiatrists.
Forum writing is confusing and difficult for me because I prefer Monologues and deep one on one discussions; I will naturally have difficulty picking up on your emotional nuances and others at the same time as I can only focus on being one emotional mood at a time with one case. If the discussion starts and takes a serious tone, I get into that rhythm and it's hard for me to switch. If you throw in a joke and because I'm better focused on one-on-one and you expect me to divert my attention to your joke, I may not be able to do so because I may be focused on something else. If you want to joke with me and for me to get it, you can do so on the PM. Otherwise, I'm quite passionate about Socionics and it may seem like I'm very serious here.Yup, that's possible.
Uhh, actually I was being serious.
This thread has turned into a hilarious NF quibbling thread. Thanks, Arsal. Lol.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Can they be evil? Sure.
Would they be typed EII here? I doubt it.
Yeah, okay. I'm not in a very serious mood at the moment so... Anyway it's just an unimportant matter.
Yeah, okay. I'm not in a very serious mood at the moment so... Anyway it's just an unimportant matter.
Enjoy your jolly mood (and thanks for absorbing my emotions, here, and turning around and being humorous). I appreciate that.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Thank you. You lighten up too. Hope the pain goes away soon.
Enjoy your jolly mood.
IEEs and EIE can be seriously viscious when it comes to hitting psychological weak spots in their "opponent." I have been in (very very few) heated arguments with partners in which I was purely evil. When my anger boils over to the point where I WANT to hurt the other person (it happens rarely, but it does happen), I will say things which I know will really hit home. I always feel terrible afterward because in some occasions, I really hurt feelings.
I almost always hold back even during very heated arguments, but I am no saint.
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
I was an EII bully back in the day.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Hey, that's me.
and I'm not evil and everyone types me EII. But am I still non-stereotypical EII, maybe many EIIs are evil deep inside and I lack some of those genes.
My INFj friend insists that she's capable of more evil than I am, which I find hard to believe.. although she's somewhat fucked up.. and as it seems it is the only way they can be more than a bit evil.
matricide
Actually, yeah, depending on what the intertype relation is, someone who you have to live with every day, who has power over you, who controls whether you get money or not, etc, etc, could seem evil from that point of view, if they were a conflict or supervisor or some other difficult relation.
We should post this in the 'beta' section and see if any of them have bad conflict experiences. Or ask the ILEs about supervision. (Wait, is that the right one? I think so.)
But I realize that's not the definition of 'evil.'
Reply With Quote
