Official Book Thread

[Amber]

I do get bothered by the fact that you don't seem to listen when I give plausible reasons for being other types, but that just seems to only give you more justification for your type of me. I try and keep an open mind, listen to what you have to say, but you don't seem to be interested in having a rational discussion with me at all, especially since I have already asked to discuss it with you in private so that maybe we could come to some understanding.

I received messages from the writer that there is some more editing to do.


he forgot to insert one of the most spontaneous things he wrote ... a paragraph written in the peak of artistic inspiration after some complexes were accidentally hit by a fan.The paragraph was published too fast in a nervous reaction and he didn't even do any proofreading. Its place is before one of the last long epistolary insertions which alas! ..never got any response, so captivating and interesting they were.

Check my subconscious? What a bunch of psychobabbling bullshit. The difference between you and I are likely due to your preference for making things personal, where I am trying to do the opposite. I am trying to be reasonable. I expect people to listen to reason. This is classic LII. I am also slightly more limbic than calm, according to SLOAN

moreover, he forgot to include in the book the fact that he didn't get any response to this question

No I really am not aware of having said anything offensive. what did I say?

and then started harassing me with the "rational discussion" he had already asked for some time ago ..without any feedback, ofc.

[Skepsis]

"I do get bothered by the fact that you don't seem to listen when I give plausible reasons for being other types, but that just seems to only give you more justification for your type of me. I try and keep an open mind, listen to what you have to say, but you don't seem to be interested in having a rational discussion with me at all, especially since I have already asked to discuss it with you in private so that maybe we could come to some understanding."

I received messages from the writer that there is some more editing to do.


he forgot to insert one of the most spontaneous things he wrote ... a paragraph written in the peak of artistic inspiration after some complexes were accidentally hit by a fan.The paragraph was published too fast in a nervous reaction and he didn't even do any proofreading. Its place is before one of the last long epistolary insertions which alas! ..never got any response, so captivating and interesting they were.


"Check my subconscious? What a bunch of psychobabbling bullshit. The difference between you and I are likely due to your preference for making things personal, where I am trying to do the opposite. I am trying to be reasonable. I expect people to listen to reason. This is classic LII. I am also slightly more limbic than calm, according to SLOAN"

moreover, he forgot to include in the book the fact that he didn't get any response to this question
"No I really am not aware of having said anything offensive. what did I say?"
and then started harassing me with the "rational discussion" he had already asked for some time ago ..without any feedback, ofc.

I have to point out here that this is factually incorrect. The entire conversation was copied and pasted in the order they were sent. I was concerned that I did make an error and accidentally omitted something. I double checked and could not find any omissions. If I really did omit something, I will gladly amend.

I am done conversing directly with Amber for the time being. I tried to keep our discussion private to avoid what has just transpired, and to voice my criticisms of typology in the forum. Since many people are quite devoted and knowledgeable about Socionics, it's reasonable that I don't yet want to openly criticize it. I am not knowledgeable enough about it and do not feel confident enough to debate it in depth. Much of it does come down to epistemology and how do we know what the basic architecture of mind is. There is much I still do not know or understand. Ultimately, my skepticism begins with Jung, but my quest for understanding is endless. This is a passion of mine.

Something I can honestly say bothers me, is when someone quotes what I state and weaves it into their own narrative. It is the bias being displayed that truly does bother me. This is why I posted the conversation, so there could be no doubt about what was actually said. The context is just as important as what was said. I have a whole host of my own personal biases that I try to discover and correct for, especially when approaching something like typology, which is difficult if not impossible to approach in an unbiased, scientific way. Consciousness is one of the few areas where science has had much trouble penetrating.

One of the other things that bother me is when someone says they will be reasonable once I agree with them. I asked her to be reasonable and she said she will be reasonable once I accept that I was FiNe, or in other words, just accept that she is correct. What is reasonable about this?

My conversation with Amber is part anecdotal, part criticism of typology, and a disagreement about my type. I often try to criticize typology by trying to argue what typology cannot tell us with any degree of certainty. That is my approach. But in her mind, everything I say is further evidence for what she has already concluded. This is a confirmation bias.

Let me be clear that my conversation with Amber was not an attack on her. I apologized to her that I offended her. I made a joke a couple of months ago. I was poking fun of her and was not meant to be taken as derogatory. I thought I was being playful. It is just my humor. It is twisted, dark, and often taken out of context. It is probably disgusting to most people. I'm still sorry I offended her. She is stating that I have since said something that has offended her. I don't know what that is, so I can't address it.

My approach is more impersonal that hers. The fact that she doesn't see that is another example of confirmation bias. During our conversation, my own writing style has shifted to distance myself from the personal. This is the general approach I take during conflicts. It is to become more rational and less personable. As long as there isn't any conflict, I can let my guard down and become personable again. I would expect that this alone is evidence toward my own preferences. But, pointing out everything personal I state and not mentioning all of the impersonal things I state, is a confirmation bias.

I'm sorry I singled her out months ago. It was not fair. I think we are miscommunicating and our understanding of one another is limited, as is often the case online. I would just like to agree to disagree and move on from here.

I am sorry to have moved this thread into the wrong direction. It should instead be filled with pages of interesting books.

[Amber]

Re: your behavior

Originally Posted by Amber

Originally Posted by Jimmers

Originally Posted by Amber

Originally Posted by Jimmers

Originally Posted by Amber
last evening you posted a few things that i probably attached the right meaning to.

kindly stop.



I'm really not sure what you are referring to.



I am sorry. I must have fast-forwarded something automatically.
a while ago Kim wrote me a PM to NF-inform me that mby I was needlessly harassing a person who was quite affected by some traumatic experiences (Suede). I eventually conceded to treat him as a human being and not only as a total jerk.



oh, lol. I didn't know if I said something offensive or what the hell happened.

cheers



i think i'm clicking send for half messages in a hurry or smth.

u did know u said smth. offensive (as a delta nf), but that was obviously a matter of deep feeling that u are free to indulge in. the point of my message was that you should probably stop ..especially since i don't recall having given u any concrete reasons to hate me or deeply dislike me and inform me of that in a compulsive way. i have already cut u from my "friends" list to let u know i'm fine with ur decision.



No I really am not aware of having said anything offensive. what did I say?

• 03-27-201509:47 PM
  Re: your behavior
  
  • Jimmers

Re: your behavior

Originally Posted by Amber

Originally Posted by Jimmers

Originally Posted by Amber

Originally Posted by Jimmers

Originally Posted by Amber
last evening you posted a few things that i probably attached the right meaning to.

kindly stop.



I'm really not sure what you are referring to.



I am sorry. I must have fast-forwarded something automatically.
a while ago Kim wrote me a PM to NF-inform me that mby I was needlessly harassing a person who was quite affected by some traumatic experiences (Suede). I eventually conceded to treat him as a human being and not only as a total jerk.



oh, lol. I didn't know if I said something offensive or what the hell happened.

cheers



i think i'm clicking send for half messages in a hurry or smth.

u did know u said smth. offensive (as a delta nf), but that was obviously a matter of deep feeling that u are free to indulge in. the point of my message was that you should probably stop ..especially since i don't recall having given u any concrete reasons to hate me or deeply dislike me and inform me of that in a compulsive way. i have already cut u from my "friends" list to let u know i'm fine with ur decision.



Amber, I really don't know what you are talking about here. I looked back at what I posted and I didn't see anything that was referring to you. Perhaps you misinterpreted? I don't know because you haven't told me what has offended you. I posted some songs and discussed Te vulnerable, but beyond that, I'm at a total loss here.

While I don't think we were ever really friends to begin with, I don't hate or deeply dislike you. I do get bothered by the fact that you don't seem to listen when I give plausible reasons for being other types, but that just seems to only give you more justification for your type of me. I try and keep an open mind, listen to what you have to say, but you don't seem to be interested in having a rational discussion with me at all, especially since I have already asked to discuss it with you in private so that maybe we could come to some understanding.

I'm not into social drama, so it is unlikely that I would post some passive aggressive statement in an attempt to offend you.

Your email has unfortunately been helpful to me. Unfortunate in that you were offended, but helpful in that it has helped me come to understand that I am more likely to be merry vs serious.

You don't have to respond you if don't like, but I would appreciate it if you would.

03-28-201510:14 AM



10:14 AM

Beyond the factually incorrect information in the previous message presented by the famous writer in question, I think many things are coherent, consistent, and clear now. I accept his apologies and I think the "offense" can be left behind now. I do agree however that we are done conversing about his type. I hope he can find his peace of mind and inner harmony and he will no longer dream of being "pigeonholed" by me.