-
@Kill4Me. i woke up this morning with several things bothering me all of a sudden.
1. i think you are right with the air of stubborness you detect. i think you spotted something real there (although i don't think it's in the way exactly that you might think it is - because maybe it's that you think i shut out your input, which this will only reinforce that. it was more that when unfair or unreasonable boxing (of myself) starts up, and i start to feel rather significantly misrepresented or misunderstood, that i feel i must try to do something about that.
2. i think you may have spotted something with the idea of a type being a box to play in. i like playing with type and type ideas and my personality in my mind. that's true.
3. i *have* probably acted more agreeable/naive than i am. it's not out of an attempt to deceive. it's that i tread carefully and will seep around people like water. again i don't set out to do this. it appears to be how i roll. i make myself non-threatening and receptive often. perhaps this is quiet E9-ish of me and quite SEI-ish of me. but also, i would say it is often with "good intent." i am genuinely interested in how you approach typing, my own free-flying presumptions in the previous post aside. it's been an interesting puzzle i've wanted to solve.
4. you are right that there is a humanistic part to me and if you think i might think even minor things are violence or even that in some cases i wouldn't hurt a fly, you are seeing something real. it's just it's not the only thing there.
5. i am serious when i say that i imply you can be good at this typology stuff. you are able to (like i said) spell things out in these direct concrete ways. i struggle to do that tremendously. it's difficult for me to talk about socionics without being vague to the point of pointlessness. and you don't have that problem, which is cool.
6. you seem to be developing your stuff independently, and well, the influences of group-think on the forum and how people deal with that is something that interests me too.
7. you are right there *is* confusion and uncertainty regarding my self-typing - it's just not that i am completely lost. i also see this as something that it is okay if it takes time - i don't fear years, decades, or even a lifetime over questions i find meaningful. i also believe that you genuinely maybe (???) are trying to assist with your clear logic and way of breaking it down?
8. despite your narratives in your posts, i don't know if you are a "psycho" only what you appear to be. that seemed like it was labeling and accusation, and a premature ruling. but i meant it in humor. (the benevolent part of me, which sometimes can be expansive, does think there's room in the world for psychos, on their own little islands sinking into the sea as the oceans rise... no, just kidding!)
9. i do perceive there maybe being two things going on here. 1) you are genuinely interested in typology and *are* looking for truth; and 2) you wish to be a typology conqueror - to be dominant, which isn't the same as being the best exactly. although these two things can work together, they are also competing with one another.
now that i've laid my cards on the table i feel better, and... much worse. i don't like laying my cards out and i've done it for you. FEEL SPECIAL.
there. now it's all constructive-criticism like. and i was being a coward by giving mostly negative feedback in my previous post. and it had this "you don't know anything of me at all" vibe to it, which i don't believe is true.
i just have to back-track and go back and forth in infuriating ways. but it's honestly that i hold multiple interpretations in my head at the same time. i am trying to hone them down, it's just it takes me forever (sometimes never).
(also, i'm still being presumptuous - but i've granted permission to myself again due to you doing it first)
Last edited by inumbra; 01-16-2016 at 06:52 PM.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules