Dual with bad morals

[Singu]

lol @ using Socionics to psychoanalyze people.

It's like why don't you just ask your dad in why he treated you that way.

[Wavebury]

Couldn't care less about morals and scruples. If someone is good to me, I'm good to them. And vice versa. It's pretty simple and makes morality moot.

I used to be like this, but then I realized that it's not a good long-term approach to relationships. Because if someone is a jerk to others, and not to you, you do have to wonder why they're making an exception. I mean, despite the fact that someone being a jerk to everyone else bothers me deep down, there's also the fact that you will soon be on the receiving end of their abusive treatment too, it's usually just a matter of time before the mask falls off, ime.

[Sanguine Miasma]

Potentiality for development whatever goals are...

I would not personally focus on this.

Some people are quite insecure in this area or inflexible in general so it would fit for them.

[Aramas]

I used to be like this, but then I realized that it's not a good long-term approach to relationships. Because if someone is a jerk to others, and not to you, you do have to wonder why they're making an exception. I mean, despite the fact that someone being a jerk to everyone else bothers me deep down, there's also the fact that you will soon be on the receiving end of their abusive treatment too, it's usually just a matter of time before the mask falls off, ime.

I don't buy that tbh. Humans have always and forever been selective with their goodness and their kindness. It has never been the case in human history that people in general have been kind to everyone simply because they were human. Only in recent years have a few people begun regarding people as worthy of kindness simply because they are human. And still, the majority of humans still enact in/out group behavior. And it is a very successful strategy for survival. People who are too inclined not to enact those kinds of behaviors tend not to be selected for on an evolutionary time scale.

So, a person being an ass to one person is not necessarily an indicator of the totality of that person's nature. A person being mean to one person does not automatically mean that person is wearing a mask when being nice to someone else or that they will take advantage of or hurt someone else. Human behavior is situational and it often depends more on an interpersonal dynamic and an interaction between characters than on the nature of a single person in isolation.

The idea of abusers and their masks is something that's only become popular online because of fad psychology.

[Bertrand]

being an ass to others implies a morality I thought didn't exist anyway

[Raver]

An SLI with bad morals might as well be my conflictor rather than my dual. This is why it's extremely naive to take Socionics as the sole determinant for successful relationships and friendships when other factors come into play.

[Wavebury]

I don't buy that tbh. Humans have always and forever been selective with their goodness and their kindness. It has never been the case in human history that people in general have been kind to everyone simply because they were human. Only in recent years have a few people begun regarding people as worthy of kindness simply because they are human. And still, the majority of humans still enact in/out group behavior. And it is a very successful strategy for survival. People who are too inclined not to enact those kinds of behaviors tend not to be selected for on an evolutionary time scale.

So, a person being an ass to one person is not necessarily an indicator of the totality of that person's nature. A person being mean to one person does not automatically mean that person is wearing a mask or that they will take advantage of or hurt someone else. Human behavior is situational and it often depends more on an interpersonal dynamic and an interaction between characters than on the nature of a single person in isolation.

The idea of abusers and their masks is something that's only become popular online because of fad psychology.

I disagree, for the most part, I do think it's possible to determine if people are good or bad by observing how they treat others. But most people are not 100 percent good or bad, they just tend to one or the other. Ethical questions are complex though, I don't pretend to know what good and bad is in an objective sense, I guess I am just too for this debate.

But I don't know if this debate matters to you, your last sentence is very dismissive.

[Aramas]

I disagree, for the most part, I do think it's possible to determine if people are good or bad by observing how they treat others. But most people are not 100 percent good or bad, they just tend to one or the other. Ethical questions are complex though, I don't pretend to know what good and bad is in an objective sense, I guess I am just too for this debate.

But I don't know if this debate matters to you, your last sentence is very dismissive.

If it didn't matter to me, I wouldn't have bothered to reply. I was simply stating a fact. All this talk about abusers, masks, psychopaths, sociopaths, narcissists, etc., comes from a social fad. People who use that knowledge to inform their perspective are partaking in that fad. Are you trying to dismiss me by saying I'm dismissive? xD

People who are partaking in this fad are blind to human nature to some degree imo, because they oversimplify and ignore behaviors that contradict anything more than a one dimensional understanding of human behavior.

[Wavebury]

If it didn't matter to me, I wouldn't have bothered to reply. I was simply stating a fact. All this talk about abusers, masks, psychopaths, narcissists, etc., comes from a social fad. People who use that knowledge to inform their perspective are partaking in that fad. Are you trying to dismiss me by saying I'm dismissive? xD

Haha, no, I'm not trying to dismiss you or what you're saying. Thanks for the clarification, I guess the word "abuser" might have been a little poorly chosen, here. Yeah, it comes from a fad. It's hard not to be infleunced by these things.

Anyways, personally, I do think a person's character does play a role in how I choose them as friend or partner, how they treat me is probably the most important thing, though, I guess what I'm trying to say is that if someone treats me well and is a jerk to alot of other people, I'm gonna have doubts about taking them on as an ally, even if they treat me well and are a dual in socionics.

But I guess you are not me, and I'm not judging how you choose your relationships, to each their own method that works best etc etc.