Typing

[Myst]

lol yeah that's what I'm starting to think, as well. I come down in the middle of so many of them when reading descriptions.

Good, means you got no bias lol

For Fe: More expressive. More effort trying to get things to be laid back and have fun.

OK, that's concrete enough, and yeah, I see you like that.

Dunno how things are over there but politically in America things (while I was growing up) got sorted either into two different kinds of bundled ways of thinking. For a very long time in the ideological wilderness it was spent trying to double down and define and adhere to a more consistent "true" system from some central principles of one of those two ways of thinking. A lot of it was coming to conclusions that are dog shit and I didn't really like/agree with but bit my tongue going "Well, that's how this stupid principle plays out so I guess that's how it is." About 6 years spent going down different rabbit holes trying to force my positions into unrealistic and stupid frameworks based on abstract and unworkable principles that result in completely repellent conclusions (eg. the "non-aggression principle" leading to complete atomism and social apathy to abusive practices by people or groups, shrugging off the life expectancy falling among my people due to suicide and drug abuse because "that's not my problem," and thinking that things are necessarily better because I can buy more cheap plastic shit from china for less this year than last year).

That stopped when I gave less of a shit about consistency and stuck more with just what I think is true or right, and had a minor realization that I was doing a lot of that ideological wandering because I wanted some sort of "us" or team to be on to struggle against the other team. A collective purpose and meaning to belong to and work for.

Hmm ok I was thinking of something else with the pidgeonholing, but this was interesting. Yeah it seems like everywhere I've been it's always two political sides/oppositions. Quite honestly I couldn't pick one side after a while of watching them when I eventually wanted to develop my own stance by thinking for myself lol. I try to go beyond all that I guess. I never tried to be this conscious about it as you though, with "ok this is how it plays out logically". I mean, I never tried to follow another's framework this consciously or whatever. I'm again getting the feel you got more focus on Ni lol. I think I'm simpler bc I'd just listen to instinct saying "nah this is complete bullshit", either that or tried to be very thorough "this doesn't add up atm so I'll need to do more watching and checking/sorting". But yeah, I get what you mean by rabbit holes, whenever I do try and test some system by someone else (anything from sports to Socionics), I do have to temporarily "act" as if I've "put it on" and then when it doesn't add up I run into a wall in the rabbithole lol. That is instead of just saying "ok let's just accept it if the a priori logic goes this way". I mean that's what I never did.

Can I ask how your new overall stance is about less consistency? It seems actually more consistent to me.

Yeah the "us" thing makes sense lol you are incredibly stereotypically Beta though lol. Maybe your sx/so adds to it too. The last sentence is really stereotypically collectivist/Fe-seeking/Ni-seeking LSI too, and I guess the soc instinct too.

More or less, yeah. There are so many possibilities for what might work and meticulously going through each and every one makes me want to pull my hair out more each time it doesn't work. Then in the back of my mine my I know my LII or ILE co-worker would likely see the potential likely alternative almost immediately. That process of sorting through myriad potentialities is like pulling teeth.

That's actually why I don't like the sort of job where there's too much troubleshooting to be done like that, because while I am able to adapt to things when I must, this sort of thing requires far more flexibility than what I am comfortable with (in the area of Ne yeah I guess). I'm not going to say SLEs like to get bogged down in shit either but to me this is more Ne PoLR than anything.

lol I was getting that impression when answering the questions. I was wondering if someone was going to jump in and say ESI because of that.

Ti is about right/wrong as much as Fi, just it's explicit (logical) and not implicit (feely).

lol yeah the only time I have any creativity is within appropriate jokes. lucky me .

Noticed you do have it there

Been told all my life I'm an opinionated dick lol coming to conclusions I'll argue over on a subject I've only just learned about.

(Same lol)

Thanks lol people that treat the very idea of exclusive definitions or valuations as innately immoral drive me up the walls.

Oh I meant discernment in general, not politically.

(I personally don't have a strong opinion on nationalism like that, either way)

I love sound clips, videos, personal interactions etc. where someone can speak in a rousing and emotionally evocative way, cut through a lot of bullshit and clearly say "this is what matters, and is worth moving mountains and giving everything for." There are a lot of quotes from saints and early 20th century politicians that have that effect, and I can never get enough of it.

If that's not LSI/EIE then I don't know what is.

Got some examples btw?

lmao yeah I only realized it after a few college course as an (initially) history major and realized memorizing facts like dates and names and places was the last thing I was interested in. I liked learning that W led to X which led to Y because of Z

For me the memorising of those facts is automatic lol but yeah that W->X->Y is what's interesting.

Yeah hard to say for certain cause there was a lot of bullying and boys raised by single mothers have a strong tendency towards avoidant behavior when not totally antisocial, but I'm inclined to agree with you here.

How did you fix the avoidance eventually?

lmao it's not standard practice for an IxxJ to let people spend 3 hours trying to talk him/her into committing a felony against the national government?

It can be for LSI (the endless arguing lol, being very principled like that.)

So you're saying Se/Fe is "do fun, dumb, impulsive shit?" lol : P

Sure

Yeah it's not that often I get that fed up and impulsive but it's been known to happen when I get to the point of "I'm just so done with this shit"

Right that's what I meant.

Going back to the references to Discrete Mathematics, if "People" = the Universe of discrete elements (people) I view people more in terms of "peoples" in separate sets and in subsets

Say for example in the graph below the Union of all equals "People" but the "Rational" circle is instead "Asians" and then "Integers" is Chinese and "Whole" is Han Chinese and "natural" is some smaller subset. "Irrational" might just be "non-Asian people" or "Europeans" (with their own unlisted subsets) with the empty space being "non-Asian & non-European peoples."

Talking about "people" as a single whole is not something I do. It's a set so broad to be almost meaningless, outside of a very basic taxonomic sense, where it's the assumed universe/context when talking about anything social or typological. Talking about "people as a whole" feels tautological and useless.

But there are multiple distinct peoples where the definitions are proximate and meaningful enough to consider and address.

I see what you mean. Thinking of people as a united whole to me actually is inspiring sometimes. For me it's other things that end up seeming meaningless and flat with me having no emotional connection to it at all either. Not sure what this depends on lol

Interesting. Is that because of the non-materialism? Because indecision is something that tends to get me screaming at traffic or getting somewhat rude and short with people.

Yes, that's what I meant. Issue with indecision... I would not relate that to Se's "position" here. A lot affects that, Rationality too.

Yeah I respond well enough to surprises I think, but it's more of a reaction like "oh, okay. This is something new that I need to take care of/deal with and get back to what I was up to"

Yeah, I get you (same)

[Sisyphean]

Good, means you got no bias lol

Hey lol that's a first

OK, that's concrete enough, and yeah, I see you like that.

That seems to be the consensus lol

Hmm ok I was thinking of something else with the pidgeonholing, but this was interesting. Yeah it seems like everywhere I've been it's always two political sides/oppositions. Quite honestly I couldn't pick one side after a while of watching them when I eventually wanted to develop my own stance by thinking for myself lol. I try to go beyond all that I guess. I never tried to be this conscious about it as you though, with "ok this is how it plays out logically". I mean, I never tried to follow another's framework this consciously or whatever. I'm again getting the feel you got more focus on Ni lol. I think I'm simpler bc I'd just listen to instinct saying "nah this is complete bullshit", either that or tried to be very thorough "this doesn't add up atm so I'll need to do more watching and checking/sorting". But yeah, I get what you mean by rabbit holes, whenever I do try and test some system by someone else (anything from sports to Socionics), I do have to temporarily "act" as if I've "put it on" and then when it doesn't add up I run into a wall in the rabbithole lol. That is instead of just saying "ok let's just accept it if the a priori logic goes this way". I mean that's what I never did.

Can I ask how your new overall stance is about less consistency? It seems actually more consistent to me.

Yeah the "us" thing makes sense lol you are incredibly stereotypically Beta though lol. Maybe your sx/so adds to it too. The last sentence is really stereotypically collectivist/Fe-seeking/Ni-seeking LSI too, and I guess the soc instinct too.

As far as consistency, I guess framed in a particular light it would be considered the most consistent, but I mostly meant that if a principle/idea I generally agree with has some sort of autistic and distasteful conclusion I just opt not to follow it to that far, consistency be damned in that case. The other meaning would be how in America at least all of these different ideas and frameworks often are built around an assumption of absolute universality--how it applies in one instance is how it must apply in all instances. That premise strikes me as collossally naive and stupid. My People aren't Those People.

An example of this universalism is the American inertia to "Free Trade," that universal equal uninhibited access to the national economy--internationally--is eo ipso a generator of positive results and sacrosanct. If towns are being thrown into economic depression and total unemployment because the jobs leave for India or China then those American workers should just "get more competitive" (how is never stated, often it means similarly accepting slave wages). The notion of the American government taking policy action specifically on behalf of the economic interests of Americans simply because they're Americans, irrespective of inhibiting and market distorting effects, is anathema because it's an anti-universalist and in that way inconsistent implementation of the idea of a Market Economy.

But as you pointed out, if reframed from a starting point of "I will do what's best for my people" it can become consistent rather than hypocritical. The accusation of hypocrisy on things like that doesn't phase me at all, anymore, I guess was the main drive of my statement.

That's actually why I don't like the sort of job where there's too much troubleshooting to be done like that, because while I am able to adapt to things when I must, this sort of thing requires far more flexibility than what I am comfortable with (in the area of Ne yeah I guess). I'm not going to say SLEs like to get bogged down in shit either but to me this is more Ne PoLR than anything.

Yeah that sounds exactly why I hate those parts of the job lol problems that I can't just bulldoze through.

Ti is about right/wrong as much as Fi, just it's explicit (logical) and not implicit (feely).

Hmm, explicit/implicit is a new way to think of it for me. I had been stuck with true/false vs morally right/wrong.

Oh I meant discernment in general, not politically.

(I personally don't have a strong opinion on nationalism like that, either way)

Yeah lol I thought so as well. I meant it more in a general principle as well. The very idea of any sort of discernment between good, bad, correct, incorrect, true, and false is anathema today. It hurts people's feelings, and excludes people, ideas, and things. The mindset and implications, ontologically, always make me viscerally nearly irrationally angry.

If that's not LSI/EIE then I don't know what is.

Got some examples btw?

Got a couple videos that are the first ones I could recall as being in that ballpark off the top of my head. Not trying to convert anyone (but everyone totally should : P ) but the biggest ones that come to mind are stories of Saint martyrs, a few Bible verses in those contexts, and St Louis de Montfort's prayer to Mary

Great story with this guy st-raymond-nonnatus-pray-for-us-2.jpg

Not a martyr but St Pius X was awesome 1-8.jpg tumblr_o1wwndWkyT1uaxri9o1_1280.jpg

Neither martyr nor saint, but a great speaker that didn't forget what inspiration looks like sheen love hate.jpg

"[15] I know thy works, that thou art neither cold, nor hot. I would thou wert cold, or hot.

[16] But because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold, nor hot, I will begin to vomit thee out of my mouth. [17] Because thou sayest: I am rich, and made wealthy, and have need of nothing: and knowest not, that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked. [18] I counsel thee to buy of me gold fire tried, that thou mayest be made rich; and mayest be clothed in white garments, and that the shame of thy nakedness may not appear; and anoint thy eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see. [19] Such as I love, I rebuke and chastise. Be zealous therefore, and do penance. [20] Behold, I stand at the gate, and knock. If any man shall hear my voice, and open to me the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me."

St. Louis De Montfort's Prayer to Mary

Hail Mary, beloved Daughter of the Eternal Father! Hail Mary, admirable Mother of the Son! Hail Mary, faithful spouse of the Holy Ghost! Hail Mary, my dear Mother, my loving Mistress, my powerful sovereign! Hail my joy, my glory, my heart and my soul! Thou art all mine by mercy, and I am all thine by justice. But I am not yet sufficiently thine. I now give myself wholly to thee without keeping anything back for myself or others. If thou still seest in me anything which does not belong to thee, I beseech thee to take it and to make thyself the absolute Mistress of all that is mine. Destroy in me all that may be displeasing to God, root it up and bring it to nought; place and cultivate in me everything that is pleasing to thee.

May the light of thy faith dispel the darkness of my mind; may thy profound humility take the place of my pride; may thy sublime contemplation check the distractions of my wandering imagination; may thy continuous sight of God fill my memory with His presence; may the burning love of thy heart inflame the lukewarmness of mine; may thy virtues take the place of my sins; may thy merits be my only adornment in the sight of God and make up for all that is wanting in me. Finally, dearly beloved Mother, grant, if it be possible, that I may have no other spirit but thine to know Jesus and His divine will; that I may have no other soul but thine to praise and glorify the Lord; that I may have no other heart but thine to love God with a love as pure and ardent as thine I do not ask thee for visions, revelations, sensible devotion or spiritual pleasures. It is thy privilege to see God clearly; it is thy privilege to enjoy heavenly bliss; it is thy privilege to triumph gloriously in Heaven at the right hand of thy Son and to hold absolute sway over angels, men and demons; it is thy privilege to dispose of all the gifts of God, just as thou willest.

Such is, O heavenly Mary, the "best part," which the Lord has given thee and which shall never be taken away from thee-and this thought fills my heart with joy. As for my part here below, I wish for no other than that which was thine: to believe sincerely without spiritual pleasures; to suffer joyfully without human consolation; to die continually to myself without respite; and to work zealously and unselfishly for thee until death as the humblest of thy servants. The only grace I beg thee to obtain for me is that every day and every moment of my life I may say: Amen, so be it's all that thou didst do while on earth; Amen, so be it's all that thou art now doing in Heaven; Amen, so be it-to all that thou art doing in my soul, so that thou alone mayest fully glorify Jesus in me for time and eternity. Amen.


First Video: https://www.bitchute.com/video/OTMlklCnkfTh/

Second Video:

How did you fix the avoidance eventually?

My job forces me to approach/initiate conversation with strangers on the phone and in person regularly and frequently. Some of the client engagements are specifically about starting conversations with people in order to elicit either information or physical access to the premises. Kind of a "sink or swim" thrown in the deep-end solution, but at least it worked.

Right that's what I meant.

I see what you mean. Thinking of people as a united whole to me actually is inspiring sometimes. For me it's other things that end up seeming meaningless and flat with me having no emotional connection to it at all either. Not sure what this depends on lol

To clarify I don't think that "people" necessarily a functionally redundant set in every possible scenario, but that for it to be meaningful would require a considerable social set existing outside of it which poses at least a potential existential threat to make a common "humanity" exist presently, and proximately in my and other's minds contra the not-humanity of the new other, a la the process the boys in the Robber's Cave Experiment automatically engaged in once the experiment organizers were able to externally provide a common goal.

But since antagonistic aliens aren't very likely, that's all hypothetical lol

Yes, that's what I meant. Issue with indecision... I would not relate that to Se's "position" here. A lot affects that, Rationality too.

I'm assuming particularly introverted Rationality, since my understanding of extroverted Rationality would have to take stock of multiple data points or sources of emotional input first.

[Myst]

As far as consistency, I guess framed in a particular light it would be considered the most consistent, but I mostly meant that if a principle/idea I generally agree with has some sort of autistic and distasteful conclusion I just opt not to follow it to that far, consistency be damned in that case. The other meaning would be how in America at least all of these different ideas and frameworks often are built around an assumption of absolute universality--how it applies in one instance is how it must apply in all instances. That premise strikes me as collossally naive and stupid. My People aren't Those People.

Hm well yeah you do need to add more conditions in many cases than just apply the thing universally. Very few principles can be applied truly universally.

So by extending and improving the system, you can avoid the wrong conclusions.

It's interesting how you learned to recognise how a conclusion would be "autistic or distasteful". This definitely requires some more awareness or trust in feelings than what you had before, when you were trying to follow the conclusions blindly.

An example of this universalism is the American inertia to "Free Trade," that universal equal uninhibited access to the national economy--internationally--is eo ipso a generator of positive results and sacrosanct. If towns are being thrown into economic depression and total unemployment because the jobs leave for India or China then those American workers should just "get more competitive" (how is never stated, often it means similarly accepting slave wages). The notion of the American government taking policy action specifically on behalf of the economic interests of Americans simply because they're Americans, irrespective of inhibiting and market distorting effects, is anathema because it's an anti-universalist and in that way inconsistent implementation of the idea of a Market Economy.

I would say in our current world it's quite fine and the most sensible for the government to take action for their people, as we (as in, humanity overall) definitely did not create the environment so far for true globalism.

And it's an interesting question, I just rarely contemplate it lol, about how you'd want to reconcile globalism with nationalism.

But as you pointed out, if reframed from a starting point of "I will do what's best for my people" it can become consistent rather than hypocritical. The accusation of hypocrisy on things like that doesn't phase me at all, anymore, I guess was the main drive of my statement.

Yes, that's a good overall high-level principle. What kind of people accused you of hypocrisy?

Hmm, explicit/implicit is a new way to think of it for me. I had been stuck with true/false vs morally right/wrong.

Well it's a Socionics distinction for Sensing/Logic vs Intuition/Ethics. For me the most interesting was to figure out/accept that Ethics is implicit.

Yeah lol I thought so as well. I meant it more in a general principle as well. The very idea of any sort of discernment between good, bad, correct, incorrect, true, and false is anathema today.

+1000

It hurts people's feelings, and excludes people, ideas, and things. The mindset and implications, ontologically, always make me viscerally nearly irrationally angry.

Wasn't the idea actually to avoid hurting people's feelings and total inclusion?

Got a couple videos that are the first ones I could recall as being in that ballpark off the top of my head. Not trying to convert anyone (but everyone totally should : P ) but the biggest ones that come to mind are stories of Saint martyrs, a few Bible verses in those contexts, and St Louis de Montfort's prayer to Mary

Thanks for the examples. Yeah, you want an EIE lol

My job forces me to approach/initiate conversation with strangers on the phone and in person regularly and frequently. Some of the client engagements are specifically about starting conversations with people in order to elicit either information or physical access to the premises. Kind of a "sink or swim" thrown in the deep-end solution, but at least it worked.

I've heard that from an LSI before.

To clarify I don't think that "people" necessarily a functionally redundant set in every possible scenario, but that for it to be meaningful would require a considerable social set existing outside of it which poses at least a potential existential threat to make a common "humanity" exist presently, and proximately in my and other's minds contra the not-humanity of the new other, a la the process the boys in the Robber's Cave Experiment automatically engaged in once the experiment organizers were able to externally provide a common goal.

But since antagonistic aliens aren't very likely, that's all hypothetical lol

I don't think only other living beings can pose a potential existential threat.

And that is a strong argument for globalism for me.

Even if not doing it in the nonsensical way as it's now. (I'm not going to get too political here now lol, but yeah, the attempt at introducing these migrants was done in a totally disorganised chaotic silly and very harmful way.)

I'm assuming particularly introverted Rationality, since my understanding of extroverted Rationality would have to take stock of multiple data points or sources of emotional input first.

I think Ej's are very decisive too, they easily take stock of those multiple data points in a dynamically flexible way (flexible compared to Ij lol).