Greta Thunberg

[Socionics Is A Cult]

Previous thread was closed for some reason.

I've been watching "Greta Thunberg: A Year to Change the World"

She becomes very upset at one point "If you feel bad today...so many people are so sad and so depressed...but that's a good thing because that means they still have empathy. And they don't want to live in this world where we have lost empathy."

"So many people come up to me and say they believe there is something wrong with them because they are feeling like shit. But I think it's the opposite. It's the rest who can maintain living in this society where we care only about prestige and these shallow things that don't matter and being the best and so on. Those are the people who are not normal."

She had depression for several years before she started protesting, so clearly she is speaking from experience.

She's very aware of the impact her words can have (that she might get headlines about making an emotional speech, that there will be a reaction):
"People are only listening to the emotional bits, like "How dare you!" and "I want you to panic!" and so on. I say these things because they get people's attention, and now I have people's attention. I don't need to make a speech like that. I want them to listen to the actual content and the science."

From a speech: "Hi. I've given many speeches and learned that when you talk in public, you should start with something personal or emotional to get everyone's attention. But today, I will not do that. Because then those phrases are all that people focus on. They don't remember the facts, the very reason why I say those things in the first place. We no longer have time to leave out the science.

She considers herself an introvert ("a small, shy, girl who's speaking about science versus Donald Trump" and of course she has Asperger's).

I can certainly see why people would say EIE or ILI. I can imagine her having a or HA and don't get any sense that she values . EIE was the type that I saw most fitting, but the two key details about her personality are that the climate change situation has made her depressed (at least in the past), and that she has a condition that impacts social interaction (although as far as I can see, she is well-adjusted). Being single-minded in a cause that requires social activism (at least in her opinion) may make her seem more conscientious, and may lead to some social mastery.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Being sad or depressed doesn't necessarily mean 'you still have empathy' - you could just be sad and depressed. Plenty of sad and depressed people are jerks that don't have much empathy- I don't know where she gets her logic from. That Inside Out movie? It was a cool movie but it was just a movie- and real life is more complicated than 'Sadness having Empathy.'

And being happy doesn't make you this bad immoral person that's without empathy either. I guess that's how a lot of Fi valuers view the world though. (I do think Greta is Fi valuing)

[Socionics Is A Cult]

Being sad or depressed doesn't necessarily mean 'you still have empathy' - you could just be sad and depressed. Plenty of sad and depressed people are jerks that don't have much empathy- I don't know where she gets her logic from. That Inside Out movie? It was a cool movie but it was just a movie- and real life is more complicated than 'Sadness having Empathy.'

And being happy doesn't make you this bad immoral person that's without empathy either. I guess that's how a lot of Fi valuers view the world though. (I do think Greta is Fi valuing)

I did not say that being depressed means that you have empathy. I merely think that her being depressed because of climate change, and being concerned about others being depressed because of climate change might be indicative of being an Agreeable type (in the Big Five). I certainly did not link those traits to , either.

It's difficult for me to imagine that a young Socionics LIE for example would be so motivated and act as she has done to tackle the climate crisis. Although I am increasingly finding Socionics unhelpful when analysing others.

I've since decided I can't really decide between EIE and ILI.

I think if she was being typed in the Big Five, she would score:
introverted
high openness to experience
conscientious
neurotic
and possibly moderately high on agreeableness.

[Marep]

LSI

[Tallmo]

ILI

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I did not say that being depressed means that you have empathy.

I know you didn't. I was responding to something Greta herself said. Not anything you said. Maybe my Fi comment wasn't fair though, I certainly don't think all Fi valuers are like that or anything. Still think Greta is very Fi though.

[timber]

I'm not against k4m's interpretation of her being a INFj with Aspergers.

I watched a three part documentary on her on PBS and this is how I also interpret her sociotype as being. Her Father also struck me as being either her dual, or her activator at SLI.

[The Reality Denialist]

This is what happens when the victim mentality goes off the balance

[Socionics Is A Cult]

I can't see EIE anymore. Just think INXX perhaps.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Yeah there is no way she'd be from a Merry quadra.

[Lycantrope]

EII

[nifl]

maybe Ti
reminds me of Liev Schreiber

[Sol]

mb ESTP

[Djangr]

ESI

[hellohellohello]

LII; per V. Stratievskaya - https://socionika-forever.blogspot.c...post_8107.html

[Still Alive]

Ah yes, the Se PolR type that organizes thousands of people to rally for a cause out of idealism

[hellohellohello]

Ah yes, the Se PolR type that organizes thousands of people to rally for a cause out of idealism

The LII does not tolerate any manifestations of abuse and arbitrariness, since he considers these to be the origin of unfairness and injustice and, consequently, the original cause of all misfortunes and evils.

Being the intolerant opposer of any unfair, in his opinion, and based on abusive force dictatorships, the LII tries to instill everywhere his own “dictatorship of fairness”, that is based on raising the quality of “ethically fair” self-awareness. Abusive force in such a dictatorship is applied only to those who are unable for some reason to bring up this quality in themselves, that is, only towards the “predators”.

The LII considers that volitional influence is justifiable if it is just and fair.

The LII condemns any abuses of power, force, and influence. He does not tolerate crude pressuring, authoritativeness, and commanding tone and resists any attempts at forceful influence – both volitional and ethical.

The LII is critical of any methods of crude and petty influencing. It is impossible to subordinate him to volitional pressure. Any attempt to pressure him inevitably leads to a conflict. The LII does not yield to crude force even if it presents a threat to him life. He won’t allow to humiliate himself, to be “taken by his throat” – better he will die.

The LII won’t allow for others to encroach on his rights – he immediately demonstratively resists this (as a kind of preventive measure).

The LII not only does not tolerate and endure volitional pressuring, but he also tries to safeguard himself from any forceful actions. While at this, the measures the LIIs undertakes to shield and protect himself often exceed the measure of influence exerted on him. For example, the LII may refuse to help with a minor service simply because he assumes that such service may become a part of the “system of relations”, and then his acquiescence and concession will become the norm of behavior for everyone else, and this will be unfair towards him.

Protection of his territorial rights is also an important issue for the LII. The LII is ready to look however inhospitable, impolite, unfriendly, and inconsiderate, but he won’t allow a stranger to enter into his house with his “trunk forward”. The LII is wary of any uninvited and unwanted visitors, because they “steal” his time, his resources, his space and infringe on his personal freedom.

The LII feels himself defenseless in situations of sudden volitional pressure that he hasn’t been able to foresee and account for. In such cases, the LII often acts in an excessively and unjustifiably yielding manner, which he analyzes regretfully later on and tries to hence forth be more farsighted and prudent, and not repeat the same mistake.

The LII fears giving any precedent or reason for volitional action towards himself; therefore he sometimes looks a person without any weaknesses (“Iron Felix“). Dislikes when someone else plays on his weaknesses. Cannot tolerant wimps, complainers, does not allow to evoke pity in himself (the LII dislikes “cheap” emotional tricks).

The LII does not allow himself to show force towards a weaker person. He tries to influence by words and by persuasion. Physical punishment is used only as the most extreme measure.

For LII it is difficult to talk in a commanding tone. Imperious intonations are not characteristic of him. Although, if he loses his temper and flares up, he may say unduly sharp and harsh things.

He does not tremble before his bosses and supervisors, but holds himself with dignity and does not fawn before them. (“I’d love to serve. Servility is what I hate.”*) If someone raises his voice at him, he immediately “tunes out” and “disconnects”. Often an impression arises that he doesn’t even react to the charges that are presented to him.

* Editor’s note: a quote from Alexander Griboyedov’s play Woe from Wit. Translation by A. Vagapov.

The LII demonstratively ignores intrusive advice and moralizations. He’s especially wary of, and dislikes, those who “always know how everything should be”. The LII finds it very difficult to insist on something, be assertive – he knows all too well that this is not his method. For him it’s always unpleasant to demonstrate his power, will, determination. He never allows himself to be intrusive and does not like this quality in others.

Usually feels uncomfortable whenever his volitional qualities are discussed by strangers. As a rule, he tries to avoid talking about it. Fighting for his rights requires the LII to constantly overexert himself, which, in turn, often leads him to physical fatigue, a condition that is very unpleasant to him and which he tries to avoid. Regulates his level of strain: tries to know his own strength and capabilities, resists being overloaded, and tries to rest in time when he feels that his energy is running out (self-preservation instinct). The LII resists even an oversaturated entertainment program.

When LII’s dual ESE becomes his partner, the problems of overload, overexertion, volitional pressure and defense get resolved in the most natural way: the ESE energizes the LII with his own energy and activity, constantly maintaining his emotional and physical vitality. The ESE encourages the LII, doesn’t let him become apathetic, provides him with a very flexible routine of physical and emotional exertion, and keeps him in a state of optimal activity and excitement.

The ESE is the only one who can very precisely and naturally stimulate LII’s activity, the only one who can easily stir him up, get him fired up, get a reaction out of him and entertain him. The ESE can easily relax the LII and calm him down, can create optimal conditions for the LII to work and rest fully.

Defending LII’s interests, ideas and views, the ESE can easily overcome even those difficulties that seem most insurmountable. When the ESE and the LII defend justice, barriers and obstacles simply do not exist for them. As history shows, LII’s ideas easily gain popularity with the support of ESE’s volitional pressure.

[hellohellohello]

Fits pretty well doesn't it? You don't know shit.

[Still Alive]

do you expect me to read that wall of nonsense? you could use your brain once in a while instead of parroting random descriptions. how the fuck a type like me is supposed to care about big projects or movements when I can barely focus on reality for 5 minutes at a time is beyond me.

[qaz00]

D-ILI

[Singu]

Ehhh. Ethical type. I started watching the video that Ave posted. . . "we will never forgive you" "you are immature" "my future is at stake" "how dare you" "shame on you" emotional manipulations and attempts at guilt-tripping without any kind of concrete plan suggested. Yes, she recited lots of facts to support her emotional pleas (Te to support Fi). . . but no Ti involved. I think IEE. I didn't however finish the video, so maybe she got to that later. Good at Fe, can really pull on the heart-strings, and the dramatic pauses, she knows how to use Fe very well.

It seems irrational to judge her entire personality from a very limited observation of her.

For all we know, we don't know what her actual logical ability is like. She may use logic in other situations that we don't know of. Or she may use or develop logical abilities later.

It doesn't matter though, because we are capable of being both logical and emotional at the same time. It's not a matter of being either logical or emotional. It's just a matter of how we want to use either logic or emotions, depending on situations or choices that we make.

[timber]

@Singu, here's another very short piece of writing you'll never read: LINK

Many biologists that I've known have been agnostic, some have been theists, some have been atheists. But atheism is by nature a closed-view, it's a denial, a refusal, and also takes faith whereas agnostics remain open to having their minds changed. Agnosticism is more in line with scientific thinking in general, so I'd expect that to be the most common view. Having faith does not make a person's worldview contradictory however, especially if they recognize that it is faith. (The theists tend to be able to recognize that it's faith, the atheists deny it heh)

There are so many holes in the evolutionary biology fields. The Theory of Natural Selection, although a foundational bedrock for all of the life sciences, still has MAJOR holes to be understood still.

The gradualism, this slow march from pond scum to people, had to many close calls, to many happen-stance, I for one, just don't buy the aithiest world view. I can't even argue them, because I think they are well argued for their side, and most agnostics can't argue with atheists well either. The atheists have this round and probably many more for a couple generations to come.

I think quantum physics will reveal God, eventually. The life sciences are far and away the most atheistic there is.

If it was as simple as a lightening bolt in some water filled with organic compounds, we would have done it by now. The sheer complexity of a RNA encased in a phospholipid bi-layer boggles the mind that it neatly occurred on primordial Earth. Further, that that cell divided with immaculate copies and survived the hell scape....

Evolutionary biologists might have been able to explain with well founded research and experimentation how life progresses via natural selection, but the very beginnings, how cells and RNA/DNA first started, they want everyone to rely on faith that they have the most educated guess.

The same thing with the Big Bang, trust us, the Math can't lie. Trust us, we have the cosmic microwave back ground picture...

Believe me, we are master technicians of reality, but at the same time, science doesn't have as many answers, especially of the big themes and topics, that they like to present as having.

We, humanity, are fucking children, and science is as culturally bound by bias just as much anything else we think and believe. There is no Universal language, including Math and science. Although it really really feels like it to us WORD-LOGIC- THINKING- MEAT BAGS.