Its just a form of tribalism. It can help foster cooperation and team spirit by uniting people under a flag, sacrificing the individual for the greater good (in this case your country).
Its mostly a Fe valuing thing.
And more beta than alpha.
Opposite of it would be delta who like to go their own way more and generally dont care about the greater whole of society and groupthink
.Originally Posted by Number 9 large
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
you can pretend all u want but ur still Fe lead sistah
I’m not pretending
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Ok just stupid then?
You are the stupid one for not reading and comprehending what I wrote and thus in turn calling me names for your lack of comprehend
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Lack of comprehend? U mean lack of comprehension?
wow so most conservatives are Fe, ur brilliant.
It makes no fucking difference whether you call it Fe or Delta, you might as well say that nationalists are made out of mostly carbon and water. It's a meaningless categorization.
What difference does it make, whether you call nationalism Fe or conservativism or tribalism or an idea born out of atoms?
The real question is, how does nationalism work? Or what it even "is"? And in what context?
Nobody cares about ur anti socionics stance. Just gtfo the forum if u dont believe in it.
"Love it or leave it!" Well ironically this is the exact kind of tribalism that you were talking about. You're typing yourself Fe-valuing, so at least you're consistent.
I mean you're right though, this forum sucks and is full of idiots like you who have abandoned any kind of rational thinking.
It's just a testament to how irrational thoughts and blind beliefs in whatever fads can manifest. It has been a trainwreck of amusement, but tragic.
Nobody outside of this forum will ever take Socionics seriously, noob.
Yea the forum is full of people u think are stupid, so u cling around here because? Just gtfo already and save everybodys time. Thanks
You're not debating "is socionics real?" You're just yelling "socionics can't possibly be real!" all over a socionics forum like a dog peeing all over a fire hydrant to show this is your territory with your superior Popper books, which you don't even discuss with us. I don't believe in The Gospel of Socionics, but it might be true or might not until more empirical testing is done and this is a place to post that's not horrible except for the near-complete lack of moderation.
Your framing of your "socionics cult" as an alternative-hypothesis that has no value, and which people only believe because of herd-mentality, also implicitly casts whatever your own idea of "The Truth" or "The Pursuit Of Truth" is as if it is the null hypothesis, and that it has inherent value by default.
But truths are just phrases. Ideas. Scaffolds for one's thoughts. You only need truths for the act of thinking and speaking. So they're just human institutions. They may be useful to your wants, but they're still alien to you. There's no inherent reason they should be your wants, rather than a mere means to an end.
You can think as reason as much as you want for your own wants, but no one is making you do it. If you've lost the pleasure in contemplating something before you've gotten to the bottom of it then there's no compulsion for you to keep digging unless you have some other personal purpose in doing so. If you no longer believe in something, as a cause-in-itself, you don't need to waste any more energy on it either.
No "highest cause" is worth you serving it for its sake. Thoughts tend to form a hierarchical structure as they go along, so if you serve the highest cause of Truth in itself, you're as servile as a theologian would be to his religious convictions.
Truth is just another thing to possess you.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
