People Who Hate Everything and Everyone
Does anyone else here know anyone who just hates everything and everyone, who would literally take a giant dump on everything and give everyone a lobotomy if it were legal? Hateful people just amuse me because the hatred ends up consuming them but it's still sort of stunning and sort of sad.
Let the hate consume you!
Please don't let the hate consume you.
People who are like that are usually people who have been crapped on themselves lol. It's the crap cycle.
Possibly, but not everyone responds to mistreatment by dealing it back out.Originally Posted by Aramas
I'd say it goes Gamma introverts > Ni valuing introverts > Ni valuers > everyone else in terms of taking a negative attitude towards people. Negativity is about Ni mostly.
No.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
Ni.
Poor little Adi ******. If only those mean nasty Jews didn't crap on him by not letting him into art school, he wouldn't've had to kill 6 million of them. I declare today International Adi ****** Day in honor of this ultimate victim whom we should all pity.
You're probably right to some degree. I've noticed that Se types are much more likely to hurt others in response to being hurt. Si holds it in. Especially Ne creatives. Vengefulness and quid pro quo are quintessentially Se.
I've noticed that a lot of descriptions of psychopathy or narcissism seem to have some correlation with how most Se types I've known acted. For example, a few lists of abusive behavior I've seen mention ultimatums as a sign of abuse. And ultimatums are listed in at least one place as belonging to Se.
I don't know what to make of it, but it's interesting.
Last edited by Aramas; 07-19-2019 at 04:30 AM.
When I was an angsty teenager I used to tell people that I hated everything and everyone, and would also be quite rude, sarcastic and vulgar at times. This coupled with my avoidant tendencies resulted in me not befriending anyone whatsoever for a very long time. I think the primary reason was that I just felt terribly misunderstood, unseen and unloved. Growing up, moving and finding more like-minded people helped that, although those feelings never quite go away entirely.
It's easy to disregard feelings of disillusionment and frustration by labeling someone an "angsty teenager." Teenagers are just becoming aware of how disappointing life and people can be, in many cases. They realize on some level that the demands placed on them are unreasonable, arbitrary. They realize that people are often capricious or simply hateful. They still have enough energy to buck the system they live in. It's passed off as a "hormonal reaction," but that characterization is like the 1800s when women were just labeled "hysterical" and slaves just had "drapetomania." There's one for the kids, too: ADHD.
Adults consider teenagers socialized when they have finally internalized the demands that are placed on them. They gladly do the things they once hated to do, or at least have learned how to hide the fact that they hate every bit of it. Their parents were always right about everything, and they were just being silly, stupid, and young. Congratulations, now you're a mature adult! Isn't it great?
Then you have the ones who don't die inside because they can never really forget that there's a lot of bullshit in the world and it really is bullshit. George Carlin, Bill Hicks, etc. Angst is not an invalid or immature reaction. (Nothing is immature, really, because maturity always applies to an arbitrary standard that someone makes up.) Don't learn to disregard your own feelings just because someone else tells you they're wrong. There's Fi.
Last edited by Aramas; 07-19-2019 at 04:11 PM.
Very true.
I've had the impression growing up of being treated like a dog, not far from "Sit. Good boy!" which is basicaly positive reinforcement, I detest this. I cannot express how angry it makes me feel to see people being happy about living up to be a good doggy. It's accepted, even encouraged in most places I look, and well, it's normal in a way, we all feel good when things go our way and not good if it doesn't so it shows, but there's a point it's abused.
I believe this positive conditionment cause more harm than good.
There's nothing wrong with hating things. It's very antiseptic and life-affirming.
The things about hate though is it seems to lead nowhere, in my experience anyways. There's a destructive force to it many times. But to dislike an act (within reason) is different.
I've always thought Bill Hicks had strong Fi
love is life affirming
Hate and love aren't always mutually exclusive but if you hate everything you can't love to hate things that deserve it either. I made this thread because I hate when people just hate everything. Hating things that deserve it is the real force lightning. I posted that gif because I like it, dammit. Dammit is German for "therewith," I think.
There is a socionics experimental study on emotions. Supposedly there's a triad of hostility (anger, aversion and contempt). And these are the results of the experiment.
Aversion (control sample - 1.9%)
1.LSI (6%)
2.EIE (4.8%)
3.IEI (4%), ILE (3.8%), LSE (3.7%)
4.ESI (3.2%), ILI (3.1%)
5.IEE (2%)
6.SLI (1.2%)
7.SEI, LII, ESE, SLE, LIE, SEE, EII (0%)
Disgust, according to K. Isard, is often experienced in conjunction with anger and contempt, together these emotions constitute a triad of hostility [1, p. 275]. But it is also possible that those who voted to disgust be perceived as disgust, sensory dislike. Representatives of the quadra Beta voted most often for this emotion.
Contempt (control sample - 1.1%)
1.LSE (15%)
2.SLE (14%)
3.ILI (7.8%)
4.ESE (6.6%)
5.LII (6%)
6.ESI (3.2%), LSI (3%)
7.SLI (2.4%)
8.IEI, IEE (2%)
9.ILE, SEI, EIE, LIE, SEE, EII (0%)
K. Izard connects the emotion of contempt primarily with a sense of superiority over another person [1, p. 283]. In general, the indicators of this emotion are higher among logicians; perhaps, with LSE and SLE, contempt accompanies anger.
Anger (control sample - 8.7%)
1.LIE (23%)
2.LSE (22%), SEE (21.7%)
3.LSI (21.2%)
4.SLE (14%)
5.ESE (10%)
6.IEI (8%), ILE (7.7%)
7.ESI (6.5%)
8.IEE (5.5%)
9.EIE (4.8%), ILI (4.7%)
10.LII (4%)
11.SLI (2.4%)
12.SEI, EII (0%)
Anger, as well as joy, according to the results of the polls, looks primarily an extrovert emotion. The ability to intensely experience anger is associated in psychology with a choleric temperament [4], which is quite consistent with our indicators and socionic descriptions of LIE, LSE and SEE. A rather high result of LSI has become quite unexpected, as a rule, external manifestations of anger are not characteristic of this type.
X
Last edited by Mila; 07-24-2019 at 05:18 PM.
finally the trite ESI stereotype of a hateful ass gets its justice
LSI/EIE, yeah
You can't experiment with statistical data, lol. It's just going to be correlation and not causation.
Let's say you correlate "triad of hostility" with say, Whites, Blacks, Asians, Jews, etc. Well you're sure as hell going to be producing some kind of data, but what does it all mean? It's all just correlation and might as well be meaningless.
of course you can. at least you have some data to base your hypothesis on. it's interesting data because some stereotypes are against it
Link to the study, @Ragdoll Lynx?
Some ESI's seem to like angry individuals. Well, everyone can have their own fetishes. Yeah but why is aversion connected to hostility? I just want to leave it alone.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
*GASP* LIEs capable of anger? IMPOSSIBLE. According to the "experts" around here, that's the territory of Fe leads.
I shared it with you the other day. The X below the quote is the link.
yup, choleric temperament is associated to the extroverted rationals in general. anger is a complex emotion though (it can be positive and negative) that we can all experience and express. it's the motives behind it that reveal something about the type, rather than the sentiment in itself.
So you did. I'm way behind in my reading.
Thank you, @Ragdoll Lynx.
love and hate coexist. as anything we partly accept and partly reject
2nd happens from a wish to have something better. Devil is God's angel too
Some people reject all, and that's called "going to Hell," something that happens in this life (there is only one life no matter what you think happens. If you believe there can be more than one life, you've basically come as close as anyone can to making a horcrux, because if there's one soul, it has one life no matter what happens to the body and even to the mind, and if you think there's somehow more than one life by other standards, you have split your soul to drop responsibility for your actions, probably because you're a slave to sin which is a self-imposed deception by your mind because you want to judge without realizing you can only judge ultimate reality as a whole that way.)love and hate coexist. as anything we partly accept and partly reject
2nd happens from a wish to have something better. Devil is God's angel too
anyone has love and hate to anything
Well you perform an "experiment" by saying "We expect the result to be X, due to YZ reasons".
If you make no prediction, then you have no hypothesis and that's not an experiment. It's just about gathering data and statistics.
Now you might have no hypothesis, make no prediction and perform an experiment anyway, because you have no idea what the result will be. But the problem with that approach is you don't really know what exactly it is that you're looking for. So you might simply not understand what the result will mean, without having a theory that can explain the result.
As for gathering more and more statistical data and making correlations, such as correlating feelings of Contempt with Type X. Well the problem is that without an explanatory theory we have no idea if it's correlation or causation. The correlation might be completely meaningless, just as it's relatively meaningless to correlate Whites with Contempt or Blacks with Contempt.
Is this kind of data meaningful?
Correlation with race and feelings of contempt:
Whites: 8.7%
Blacks: 7.1%
Asians: 9.2%
For people that think "race" is a fundamental characteristic in which the feelings of contempt are derived from, then yes. But for others, "race" is not such a fundamental characteristic, it's merely mainly differences in the color of the skin.
Of course Socionists are going to think the "16 Types" are fundamental characteristics in which everything is derived from. But for others, it's not so convincing.
It's not enough to say, "We observe 16 types, therefore we can make various correlations with them". Just as we can't say "We observe races, there are visual differences in the color of the skin, and we can make all sorts of correlations with races".
Socionics is like saying, "Well look, the differences in the color of the skin is real. We can use color experts, we have people with really good eyesight, we can measure the wavelength of light using a spectroradiometer, etc.". But that's not the point.
Comparing psychological typology to racism... how low can you go.
It's not a comparison to racism, lol.
It's about how correlations are not inherently meaningful in of itself. If it's not race, then I can bring up virtually any other characteristics, which again the correlation may have nothing to do with each other in the context of what we want to find out of the correlations.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote